Preference: Gifted or Bright

[Embassy]

If you could choose between the two, would you wish your child to be gifted or bright?

 

Why?

[La Condessa]

Other, because I honestly don't care. I want my kids to be what they are, and to work hard to improve on their natural abilities (whatever they may be).

[Dmmetler]

I'd prefer my DD to be closer to "bright" than she is. If she were in the typical "school level GT", where school is easy, homework isn't a chore, and a pull-out program a couple of times a week is OK, I think she'd find life a lot easier.

 

And when she's an adult, or even when she gets to college, I don't think it will be a problem. I hope not, anyway.

 

But at ages 2-6, so far, it has been a problem. She simply isn't developing in the same rate or at the same pace as other kids, and it makes it hard for her emotionally, because she so WANTS to fit in, and can't. The kids who are reading the kind of books she likes to read and studying the kinds of things she likes to learn don't want to spend time with a "baby". Or they might let her participate for one activity, but then it stops when she's the one child not allowed to ride her bike past the end of the block. Yet, the response in any form of testing comes down to "She's extremely gifted. Congratulations!" Which doesn't address the situation at all. Yes, she can hit the top of every single test-but when going to Sunday school makes her feel like a failure, because the only one who understands her is the teacher (and sometimes not even the teacher), that's not good.

 

Separating out academics and giving her academic outlets, and leaving a lot of her social interaction for "run around at the park" or "go to dance class and play on the playground afterwards" has helped-but it doesn't change that she still doesn't have any good friends who really "get" her and who she's not having to constantly adjust what she does to fit in with.

 

I've gotten to the point of paying a couple of the older girls who DD likes best to spend time with her as a "mother's helper" type situation-but also to give DD someone to talk to, someone who is willing to help her make elaborate stories with her American Girl dolls, and understands more of the history than is in the book or two that mommy has read to them. But that's not ideal either-because when we're at our homeschool group and those teen girls have other teen girls to spend time with, they're friendly and nice, but they're not going to leave their friends to go play with DD-which, again, leaves DD in limbo.

[Crimson Wife]

I wish my kids were less asynchronous, had fewer overexcitabilities, and had no 2E issues.

[Embassy]

I love my kids for who they are and can't imagine them any other way, but knowing issues/difficulties that come with the gifted turf I think they would have a happier and more satisfied life if they were bright.

[JeanM]

I love my kids for who they are and can't imagine them any other way, but knowing issues/difficulties that come with the gifted turf I think they would have a happier and more satisfied life if they were bright.

 

I wish my kids were less asynchronous, had fewer overexcitabilities, and had no 2E issues.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree: I totally agree with both of these!

[8filltheheart]

If you could choose between the two, would you wish your child to be gifted or bright?

 

Why?

 

We have never had any of our kids formally tested other than our Aspie, but I suspect that one of our children is gifted.

 

My child that I believe is gifted dwells in why. My kids that bright learn very easily.

 

I have no idea where ds actually lies in the scheme of things and I really could careless. But, I find his way of thinking fascinating. So, if he falls into the gifted spectrum, I think his way of seeing the world will end up benefiting him greatly.

 

Either way, he simply is who he is.

Edited July 18, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[LittleIzumi]

I voted other because 1) of course we love them no matter what, but 2) because there is such a HUGE range of gifted. Mildly/moderated gifted? Bring it on, lol! I would be scared of what to do with a PG kid though. That's way beyond the scope of my experience and understanding. We're probably close to the gifted line here, since I've seen different scores as the cutoff for mild/moderate giftedness from brightness, and it's asynchronous enough here already!

 

*excuse me as I go force my dd to read *something--even just one page* today before she spends the rest of the day on math :lol:*

[wapiti]

I wish my kids were less asynchronous, had fewer overexcitabilities, and had no 2E issues.

 

I voted other because 1) of course we love them no matter what, but 2) because there is such a HUGE range of gifted. Mildly/moderated gifted? Bring it on, lol! I would be scared of what to do with a PG kid though. That's way beyond the scope of my experience and understanding. We're probably close to the gifted line here, since I've seen different scores as the cutoff for mild/moderate giftedness from brightness, and it's asynchronous enough here already!

 

:iagree:

[Jenny in Florida]

I can't answer that question, because I love the kids I've got and wouldn't wish them to be anything or anyone other than themselves.

 

I've heard and read that "bright" or "pleasantly gifted" is the easiest thing to be. We're talking moderately gifted, around 130 IQ. Those kids are supposed to have the easiest time, because they are bright enough to do well in school and work but not so different as to stand out or be bored.

 

But I'm sure that's a generalization with which many people would disagree.

 

What I have is highly/profoundly gifted kids, and they are a real handful (or two, each). But I love them and revel in watching them grow and learn. So, I wouldn't have it any other way.

[zaichiki]

If you could choose between the two, would you wish your child to be gifted or bright?

 

Why?

 

:lol:

 

That's like asking if you'd prefer your child to have blonde or red hair!

[zaichiki]

I wish my kids were less asynchronous, had fewer overexcitabilities, and had no 2E issues.

 

:iagree:

That would make life easier, no?

[Krista in LA]

I have one gifted and one bright, and the gifted one causes far more stress for me. I think part of it is higher expectations on my part - she'll be taking ACT and SAT this fall and the thought of her not doing exceptionally well on both stresses me out! I know she is capable of so much and feel like a failure if she doesn't achieve at the level she could.

[MinivanMom]

:lol:

 

That's like asking if you'd prefer your child to have blonde or red hair!

 

:iagree:

 

For the record I have a brunette, a red-head, a strawberry-blonde, and a blonde. Every kid is unique. I would guess they are all going to be somewhere in the bright to gifted range, but they will each have their unique strengths and weaknesses. I take them as they are and do my best to help them reach their full potential.

[Maus]

I wish my kids were less asynchronous, had fewer overexcitabilities, and had no 2E issues.

 

:iagree: Sigh, yes. I wouldn't want to change their wonderful intelligence, but we could do without the drama. And it's not just their OEs we're dealing with (we have a pretty good stack of parental OEs in the mix, too.)

[catz]

I wish my kids were less asynchronous, had fewer overexcitabilities, and had no 2E issues.

 

:iagree: We have no known 2E issues, but having a HG-PG kid is definitely a mixed bag. The parent tendencies around here probably don't help either.

[radiobrain]

I personally prefer "My little oddballs." :D

 

 

 

 

And as the quintessential oddball myself, I am the one person who voted neither.:001_huh:

[Spy Car]

I think it is a fallacy to think that all children that score are highly-gifted have "issues."

 

Bill

[Jenny in Florida]

I think it is a fallacy to think that all children that score are highly-gifted have "issues."

 

Bill

 

Possibly, but I've yet to meet one who didn't/doesn't.

 

They think more. They think more deeply. They often care more. They frequently aren't terribly socially successful, because it's so tough to find age peers to whom the relate in any meaningful way. And most of these kids really, really want that kind of meaningful relating.

 

Maybe it's because I'm a recovering gifted kid myself (and am married to one, too) that I take this so much for granted.

 

And I do realize that my "sample size" is too small to be scientifically significant. But I can tell you that I made most of my closest friends as a kid through gifted programs and classes, and not one of us graduated from high school in a traditional way. Most of us had an unusually rough time in our teens and young adult years (substance abuse, awful relationships, trouble sticking with either education or jobs, etc.).

 

My daughter graduated this June from an early entrance college program for highly gifted young women. She has told us repeatedly that she has the fewest "issues" of any of the girls she met there. Almost without exception, they have been diagnosed with a variety of disorders (primarily associated with anxiety), and many of them are medicated.

 

So, sure, there are probably some highly/profoundly gifted kids who avoid many or all of these problems, but I'd be willing to bet there aren't a lot of them.

[Spy Car]

Possibly, but I've yet to meet one who didn't/doesn't.

 

They think more. They think more deeply. They often care more. They frequently aren't terribly socially successful, because it's so tough to find age peers to whom the relate in any meaningful way. And most of these kids really, really want that kind of meaningful relating.

 

Maybe it's because I'm a recovering gifted kid myself (and am married to one, too) that I take this so much for granted.

 

And I do realize that my "sample size" is too small to be scientifically significant. But I can tell you that I made most of my closest friends as a kid through gifted programs and classes, and not one of us graduated from high school in a traditional way. Most of us had an unusually rough time in our teens and young adult years (substance abuse, awful relationships, trouble sticking with either education or jobs, etc.).

 

My daughter graduated this June from an early entrance college program for highly gifted young women. She has told us repeatedly that she has the fewest "issues" of any of the girls she met there. Almost without exception, they have been diagnosed with a variety of disorders (primarily associated with anxiety), and many of them are medicated.

 

So, sure, there are probably some highly/profoundly gifted kids who avoid many or all of these problems, but I'd be willing to bet there aren't a lot of them.

 

I scored so high on the school administered IQ test that they demanded a re-test :tongue_smilie:

 

Just to show them I did slightly better the second time. They were suspicious because I seemed like just another "bright" kid. I was quite social, athletic, extraverted and not "quirky" and just did not fit the stereotype.

 

My son hasn't been tested yet, but I strongly suspect it will be the same deal.

 

Bill

[Crimson Wife]

I think it is a fallacy to think that all children that score are highly-gifted have "issues."

 

Bill

 

No, I don't think all HG+ individuals have issues. However, I think that for those who do, the giftedness exacerbates whatever else is going on with them. Kind of like an amplifier.

[ElizabethB]

I was quite social, athletic, extraverted and not "quirky" and just did not fit the stereotype.

 

 

You can't tell us you're not quirky! Just look at the whale and the avatar!!

:lol::lol::lol:

 

My husband and I have a friend whose IQ is very high, Rhodes Scholar, teaches himself languages for entertainment...yet, he is a pilot and most people don't realize just how smart he is, he is funny and fits in well. Every once in a while talking to him, he'll say something non sequitur. Then, 5, 10, 15 minutes later, the conversation will get to the point he was at back then and suddenly his comment doesn't seem so non sequitur!

[Spy Car]

You can't tell us you're not quirky! Just look at the whale and the avatar!!

:lol::lol::lol:

 

 

We call them "eccentricities" :D

 

Bil

[EthiopianFood]

We call them "eccentricities" :D

 

Bil

 

Of course you do, Bill. Of course you do. :tongue_smilie:

[Jenny in Florida]

You can't tell us you're not quirky! Just look at the whale and the avatar!!

 

 

Yep.

 

For what it's worth, my son is much less obviously "weird" than my daughter. He has a larger social circle and looks pretty normal on the outside.

 

Underneath, however, he has most of the same issues she does. He just saves them for us at home.

 

As I said, I'm sure there are some kids who don't have "issues." I've just never met one. (And the director of the college program from which my daughter just graduated has studied profoundly gifted girls for years and can talk at length about their challenges.)

 

I'm glad you and your son have skirted some of those problems.

[radiobrain]

I, personally, look at oddball, eccentric and quirky as positives.

 

I am heavily involved in a gifted program and I am exposed to over 1000 gifted kids (most are traditionaly schooled) during any given year.... many are super quirky, many seem totally average. There are some kids who I hear are PG, but it is not obvious. You can't judge a book...etcetc

 

ugh, it's too early and hot to think properly.

[silliness7]

As an insanely busy homeschool mom with so much to juggle I prefer bright *and* highly motivated to anything and everything. Obviously you take what you get. But that dark corner of your brain that is getting frustrated with the stress of this or that or the other....I mean who can help thinking "why can't so & so be more like the highly motivated bright one?" <gasp>

 

DON"T SAY THAT OUT LOUD. :D (that goes without saying, right?)

 

I'd like to think I'm so exceptionally noble that I wouldn't ever think such a thing. But I am not. The bright motivated kid is easy to teach and makes homeschooling a joy. The ADHD kid who hates to read and throws multiple tantrums a day over every conceivable type of school assignment, not so much. :tongue_smilie:

 

I voted bright as opposed to gifted. I've never had a gifted child but what I've read about them they sound like they need constant mental stimulation at higher and higher levels and may overly rely on parent to provide that. No thank you.

[zaichiki]

I scored so high on the school administered IQ test that they demanded a re-test :tongue_smilie:

 

Just to show them I did slightly better the second time. They were suspicious because I seemed like just another "bright" kid. I was quite social, athletic, extraverted and not "quirky" and just did not fit the stereotype.

 

My son hasn't been tested yet, but I strongly suspect it will be the same deal.

 

Bill

 

Just to back Bill up here (not that he needs it) --

I know a PG family with several kids and no issues. They are PG, athletic, easy-going, and make friends easily.

[zaichiki]

I am heavily involved in a gifted program and I am exposed to over 1000 gifted kids (most are traditionaly schooled) during any given year.... many are super quirky, many seem totally average. There are some kids who I hear are PG, but it is not obvious. You can't judge a book...etcetc

 

 

Thanks for sharing that.

 

My own kids happen to be a mixed bag. Some have more obvious issues than others.

 

I don't think the issues are necessarily linked to the IQ, though. In our family one side has more issues and the other side has fewer. It also happens that the side with fewer issues seems to be further along on the IQ bell curve. Disclaimer: the gifted individuals on both sides are quirky, but not all have issues.

 

As an aside -

What are you all thinking is the difference between the natural quirkiness that comes with high IQ and *issues*?

[Ester Maria]

I think it is a fallacy to think that all children that score are highly-gifted have "issues."

 

Bill

:iagree:

 

Few things make me roll my eyes as much as that assumption.

For some reason, or at least my anecdotal experience points to such a generalization, it also seems to be a distinctly American phenomenon, because in many places in Europe there does not seem to be a prevalent assumption that if you have a gifted child (even a PG one) they necessarily have "issues" (any more so, at least, than any person has "issues" - because, well, people of all sorts have various "issues") and that even if they do have them they are necessarily caused by their giftedness (but may be a result of other variables in a child's life and "treatable" accordingly).

 

For all I know, some of the most well-adjusted, NORMAL people, incredibly socially intelligent and capable of functioning on multiple levels and with a variety of people, were also some of the most intelligent and the most professionally accomplished ones - in fact, their adaptability to various social surroundings seems to go hand in hand with their mental adaptability to various concepts. On the other hand, I have known various eccentrics whom I would not consider overly intelligent per se, just eccentric. And then there is everything in-between, such as the classic image of a brilliant quirky professor, or people who manage to fool you into thinking they are extraordinary because they exhibit many textbook traits, but turn out average at the end of the day, and so forth. Some are dramatic, some not; some are socially awkward, some not; some are bratty, some not; some are more prone to melancholy, others not; about most of those things something can be done, too, if you consider it excessive, because there is a lot of weight on the environment too, not just biology.

 

The point is, people are different, this has little to do with intelligence. Yeah, there are kids for whom it will be hard to take that they cannot discuss their interests with their age group. Others, not so much, because it will be inherently obvious to them that one should "compartmentalize": okay, I cannot talk to you about Cicero, but what I can do with you is legos and swimming, so I will connect with you on that level, and when it comes to Cicero, I will save that for other contexts, even if they include much older people at this point. Then there are "manipulators", able to turn just about every situation to their advantage, including their intelligence and functioning with it in the world - being able to do that is *extremely* important life-wise, probably one of the most important factors of success. I never wanted to commiserate with my children about how sad it is that they cannot do X or Y with other children, I always wanted to emphasize how they have to get the best out of every situation possible and leave wishful thinking aside - there is NO POINT in endless complaints on how you cannot discuss Cicero with other children from the bloc, and there is NO POINT in asking from other people to give you that which they cannot give you (at least yet), so quit the drama and think pragmatically: how do I use this situation, what is in it for me and for them, how do we connect on other levels, if we cannot on this one? My children have pretty much grown up with that mantra in their early years (adapted for their age accordingly) and, honestly, somewhere about 7-8 it settled in and they became MUCH more reasonable creatures, and from then it progressed. Some years later, they not only CAN connect to "normal" kids, but they are freaking good at it too, as well as at "calculating" what would be reasonable and acceptable to share. For one, a social butterfly, that is a normal thing - the other one had to learn that skill. Which is even better, as she can pride in an actual achievement there. :tongue_smilie:

 

From the teaching perspective, not too different either: you always meet them where they are and build up from there, gifted or not. Yeah, you might need to outsource, accelerate, use college materials, fly through things more quickly or delve more deeply - big deal, if you had a child that was behind, you would also be building all sorts of bridges to get to them, this is the same, only reverse and maybe more difficult to "prescribe" how to handle as each situation is so individual. But then again, big deal, you are always raising an individual, gifted or not, and adapt things accordingly.

[Spy Car]

:iagree:

 

Few things make me roll my eyes as much as that assumption.

For some reason, or at least my anecdotal experience points to such a generalization, it also seems to be a distinctly American phenomenon, because in many places in Europe there does not seem to be a prevalent assumption that if you have a gifted child (even a PG one) they necessarily have "issues" (any more so, at least, than any person has "issues" - because, well, people of all sorts have various "issues") and that even if they do have them they are necessarily caused by their giftedness (but may be a result of other variables in a child's life and "treatable" accordingly).

 

For all I know, some of the most well-adjusted, NORMAL people, incredibly socially intelligent and capable of functioning on multiple levels and with a variety of people, were also some of the most intelligent and the most professionally accomplished ones - in fact, their adaptability to various social surroundings seems to go hand in hand with their mental adaptability to various concepts. On the other hand, I have known various eccentrics whom I would not consider overly intelligent per se, just eccentric. And then there is everything in-between, such as the classic image of a brilliant quirky professor, or people who manage to fool you into thinking they are extraordinary because they exhibit many textbook traits, but turn out average at the end of the day, and so forth. Some are dramatic, some not; some are socially awkward, some not; some are bratty, some not; some are more prone to melancholy, others not; about most of those things something can be done, too, if you consider it excessive, because there is a lot of weight on the environment too, not just biology.

 

The point is, people are different, this has little to do with intelligence. Yeah, there are kids for whom it will be hard to take that they cannot discuss their interests with their age group. Others, not so much, because it will be inherently obvious to them that one should "compartmentalize": okay, I cannot talk to you about Cicero, but what I can do with you is legos and swimming, so I will connect with you on that level, and when it comes to Cicero, I will save that for other contexts, even if they include much older people at this point. Then there are "manipulators", able to turn just about every situation to their advantage, including their intelligence and functioning with it in the world - being able to do that is *extremely* important life-wise, probably one of the most important factors of success. I never wanted to commiserate with my children about how sad it is that they cannot do X or Y with other children, I always wanted to emphasize how they have to get the best out of every situation possible and leave wishful thinking aside - there is NO POINT in endless complaints on how you cannot discuss Cicero with other children from the bloc, and there is NO POINT in asking from other people to give you that which they cannot give you (at least yet), so quit the drama and think pragmatically: how do I use this situation, what is in it for me and for them, how do we connect on other levels, if we cannot on this one? My children have pretty much grown up with that mantra in their early years (adapted for their age accordingly) and, honestly, somewhere about 7-8 it settled in and they became MUCH more reasonable creatures, and from then it progressed. Some years later, they not only CAN connect to "normal" kids, but they are freaking good at it too, as well as at "calculating" what would be reasonable and acceptable to share. For one, a social butterfly, that is a normal thing - the other one had to learn that skill. Which is even better, as she can pride in an actual achievement there. :tongue_smilie:

 

From the teaching perspective, not too different either: you always meet them where they are and build up from there, gifted or not. Yeah, you might need to outsource, accelerate, use college materials, fly through things more quickly or delve more deeply - big deal, if you had a child that was behind, you would also be building all sorts of bridges to get to them, this is the same, only reverse and maybe more difficult to "prescribe" how to handle as each situation is so individual. But then again, big deal, you are always raising an individual, gifted or not, and adapt things accordingly.

 

Great post!

 

Bill (who feels the brevity of his post makes a nice contrast :tongue_smilie:)

[MinivanMom]

I think it is a fallacy to think that all children that score are highly-gifted have "issues."

 

Bill

 

:iagree:

 

Few things make me roll my eyes as much as that assumption.

For some reason, or at least my anecdotal experience points to such a generalization, it also seems to be a distinctly American phenomenon, because in many places in Europe there does not seem to be a prevalent assumption that if you have a gifted child (even a PG one) they necessarily have "issues" (any more so, at least, than any person has "issues" - because, well, people of all sorts have various "issues") and that even if they do have them they are necessarily caused by their giftedness (but may be a result of other variables in a child's life and "treatable" accordingly).

:iagree:

 

In fact, I'm going to go the opposite direction and say that giftedness can be a huge asset. I've personally known several people who overcame horrendous personal trials (extreme abuse and neglect, poverty, homelessness as a child) to become functional college-educated adults. Their intelligence opened doors to them that would not have existed otherwise (gifted programs where they met children of college-educated families, teachers eager to mentor them, college scholarships, etc). Their lives would have been very different without that natural intelligence.

[zaichiki]

I always wanted to emphasize how they have to get the best out of every situation possible and leave wishful thinking aside - there is NO POINT in endless complaints on how you cannot discuss Cicero with other children from the bloc, and there is NO POINT in asking from other people to give you that which they cannot give you (at least yet), so quit the drama and think pragmatically: how do I use this situation, what is in it for me and for them, how do we connect on other levels, if we cannot on this one?

 

:) I will remember this. Thanks.

 

I have one child who "compartmentalizes" easily and does this naturally. Another needs training, but isn't particularly interested in seeing things from another perspective. Maybe he'll grow into it... Hey, they each have their strengths and weaknesses...

[Maus]

I think it is a fallacy to think that all children that score are highly-gifted have "issues."

 

Bill

Well, "all" is the keyword, right? Anytime you say "all" (or "none"), you've created a fallacy.

 

I do think the majority of gifted kids have OEs to some degree. Some OEs just stand out more, and most OEs in most individuals are instinctively and unconsciously well-hidden by adulthood, and often by the teen years. (In other words, within the adult gifted population, you would rarely be able to pick out an individual's OEs.)

[catz]

I scored so high on the school administered IQ test that they demanded a re-test :tongue_smilie:

 

Just to show them I did slightly better the second time. They were suspicious because I seemed like just another "bright" kid. I was quite social, athletic, extraverted and not "quirky" and just did not fit the stereotype.

 

My son hasn't been tested yet, but I strongly suspect it will be the same deal.

 

Bill

 

I suspect my kids would be somewhat similar in a school system. My son attended for 2 years and no one suspected (including us because we were never IDed young) until he ceilinged out their GT screener. I still think they're quirky, but they also have the gift of disguise. I remember my main goal in elementary school was just not to stick out. I was very careful about what parts of myself I would reveal in different settings. Both my kids are extroverted and socialize well with a wide variety of kids. I think they save their "quirks" for their parents mostly!

 

I do think they are more intense, require more energy, and can be harder to keep ahead of than an average to MG child. I do think they're great though and they're definitely related to us! I wouldn't actually want to change them.

 

As a GT family, I think we tend to seek out and find other GT families whether they identify that way or not. When you've got your own circle of GT kids to run with, I think your sense of average changes. I personally thought all preschoolers could assemble lego sets intended for 8-12 year olds and could multiply and divide before my oldest went to school. :tongue_smilie:

[Spy Car]

I suspect my kids would be somewhat similar in a school system. My son attended for 2 years and no one suspected (including us because we were never IDed young) until he ceilinged out their GT screener. I still think they're quirky, but they also have the gift of disguise. I remember my main goal in elementary school was just not to stick out. I was very careful about what parts of myself I would reveal in different settings. Both my kids are extroverted and socialize well with a wide variety of kids. I think they save their "quirks" for their parents mostly!

 

I, for example, played football and was part of the social-jock crowd in Junior High School, but would also sneak away on Wenesdays to play Chess with my nerdy friends in the Chess Club, in which I served as the President. We also re-grouped at time after-school to form the "Rocket Club." Same nerds, different activity.

 

It was soooooo uncool that (being the typical adolescent boy that I was) I kept these activities on the Q.T. It was in many measures a bifurcated school experience.

 

Bill

[Bang!Zoom!]

I vote for bright, although it doesn't lend itself to as many memorable moments like house fires, infestations of fruit flies, random house pets appearing and then escaping....drained bank accounts and therapy for mom. :) :)

[Donna]

I, for example, played football and was part of the social-jock crowd in Junior High School, but would also sneak away on Wenesdays to play Chess with my nerdy friends in the Chess Club, in which I served as the President. We also re-grouped at time after-school to form the "Rocket Club." Same nerds, different activity.

 

It was soooooo uncool that (being the typical adolescent boy that I was) I kept these activities on the Q.T. It was in many measures a bifurcated school experience.

 

Bill

 

I had a similar high school experience. I played soccer as the only girl on the boys' varsity soccer team (my jock side, LOL) then was on the debate team, the math olympiad team, and on the Odyssey of the Mind team.

 

I ran with a number of different crowds and compartmentalized well. :001_smile:

[Iucounu]

No amount of increased intelligence is a bad thing. I wish there were a poll option where I could wish for the entire human race to become more intelligent. I could never wish for either of my children to be less intelligent, even though my older one has certainly caused some stressful times. :)

[zaichiki]

I wish there were a poll option where I could wish for the entire human race to become more intelligent.

 

:lol::lol::lol:

[MBM]

I, for example, played football and was part of the social-jock crowd in Junior High School, but would also sneak away on Wenesdays to play Chess with my nerdy friends in the Chess Club, in which I served as the President. We also re-grouped at time after-school to form the "Rocket Club." Same nerds, different activity.

 

It was soooooo uncool that (being the typical adolescent boy that I was) I kept these activities on the Q.T. It was in many measures a bifurcated school experience.

 

Bill

 

At one of the public junior high schools in our suburb, the school sign proudly lists all the years the school took first place in state and nationals for the Science Olympiad.

 

Students have to try out for the team and are expected to study at least an hour or two per day. Those who want to study along are allowed to do so, and interestingly, it is a very popular club, possibly the most popular. I give much of the credit for this to the coaches. They're awesome.

 

Those who earn medals are required by the coaches to wear them on a day that commemorates their achievements and culminates in a pep rally for the entire club. Many of these students later go on to do very well in science.

 

I wish more schools would encourage and recognize academic achievement like this junior high does instead of viewing it as something *geeky* kids do. Schools acknowledge achievement in sports, which is great, but they shouldn't ignore or discourage the academic achievements. Not saying this specifically to you, Bill, but I feel so many schools unfortunately have created an atmosphere where academic achievement is considered something almost shameful, something to be hidden.

[SnegurochkaL]

 

I wish more schools would encourage and recognize academic achievement like this junior high does instead of viewing it as something *geeky* kids do. Schools acknowledge achievement in sports, which is great, but they shouldn't ignore or discourage the academic achievements. Not saying this specifically to you, Bill, but I feel so many schools unfortunately have created an atmosphere where academic achievement is considered something almost shameful, something to be hidden.

 

:iagree: A month ago my husband went to his high school re-union and whole family went along. It was an interesting experience for me to see a typical high school in US, because I was educated abroad. I saw all kinds of sports trophies and sports achievement recognition and almost non of the academic ones. We finally saw a trophy for taking a 4th place in Mathcount competition as a team:tongue_smilie:. It was almost hidden and it took me some time to figure out what it was for.:confused:

On a contrary, my school had several "recognition boards" where the portraits of the best school students were presented. Kids felt honored seeing their portraits as a recognition of their achievements in different fields such as math, physics, chemistry, biology etc. Most of those kids were participating at different level olympiads individually and as a team. Team achievements were based on a summary of individual results of participants, so everyone had a chance to compete.:auto:

[Spy Car]

At one of the public junior high schools in our suburb, the school sign proudly lists all the years the school took first place in state and nationals for the Science Olympiad.

 

Students have to try out for the team and are expected to study at least an hour or two per day. Those who want to study along are allowed to do so, and interestingly, it is a very popular club, possibly the most popular. I give much of the credit for this to the coaches. They're awesome.

 

Those who earn medals are required by the coaches to wear them on a day that commemorates their achievements and culminates in a pep rally for the entire club. Many of these students later go on to do very well in science.

 

I wish more schools would encourage and recognize academic achievement like this junior high does instead of viewing it as something *geeky* kids do. Schools acknowledge achievement in sports, which is great, but they shouldn't ignore or discourage the academic achievements. Not saying this specifically to you, Bill, but I feel so many schools unfortunately have created an atmosphere where academic achievement is considered something almost shameful, something to be hidden.

 

I agree. But I think problem goes way beyond the schools to society at large.

 

Bill

[kiana]

It seems counterproductive to wish for something other than the children you have.

[MBM]

I agree. But I think problem goes way beyond the schools to society at large.

 

Bill

 

Yes, it is definitely a societal problem, but, IMO, so many schools perpetuate the attitude that learning is a geek thing. I think that's where it could change, if only just a little. For example, my youngest son's former Catholic elementary school does not acknowledge students who do well academically at all. A kid could win the state spelling bee or regional MathCounts and it means nada to them. Sports are an entirely different story. In cases like this, schools are dropping the ball (no pun intended!).

 

[zaichiki]

Yes, it is definitely a societal problem, but, IMO, so many schools perpetuate the attitude that learning is a geek thing.

 

 

A charter magnet school was opened where we used to live -- for middle school aged kids. It was based on the Russian system and did a lot of what Sneguochka listed. It lasted 2 years before it was "taken away" from the founder, new teachers were hired, the curriculum was changed and "dumbed down," and the entire school culture changed. It's nothing like it used to be. Sigh.

[Serenade]

I chose bright, because often gifted kids have other issues, or quirks, that go along with being gifted. To me, bright kids seem to have the best of both worlds -- they're good students, and often seen by their peers as being a success. Often gifted kids, on the other hand, are thought of as being geeks, weird, or quirky. I know it's not the case all the time, but often it is.

[minuway]

I personally prefer "My little oddballs." :D

:

 

 

:iagree:

 

My oldest (6) has intense overexcitabilities, and I only recently read about these connected to gifted people. I was worried that she had some awful amalgam of OCD/ADHD/anxiety disorders, but she also works several grade levels above her age. It never occurred to me that she was "gifted" though (I read early and voraciously, and my husband is a theoretical physicist so I figured she had the math genes), but everything made sense after reading about perfectionism and overexcitabilities in gifted children. It also gave me insight into my highly gifted husband, who has just about all of the overexcitabilites in sometimes crippling force. In fact, they way that some of his matched some of mine probably had a lot to do with why we connected so strongly in the first place. But seeing my child struggle the same way has given me more compassion for him and overall.

 

I'm sure life would be easier, more straightforward for me if neither were gifted, but they wouldn't be *them.* I love them dearly and couldn't wish them different. Its not all difficulty; there are aspects of their giftedness that are truly delightful!

[zaichiki]

:iagree:

 

My oldest (6) has intense overexcitabilities, and I only recently read about these connected to gifted people. I was worried that she had some awful amalgam of OCD/ADHD/anxiety disorders, but she also works several grade levels above her age.

 

I'm going to borrow the Misdiagnosis book that was suggested earlier in the thread (I think it was this thread). When my oldest was younger people frequently suggested I might want to learn more about ADD. One person even suggested Aspberger's to me. And I wondered for a while, too. But last school year (not the year that we've just completed) we sent him to a small Catholic school. It is considered the most academically challenging school in our area. He was grade skipped and still ended up on the honor roll every quarter and was placed in that grade's high math class. He took a few weeks getting used to the organizational skills needed to get his homework done correctly/on time and prepare for tests, but by the end of the first month he had no more trouble in that area. He always got good comments about his behavior on progress reports. I now realize, if he truly had ADD or Aspberger's, he would have struggled in a traditional, formal, Catholic school (middle school) setting, with lockers, changing classes, homework, tests/quizzes. Well, there would have been at least *some* sign that there could be issues. I feel confident he has no issues beyond overexciteabilities (but he sure does have his share there). If he had never had that school experience I would likely have been questioning for a long time.

[azmomx3]

.

Edited July 21, 2011 by azmomx3