A 6-year-old smarter than Einstein?

[Colleen in SEVA]

Have you seen this 6 year old? He was just on the Today Show on NBC, and I saw him last week on another news outlet. The story is that he is an "off the chart genius" because he can do all these amazing things.

 

OK... I'm NOT trying to take this kid's thunder away or anything. Yes, he seems like a SMART kid... but to claim he is smarter than Einstein because his IQ is 172? Personally, I don't find it that extraordinary that a 6-year-old memorized lists of facts.

 

He can calculate the day of the week any given date falls on (ummm... it's a simple algorithm you can memorize http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculating_the_day_of_the_week )

 

He knows the dates of power for all the US Presidents (a normal thing for kids to know?).

 

He can say the alphabet backwards (don't all kids try this before they are 6?)

 

He learned to add when he was 4.5 (ummm.... don't most kids?)

 

He stated "I like to add, subtract, multiply, and divide" (again... don't most kids?). He repeated this statement twice in the exact same type of speech, like it was a canned answer he had memorized.

 

I don't know. I'm not trying to be negative.... but truthfully these things are just not that impressive to me. Is he smart? Definitely! Smarter than Einstein? I'm not convinced.

:001_huh:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kunl3F-0_A4

Edited March 26, 2009 by Colleen in SEVA

[Colleen in SEVA]

:D OK... Maybe it is just a matter of perspective. The first reply to a YouTube video of his states:

OMGZ O_O he's so msart :O for a six year old!!! how the heck does he noe dat stuff?! i can't even list the first president's date in office TT^TT

 

 

Maybe compared to *SOME* people, he IS a genius. :tongue_smilie:

 

Is my view of normal skewed? I know my kids are smart... but I don't really consider them genius level. They are really good at memorizing things, but to me that doesn't make someone a genius.

 

Is this boy really "one in a million"? Or does he just happen to easily remember lists of facts?

Edited March 26, 2009 by Colleen in SEVA

[VanessaS]

IQ tests are generally unreliable above IQ 145 for statistical reasons (too small of a sample). Most people I know that have IQ's over 145 I just group in my "They're pretty darn smart." category and leave it at that.

 

Maybe compared to *SOME* people, he IS a genius. :tongue_smilie:

 

LOL! Had to agree with you there. Geez... all those lists? Ever heard of the Internet?

 

I wouldn't put my kid on TV like that. Makes him seem like a circus act. And I don't know if the kid is really a genius, regardless of IQ score. Genius is more than a simple IQ score anyway, since that only measures academic aptitude.

Isn't genius defined by the manifestation of talent and abilities? Michael Jordon, Sir Isaac Newton, Pablo Picassso, Jimi Hendrix, Einstein, Jack Welch, Mozart, the Bronte sisters, Bill Gates, Marie Curie, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander the Great, and -- of course -- Jesus Christ are considered geniuses. You don't need to know their IQ scores or their grades in school (which were sometimes surprisingly low) because their genius is obvious through their works.

 

After all, I could do similar things at that age, as well, and I only have an IQ of 137. And my father has a photographic memory (a real one) and he swears it's just a trick any intelligent person can master with enough practice; the Army taught him.

 

I don't think Einstein's IQ would have tested that high at that age since he was a late-talker and IQ tests are very verbal, although there are some non-verbal ones out there now. I think the real question is: will this kid be as intelligent as Einstein when he is an adult? Probably not. Einstein's reputation of genius is based on three things that are NOT pure IQ but have more to do with g (general intelligence): ability to have original thoughts, ability to understand others' original thoughts (that no one else had ever been able to understand), and the ability to explain hugely complex things with a simple beauty.

 

And it's ridiculous to compare the intelligence of a visual-spatial thinker like Einstein with someone so obviously audio-sequential, anyway. Apples and oranges.

Edited March 26, 2009 by VanessaS

[Laura Corin]

I haven't looked at the links, but I believe that you need to use one of the older IQ tests to get a score like that - the SB-LM, for example, goes up much higher than that, so on that test, his score would not actually be so unusual. I seem to remember that someone getting an SB-LM score of 170-ish would be around 140 on one of the newer tests - very bright, but not that unusual.

 

Calvin was tested with the WPSI (WISC for young children) and the SB-LM - his SB-LM score was around fifty points higher, as far as I remember (it's been a very long time since I looked at the scores).

 

Laura

[Colleen in SEVA]

Einstein's reputation of genius is based on three things that are NOT pure IQ but have more to do with g (general intelligence): ability to have original thoughts, ability to understand others' original thoughts (that no one else had ever been able to understand), and the ability to explain hugely complex things with a simple beauty.

 

YES! This is what was going through my head, but couldn't think of the words to express. Sure, it is cool that he can memorize information, but what can he DO with information? That (to me) is true genius.

[joannqn]

So, why is he in kindergarten learning the letter of the week with all the other kindergartners?

[Nan in Mass]

Vanessa - Would you be willing to ask your father how he learned? I need my visual memory to be better for drawing and painting. -Nan

[Catwoman]

I wouldn't put my kid on TV like that. Makes him seem like a circus act.

 

My thoughts, exactly!

 

Every time I see something like that, it really bothers me, because it's so obvious that there is no benefit to trotting this poor kid out and having him show off; the only reason parents do that sort of thing is because they want the attention for themselves. I guess they figure that they deserve to be famous and admired for having a bright kid.

 

I'm always in favor of trying to keep kids "normal," no matter how intelligent they may be, because whether or not they can do calculus when they're 9, they're still just kids. Appearing on the Today show and reciting a bunch of canned, "I love learning," phrases and answering the hosts' questions, does not qualify as "normal" to me.

 

Cat

[Reya]

I have to take a breath before I reply.

 

Simply put: There are a LOT of people, alive and dead, smarter than Einstein. By a great deal, some of them.

 

In common parlance, "Einstein" stands in for "the most smartest guy EVAH!" and any supposed genius is compared to a bizarre, bloated idea of him: "Yeah, they said he measured his IQ at 187, but he couldn't be smarter than EINSTEIN!" Why not? "Because Einstein was the smartest person!" Why? "Because he invented relativity and stuff?" And what is the general theory of relativity? "It's really COMPLICATED!"

 

Um. And you can fully explain DNA replication in 150 words or less, then?

 

Intelligence is potential for talent, not talent manifested. For every Einstein-like revolutionary, there have been one hundred thousand of equal or greater intellect who did nothing of note and ten thousand who made substantial, impressive contributions that weren't nearly sexy enough to grab the attention, if not the comprehension, of the public.

 

Einstein is impressive not because he was smart but because of his accomplishments. His intelligence enabled them, but his intelligence did not make such accomplishments mandatory. In fact, to say he did so much because he was smart, as if intelligence makes such things happen automatically, is belittling.

 

Sooo...the child. Most people who have built-in mental calendar calculators aren't impressive intellectually (impressive intellect to me is in the 99.999th %ile and above--EG) except for in sheer compuational power and memory for dates. Some are, though. No one really knows how or why some people can do this; I have an idea, having something similar but much more limited, and if I'm right, then it's entirely subconscious and independent from intellect, as we'd call conscious problem-solving.

 

Without seeing his other abilities, you can't say, though.

 

The drive to learn and memorize is usually found in children who are at least moderately gifted. If it is conscious, then he is, at minimum, MG.

[Reya]

So, why is he in kindergarten learning the letter of the week with all the other kindergartners?

 

Because his parents aren't fighting? What do you think happens to MOST very precocious children?

 

I had mastered the K-6 math sequence before setting foot in an elementary school building. My K teacher saw my abilities, and her solution was to make special "enrichment" centers that had really COMPLICATED Kindergarten math.

 

Seriously! This is what MOST schools think is appropriate.

 

DS was luckier. He went very briefly to an extremely laid-back private school when he was 3-4. They combined Pre-K, Preschool, and K all in one class in the afternoons, when he went. The teachers saw he was the best reader and the best in math in the class, so they wanted to put him in the 1st/2nd grade classroom the next year. They weren't worried that he was barely writing--on average, that's where he fit, so they weren't bothered by the idea of a four-year-old in a class with 2nd graders! He could have fit in their pockets. :-)

 

He was the EXTREME exception, however. More commonly, kids like this are given a pullout program three times a week with work barely harder than in their usual classes and are told that's all any gifted child should need and he should concentrate on being more sociable, instead.

[Reya]

There are enormous differences between people above 145. ENORMOUS. That's where highly gifted BEGINS. Most people can't tell the difference because to most people, even gifted people, they're too far away to discriminate.

 

I can't tell the difference between a person of average intelligence and a person of IQ 135. And I've tutored both. To them, there's an enormous gap.

 

I can tell quite easily between 145 and 160 and 160 and 180 or so. To me, there is an enormous gap.

 

Who is right? We both are. There is a big gap between each level, but it's easier to see when you're close, just like you could easily spot high schoolers among college students when you were 21 but it's harder now.

 

(These are "old" numbers, BTW. The new tests pretty much squash everything above 140 or so into a 20-point range and are much less accurate in discriminating between abilities. That doesn't mean the differences aren't there anymore--it just means that the test-makers don't care about them and make no effort to discriminate against them anymore. The test-makers themselves would be almost all "bright" or MG. See a hint of prejudice here?)

 

And what's up with the Einstein myth-building, here? Of COURSE TONS of people understand Einstein's theories. That's how they got accepted in the first place! Every physicist with a master's degree should understand it. The problems are the RAMIFICATIONS of the theory, which Einstein did not resolve, not understanding this amazingly complicated theory.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Reya

[Reya]

I'm always in favor of trying to keep kids "normal," no matter how intelligent they may be, because whether or not they can do calculus when they're 9, they're still just kids. Appearing on the Today show and reciting a bunch of canned, "I love learning," phrases and answering the hosts' questions, does not qualify as "normal" to me.

 

A truly intelligent child is not going to BE normal, no matter what you do with him. I understand some parents' motivation. Some people just want others to understand their children, in the same way that people go shows with their autistic kids or the conjoined twin girls or whatever else isn't "normal." I'd never do it, because of the circus aspect. But I do understand why they might want to.

 

It's the very un-normalness (to outsiders) of truly intelligent children that cause so much friction. It's very likely that those answers were awkward NOT because they were canned but because they were given by a 6-year-old, and 6-y-os are awkward. Every 6-y-o I've every babysat had certain things he or she loved to say about his/her passions--over and pver and over again.

[Reya]

I seem to remember that someone getting an SB-LM score of 170-ish would be around 140 on one of the newer tests - very bright, but not that unusual.

 

Yes and no. All the upper range that SB-LM discriminates is simply crammed down into a very narrow range on one of the very newest tests--and it's also far less reliable. So a 170 could be anything from 141 to 156. And so might a 160. And a 190.

 

The kids are just as different as they ever were--and they are very DIFFERENT. The test just can't tell them apart. This is why Deborah Ruf combines a new test with other criteria for discriminating between her upper three levels, which correspond approximately to HG, EG, and PG.

[Reya]

He learned to add when he was 4.5 (ummm.... don't most kids?)

 

 

Nope! 4% before K:

 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001035.pdf

[Colleen in SEVA]

Nope! 4% before K:

 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001035.pdf

 

This baffles me... even SIMPLE addition/subtraction? As in -- I give one kid 3 cookies, another kid 5 cookies, and the first kid says "Why did he get 2 more cookies than me?"

 

or...

 

"Grandma A sent me 3 dollars for my birthday and Grandma B sent me 3 dollars for my birthday! Now I have SIX DOLLARS!"

 

Really?!? Only FOUR PERCENT of kids do this before K? That just doesn't seem right.

[Catwoman]

A truly intelligent child is not going to BE normal, no matter what you do with him.

 

I think we may be thinking the same basic thing, but using different terminology. When I say, "normal," I don't mean, "average." I mean that a brilliant 6 year-old is still, emotionally, a little kid. Many parents of gifted children seem to believe that, because their kids speak like mini-adults, that they really are adults in small bodies. They forget that even the brightest child still needs to be able to be a kid.

 

Did that make any more sense?

 

Cat

[joannqn]

This baffles me... even SIMPLE addition/subtraction? As in -- I give one kid 3 cookies, another kid 5 cookies, and the first kid says "Why did he get 2 more cookies than me?"

 

or...

 

"Grandma A sent me 3 dollars for my birthday and Grandma B sent me 3 dollars for my birthday! Now I have SIX DOLLARS!"

 

Really?!? Only FOUR PERCENT of kids do this before K? That just doesn't seem right.

 

 

You'd be surprised, especially if you are used to your own advanced/accelerated/gifted kids. I thought all kids could accomplish the same academics as my kids if they were only taught and given the opportunity.

[Mommy22alyns]

The big question is, what does that poor child do all day in a kindergarten class?? :001_huh:

 

He's obviously extremely smart, but it's all just rote memory right now.

 

Reya, that link you posted is bowling me over! I wasn't surprised by the 4% arithmetic mark, but only 1% of entering kindergarteners knowing how to read - that shocked me.

[Reya]

Really?!? Only FOUR PERCENT of kids do this before K? That just doesn't seem right.

 

Yep! :-)

 

I don't remember where I mentioned it last, but EVERYONE normalizes to themselves and their families. That's why I'm so bemused by people freaking out over DS. I just don't think it's that special!

[Reya]

My baby wiggled and deleted my reply.... :-(

 

Yes and no.

 

Yes, every kid loves to play.

 

No, because different kids have different kinds of play, and some play is considered "unacceptable" to certain people.

 

DS thinks all of the following are play:

Star Wars

Latin

Legos

Singapore NEM 1

Snap Circuits

video games

 

In fact, I don't think he fully understands why Snap Circuits count for school but video games don't! There are people who will tell me, loudly and angrily, that NO child would EVER choose to do math or science or Latin for fun and that I'm warping my kids by preventing them from being "normal".....but that's not at all true. You have to let a kid do what's "normal" for THEM.

 

I might sound picky, but that's how I cut it. :-)

 

We're probably essentially agreeing here, and I certainly wouldn't trot my kid out. But I don't think being a kid should look just like one thing!

[Reya]

Reya, that link you posted is bowling me over! I wasn't surprised by the 4% arithmetic mark, but only 1% of entering kindergarteners knowing how to read - that shocked me.

 

 

That's why I said a good 40% of kids of parents on TWTM boards--at LEAST--are in the top 10%! People were grumbling about how "dumbed-down" the schools are and won't believe me when I say that for every one of them there are several parents who can't believe the unrealistically high standards expected of their kids--*in the same schools.*

 

It's part of the "if you're doing less than what I think you should, it's dumbed down, and if you're doing more, it's evil pushing" syndrome. :tongue_smilie: I *try* to at least keep SOME perspective--I set my "good school" standards at the bottom of the top 5% in a typical public school.

[JWSJ]

But, is he smarter than Ender of Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card?...

[JenneinCA]

Ender was smart but Peter was smart and Valentine was smart too. Ender was was chosen because he was willing to do anything (at any cost) to win. There is far more to success than iq.

 

Iq is a measure of potential. Success is a measure of achievement. They are different.

[~Jenn~]

The kid in the video seems as if he has a photographic memory. Is that an indication of future potential..maybe, maybe not. The real question will be whether or not he possesses the ability to take all those archived facts and combine them with any creative and critical thought to produce anything aside from party tricks.

 

The equation for calculating IQ is 100xMental Age/Chronological Age. An IQ of 176 would put this boy at a mental age of 10.5 yrs. Impressive, yes. Off the charts...no.

 

I always laugh when people boast that they've had their 2 yr. old tested and his/her IQ is 150 which basically means the child has the same intelligence as a 3.5 yr old. :001_rolleyes:

Edited March 27, 2009 by ~Jenn~

[Catwoman]

Yes and no.

 

Yes, every kid loves to play.

 

No, because different kids have different kinds of play, and some play is considered "unacceptable" to certain people.

 

DS thinks all of the following are play:

Star Wars

Latin

Legos

Singapore NEM 1

Snap Circuits

video games

 

In fact, I don't think he fully understands why Snap Circuits count for school but video games don't! There are people who will tell me, loudly and angrily, that NO child would EVER choose to do math or science or Latin for fun and that I'm warping my kids by preventing them from being "normal".....but that's not at all true. You have to let a kid do what's "normal" for THEM.

 

I might sound picky, but that's how I cut it. :-)

 

We're probably essentially agreeing here, and I certainly wouldn't trot my kid out. But I don't think being a kid should look just like one thing!

 

LOL --we're definitely agreeing! When you described what's normal for your ds, you might as well have been describing mine, too! :D

 

Cat

[MamaSheep]

A couple of observations. Kids with Asperger's Syndrome often have very high IQs. They very typically are superb at memorizing lists and other rote information, and also very typically speak using rote phrases that sound very "canned", and/or highly pedantic expressions that make them sound like an encyclopedia or professor (which is why some people call it "little professor syndrome"). They also can (though don't always or even usually) have some savant skills, such as knowing where all the trains in a train system are supposed to be at any given time according to their schedules, or knowing the day of the week of any given date in history.

[ElizabethB]

LOL --we're definitely agreeing! When you described what's normal for your ds, you might as well have been describing mine, too! :D

 

Cat

 

OK, my daughter has her moments, too. She sometimes does Spanish or Spelling for fun in the evenings, and I just found this note on the floor:

 

She drew a big heart and then wrote:

 

"Hi Mom i like you but I want to do more school Bye"

 

A second sheet of paper said: "7 + 7 = 14. I love you." (Two heart drawings)

 

...we could start with more punctuation and capitalization, I guess!

 

We have been doing a light week here, it's spring break for the local schools so we only have been doing Bible verses and math. (We took a fair amount of break when my husband was deployed for 4 1/2 months, we would normally take a spring break otherwise.)

Edited March 27, 2009 by ElizabethB

[JWSJ]

Ender was smart but Peter was smart and Valentine was smart too. Ender was was chosen because he was willing to do anything (at any cost) to win. There is far more to success than iq.

 

Peter was rejected because he was too violent.

Valentine was rejected because she wasn't violent enough.

 

Ender wasn't aware what he was doing was real.

 

That gave him a lot of flexibility to do anything to win.

 

Yes, this book illustrates personality has a lot to do with how you turn out.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

The big question is, what does that poor child do all day in a kindergarten class?? :001_huh:.

 

He learns to hold a tray in the cafeteria. He learns to cut curves and a straight line. He learns to hold a crayon and color within the lines and hone his fine motor skills. He learns not to annoy other people. He learns to wait his turn. He plays pretend on the playground. He learns to open his little milk carton (a useful skill, lol). He listens to stories and enjoys picture books and explores art and music. He plants seeds and paints with shaving cream on the tabletop. He dresses up like a fireman. He runs around making noises like a firetruck and learns when it's appropriate to do that and when it's appropriate to use an indoor voice.

 

My ds had similar rote abilities and some higher order thinking going on in K, but he has such fond memories of kindergarten that he took me aside last summer (he's 19) and begged me to send our 4 y/o to K this fall instead of keeping her home. I admit we've had off-the-chart amazing public kindergarten experiences for our kids, and that's probably not the norm. But even a brilliant kid may have a good time for three or four hours with a group of age-mates. And there's certainly no pressure academically. Just fun -- if it's the right program.

[musicianmom]

He learns to hold a tray in the cafeteria. He learns to cut curves and a straight line. He learns to hold a crayon and color within the lines and hone his fine motor skills. He learns not to annoy other people. He learns to wait his turn. He plays pretend on the playground. He learns to open his little milk carton (a useful skill, lol). He listens to stories and enjoys picture books and explores art and music. He plants seeds and paints with shaving cream on the tabletop. He dresses up like a fireman. He runs around making noises like a firetruck and learns when it's appropriate to do that and when it's appropriate to use an indoor voice.

 

 

I need to remember this list. If someone tells me, "But your dd needs kindergarten, it's about so much more than academics!" I can agree and list out all these things. Then I can show how we cover those areas in settings other than school.

 

I guess I should take her to a cafeteria-style restaurant that serves milk in little cartons and check that off the list.

[Jumping In Puddles]

I need to remember this list. If someone tells me, "But your dd needs kindergarten, it's about so much more than academics!" I can agree and list out all these things. Then I can show how we cover those areas in settings other than school.

 

I guess I should take her to a cafeteria-style restaurant that serves milk in little cartons and check that off the list.

 

I think the point was that those things are not harmful for a kid that seems too smart to be in kindergarten and those are worthwhile things -- not that you can't get those skills at home! It is not a list to just check off, but a description of K, public, private, or homeschool.

 

Kindergarten is so much more than academics, which is why you'll often see on this board, people with older children encouraging newbies to be gentle with their K'ers and take field trips and bake cookies and sing songs and read lots and lots of books instead of worrying about Latin or history or geography.

 

EDIT: It's a little hard to tell if you were being snarky or serious about taking your dd to a restaurant for experience in opening milk cartons, but I would say that all kids will have some gaps - kids in the public schools will have gaps and so will homeschool kids but I would discourage (in case you weren't being snarky) trying to prove anything to people who will criticize your choice of homeschooling. It is none of their business and it would be a good idea to "pass the bean dip!"

 

So, next time someone tells you, "But your dd needs kindergarten, it's about so much more than academics!" You can agree and say "would you please pass the bean dip?" If you don't, you may find yourself frustrated and explaining way more often than you'd want to about homeschooling.

Edited March 27, 2009 by Jumping In Puddles

[Colleen in SEVA]

I always laugh when people boast that they've had their 2 yr. old tested and his/her IQ is 150 which basically means the child has the same intelligence as a 3.5 yr old. :001_rolleyes:

 

:D:D This made me laugh as well!! :D:D

[musicianmom]

I was being serious. There are a lot of things I do forget about, living in my happy SAHM bubble. I have a sort of running list in my mind of things my kids need to learn and I seek out ways to help them acquire those skills. My dd is in a preschool gymnastics class right now because I saw her being really timid and afraid to try things at the playground. It has worked wonderfully -- last time we were at the park, she was climbing all over everything!

 

I hope I'm able to do the "bean dip" thing and avoid specific arguments about hs. However, my MIL will find a way to back me into a corner when dh isn't around. I know it, she's done it before about other things. I know I can't convince her, I just want to stump her long enough to shut her up.

 

Your points about K being a potentially good thing are valid. :)

[Karenciavo]

Perhaps the fault is with the interviewer being amazed too easily and the child didn't get to demonstrate what he can really do.

[Storm Bay]

What a fun thread. Really. Here's what I have to say to various posts, in no particular order.

 

First, Pam with all the letters--I agree. I loved school from K-3. Sure, it was way too easy, but I had so much fun with my friends, sitting at my desk, acing my work. 4-12, the opposite experience, except for the friend part.

 

I agree that these all sound like rote skills, so it's hard to say.

 

I don't think you can label genius based solely on IQ and not really at 6. Genius, as someone pointed out, goes beyond. (my words)

 

All of this reminds me of the weaknesses of testing. You cannot truly test every ability. Einstein is not the paradigm of genius. Today a boy like him would be put in a special needs class. Edison was labelled mentally retarded. Fessenden, another genius, was obviously gifted throughout his academic career, both when being homeschooled and when he went to private school.

 

Testing cannot test every type of intelligence there is, including intellectual areas. You just can't. Even that first writer of an intellegence (was it Binet or the other one?) thought so.

 

My dh is so good in this area. When I was concerned about how gifted our dc would be (dd was a baby), he said that his main concern was what kind of people they turned out to be.

 

As for me, I manage to connect with people of many intelligences, but that has to do with my personality and the fact that I have so many interests. There aren't many I can have the kind of conversations with that really stimulate my brain, but I don't let that bother me as long as I have some people in my life I can do that with.

 

I agree that the WTM forum is skewed as far as intelligence is concerned. I jokingly call this forum the "smart" forum, because there is a much higher than average percentage of bright/gifted and on up people on them. When I came here, I thought that that woman who told me that writing your name is a 5 yo skill must have been wrong or not seen enough children, because of how many kids were doing that, and not just on the AL board. I thought perhaps it was a 4 yo skill for many.

 

It's true that we get skewed by what our dc do. I don't bother telling most people what my kids did, because it's not a competition. It just isn't.

[Terabith]

If kindergarten were like that in my school, I would totally be sending my daughter. My ideal kindergarten would include lots of arts and crafts, scissors skills, drawing, playing outside (LOTS) on the playground, going for romps and free time in the woods, lots of time for pretend play and building with blocks and painting at the easel, listening to stories, looking at or reading great picture books, a real emphasis on working on gross motor skills (jumping rope, riding a bike, hopscotch, forward rolls, etc), Montessori type practical life, riding the bus, eating in the cafeteria, taking nature walks, building forts with cardboard boxes and blankets, negotiating peer relationships, cooking, playing group games like Red Rover and Duck Duck Goose, work in a woodworking centers, do circle dances, learn to finger knit, sing songs and "do music class." Have daily sessions with school wide Spanish teacher and gain as many conversational skills as possible. Learn sign language. Cover some basic phonics and math, and learning facts and nomenclature (names of shapes, dinosaurs, identifying flowers and trees and birds, geography, etc). Unit study stuff like the human body, dinosaurs, space, holidays, presidents. Watch caterpillars turn into butterflies and tadpoles into frogs. Have class pets. Plant a garden, have an ant farm, watch earthworms, maybe get an incubator and hatch duck eggs! Have a mother with a young baby come in every month so the children can watch how a baby grows and learn about babies. Go on field trips to farms and orchards and the fire station and a bakery and the hospital. Take them to the library and let them all get their first library cards. Have real responsibilities in the classroom: sweep, clean the tables and other messes, set the table, wash the dishes, care for the pets, mop up spills.

 

If my local kindergarten were like this, I'd send her in a heartbeat! I wish it was. I can't provide that at home. I wouldn't care if she didn't learn to read or add that year; this type of environment would be so enriching to her as a total person.

 

But my local kindergarten is not like this. It's about sitting at your table and not talking to your neighbor. It's about listening to your teacher and coloring page after page of boring worksheets that go over things you mastered years ago. It's about sitting still and going to the bathroom on a schedule and learning about "responsibility" by completing and returning homework that is still more busy work. It's about selling wrapping paper and cookies and chintzy gifts to raise money for the school. It's about meeting SOL's rather than nurturing young human beings.

 

That's why I'm homeschooling. Quite frankly, it's not my first choice. There are a lot of advantages to homeschooling, and I think as she gets older, it will be far easier to provide her with a quality education in an amount of time that lets her have a life and doesn't tie us to a school schedule. But I wish there were a kindergarten like this. My daughter is so social. She would thrive and be nourished and would gain advantages I can't give her.

 

So I homeschool and try to offer as much of these things as I can, even though I don't have twelve or fifteen aged peers. (I think 16 would be a perfect size for a kindergarten class, with a teacher and an aide.)

 

It's not about how smart she is. It's about how much fun she is having and how she is growing as a whole person. There will be plenty of time for hard work in academics. I think a program for a seven year old should have a lot more structure and academic learning in it. But for five and six year olds..... It's just not the same.

[Storm Bay]

If kindergarten were like that in my school, I would totally be sending my daughter. My ideal kindergarten would include lots of arts and crafts, scissors skills, drawing, playing outside (LOTS) on the playground, going for romps and free time in the woods, lots of time for pretend play and building with blocks and painting at the easel, listening to stories, looking at or reading great picture books, a real emphasis on working on gross motor skills (jumping rope, riding a bike, hopscotch, forward rolls, etc).

 

Aside from the walks in the woods, this is exactly what kindergarten was when I went. It was so much fun. Okay, there were these dumb little worksheets for concepts such as over and under, but I thought they were fun, even if easy! Of course, this was a long, long time ago when kids weren't expected to learn to read or do arithmetic in K. I don't even remember if we counted or learned the alphabet there.

 

Oh, yes, you forgot snack time ;). We had snack time. And K was half a day. I remember lying down on a mat to rest, but I don't know if we did this all year, or just when we had it in the afternoon. And this was in the days when in grade 1 you sat at a desk alone and worked. But had 2 recesses plus a full hour for lunch. And no homework. Not that those were the good old days, as there were plenty of problems, but some things were better.

[Jumping In Puddles]

I was being serious. There are a lot of things I do forget about, living in my happy SAHM bubble. I have a sort of running list in my mind of things my kids need to learn and I seek out ways to help them acquire those skills. My dd is in a preschool gymnastics class right now because I saw her being really timid and afraid to try things at the playground. It has worked wonderfully -- last time we were at the park, she was climbing all over everything!

 

I hope I'm able to do the "bean dip" thing and avoid specific arguments about hs. However, my MIL will find a way to back me into a corner when dh isn't around. I know it, she's done it before about other things. I know I can't convince her, I just want to stump her long enough to shut her up.

 

Your points about K being a potentially good thing are valid. :)

 

That is why I had to ask :lol: it is hard to tell the tone over the net. I didn't get the bean dip thing at first because I really, truly wanted to defend my choice! It wasn't until after reading the many, many bean dip threads and boundary threads here did I really think I could manage to avoid the trap.

 

I do feel for you; it is especially hard when it is your MIL! :001_huh:

 

 

If my local kindergarten were like this, I'd send her in a heartbeat! I wish it was. I can't provide that at home. I wouldn't care if she didn't learn to read or add that year; this type of environment would be so enriching to her as a total person.

 

 

 

Our local (private Montessori) kindergarten is like that! My dd goes to the preschool there, and you summed it up perfectly! The kindergarners in the class (3-6) classroom get separated for a little while to maybe do reading or have a lesson in telling time, etc. but they are with the preschool class and can choose their work like the pk'ers. My ds who is homeschooled for K but goes to the school 2-3 mornings a week for all the stuff you mentioned! (the other 6 kindergartners go 3 full days a week or 5 half days). I told the teacher, she did NOT have to include ds with the other K'ers if she didn't want to but she says she does count him as K, she just doesn't worry about the phonics/math. The kindergarners are the role models and they make a big deal out of that! They have 7 rules on the wall that the K'ers came up with (my son's rule is "never call names") and they each have chores like feeding the tortoise, wiping the tables, etc. They help the little kids get their slippers on and tie their shoes and help them to stand in line etc. And it is in an old, 200 year old farmhouse with a barn full of animals in the back and there is a stream and pond...

 

I tried to get the director to open the elementary program (grades 6-8 and there are currently 22 students) to include homeschoolers one or two days a week and she said no. :( They tried that before with 2 boys and the other enrolled students didn't think it was fair the HS'ers didn't have the same work... IDK, but I would love to continue with them!

Edited March 27, 2009 by Jumping In Puddles

[Geo]

Intelligence is potential for talent, not talent manifested.

 

Amen! There is so much unrealized potential in all

of us. Some of us waste more "potential" than others.

 

 

Geo

[Mommy22alyns]

He learns to hold a tray in the cafeteria. He learns to cut curves and a straight line. He learns to hold a crayon and color within the lines and hone his fine motor skills. He learns not to annoy other people. He learns to wait his turn. He plays pretend on the playground. He learns to open his little milk carton (a useful skill, lol). He listens to stories and enjoys picture books and explores art and music. He plants seeds and paints with shaving cream on the tabletop. He dresses up like a fireman. He runs around making noises like a firetruck and learns when it's appropriate to do that and when it's appropriate to use an indoor voice.

 

My ds had similar rote abilities and some higher order thinking going on in K, but he has such fond memories of kindergarten that he took me aside last summer (he's 19) and begged me to send our 4 y/o to K this fall instead of keeping her home. I admit we've had off-the-chart amazing public kindergarten experiences for our kids, and that's probably not the norm. But even a brilliant kid may have a good time for three or four hours with a group of age-mates. And there's certainly no pressure academically. Just fun -- if it's the right program.

 

 

 

I guess my question would have been more appropriately phrased, "What does he do in kindergarten while the rest of the class is learning their letters/numbers?" :) I definitely don't mean to diminish all the fun that can be had in a good K, but at the same time, how does he handle going over things he already knows for the good of everyone else?

 

 

I guess I should give Becca a milk carton and let her practice opening it too. She wouldn't like shaving cream all over the table though, it would freak her out. :lol:

[ladydusk]

Shaving cream is best done in the bath tub. Easy cleanup, tell her it's soap.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I guess my question would have been more appropriately phrased, "What does he do in kindergarten while the rest of the class is learning their letters/numbers?" :) I definitely don't mean to diminish all the fun that can be had in a good K, but at the same time, how does he handle going over things he already knows for the good of everyone else?

 

 

I guess I should give Becca a milk carton and let her practice opening it too. She wouldn't like shaving cream all over the table though, it would freak her out. :lol:

 

Well, I know Ben was reading at the time, well, ANYthing. And writing cursive and doing a full 2nd grade Calvert curriculum with ATS (because I was anal about getting his work "certified" and that was where he was working in his least advanced subject (writing)) at home. And he learned "A" and "B" and made notebooks with the numbers 1-10 in them with his kindergarten classmates.

 

And he wasn't bored at all. I'm not sure why. He just did the stuff and played and had a blast.

 

I suppose that part was a little bit of a waste of time, but it worked for us. And it served to show Ben that although not everyone was working at his academic level, he could be friends with them and appreciate their strengths and weaknesses. Because for a long time, he was a bit of a little snot about people who didn't know as much as he about the same things as he did. And having him with his age-mates in regular public K helped with that a bit.

 

We give up some things when we don't have our children educated with a group of others. And we gain some things as well. We just have to weigh these choices for each child, for each family. I know for some, home schooling is a lifelong commitment never to be tinkered with. For us, it's something we weigh carefully every single year -- how will this child best be served academically, professionally (for three of our years), and socially? For a few of the years, public school was the clear answer. For some years, private school. For some, international schooling. For some others, boarding school. It all depends on the child and on the year.

 

(This obviously is not everyone's choice of a road to take. But it worked for us for all three children. YMMV, all usual disclaimers apply. And wow, I've sure veered away from the original topic, huh? :glare: Sorry.)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

It's true that we get skewed by what our dc do. I don't bother telling most people what my kids did, because it's not a competition. It just isn't.

 

Yep.

 

And I agree with your husband. I would rather have a hardworking child than a smart one, any day. Both is good, of course, but a lazy, smart kid? No. I made the mistake with ds of praising him for his innate ability. I should have kept absolutely quiet about that and instead praised him only for the important things -- perseverance, kindness, loyalty, truthfulness, hard work.

 

(Not that I didn't praise those things. But I should have been exclusive about it.)

 

This article drove the point home.

[Storm Bay]

Yep.

 

And I agree with your husband. I would rather have a hardworking child than a smart one, any day. Both is good, of course, but a lazy, smart kid? No. .

 

 

I became the lazy smart kid by staying in ps after the fun was over (and, like your son, I found all that easy work in ps fun. I just loved doing school work of any kind, and used to daydream about my teacher giving me homework, which wasn't done in the early grades).

 

What I'm working on is getting my lazy, smart kid to learn to work. In fact, this is why she's not already in high school. She'd rather draw/sing/make up alphabets and languages/read/write stories than do her work. I'm on her all day. She's been told she doesn't get to start high school unless she finishes all her subjects on time. I'm "mean," I know, but the drawback to her staying home is that she doesn't see the need to finish on time. Okay, she didn't when she was in ps, either. She's been slowly moving from being a Lollygagging Dillydallier to a Hard Worker. She's made progress, but I'd like that to speed up a lot.

[Reya]

The kid in the video seems as if he has a photographic memory. Is that an indication of future potential..maybe, maybe not. The real question will be whether or not he possesses the ability to take all those archived facts and combine them with any creative and critical thought to produce anything aside from party tricks.

 

The equation for calculating IQ is 100xMental Age/Chronological Age. An IQ of 176 would put this boy at a mental age of 10.5 yrs. Impressive, yes. Off the charts...no.

 

I always laugh when people boast that they've had their 2 yr. old tested and his/her IQ is 150 which basically means the child has the same intelligence as a 3.5 yr old. :001_rolleyes:

 

IQs have not been calc as an age ratio for a long time. That's how they were very originally derived.

 

I don't know who'd test a 2-y-o, though.

[Reya]

He learns to hold a tray in the cafeteria. He learns to cut curves and a straight line. He learns to hold a crayon and color within the lines and hone his fine motor skills. He learns not to annoy other people. He learns to wait his turn. He plays pretend on the playground. He learns to open his little milk carton (a useful skill, lol). He listens to stories and enjoys picture books and explores art and music. He plants seeds and paints with shaving cream on the tabletop. He dresses up like a fireman. He runs around making noises like a firetruck and learns when it's appropriate to do that and when it's appropriate to use an indoor voice.

 

 

Because those things are SO hard to learn outside of Kindergarten! I bet he learns socialization, too, along with a big heaping serving of underachievement and standing in line!

 

This sounds like the arguments against homeschooling. Who learns to make noises like a firetruck in Kindergarten or is prevented from doing so by not attending? Plants seeds? Opens milk cartons? It's pretty sad if that's the first time a kid has done those things or if a kid is dependent on Kindergarten for those experiences.

 

I hope this is a joke!

 

(Shaving cream is the best way to clean the fronts of large appliances. BTW. No better way to do it when you have little kids.)

 

My DS mostly refined his manipulative abilities in K. And he was 3 years old. Sure, he cut and colored and cooked and the like. But we do those things at home.

[Reya]

I think the point was that those things are not harmful for a kid that seems too smart to be in kindergarten and those are worthwhile things -- not that you can't get those skills at home! It is not a list to just check off, but a description of K, public, private, or homeschool.

and explaining way more often than you'd want to about homeschooling.

 

These are things you do in any remotely decent home environment ANYWAY.

 

Inappropriate academic settings teach children how to be intolerant of the less intelligent and how to be lazy and get by with the minimal amount of work. In my DS' case, it teaches him how he can make other people basically into his own personal flunkies to do his bidding--he was so much more mature, and he took full advantage of the situation. They never learn low to study, how to apply themselves, how to work toward rewards, how to be consistent, how to be organized, etc. To create the potential for all these future problems just because you're afraid they won't grow plants in Dixie cups in second grade, too, isn't something I can agree with.

 

The appropriateness of the placement depends, of course, on just how gifted a child is. That's another problem with our system--too many see "gifted" as a binary condition. If my gifted kid turns out farther ahead than Susie's, it's simply becase I'm a better parent! If X is appropriate for my gifted kid, it's appropriate for Susie's, and Rachel's, and Ann's....! But it's just not true.

[Reya]

And I agree with your husband. I would rather have a hardworking child than a smart one, any day. Both is good, of course, but a lazy, smart kid? No. I made the mistake with ds of praising him for his innate ability. I should have kept absolutely quiet about that and instead praised him only for the important things -- perseverance, kindness, loyalty, truthfulness, hard work.

 

 

And you're simultaneously arguing for the appropriateness of an environment that will teach a child who has mastered reading and the for operations none of those things. How on earth can a child be hardworking with that kind of ability gap?

 

We praise productive effort, here. We praise insights and thought, perseverance and creativity. It doesn't matter whether you're born smart or dumb--it matters whether you're THINKING smart or dumb. They are very different things--for one thing, the second is completely relative to your abilities.

 

What REALLY gets me is that people will simultaneously say. "Well, what really matters is hard work!" and then instantly add, "It's inappropriate to teach a Kindergartener modern physics under any circumstances."

 

But if the only thing that challenges the kid is modern physics, how else will he learn hard intellectual work, even for a mere 30 minutes a day?

 

You can't have it both ways. Either laziness and underachievement is a fine price to pay for all those great intangible rewards of being age-locked with peers, or you teach hard work by providing kids with an opportunity for challenge, however unusual that appears.

[~Jenn~]

Reya..

 

Wow. I'm new here but this whole gifted subject seems to be really, really, really, super duper important to you. Wow.

 

Ds has been professionally assessed and falls in the exceptionally - profoundly gifted range but to me that's just a tiny bit of who he is. I also realize that in all honestly..nobody (except perhaps myself, my husband and the grandparents) really gives a hoot how smart ds is.

 

From reading the posts of yours that I've come across the only thing you seem to want to work into every topic is to reinforce just how gifted they are.

 

I do hope for their sakes you see them for more than just their intelligence. If you put soooo much energy into reassuring yourself that they really are the most gifted children on the planet you're going to miss out on the rest of them.

Edited March 28, 2009 by ~Jenn~

[Reya]

Reya..

 

Wow. I'm new here but this whole gifted subject seems to be really, really, really, super duper important to you. Wow.

 

Ds has been professionally assessed and falls in the exceptionally - profoundly gifted range but to me that's just a tiny bit of who he is. I also realize that in all honestly..nobody (except perhaps myself, my husband and the grandparents) really gives a hoot how smart ds is.

 

From reading the posts of yours that I've come across the only thing you seem to want to work into every topic is to reinforce just how gifted they are.

 

I do hope for their sakes you see them for more than just their intelligence. If you put soooo much energy into reassuring yourself that they really are the most gifted children on the planet you're going to miss out on the rest of them.

 

 

Er. My kids aren't all that gifted. At least DS isn't. (Goodness knows aobut DD at this point.) To put it bluntly, he's a bit slow for my family.

 

Exactly how have I worked in how smart they are in the post you're replying to? Did you think I was saying my kids are doing modern physics????

 

Um. Yeah. Sure.

 

Modern physics.

 

The kid who had mastered the four operations was...THE ONE IN THE VIDEO! I certainly don't consider DS to have mastered them, or else I wouldn't have him doing 3rd grade math. Believe it or not, I can argue for the appropriate education of any child.

 

Giftedness becomes the center of a child's identity ONLY IN an inappropriate educational environment. When a child is fully accommodated, it might change their approach to life and change what they think is "fun", but they don't think about it unless someone's making them feel like a freak by telling them that their fun isn't appropriate. Which many people seem determined to do.

 

I could talk off-topic about the other things DS does. Since you're wondering what else he does (or I care about), his newest accomplishment is in swimming! He's in an Advanced level class--there are only three kids now in his age range (out of well over 100!) who are that high, and he can join the swim team this summer. Last summer, he'd never had a swim lesson and was scared of putting his head underwater, so this is amazing for us, and I'm incredibly proud of all his hard work and concentration! He's also doing a really great job of listening to the instructor--which is no small feat for him in such a noisy, distracting environment. I love swimming for him because we can keep him in groups where he's around the middle in ability--it's great for him to have to work so hard. I am so incredibly proud of how hard he's worked.

 

Do you want to know what I am VERY proudest of, though? I know, when I take him out to play with other kids, that when there is an altercation or tears or whatever that I don't need to get up and rush to the door with the other moms because he never does anything of that kind of concern anymore. It's great to be able to chat and know that if anything goes wrong, it's not going to be becase of my kid. It's been like this for six months, at least, and it's GREAT. I love him being a "good kid" so much more than anything else he's done. EDIT: Except for maybe how he treats his sister!

 

And NOW I'm evil because I think my kid's perfect in every way, right?

 

He's not. But he IS a good kid.

Edited March 28, 2009 by Reya