Gifted Children

mumps

I think it can be a really difficult balance. It is so important that he can be a little boy and play but I do think that very bright children can miss out at school.

My DD was always bright, before her 2nd birthday we realised she was reading, by experimenting we found her reading vocabulary was greater than her spoken vocabulary. At 3 at playgroup she would sit and read to the other kids, didn't always make her or me popular with other parents. When she was due to start school we visited the school, the reception teacher was most definite that she would be doing exactly the same as everyone else, so we had a four year old who liked to read Famous 5 books who was going to have to work through pre reading skills! She would have been bored to death. We home schooled, well she stayed at home, for a few years. When she started school she came home very excited one day, the teacher who was covering her class while her teacher was off sick had brought in some special maths for her. She was so happy telling me "Mrs X doesn't think I'm a nuisance." I said I hoped she was never a nuisance. "Oh" she said, "Mrs Y is always saying I'm a nuisance because I finish the work sheets too fast."

When we were "home schooling" she did swimming, dancing, music lessons and also went to a French Club and Rainbows. She thrived and quite effectively educated herself. When she started school she was assessed and I was told she was top of her year in everything but PE.

We found the computer great, she loved educational games and also creating her own stories as books. Music was something she loved and she started lessons at 3 and by the time she was due to start school she had done her first practical and theory exams.

Our biggest problem was other parents who seemed to see her as some sort of threat. I used to point out to them that all the kids would be reading fluently in a few years and their kids were far ahead of her in physical activities, HV suggested we have her assessed for dyspraxia as she was so poorly coordinated hence we encouraged her swimming and dancing but she was never any good at PE.

My advice is be led by him and his interests and be prepared for schools to be less than enthusiastic about a very bright child, it isn't unusual from what I have heard. We lived in an area with grammar schools so the problem ended when she was 11. She was still in top sets for everything but was with other kids who were bright.

Good luck and enjoy him, very bright kids can be hard work but it is worth it.

Just wanted to say my sons are all bright, all have 1st class honours degrees but were much more of a "fit" at school. I think there is a real difference at some point, don't know how you would measure it but it does make a difference.

mumps

Goldiegirl wrote: »

The title of the thread is obviously going to attract people who have gifted children or have been described as gifted.


That's why it seems as if a high proportion of posters are gifted.


(no I'm not gifted!)

No I'm not either and I was a very lazy kid at school. I think the other thing that happens is somayeone like me talks about their gifted child (as it is relevant) and s little or nothing about their other children not because they are only proud of one but because it is less relevant.

lulu_92

We didn't really have Gifted and Talented at my school. I always did well in primary school and was told I was very bright and clever for my age. When I went to secondary school I was put in second sets for everything but French, although when it came to my GCSEs I was put on the higher paper for everything except science, which meant I could only get a C, but I got an A* for my coursework so ended up with a B. I came out of school with 2 As, 6 Bs and 2 Cs, which was higher than I was predicted by my teachers.

We did have a sort of Gifted and Talented group at secondary school, but it was about 15 of us that got to go on a residential trip and about 8 of us who did a tour of local primary schools with some theatre in education workshop.

I don't really see myself as gifted. Some things I do better than other things, for example my OH is so much better at the Countdown Numbers round than I am, but I'm better at the words round!

lisa110rry

jobbingmusician wrote: »

To those who say 'don't push him ' - I was gifted and clearly remember bursting into tears at primary school because the teacher said we were going to do something new and exciting, and it turned out to be something we had done before. I can so vividly recall the depressing feeling that we were never going to learn anything exciting!

So I was not the only one? Thanks for this post jobbingmusician. I was officially given the title "Gifted/Talented" 52 years ago at the age of 6/7 and had the wonderful opportunity of attending a school "for Gifted Children". I loved the learning, but I am/was an only child so I missed a lot of social interaction outside school because I no longer knew the neighbourhood kids and lived too far from my new school to stay for any after-school activities. (My mother did not drive.)

After my elementary school days were over at 14, the programme finished and I had to go to a state high school. It was simply horrible having to "do over" things we had thoroughly done in years past. This affected my behaviour and I was "naughty", though in no way to hurt others. I used to cut classes I knew would be repetitious, was rebellious in my clothing and a few more serious things.

The wonderful release came when I was allowed to take my Uni exams early and go to Uni a year early.

FBaby

Gifted refers to academic ability

I think that is a very good point you make LE. It is a very misguiding term. From a school perspective, both my children fall under the 'gifted' category, because they are in the top 5% (or whatever it is) academic results.

From my perspective, they are 'gifted' only in the sense that they are lucky to be born with an ability to process and memorise information quicker than average, but I don't see that it makes them gifted, or if they are, so are most children who will be much above average than the norm in some skill or another.

'Gifted and Talented' seems to give some sort of aura to the person label with it that I think does them more damage than good. Why not just refer to them as the top 5% most academic children, or top 5% good at sport etc... and that only in the context of making sure that their needs are met accordingly.

ViolaLass

lulu_92 wrote: »

We didn't really have Gifted and Talented at my school. I always did well in primary school and was told I was very bright and clever for my age. When I went to secondary school I was put in second sets for everything but French, although when it came to my GCSEs I was put on the higher paper for everything except science, which meant I could only get a C, but I got an A* for my coursework so ended up with a B. I came out of school with 2 As, 6 Bs and 2 Cs, which was higher than I was predicted by my teachers.

You were called gifted but were in set 2 for everything? Were there a lot of 'gifted' kids at your school?

Person_one

ViolaLass wrote: »

You were called gifted but were in set 2 for everything? Were there a lot of 'gifted' kids at your school?

Is there any need for b*tch*ness? Everybody else just scrolled past that and didn't see any need to be mean about it.

ViolaLass

Person_one wrote: »

Is there any need for b*tch*ness? Everybody else just scrolled past that and didn't see any need to be mean about it.

I'm not being !!!!!y, I'm asking because it doesn't quite make sense to me. I assumed the poster wasn't joking so I asked for clarification. It's a shame you assumed I was judging.

lulu_92

ViolaLass wrote: »

You were called gifted but were in set 2 for everything? Were there a lot of 'gifted' kids at your school?

That's why I didn't read too much into it. They said I was gifted but obviously not gifted enough to be in set 1 for anything. It was irritating as I sometimes felt that I was bored in lessons as I didn't find them that challenging (My As and Bs were in Drama, English Language and Literature, Maths, Science, ICT and French) but I did better than a lot of those in set 1. At the end of the day it isn't a factor in my day to day life. I mean it did help me get into university but I hardly ever get asked about GCSEs now I have a degree.

And, for what it's worth, it did come across as a bit condescending and rude, but I see now you didn't intend to be

silly_moo

mumps wrote: »

I think it can be a really difficult balance. It is so important that he can be a little boy and play but I do think that very bright children can miss out at school.

My DD was always bright, before her 2nd birthday we realised she was reading, by experimenting we found her reading vocabulary was greater than her spoken vocabulary. At 3 at playgroup she would sit and read to the other kids, didn't always make her or me popular with other parents. When she was due to start school we visited the school, the reception teacher was most definite that she would be doing exactly the same as everyone else, so we had a four year old who liked to read Famous 5 books who was going to have to work through pre reading skills! She would have been bored to death. We home schooled, well she stayed at home, for a few years. When she started school she came home very excited one day, the teacher who was covering her class while her teacher was off sick had brought in some special maths for her. She was so happy telling me "Mrs X doesn't think I'm a nuisance." I said I hoped she was never a nuisance. "Oh" she said, "Mrs Y is always saying I'm a nuisance because I finish the work sheets too fast."
[...]
Good luck and enjoy him, very bright kids can be hard work but it is worth it.

Thanks for sharing your experiences mumps, it's always great to hear from parents who have been in a similar situation. It's really sad that some teachers are so inflexible that they won't accommodate a brighter child.