Gifted Children

ognum

Person_one wrote: »

Well maybe, or maybe just a bit of very human showing off?

I don't wish to be harsh, genuinely, but it always amuses me the way these threads go. It's exactly the same if there's a thread about reading early or similar, so many prodigies!

I have always said as parents become competitive that by the time 99% of children go to school they will be able to walk, talk and poo in the right place.

notanewuser

FBaby wrote: »

I agree with this. I now remember this infant toy that my kids had when you put object shapes in the same shape box, and both mine graps this at a very early age without trial and error. They took the object, looked at it and in the right one it went first time. I never thought anything of it until I saw other kids quite a few months older taking so much longer to grasp the concept. I realised then that even under the age of 18 months, they were showing an ability to process information at a quicker pace than average.

DD was the same and was doing 50 piece jigsaws alone long before she was 2. She started at full time school nursery last year 6 weeks off 4. By Feb half term she'd finished all of the nursery maths exercises. By the end of the summer hols she'd finished the reception ones too, and now she's in reception class she's doing Y1 maths. She picked up speaking and reading in Welsh with ease (it's not spoken much at home) and has taught herself how to read in English, needing very very little help.

But by far the thing I'm most proud of is how her teacher says she looks after the younger children at school. How she's happy to play with anyone and help them. They're ensuring she's not bored while allowing her to play. I think the balance is right.

Mojisola

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

Ignoring the needs of a child who is academically capable to "let them be a child" risks making them a disruptive influence like I was and losing interest in school as they aren't being challenged. If they want to learn they should be encouraged.

I don't think the needs of any child should be ignored but even an academically gifted child needs to develop all parts of him/herself.

A school that doesn't offer extra work to a gifted child isn't doing its job properly - neither is a parent who concentrates only on that aspect of their child to the detriment of social and personal development.

Sally_A

@Silly Moo - I was reading at 2, getting 100% in Mensa type tests at the age of 9, but I am a non starter at academia - things that interest me I will learn about, but school subjects did not.

Daughter was also a quick learner, knew her letters by 2 and loved puzzles.

Our afternoon quiet half hour was spent watching Countdown, she would get double points as only 2 or 3 years of age, so I had to get a 6+ letter word to keep up!

Those foam letters you can get from Betterware or similar were good to play with in the bath, stick them on the wall in a square and look for words with adjacent letters (a bit like Boggle).

Her favourite book was a rather complicated maze book, lots of lovely pictures, she was so quick at finding the route and avoiding the obstacles - this kept her amused for months as there was always more to see in the maze.

At 6 or 7 she was doing the Countdown numbers game.

She achieved top set at school and did A levels - but chose not go to University, and to get a job instead...for which she beat Uni Grads in the interview tests.

Keep stretching your sons imagination, but don't push too hard - an interest in everything is a good trait to have - a lot of stimulation can be done out of school hours - puzzle books, eg The Puzzler (is that still published?) will have some puzzles that he can do, also simple Sudoko.

Make it enjoyable for him, but most of all enjoy your time with your young boy.

pipkin71

You've had some great advice in this thread silly moo.

Learning through play at this age, suitable to your son's level of attainment, will keep him stimulated and the nursery will help ensure all his needs are met, including social skills.

Once he starts school, hopefully the school will recognise his ability and cater appropriately. My own experience of the school my daughters attended was that whilst they had provisions in place for those who struggled academically, the school couldn't fully provide what my daughters needed in the areas they excelled so they were home educated but others have had great experiences with their schools being able to cater for children of all abilities.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

notanewuser wrote: »

Not ideal at 3 to be honest.

Could have a keyboard around in the house, though. Getting a ukulele and a few percussion instruments (or making them from beans, rice, etc as another fun activity) won't hurt, either.

Person_one wrote: »

Well maybe, or maybe just a bit of very human showing off?

I don't wish to be harsh, genuinely, but it always amuses me the way these threads go. It's exactly the same if there's a thread about reading early or similar, so many prodigies!

Depends. According to DD1's father, she had a vocabulary in excess of the average lexicographer by the time she was 9 months old - as far as anyone else was concerned, she was definitely saying something. Trouble was that it was completely unintelligible to anybody else - and when he was convinced she was explaining the concept of powered flight, to me it sounded as though she was saying 'plane! Go up! Whoosh!' followed by infant babble which I'm sure meant something, but I'm sure as hell it didn't relate to the flow of air being faster underneath the wings than it is on the top, thereby generating lift, whatever her father claimed it to be.

DD2 was completely different. Razor sharp from tiny. Arguing from before she could walk (complete with 'You're wrong, I'm telling Mama'), wanting to know everything, and asking questions based on the 'everything'.



The trouble is that people have different learning styles - the archetypal Child Genius is very good with verbal information/reading/writing - as most education is predominately verbal instructions or reading, those kids who thrive on that progress, get noticed, get rewarded. The majority of parents I have heard talking about how smart their infants are refer to long lists of words, being able to recite the alphabet, 'reading' their favourite stories, when it's quite likely that they've remembered the verbal information much like the words of a song.

Visual learners don't tend to be identified as smart because very little teaching is done in that way - the most is usually the odd picture on a photocopied sheet of words. Most text and writing/worksheets are in black and white, instructions are verbal and/or written lists.

And heaven help the kinaesthetic learner - they spend their days being told to sit down, sit still, stop fidgeting, stop doodling, stop this, stop that, stay still.


I think that most of those infant geniuses ultimately turn out to be within normal parameters, but they've had a head start through chance in that their learning style happens to coincide with the way most education is provided.

Indie_Kid

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Could have a keyboard around in the house, though. Getting a ukulele and a few percussion instruments (or making them from beans, rice, etc as another fun activity) won't hurt, either.

Agreed. I have friends who have bought their children / grandchildren a ukulele and are around the same age. They're cheap; so it's not an issue if they do get broken or the child decides after 5 minutes they've had enough.

FBaby

I think that most of those infant geniuses ultimately turn out to be within normal parameters, but they've had a head start through chance in that their learning style happens to coincide with the way most education is provided

Although I agree with this, I do think that this sort of intelligence does tend to put you ahead in life. DD's 'gift' is that she can process information/concept much quicker than average, and then she's got the memory to store the information and retrieve it as soon as she needs it. That skill means that she does very well at school, but also in other aspects of her life. She has always been very mature for her age as she can also process 'emotional' information and use it appropriately.

My experience is that, recalling all my fellows at schools who were considered very clever, as well as children who are now young adults, all those who were also naturally ambitious have done extremely well pursuing their studies and professions.

Saying that, I don't like the term G&T applied to an academically able child. I don't feel my children have a gift or a talent, they have mental capacities significantly above average, I expect high IQ and EQ.

[Deleted User]

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

The majority of parents I have heard talking about how smart their infants are refer to long lists of words, being able to recite the alphabet, 'reading' their favourite stories, when it's quite likely that they've remembered the verbal information much like the words of a song.

I think that most of those infant geniuses ultimately turn out to be within normal parameters, but they've had a head start through chance in that their learning style happens to coincide with the way most education is provided.

Right on the money.

I've got a friend who's son can be seen 'reading' on a video - he's only 3, and has clearly memorised the book. Lots of people are jumping on the "oh my gosh how smart is he" bandwagon. My son use to do this all the time. Just because you can point at words and say them doesn't mean it is reading. He's got a great memory, but he's also stubborn and will only work hard in things he's very interested in. Loves to read, hates to write.

If you think your child is gifted - wait to see what the school thinks. Otherwise, expose them to lots of things and days out. Talk to them about stuff, read books together. Basically all the stuff you should do with any child really.

Lunar_Eclipse

Person_one wrote: »

Gosh, so many gifted people and parents of gifted children just on this little forum! What are the odds?

I don't find it surprising at all. I'm not sure how many are registered on this forum, but it's millions on MSE on the whole.

The head of our primary school said some schools put their top 5% onto the G&T register, some the top 10%, some ignore it and others those whose IQ is 130+. Since pupil abilities vary hugely between schools, this might not be accurate or consistent.

Mensa etc view gifted as someone with an IQ above 130; the top 2%. Many identified as gifted by schools will not be in this top 2% bracket, and others will be missed.

Within the top 2%, there is then an unbelievable difference between an IQ of say 130/135 and 145/150. One of my children is often frustrated by how 'stupid' her sister is.