zoosermom

"and all deserve respect and opportunities, but I'm willing to recognize that certain people are superior to me in certain respects."

I agree completely. D1 is an average kid who works hard, but she does a good job in science, so we felt incredibly fortunate that in her school she was able to take as many sciences classes at whatever level she chose, and she received some really nice research opportunities because the chairman of her science department was happy to mentor her, even though she wasn't in the top track or the val/sal group. I am convinced that the opportunities they found for this average kid helped her get the money she did for college. my point being: Isn't it nice when opportunities meet up with abilities for our children, even if they didn't cure cancer last Tuesday?

Hunt

I think you suggest an important point, that academic giftedness is not necessarily an all or nothing proposition. A kid may be very talented in one academic area, but not so much in others. Schools that simply have a gifted track and a regular track may not serve kids like that very well. It's sort of like saying that we will identify the 40 best "athletes" in the school, and they will play all the varsity sports.

mathmom

Or to continue the analogy, Mathson was ready to do Olympic level math, but the rest of the gifted class was merely varsity level. (And actually a few weren't even that because of the way they did the assessments.)

Gifted is a stupid word, but it's the one we're stuck with. Our gifted program was better than nothing (and a very good fit for younger son who is not nearly as - dare I say it? - brilliant as the older one.)

zoosermom

D2 had a bunch of amazing opportunities when choosing a high school and we chose the program we did (IB) for very practical reasons. What we didn't realize was that it would turn out to be a great decision for reasons that we never could have expected. The teachers in her program are young, dynamic and accomplished. To a person, they are about energizing the kids and seeing how far they can go and what cool things they can do together. I can't tell you the opportunities that have come her way just by virtue of her willingness to jump in and try all sorts of things. She has a really interesting resume and has, I think, a really good handle on what she likes and doesn't because of all the things she's gotten to try. I wish all kids had the chance to be exposed to so much, not just the "gifted."

vicariousparent

Hunt- Yes, you can say superior in certain respects, perhaps in many respects. But not superior human beings. It may be a subtle difference but I think it doesn't take a lot of smarts to see that it is a vital difference.

Someone may in fact be "stupid" as defined by subpar intelligence, but the term "stupid" should not be used as a derogatory term.

originaloog

EMM1, our son performed in Carnegie Hall, but gifted or brilliant? I dont think so. Heh. Heh. He was just a member of an honors chorus who was picked to be on a bill with other amateur vocal groups.

Then again I have a thing when the word "passionate" is tossed about with hs students.

missypie

All three of my kids were "identified" as gifted by the school district in early elementary school. In my opinion, one is and the other two aren't. (Of course, the one who is has the worst grades.)

At one daughter's elem. school, 20% of the kids in her grade were identified as gifted! How can that be? (I guess we're in Lake Woebegone.) I still don't know how smart that particular daughter is. If she had her way, she'd do gymnastics and dancing and rock climbing and tumbling and cheer....you get the idea-her interests are not acadamics.

alh

I am a big fan of: "Dumbing us Down" by John Taylor Gatto. The problem isn't the bored student; it is the school imho. Not being willing to do mindless busywork seems to me a mark of intelligence.

alwaysamom

I absolutely agree with this, zoosermom. The wonderful teachers, the variety of amazingly interesting projects, exposure to a challenging (and rewarding!) curriculum every single day, and, maybe the most important thing of all, the elevated expectations for the students in my girls' program, are certainly things that I would wish for all kids(and having those things tailored to their needs).

bdmrad

College Confidential- where all the kids are above average. Apologies to Garrison Keillor.

Hunt

"Someone may in fact be "stupid" as defined by subpar intelligence, but the term "stupid" should not be used as a derogatory term."

I know I'm splitting hairs, but I really would like to retain the use of "stupid" as a derogatory term, because I use it to describe people whose idiotic decisions mess up the world. It's OK with me if you want to rehabilitate the word "dumb," though. In my family, I guess we said that somebody "wasn't too bright" if we wanted to express that he was lacking in intelligence, but in a non-insulting way.

dadofsam

A relative of mine taught Gifted & Talented elementary school classes for many years. Not liking the concept at all, she subverted the system by using every trick in the book to bring in as many kids at those grade levels that she could, with the result that typically more students were in her program than not in it.

emeraldkity4

A kid may be very talented in one academic area, but not so much in others. Schools that simply have a gifted track and a regular track may not serve kids like that very well.

My kids are bright with learning challenges.
Oldest tested ( as part of a ongoing study for health conditions surrounding her birth) in the 160+ IQ range using individually administered tests.
Why I mention it, is because I wanted her to be both supported and challenged in school, and she applied for the district " gifted" program.
She didn't qualify using their group administered achievement tests.
To qualify for the program, you must be two grades above average in all areas- although in some areas she was ten years above average, in others she was <gasp> average, or even more below average.

( which is also why she didn't qualify for any support programs in district, she was not two years below average in all areas)


Must be some program huh?
It serves the bright children, of well educated and employed parents quite well,because they will be supported in areas where they work harder, and they will be challenged in areas they have mastered, Ive seen it. They travel to Indonesia for xmas break, to Europe for spring break and they are quizzed at mealtimes and tutored after school.
But for the kids of immigrant, blue collar, low income parents, who struggle, they are barely represented at all in the district gifted programs. They don't quiz their kids at dinner, they don't even get to sit down or they have no idea what to ask anyway. They can't afford tutors or a vacation and their peer group/relatives don't have more than a high school education oftentimes and don't have that as a focus.

MSUDad

Love the OP.

The replies are, predictably, defensive of the special treatment and special excuses that Junior gets/needs.

The function of school is not to identify who has a certain level of native intelligence, but to get these kids ready for the world. To that end, their special needs (doesn't every kid have special needs, and aren't these TAG programs just an imprecise grouping?) are less relevant.

3xcharmed

Thankfully, high schoolers don't rule the world! Some of those bright but lazy kids may also work 30 hours a week to earn money for college or maybe they go home to attend to a sick parent. Outside of my kids social circle, I doubt very few of their classmates know how much time they spend on homework or other non-school related activities. This thread is the offshoot of one started by a parent that has valid concerns about her son's academic progress within a certain context, giftedness (as defined above). I don't think it was intended to offend or suggest that gifted children/adults are superior in any way. We may not like the label because it implies that we or our children are somehow inferior, but the use of the term "gifted" is appropriate in the context of the original thread. I agree, eveyone has unique talents that make them gifted. Tiger Woods is not only a gifted athlete, but smart enough to have attended Stanford.