How can posters ask questions about their academically advanced kids without being criticized?

[Anonymous]

It wouldn't make a difference -- most of the people disagreeing with you are also the parents of gifted kids. It's not a question of people not understanding or not having any experience with these issues or not believing that such kids exist. It's a lot of people who have BTDT and who have a different understanding of what constitutes intelligence and how you cultivate it.

[Anonymous]

And some of the people disagreeing were themselves gifted kids. So it's BTDT on many levels. When you grow up being tracked, and see a bunch of your friends who managed to flame out despite being isolated from the non-gifted kids, you come to realize that maybe the isolation is not such a great thing.

[Anonymous]

And if you grew up gifted in a mainstream, public school classroom, you appreciate what you got from all sorts of kids and what you both learned in school and figured out on your own.

[Anonymous]

Yes because BTDT is always the final say on any discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"But for many, the appeal of the GT program is so that their child is NOT the smartest one in the room. That they see other kids with abilities like their own and get used to having to work harder in a community of peers. "

Ding ding ding. This is exactly the point. And thumbs up to the one with moving the soccer star to the elite soccer team so she could grow as a player.

Why do so many people believe that a kid can only become socially adept by being in a traditional classroom? Doesn't putting the super smart kids together allow them to focus on being kids, on all the other wonderful things that make them different from each other? Suddenly Charlie Nerd isn't the dorky smart kid - he's the one who can really play piano or draw or make the other dorky smart kids laugh.

Another vote for this perspective. It's 100% on point.

[Anonymous]

It seems like the options, at least according to this thread, are:

1. Tracking and isolation in public school, where the kids learn they can't possibly socialize with those other dumb kids and because they are so smart they will always be special and turn into the next Google Guys or whatever.

2. Private school, where they learn they are rich (or that they aren't but they are so smart that they either got financial aid to go or Mommy and Daddy thought they were so smart that it was worth serious financial distress to send them to that school).

I hate to say it, but I'm going to go with rich. The damage of that label can be more easily undone by parents, IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes because BTDT is always the final say on any discussion.

It's not the final say (at least for others -- it could be for an individual), but it's certainly relevant. And it points out the underlying fallacy in the claim that people who disagree with about the necessity of acceleration/tracking aren't always coming from a position of hostility toward or disbelief in giftedness. Nor do they lack exposure to these kids you think are so uncommon -- we were those kids, so were many of our friends (then and now), and we're raising these kids. Can't speak for the others, but I've also taught these kids. In fact, we often have more and different experience with these issues than you do. So maybe it's worth listening (or even just disagreeing to disagree) rather than continually insisting that different POVs are rooted in jealousy, hostility, or ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2. Private school, where they learn they are rich (or that they aren't but they are so smart that they either got financial aid to go or Mommy and Daddy thought they were so smart that it was worth serious financial distress to send them to that school).

I hate to say it, but I'm going to go with rich. The damage of that label can be more easily undone by parents, IMHO.

Actually, I think that the risk with private school is that they DON'T learn they're rich. My DC came home with a story in which a series of 6th graders, all of whom live in $1 million+ houses, vacation abroad, go to private school, etc. all insisted they were just middle class. Nice kids, smart kids, politically savvy in some ways, but clueless about the distribution of wealth in the US, much less worldwide.

[Anonymous]

Oh brother -- give me a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh brother -- give me a break.

not sure what was meant by this, but I see the point being made above. A $1 million house price aint as exclusive as it used to be esp. if you bought in 2006-2008 period. I know lots of "millionaire next door" types and they are rich, yes, but they work to make that $, and want their kids to to have normal lives that keep the most important things in proper perspective. So I agree, lots of kids around here don't know they are rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh brother -- give me a break.

not sure what was meant by this, but I see the point being made above. A $1 million house price aint as exclusive as it used to be esp. if you bought in 2006-2008 period. I know lots of "millionaire next door" types and they are rich, yes, but they work to make that $, and want their kids to to have normal lives that keep the most important things in proper perspective. So I agree, lots of kids around here don't know they are rich.

Very American this. Everyone wants to believe they're middle class.

[Anonymous]

And that general phenomenon is accentuated when a kid's frame of reference as to what's normal (neighborhood, school) is really skewed, as it is in many privates. Suddenly HHIs of $300,000-$500,000 start seeming middle-of-the- road.

[Anonymous]

What about the kids at private school who really are rich? Do you think that if they go to public school, they will be less aware of that fact? Why is being "rich" such a hideous, horrible thing? It says nothing about a person's values, morals, empathy, goals, intelligence ... I could go on and on. There is nothing wrong with being poor ... so why is it so evil and soul-less to be a child of wealthy people? And please do not cite George Huguely as he represents no one but himself.

[Anonymous]

Thank you pp for being more articulate than I was in saying "Oh please give me a break". Some people on DCUM seem to think sending a kid to a private school is some sort of crime vs. humanity. What difference does it make how much the parents make? It's not the kids money.

[Anonymous]

11:00, didn't you get the memo? The only path to model citizenship is via the following routes: the midwest, small town USA, and of course poverty and/or middle class as defined by less than 300K.