My 4 Yr Old Son's FSIQ is 131, Now What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 15:36 and 14:57, do you think that if you had set out to persuade people that gifted advocates are a nasty, sneering, condescending bunch, you could have done a better job than your last few pages of posts here? The only thing missing is calling our kids dumber than yours, which I presume is coming next.

Yes, I'm persuaded: you guys are bullies! Dogmatic bullies. No, I'm not the person who is leaving that you're ganging up on.

I too will leave you now. Go back to thinking that intelligence is 100% innate, IQ tests capture it, and most important, your kids don't already have enough advantages so taxpayers owe your kid an education that can get them into Harvard....

I'm not ganging up on anyone...

I don't appreciate spending a great deal of time trying to share important information only to have someone say that it's all irrelevant and they are ultimately dismissing everything that's been said thus far because it's a data dump. If they wanted to opt out of the conversation just stop posting. They might as well ended with, "I'm right and you're wrong and I'm signing off now before anyone can say otherwise!".

There is a difference between bullying someone and standing your ground and calling BS on someone who is BS'ing.

My kids are in private school anyways....I'm trying to help others here. I would be happy to have some tax dollars go to help these kids.

[Anonymous]

No, not BS. Several people who disagree with you cited other studies and books. Which I doubt you are bothering to read.

The fact that you call differing opinions "BS" says all that we need to know about you. You need to learn to agree to disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Javits for godssakes. If you're going to pose as an expert, at least try to get the names right. And no, this wasn't a typo -- you're consistent across posts. I'm guessing Jarvik and Javits have somehow morphed in your mind.

Nope, just a typo but good try!

No, ignorance. You made the same mistake three days ago. And inserting an "r" mid-word, then using a "z" rather than an "s" is a pretty complex "typo" to make consistently, especially when the mistaken letters aren't anywhere near each other or near the adjacent letters in the name. Basically, you don't know WTF you're talking about, even as you insist that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant. It gets tedious after awhile, so people opt out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Javits for godssakes. If you're going to pose as an expert, at least try to get the names right. And no, this wasn't a typo -- you're consistent across posts. I'm guessing Jarvik and Javits have somehow morphed in your mind.

Nope, just a typo but good try!

No, ignorance. You made the same mistake three days ago. And inserting an "r" mid-word, then using a "z" rather than an "s" is a pretty complex "typo" to make consistently, especially when the mistaken letters aren't anywhere near each other or near the adjacent letters in the name. Basically, you don't know WTF you're talking about, even as you insist that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant. It gets tedious after awhile, so people opt out.

Well, I see it now. I have a customer with the name Jarvitz and I mistakenly morphed them. Nice try though for trying to discredit everything that I have said and the work of many university scholars based on a consistent mistake of a name.

PS I have never said I was an expert.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, not BS. Several people who disagree with you cited other studies and books. Which I doubt you are bothering to read.

The fact that you call differing opinions "BS" says all that we need to know about you. You need to learn to agree to disagree.

Reread the post. I haven't called anyones opinion bs. I said that the posters who said they were done with the thread because all I was doing was a data dump was bs.

Why can't we get back to the topic? If you are done just stop posting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gifted children are at risk if they do not receive appropriate instruction, and poor gifted children are at more risk. My dad grew up poor and fatherless in an inner-city slum, IQ 150+. His mother had a third-grade education (although she read a lot). He found school repetitive and dull, and spent a significant part of elementary school as a truant in a city park. Fortunately, a caring teacher got him to apply to the city gifted school (like Stuyvesant/Bronx Sci, but not in NYC). In high school he was a gang leader, because he knew enough chemistry to make bombs to intimidate rival gangs. Luckily, his gang never actually hurt anybody, and he made it to college and a highly successful career as a research scientist. My conclusion: spending on gifted children is a smart investment for society, so smart that it's ok if some of the funds don't exactly hit the mark.

Your post makes so much sense! I agree with your points and am very glad your dad made it out!

[Anonymous]

Anyone want to go over to some Scientology websites, copy about a dozen links, and post them here as the revealed truth?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone want to go over to some Scientology websites, copy about a dozen links, and post them here as the revealed truth?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

So now you are comparing universty studies to scientology? Now I have heard everything? Is that really the best you can come up with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, not BS. Several people who disagree with you cited other studies and books. Which I doubt you are bothering to read.

The fact that you call differing opinions "BS" says all that we need to know about you. You need to learn to agree to disagree.

Reread the post. I haven't called anyones opinion bs. I said that the posters who said they were done with the thread because all I was doing was a data dump was bs.

Why can't we get back to the topic? If you are done just stop posting.

Your post can definitely be read in multiple ways.

If you want to sneak out of that one, how about how you sneered at the MoCo poster's "little world" in 16:01?

Or this little gem at 14:57: "Yet what you offer is utterly uninformed nonsense. Take the time to read some of those articles, and you will learn that you don't even have a minimal understanding of common definitions of intelligence, much less psychometrics."

Here is the issue: people have disagreed with you and have offered their own research. Instead of agreeing to disagree, or, god forbid, reading the research they offer, you sneer at them.

Then you shift the debate, again and again. It's about whether intelligence is innate. No, it's about funding gifted education because gifted kids will save the world. No, THE WHOLE PROBLEM (your caps) is that low-SES kids aren't being identified. Here, have a dozen links that cover all these issues and many more.

So I'm getting ready for a new round of posts claiming that "giftedness is unwelcome on DCUM." Unfortunately, you don't have enough perception to realize that you're the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Okay, in your little world of Montgomery Count magnets I can see how you believe that gifted kids needs are being met. Because in your little world they are. But the world is much bigger than the HG gifted centers, Eastern & TP middle schools and Blair highschool. About 4 pages ago I posted a link to a research paper which was funded by the Jarvitz grant that was a collaboration of 3 Universities. This paper explains a lot about the educational crisis in this country.

Also, do you see what I've bolded? This is the problem. THIS IS THE PROBLEM. All the kids are high SES because there is no funding to seek out, identify, & enrich gifted kids that are anything other than high SES.

Read some of the other information that I've posted and you will expand your world a little bit.

MoCo mom here. I'll ignore your tone. You clearly know nothing about MoCo and the energy they put into recruiting low-income and minority kids for these magnets. This is Weast's big thing. And yet my kids still end up in classes with kids of university professors, NIH research scientists, and others like this. Yes, lots of non-white faces. But the story of the kid from the low-SES family is definitely the exception, not the rule.

And do you think this will change if you shake your magic wand? That maybe tomorrow all the effort MoCo puts into recruiting low-SES kids will suddenly, mysteriously, result in more low-SES kids in the magnets? That high-SES parents who know how to work the system, how to appeal magnet decisions, will stop doing this? That low-SES families will figure out how to work the system? That the answer to getting kids to succeed on the magnet tests when they are 10 lies in spending more money on recruiting low-SES kids, instead of providing better educations to them in grades K-5?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Read some of the other information that I've posted and you will expand your world a little bit.

MoCo mom here. I'll ignore your tone. You clearly know nothing about MoCo and the energy they put into recruiting low-income and minority kids for these magnets. This is Weast's big thing. And yet my kids still end up in classes with kids of university professors, NIH research scientists, and others like this. Yes, lots of non-white faces. But the story of the kid from the low-SES family is definitely the exception, not the rule.

And do you think this will change if you shake your magic wand? That maybe tomorrow all the effort MoCo puts into recruiting low-SES kids will suddenly, mysteriously, result in more low-SES kids in the magnets? That high-SES parents who know how to work the system, how to appeal magnet decisions, will stop doing this? That low-SES families will figure out how to work the system? That the answer to getting kids to succeed on the magnet tests when they are 10 lies in spending more money on recruiting low-SES kids, instead of providing better educations to them in grades K-5?

I was born and raised here and went to Eastern's and Blair's magnet program. Nothing will change if I shake a magic wand. I'm not in a position to do anything about it other than try to inform others of the issue.

The County isn't doing a good job of identifying and recruiting underprivledged children. If it was they would be in your children's classes. I never said the county isn't trying but despite their best efforts they are failing. If the county had funds from the state and federal level they may have more resources to put towards fixing this problem.

Montgomery County is unique in that it actually has magnet programs for gifted kids. There are many counties that don't. What about those kids?

[Anonymous]

I needed to start a new reply to add to my prior post.

I believe that this county and all counties should make an effort to seek out, identify and accomodate all gifted children beginning in the earliest years of schooling and not just try to recruit them for magnets when they are old enough.

As I said in past posts that early intervention is key for optimal development for all children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, not BS. Several people who disagree with you cited other studies and books. Which I doubt you are bothering to read.

.

Your post can definitely be read in multiple ways.

If you want to sneak out of that one, how about how you sneered at the MoCo poster's "little world" in 16:01? Did you read the post? Basically the net of the post was that her entire point of view was based on her experience in MoCo magnets.

Or this little gem at 14:57: "Yet what you offer is utterly uninformed nonsense. Take the time to read some of those articles, and you will learn that you don't even have a minimal understanding of common definitions of intelligence, much less psychometrics."

I didn't write 14:57....sorry.
Here is the issue: people have disagreed with you and have offered their own research. Instead of agreeing to disagree, or, god forbid, reading the research they offer, you sneer at them.
I have thanked other posters for their research and also agreed with some of the other's views on intelligence. Heck, I have ordered the 10,000 book off of Amazon for god's sake.Then you shift the debate, again and again. It's about whether intelligence is innate. No, it's about funding gifted education because gifted kids will save the world. No, THE WHOLE PROBLEM (your caps) is that low-SES kids aren't being identified. Here, have a dozen links that cover all these issues and many more.

All posts on DCUM take twists and turns. Heck, if we stayed on topic we'd all be talking about the OP's 4 year old still.

So I'm getting ready for a new round of posts claiming that "giftedness is unwelcome on DCUM." Unfortunately, you don't have enough perception to realize that you're the problem.

I have done nothing but offer information. You can spin it any way you wish but all the writing is right here. You do realize that I've been advocating for underprivledged children, right?

[Anonymous]

np - we just disagree that your approach could be effective. spend some time on urbanbaby.com (NY schools) if you want to see what happens when a school system tries to identify gfited kids at age 4.

[Anonymous]

Let's let this thread die. It's no fun debating with someone who can't agree to disagree. It makes reasoned debate impossible.

When she launches a barrage of links on different points that we thought we had reached agreement on, it's depressing. But it starts to seem totally useless when s/he calls opposing opinions BS, claims that others "don't even have a minimal understanding" of basic concepts, and uses derogatory language.