Sorry Lady -- DC Privates ARE filled with gifted kids...

[Anonymous]

Giftedness and household income are highly correlated. According to the Dept. of Ed:

"Only 9 percent of students in gifted and talented education programs were in the bottom quartile of family income, while 47 percent of program participants were from the top quartile in family income. "

Not surprisingly, in wealthy communities, you are going to have a lot of "gifted" children.

[Anonymous]

Giftedness and household income are highly correlated. According to the Dept. of Ed:

"Only 9 percent of students in gifted and talented education programs were in the bottom quartile of family income, while 47 percent of program participants were from the top quartile in family income. "

Not surprisingly, in wealthy communities--especially in expensive private schools--you are going to have a lot of "gifted" children.

[Anonymous]

Giftedness and household income are highly correlated. According to the Dept. of Ed:

"Only 9 percent of students in gifted and talented education programs were in the bottom quartile of family income, while 47 percent of program participants were from the top quartile in family income. "

Not surprisingly, in wealthy communities--especially in expensive private schools--you are going to have a lot of "gifted" children.

No, you will have more students from high income households participating in gifted and talented education programs (which are more likely to be found in districts with higher household incomes.).

This is very different than saying that actual giftedness and household income are highly correlated.

[Anonymous]

Giftedness and household income are highly correlated. According to the Dept. of Ed:

"Only 9 percent of students in gifted and talented education programs were in the bottom quartile of family income, while 47 percent of program participants were from the top quartile in family income. "

Not surprisingly, in wealthy communities, you are going to have a lot of "gifted" children.

I disagree. Kids from high socioeconomic levels are not necessarily "gifted" but pampered. The usual assessments for giftedness are all biased. They do not really measure giftedness simply intellectual pampering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Giftedness and household income are highly correlated. According to the Dept. of Ed: "Only 9 percent of students in gifted and talented education programs were in the bottom quartile of family income, while 47 percent of program participants were from the top quartile in family income. " Not surprisingly, in wealthy communities--especially in expensive private schools--you are going to have a lot of "gifted" children.

No, you will have more students from high income households participating in gifted and talented education programs (which are more likely to be found in districts with higher household incomes.). This is very different than saying that actual giftedness and household income are highly correlated.

I'd probably agree with you that part of the reason you see more high SES children in G&T programs is because they are high SES. In other words, part of their IQ score is attributable to the advantages they have from wealth.

But would you agree that there's also some genetic component that correlates wealth with giftedness? Of course I'm not saying that wealthy people produce smart children. But I think it's reasonable to say as a matter of genetics that smart people produce smart children, and also that smart people are more likely to be wealthy, such that smart children and wealth should be somewhat correlated.

I suppose some people might think that childhood giftedness is just randomly distributed across the entire population, but I think there's a strong genetic component there.

What do you think?

[Anonymous]

"But I think it's reasonable to say as a matter of genetics that smart people produce smart children, and also that smart people are more likely to be wealthy, such that smart children and wealth should be somewhat correlated."

It's a good argument......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suppose some people might think that childhood giftedness is just randomly distributed across the entire population, but I think there's a strong genetic component there.

The research seems to indicate that between 50-70% of IQ is inherited. There is debate within that range (eg is it closer to 50 or closer to 70), if I recall correctly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The research seems to indicate that between 50-70% of IQ is inherited. There is debate within that range (eg is it closer to 50 or closer to 70), if I recall correctly.

Cite to that research please?

[Anonymous]

I'm going to comment on the thread title here. Why, even though this site is called DC Urban Moms and Dads, are there an increasing number of comments that refer (usually in a snide, derrogatory way) to the readers of the cite as "lady" or "ladies." A student of language here, this antiquated terminology is meant to minimize the ideas of these women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to comment on the thread title here. Why, even though this site is called DC Urban Moms and Dads, are there an increasing number of comments that refer (usually in a snide, derrogatory way) to the readers of the cite as "lady" or "ladies." A student of language here, this antiquated terminology is meant to minimize the ideas of these women.

Well, yeah, I think that was exactly the point. The OP of this thread titled it as a slap against the OP of the other thread.

[Anonymous]

Tell em, lady.

[Anonymous]

My kid is "gifted" or whatever that bullshit test said and I put DC in a fancy private school and it was ridiculous. The school did everything it said it would...tell all of these kids, ALL OF THE TIME, how super-duper special and amazing they were. Guess how obnoxious a bunch of super-duper kids and their parents are?

Needless to say, we are in PS, with regular, smart, and GASP, lower IQ kids and much much happier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cite to that research please?

I was flipping through some books I've got, but here are some online sources:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/t0844nw244473143/
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/250/4978/223
http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/13/4/148

You can only access the full text if you have a subscription through your employer, but the abstract is free.

The New York Times in 2006: "A century’s worth of quantitative-genetics literature concludes that a person’s I.Q. is remarkably stable and that about three-quarters of I.Q. differences between individuals are attributable to heredity." http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/magazine/23wwln_idealab.html

And here is the reliable standby, wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Interesting reading in any event.

[Anonymous]

I'd probably agree with you that part of the reason you see more high SES children in G&T programs is because they are high SES. In other words, part of their IQ score is attributable to the advantages they have from wealth.

But would you agree that there's also some genetic component that correlates wealth with giftedness? Of course I'm not saying that wealthy people produce smart children. But I think it's reasonable to say as a matter of genetics that smart people produce smart children, and also that smart people are more likely to be wealthy, such that smart children and wealth should be somewhat correlated.

I suppose some people might think that childhood giftedness is just randomly distributed across the entire population, but I think there's a strong genetic component there.

What do you think?

By that logic you would clearly conclude that many inhabitants of the Middle East (e.g., Saudi Arabia) where per capita income is off the scale (no need to work and every one gets a house) are super gifted with smart children. Simply going with your premise high socioeconomic status is highly correlated with giftedness, intelligence and smartness (whatever term you wish to use)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By that logic you would clearly conclude that many inhabitants of the Middle East (e.g., Saudi Arabia) where per capita income is off the scale (no need to work and every one gets a house) are super gifted with smart children. Simply going with your premise high socioeconomic status is highly correlated with giftedness, intelligence and smartness (whatever term you wish to use)

First, if it wasn't clear from the context, my statement was directed at the US, and was not meant to include outlier situations like Middle East oil economies.

Second, I hope it's obvious my statement was speaking of an average correlation across broad populations. It doesn't suggest a correlation in individual situations. In other words, if a borderline imbecile wins a $10 million lottery, he's not going to suddenly start producing gifted children. (I suppose these situations are analogous to the Middle East situation you described, where a large portion of the population essentially won an oil lottery.)

Third, I think your Saudi Arabia example might not be the right one. I got curious about it, and discovered (with some surprise) that Saudi Arabia actually ranks fairly low on a GDP Per Capita scale that evaluates purchasing power. See https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html?countryName=Saudi%20Arabia&countryCode=sa®ionCode=mde&rank=55#sa . Saudi Arabia at #55, while US at #11. But I understand your point, and you could easily shift it to refer to some place like Qatar with similar oil wealth and a smaller population

Fourth, I have not done the math, but I'd guess that even if you do include places like Qatar, my point still stands when you calculate things on a worldwide basis. Or alternatively, if you calculate solely within a place like Qatar, I'd guess that relative wealth might correlate with scores on intelligence tests, for the same reasons I described above. Not everyone is equally wealthy, and I'd guessing that on average, those smart enough to increase their wealth also might pass some of those smarts to their children genetically.

There's probably some actual research on this somewhere, but I'm not curious enough to seek it out right now. Maybe the person who posted giftedness research above has that in her file somewhere.