My 4 Yr Old Son's FSIQ is 131, Now What?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Actually there is an academic consensus. I will send more information from different sources. The UCONN information was summarized nicely so I started with that. |
Anonymous
|
http://www.nagc.org/commonmyths.aspx
From the Natl Association of Gifted Children. Common Gifted Education Myths Myth: Gifted students don’t need help; they’ll do fine on their own Truth: Would you send a star athlete to train for the Olympics without a coach? Gifted students need guidance from well-trained teachers who challenge and support them in order to fully develop their abilities. Many gifted students may be so far ahead of their same-age peers that they know more than half of the grade-level curriculum before the school year begins. Their resulting boredom and frustration can lead to low achievement, despondency, or unhealthy work habits. The role of the teacher is crucial for spotting and nurturing talents in school. Click here for more Myth: Teachers challenge all the students, so gifted kids will be fine in the regular classroom Truth: Although teachers try to challenge all students they are frequently unfamiliar with the needs of gifted children and do not know how to best serve them in the classroom. The National Research Center on Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT) found that 61% of classroom teachers had no training in teaching highly able students, limiting the challenging educational opportunities offered to advanced learners.[1] A more recent national study conducted by the Fordham Institute found that 58% of teachers have received no professional development focused on teaching academically advanced students in the past few years. Taken together, these reports confirm what many families have known: not all teachers are able to recognize and support gifted learners. Click here for more Myth: Gifted students make everyone else in the Class smarter by providing a role model or a challenge Truth: In reality, average or below-average students do not look to the gifted students in the class as role models. They are more likely to model their behavior on those who have similar capabilities and are coping well in school. Seeing a student at a similar performance level succeed motivates students because it adds to their own sense of ability. Watching or relying on someone who is expected to succeed does little to increase a struggling student’s sense of self-confidence. [2] Similarly, gifted students benefit from classroom interactions with peers at similar performance levels. Click here for more Myth: All Children are Gifted Truth: All children have strengths and positive attributes, but not all children are gifted in the educational sense of the word. The label “gifted” in a school setting means that when compared to others his or her age or grade, a child has an advanced capacity to learn and apply what is learned in one or more subject areas, or in the performing or fine arts. This advanced capacity requires modifications to the regular curriculum to ensure these children are challenged and learn new material. Gifted does not connote good or better; it is a term that allows students to be identified for services that meet their unique learning needs. Click here for more Myth: Acceleration placement options are socially harmful for gifted students Truth: Academically gifted students often feel bored or out of place with their age peers and naturally gravitate towards older students who are more similar as “intellectual peers.” Studies have shown that many students are happier with older students who share their interest than they are with children the same age.[3] Therefore, acceleration placement options such as early entrance to Kindergarten, grade skipping, or early exit should be considered for these students. Click here for more Myth: Gifted education programs are elitist Truth: Gifted education programs are meant to help all high-ability students. Gifted learners are found in all cultures, ethnic backgrounds, and socioeconomic groups. However, many of these students are denied the opportunity to maximize their potential because of the way in which programs and services are funded, and/or flawed identification practices. For example, reliance on a single test score for gifted education services may exclude selection of students with different cultural experiences and opportunities. Additionally, with no federal money and few states providing an adequate funding stream, most gifted education programs and services are dependent solely on local funds. This means that in spite of the need, often only higher-income school districts are able to provide services, giving the appearance of elitism. Click here for more Myth: That student can’t be gifted; he’s receiving poor grades Truth: Underachievement describes a discrepancy between a student’s performance and his actual ability. The roots of this problem differ, based on each child’s experiences. Gifted students may become bored or frustrated in an unchallenging classroom situation causing them to lose interest, learn bad study habits, or distrust the school environment. Other students may mask their abilities to try to fit in socially with their same-age peers. No matter the cause, it is imperative that a caring and perceptive adult help gifted learners break the cycle of underachievement in order to achieve their full potential. See ERIC digests on underachievement in gifted boys; underachievement of minority students. Click here for more Myth: Gifted students are happy, popular, and well adjusted in school Truth: Many gifted students flourish in their community and school environment. However, some gifted children differ in terms of their emotional and moral intensity, sensitivity to expectations and feelings, perfectionism, and deep concerns about societal problems. Others do not share interests with their classmates, resulting in isolation or being labeled unfavorably as a “nerd.” Because of these difficulties, the school experience is one to be endured rather than celebrated. It is estimated that 20 to 25% of gifted children have social and emotional difficulties, about twice as many as in the general population of students. [4] Click here for more Myth: This child can’t be gifted, he Has a Disability Truth: Some gifted students also have learning or other disabilities. These “twice-exceptional” students often go undetected in regular classrooms because their disability and gifts mask each other, making them appear “average.” Other twice-exceptional students are identified as having a learning disability and as a result, are not considered for gifted services. In both cases, it is important to focus on the students’ abilities and allow them to have challenging curricula in addition to receiving help for their learning disability. [5] Click here for more Myth: Our district has a gifted and talented program: We have AP courses Truth: While AP classes offer rigorous, advanced coursework, they are not a gifted education program. The AP program is designed as college-level classes taught by high school teachers for students willing to work hard. The program is limited in its service to gifted and talented students in two major areas: First AP is limited by the subjects offered, which in most districts is only a small handful. Second it is limited in that, typically, it is offered only in high school and is generally available only for 11th and 12th grade students. Coupled with the one-size-fits all approach of textbooks and extensive reading lists, the limitations of AP coursework mean that districts must offer additional curriculum options to be considered as having gifted and talented services. Click here for more Myth: gifted education Requires An Abundance of Resources Truth: Offering gifted education services does not need to break the bank. A fully developed gifted education program can look overwhelming in its scope and complexity. However, beginning a program requires little more than an acknowledgement by district and community personnel that gifted students need something different, a commitment to provide appropriate curriculum and instruction, and teacher training in identification and gifted education strategies. Click here for more Continue to an in-depth look at the first myth Return to the Know Your Information main page. Return to Myths About GIfted Education Homepage Return to the Advocacy Toolkit main page. [1] Archambault, F. S., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W., Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C. L., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers (#93102). Storrs, CT: the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. [2] Fiedler, E.D., Lange, R. E., Winebrenner, S. (1993). In search of reality: Unraveling the myths about tracking, ability grouping, and the gifted. Roper Review, (16), 4-7. [3] Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M.U.M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students. Iowa City: University of Iowa. [4] Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: myths and realities. New York: Basic Books. [5] Olenchak. F. R., & Reis, S. M. (2002) Gifted students with learning disabilities. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. Robinson, and S. Moon (Eds.), The Social and Emotional Development of Gifted Children (pp. 177-192). Waco TX: Prufrock Press. |
Anonymous
|
http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/browse_by_topic_articles.aspx
This link is from the Davidson Institute and includes around 40 research based articles on gifted education from a large variety of sources. There are also many more on other topics that you may find interesting. |
Anonymous
|
Everything source you're choosing comes from a single paradigm. That doesn't prove that there's an academic consensus, just that you haven't read broadly.
Gifted education (special needs, segregate, accelerate) is one paradigm and clearly traceable to political decisions (i.e. federal mandate/funding for special education); multiple intelligences (e.g. Gardner) is another; genius is perspiration (e.g. 10,000 hours of purposeful practice literature, with Bronson being one of the populizers) is a third. And that's before we get to the question of what implications the neurological work on brain imaging has for identifying and fostering intellectual prowess. |
Anonymous
It's one thing to know you're really smart and love school and always get all the answers right and get an award for being the smartest girl in X grade, but it is an entirely different thing to be told you are gifted. Having that label can be really bad - from teachers who resent it (happened to me in high school), to teachers who push your parents to place you in AP classes in the middle of the school year because they must fill some slots (so you start already behind and you feel like you just must not be "gifted" in math rather than realizing it was a crappy idea to change in the middle), to feeling like you don't really have to do the work because you can skate by on your smarts. Even if you are under challenged, it still feels good to get the answers all right when you do not know that is the baseline expectation. But, when you think you are above it all? That just leads to bad work habits and uneven grades. Hate, hate, hate the label. It's one I hope my kids never learn they have (which I expect they otherwise would because my husband's IQ is not determinable - the test maxes out at 160, so I'm the dumb one in our house). |
Anonymous
There is an academic consensus from the research pertaining to psychology and education. That seems to me the most relevant paradigm for this discussion which is why I posted it. Gardner's theories have really fell out of favor in recent years. I'm not familiar with Bronson's work but will look into it however from your description it may not be that relevant here. The brain imaging studies are very interesting. Have you heard of Eide's neurolearning blog? I frequent it. It's promising stuff but is in it's infancy and not at a point that it can be used in the practical sense. For what it's worth there is no federal mandate or funding for gifted education. Most states don't have mandates or funding either. There is the Jarvitz grant but that is funding for research. |
Anonymous
Thank you. |
Anonymous
|
Re no federal mandate -- yes, that's part of the reason why gifted education has adopted the special needs paradigm. Special ed *is* mandated and the argument has been that gifted kids have needs that are just as special as those of kids with learning disabilities and should likewise be given whatever accommodations are necessary to maximize their potential to learn. Sorry if my allusion was too cryptic.
Look, you're entitled to your opinion. You can decide that one faction represents a consensus and anything/one that challenges this POV is irrelevant, discredited, or in its infancy. But anyone else reading is also entitled to know that the stuff you're posting is not WHAT EXPERTS KNOW TO BE TRUE (full stop) but just one POV among many held by people who study intelligence/genius/education. |
Anonymous
That is a fair assertion. Why don't share some of the studies you are referencing? |
Anonymous
|
Because I've given enough info/examples that anyone who is genuinely interested could google and find stuff herself. And, of course, what's interesting or relevant depends on the question you want to ask. Not to mention the fact that lots of the research isn't exactly scintillating to read. See, e.g. this study which, arguably, supports the don't tell your kid s/he's gifted approach: https://www.stanford.edu/dept/psychology/cgi-bin/drupalm/system/files/cdwecklearning%20success.pdf
If you get through that without poking your own eyes out, and decide you'd prefer a fun-to-read intro to the 10,000 hours argument (with footnotes to actual research), check out Bounce by Matthew Syed (more fun than Gladwell and more citations to actual research, IIRC). If you want practicing academics, I've already mentioned Howard Gardner's work on multiple intelligences. K. Anders Ericsson is probably the most prominent of the purposeful practice folks. |
Anonymous
| I'm interested in the answer to a question raised by a previous PP: are there studies that show you SHOULD tell your DC about IQ? |
Anonymous
Anonymous
| The Genius in All of Us (Shenk) also runs through a lot of the research on the 10,000 hours argument. It's an interesting area of research. There are some unanswered questions. For example, not all of us will reach the Olympics after practicing a sport for 10,000 hours, because there may be some ceilings on individuals' cognitive and other skills (apart from the obvious height, weight or other physical requirements of some sports). And there is apparently evidence that 10,000 hours of practice can change your body and brain, but are there limits to this? Fascinating. |
Anonymous
Here are a few links to ponder on the subject... http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/how_gifted.htm http://www.educationaloptions.com/resources/resources_need_counseling.php http://www.educationaloptions.com/resources/resources_raising_gifted_children.php http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/light_up_the_world.htm http://giftedkids.about.com/od/socialemotionalissues/a/tell_children.htm http://www.fcps.net/education-options/gifted--talented/for-parents/amend-articles/myths |
Anonymous
I love this post! You rock - thanks for sharing this insight. We have followed the same model, but I've never been able to summarize it as eloquently and succinctly as this poster. |