What elementary school did your gifted child thrive in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That may well be (Basis Arizona is different from Basis DC) but a quick perusal of these stats shows clearly that many students at MoCo magnets and local private schools take the tests at their school. So not all are taking the tests at RSM or AoPS. DCPS does offer the test at a central site (at UDC in the past years, for instance). Even if DCPS kids were taking these tests at AoPS and/or RSM, it would imply that their home school does not offer the tests or if they do, the kids don't do well. Doesn't speak too well for math enrichment (at the extreme tail) in DCPS.

Anyway, your first point is what I am trying to make.

Yep. I would imagine that a 130-ish IQ kid would be fine in any higher performing DCPS or charter. There is enough of a peer group of kids in the bright-moderately gifted range. People with highly gifted kids (145+ IQ) are generally not going to find that their kids are well served in regular public schools. Those kids will end up in public magnet programs or elite privates. Arizona doesn't have many elite privates nor does it have as many strong magnet programs, so the highly gifted kids there still often attend charters.

I think it's helpful to talk about percentages so people can be realistic about IQs. 120 is the 90th percentile -- "smarter" than 90 percent of the population. They will feel really smart in relation to most of their peers and will probably sail through life. But they don't meet the marker of "gifted" according to most programs.

130 is at the 95th percentile. 130 or 135 is the cutoff for many gifted programs.

140 is at the 99th percentile. So, only 1 in a 100 kids will fall into this group. this is when parents need to start thinking creatively about how to best meet the needs of their kid.

[Anonymous]

My 2 kids (not gifted) are/were on top of their class in 2 different upper NW elementary schools. There are/were so many smart kids with different interests and strengths. They all seem to learn outside of school just as much as in school.
The best thing is to give your child options- STEM, languages, traveling. Not sure why you would concentrate on school doing it all. Most gifted famous people have said it over and over again that schooling often gets in their way.
I know one kids who is a little brighter than others but he is also pain to handle. He won't drop an argument even when he is wrong. I see teachers too busy dealing with his behavior. Giving him extra work or challenge him is the last thing they want to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My "gifted" child was fine in elementary school. Elementary school is very basic wherever you go. I think language immersion would have been a good option for her. Yes sometimes she complained of boredom, but teachers made little adjustments. Parts of the class read more advanced books and she got exempt from spelling. One family I know advanced their child one grade and appreciate this approach. In Middle School it is more complicated. A lot of children struggle with math, and the accelerated math class where she goes is overkill with hours of boring repetitive apps. Their rationale is that if you have the privilege of accelerated math you have to work extra hard, but the result is that she is still bored, but now also hates math from doing the same thing over and over again. For the moment the middle school is not a great fit. When it works well the classes are engaging and encourage her to put out more effort.

Curious what middle school your child is at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That may well be (Basis Arizona is different from Basis DC) but a quick perusal of these stats shows clearly that many students at MoCo magnets and local private schools take the tests at their school. So not all are taking the tests at RSM or AoPS. DCPS does offer the test at a central site (at UDC in the past years, for instance). Even if DCPS kids were taking these tests at AoPS and/or RSM, it would imply that their home school does not offer the tests or if they do, the kids don't do well. Doesn't speak too well for math enrichment (at the extreme tail) in DCPS.

Anyway, your first point is what I am trying to make.

Yep. I would imagine that a 130-ish IQ kid would be fine in any higher performing DCPS or charter. There is enough of a peer group of kids in the bright-moderately gifted range. People with highly gifted kids (145+ IQ) are generally not going to find that their kids are well served in regular public schools. Those kids will end up in public magnet programs or elite privates. Arizona doesn't have many elite privates nor does it have as many strong magnet programs, so the highly gifted kids there still often attend charters.

I think it's helpful to talk about percentages so people can be realistic about IQs. 120 is the 90th percentile -- "smarter" than 90 percent of the population. They will feel really smart in relation to most of their peers and will probably sail through life. But they don't meet the marker of "gifted" according to most programs.

130 is at the 95th percentile. 130 or 135 is the cutoff for many gifted programs.

140 is at the 99th percentile. So, only 1 in a 100 kids will fall into this group. this is when parents need to start thinking creatively about how to best meet the needs of their kid.

I don't want to dis this middle school publicly, but I suspect that the approach to learning of assigning lots of boring work in the name of achievement is common to many middle schools.

[Anonymous]

https://www.newsweek.com/five-minute-intelligence-test-kids-223402

semi intersting way of looking at it. I mean, my 5.5 year old is super smart. She "gets" things I would not expect her to have an understanding of and can have a pretty nice coversation with those way beyond her years. But....she is still learning how to read and do the basic academic things they are teaching her to do in Kindergarden. Better to give a child space to learn than be taught to, so later on in life they can continue to learn and be engaged unaided by others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can answer this honestly. The answer isn't great though.

Our child thrived in our neighborhood school - a low-SES, Title 1 DCPS - until age 6. Our kid was recognized as having different needs, worked individually with multiple teachers, sent to special classes for certain subjects (for example went up to K while in PK4 for math/reading), and had their needs met academically and emotionally and socially every step of the way by virtue of being surrounded by excellent teachers and a bunch of great kids. ECE in DCPS for us was a heartwarming and valuable experience, and we do not regret sticking with our "underperforming" neighborhood elementary school.

When "real school" started (1st grade) the situation began to change. It was no longer possible to do "special" things to keep our child engaged, motivated, and learning on par with their abilities, and this was complicated by widening divides in the needs of other kids. Skipping a grade didn't sound good to us, and not sure it would have solved all the issues.

When a school focuses on teaching to a test, the bar for what schools want to accomplish moves, and making kids/families feel good and be their best in whatever way is right for them falls far behind making sure all kids can do A, B, and C tasks when it comes time to fill in those bubbles on a scantron. This isn't the teachers' fault: it's just the nature of most public schools today, and when schools serve populations that are going to have trouble with those tested objectives, the target objectives in the classroom necessarily become less advanced and there is not room for structured enrichment. High SES fancy schools don't have to worry about that stuff as much, so yeah, of course, they can serve gifted kids better because there is time/money for all that stuff.

We moved to MD. It felt like a personal failure to leave what had been such a terrific school experience for our kid. It felt like a slap in the face to those educators, and even though many of them told me privately we were doing the right thing, I felt pretty bad. I still do.

Now it's 5 years later and our child has thrived. They've been selected for magnets at each step of the way, and thrived within them, and that's made us feel like we made the best decision for our child in our situation. Was it the best decision for our old community? Nope. It wasn't.

I guess it depends on if your child has a similar cohort and a school that can provide what your kid needs consistently so they don't stagnate and lose interest in school. If they can't do that, and you can afford to move, moving to a school that can do that is ultimately what's best for your kid. But it is pretty bad for communities. That sucks.

Thank you. This was extremely helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is, NW DC is well above average, IQ and school-wise. The number of my DC’s classmates parents who went to HYP is astounding (and those are only the ones I happen to know about.)

So all my neighbors went to an ivy or something similar (duke/stanford/MIT). Sure they may have high IQs, but most lack common sense.

I know quite a few less than sharp people who went to big name schools. Not sure if it is an indicator of IQ. Seems to be more of an indicator of privilege and resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is, NW DC is well above average, IQ and school-wise. The number of my DC’s classmates parents who went to HYP is astounding (and those are only the ones I happen to know about.)

So all my neighbors went to an ivy or something similar (duke/stanford/MIT). Sure they may have high IQs, but most lack common sense.

I know quite a few less than sharp people who went to big name schools. Not sure if it is an indicator of IQ. Seems to be more of an indicator of privilege and resources.

I agree with that with one exception -- MIT. ive never met a single MIT grad who wasn't extremely intelligent.

[Anonymous]

I'll also say there is a difference between what some peple call innate intelligence and crystallized intelligence. innate is the abilty to problem solve and can be measured by IQ. crystallized is the ability to learn new things and grows with time.

Someone with a lot of crystallized intelligence will overtake someone with higher innate intelligence if that high IQ person doesn't feel the push the keep growing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can answer this honestly. The answer isn't great though.

Our child thrived in our neighborhood school - a low-SES, Title 1 DCPS - until age 6. Our kid was recognized as having different needs, worked individually with multiple teachers, sent to special classes for certain subjects (for example went up to K while in PK4 for math/reading), and had their needs met academically and emotionally and socially every step of the way by virtue of being surrounded by excellent teachers and a bunch of great kids. ECE in DCPS for us was a heartwarming and valuable experience, and we do not regret sticking with our "underperforming" neighborhood elementary school.

When "real school" started (1st grade) the situation began to change. It was no longer possible to do "special" things to keep our child engaged, motivated, and learning on par with their abilities, and this was complicated by widening divides in the needs of other kids. Skipping a grade didn't sound good to us, and not sure it would have solved all the issues.

When a school focuses on teaching to a test, the bar for what schools want to accomplish moves, and making kids/families feel good and be their best in whatever way is right for them falls far behind making sure all kids can do A, B, and C tasks when it comes time to fill in those bubbles on a scantron. This isn't the teachers' fault: it's just the nature of most public schools today, and when schools serve populations that are going to have trouble with those tested objectives, the target objectives in the classroom necessarily become less advanced and there is not room for structured enrichment. High SES fancy schools don't have to worry about that stuff as much, so yeah, of course, they can serve gifted kids better because there is time/money for all that stuff.

We moved to MD. It felt like a personal failure to leave what had been such a terrific school experience for our kid. It felt like a slap in the face to those educators, and even though many of them told me privately we were doing the right thing, I felt pretty bad. I still do.

Now it's 5 years later and our child has thrived. They've been selected for magnets at each step of the way, and thrived within them, and that's made us feel like we made the best decision for our child in our situation. Was it the best decision for our old community? Nope. It wasn't.

I guess it depends on if your child has a similar cohort and a school that can provide what your kid needs consistently so they don't stagnate and lose interest in school. If they can't do that, and you can afford to move, moving to a school that can do that is ultimately what's best for your kid. But it is pretty bad for communities. That sucks.

Thank you. This was extremely helpful.

+1. What is your MD home school?

[Anonymous]

it's also very hard to assess the intelligence of someone more than 15 IQ points above you --- you don't have the ability to follow their thought process anymore and they will just seem "weird" to you. but other people at the level will "get it."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That may well be (Basis Arizona is different from Basis DC) but a quick perusal of these stats shows clearly that many students at MoCo magnets and local private schools take the tests at their school. So not all are taking the tests at RSM or AoPS. DCPS does offer the test at a central site (at UDC in the past years, for instance). Even if DCPS kids were taking these tests at AoPS and/or RSM, it would imply that their home school does not offer the tests or if they do, the kids don't do well. Doesn't speak too well for math enrichment (at the extreme tail) in DCPS.

Anyway, your first point is what I am trying to make.

Yep. I would imagine that a 130-ish IQ kid would be fine in any higher performing DCPS or charter. There is enough of a peer group of kids in the bright-moderately gifted range. People with highly gifted kids (145+ IQ) are generally not going to find that their kids are well served in regular public schools. Those kids will end up in public magnet programs or elite privates. Arizona doesn't have many elite privates nor does it have as many strong magnet programs, so the highly gifted kids there still often attend charters.

I think it's helpful to talk about percentages so people can be realistic about IQs. 120 is the 90th percentile -- "smarter" than 90 percent of the population. They will feel really smart in relation to most of their peers and will probably sail through life. But they don't meet the marker of "gifted" according to most programs.

130 is at the 95th percentile. 130 or 135 is the cutoff for many gifted programs.

140 is at the 99th percentile. So, only 1 in a 100 kids will fall into this group. this is when parents need to start thinking creatively about how to best meet the needs of their kid.

And kids who score 100 or above in AMC12 are in the top 1% of all the kids who take the test (and the latter are already the top 5% of all US high schoolers). As studies indicate, area magnet programs do help this cohort (Blair/TJ). There seems to be no such effort in DCPS, despite having so many smart kids who might be capable of hitting those levels. There are numerous studies which have shown that nurturing math talent at these levels has outsized benefits. I know correlation does not imply causation etc. but just look at that list of Putnam fellows and the ones that did not make the cut, like Sergey Brin -- if we ever have quantum computing, it will be because of two great Putnam fellows.

[Anonymous]

I think it's helpful to talk about percentages so people can be realistic about IQs. 120 is the 90th percentile -- "smarter" than 90 percent of the population. They will feel really smart in relation to most of their peers and will probably sail through life. But they don't meet the marker of "gifted" according to most programs.

130 is at the 95th percentile. 130 or 135 is the cutoff for many gifted programs.

140 is at the 99th percentile. So, only 1 in a 100 kids will fall into this group. this is when parents need to start thinking creatively about how to best meet the needs of their kid.

130 is actually at the 98th percentile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:it's also very hard to assess the intelligence of someone more than 15 IQ points above you --- you don't have the ability to follow their thought process anymore and they will just seem "weird" to you. but other people at the level will "get it."

It's interesting you think IQ actually has merit. But carry on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can answer this honestly. The answer isn't great though.

Our child thrived in our neighborhood school - a low-SES, Title 1 DCPS - until age 6. Our kid was recognized as having different needs, worked individually with multiple teachers, sent to special classes for certain subjects (for example went up to K while in PK4 for math/reading), and had their needs met academically and emotionally and socially every step of the way by virtue of being surrounded by excellent teachers and a bunch of great kids. ECE in DCPS for us was a heartwarming and valuable experience, and we do not regret sticking with our "underperforming" neighborhood elementary school.

When "real school" started (1st grade) the situation began to change. It was no longer possible to do "special" things to keep our child engaged, motivated, and learning on par with their abilities, and this was complicated by widening divides in the needs of other kids. Skipping a grade didn't sound good to us, and not sure it would have solved all the issues.

When a school focuses on teaching to a test, the bar for what schools want to accomplish moves, and making kids/families feel good and be their best in whatever way is right for them falls far behind making sure all kids can do A, B, and C tasks when it comes time to fill in those bubbles on a scantron. This isn't the teachers' fault: it's just the nature of most public schools today, and when schools serve populations that are going to have trouble with those tested objectives, the target objectives in the classroom necessarily become less advanced and there is not room for structured enrichment. High SES fancy schools don't have to worry about that stuff as much, so yeah, of course, they can serve gifted kids better because there is time/money for all that stuff.

We moved to MD. It felt like a personal failure to leave what had been such a terrific school experience for our kid. It felt like a slap in the face to those educators, and even though many of them told me privately we were doing the right thing, I felt pretty bad. I still do.

Now it's 5 years later and our child has thrived. They've been selected for magnets at each step of the way, and thrived within them, and that's made us feel like we made the best decision for our child in our situation. Was it the best decision for our old community? Nope. It wasn't.

I guess it depends on if your child has a similar cohort and a school that can provide what your kid needs consistently so they don't stagnate and lose interest in school. If they can't do that, and you can afford to move, moving to a school that can do that is ultimately what's best for your kid. But it is pretty bad for communities. That sucks.

Thank you. This was extremely helpful.

+1. What is your MD home school?

Ditto, if you are willing to share your MD school/district, it would be appreciated. We are at a JKLM elementary and yes, it serves very bright/children who may be technically gifted pretty well, but it isn’t possible to meet the needs of certain kids within a large public school construct. I’m also skeptical about private schools.