With the really high IQ kids, I don't think it's an issue of misbehavior, at least not directly or initially, though it can eventually become one. Nor do I think it's automatic that the teachers won't know how to engage. But I do think it's very common for the exceptionally high IQ kids not to demonstrate their intelligence or skills to their teachers because they're not being challenged to do so, and then for the teachers to mistakenly think that the kids aren't so intelligent and maybe that the work they're being given is too hard, when in fact it's too easy. This creates a negative feedback loop, and the kid's frustration and disengagement will just build, as will the teacher's, until there really are behavioral problems. In my experience, parents have to be really forceful advocates because teachers will fall back on their diagnostics and their guts and miss what's really going on, and they probably reflexively (and not entirely unjustifiably) are skeptical of parents coming in bragging about how smart their kids are. It would be nice to find schools that could recognize and handle such kids without moving them out of the classroom for specialized attention because I think they benefit from being integrated with their peers, but I'm not sure where that would be for elementary or middle school around here.

Just because an individual is gifted doesn't mean they know about other gifted kids act, in general.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry, but FSIQ at 158 does not automatically mean that his teachers don't know how to engage him. The fact of the matter is that people with very high IQs tend to be better behaved than most, rather than less. In other words, your child's mediocre classroom behavior is not due to intelligence, but to other factors--and I'm guessing that one of those is your defeatist attitude grounded in the false notion that extremely high IQ kids can't be engaged by teachers and are therefore bored.

That is not a fact. It can be quite the contrary. Maybe you should research giftedness before you throw out incorrect generalities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry, but FSIQ at 158 does not automatically mean that his teachers don't know how to engage him. The fact of the matter is that people with very high IQs tend to be better behaved than most, rather than less. In other words, your child's mediocre classroom behavior is not due to intelligence, but to other factors--and I'm guessing that one of those is your defeatist attitude grounded in the false notion that extremely high IQ kids can't be engaged by teachers and are therefore bored.

? Really? where does this come from? You cannot even imagine how painful it is for a child to sit 8 hours in a classroom while he/she only needs 5 minutes to figure out how things work. They think differently and more quickly. That is all. And they try to do their best to keep their frustration for themselves. Nothing to do with misbehavior. When they are really lucky, the knowledgeable teacher - or the teacher who manages to make time for it - gives them extra work. Otherwise they stay in their world in the best case, or disturb the class when they are really no longer able to deal with their frustration. Please show a little respect here.

Of course I can imagine it--I was tested with a 155 IQ (within the margin of error for 158). Note that I did not say that PP's child was misbehaving, but since she stated that her child's recommendations would be tepid, that suggests that the child is not behaving particularly well. And, please, there are some things that a very bright child will grasp more quickly than others, but not everything. Most kids with IQs that high have subjects that do extremely well in and grasp very quickly, and others that they are OK in. That child is NOT bored 8 hours of the day because he is brilliant in every single subject and every single topic taught. The parents and teachers have to figure out which subjects should be taught differently to meet shown need. So, if that child does very well in math, it may make sense to move the child up to a higher grade math class. If it's in reading, I doubt that the child is alone in reading well above grade level.

You would have realized that if you were more brilliant.?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry, but FSIQ at 158 does not automatically mean that his teachers don't know how to engage him. The fact of the matter is that people with very high IQs tend to be better behaved than most, rather than less. In other words, your child's mediocre classroom behavior is not due to intelligence, but to other factors--and I'm guessing that one of those is your defeatist attitude grounded in the false notion that extremely high IQ kids can't be engaged by teachers and are therefore bored.

? Really? where does this come from? You cannot even imagine how painful it is for a child to sit 8 hours in a classroom while he/she only needs 5 minutes to figure out how things work. They think differently and more quickly. That is all. And they try to do their best to keep their frustration for themselves. Nothing to do with misbehavior. When they are really lucky, the knowledgeable teacher - or the teacher who manages to make time for it - gives them extra work. Otherwise they stay in their world in the best case, or disturb the class when they are really no longer able to deal with their frustration. Please show a little respect here.

Wow. I thought my own life was hard being as brilliant as I am. I didn't realize how harder it would be if I was even more brilliant than I am.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry, but FSIQ at 158 does not automatically mean that his teachers don't know how to engage him. The fact of the matter is that people with very high IQs tend to be better behaved than most, rather than less. In other words, your child's mediocre classroom behavior is not due to intelligence, but to other factors--and I'm guessing that one of those is your defeatist attitude grounded in the false notion that extremely high IQ kids can't be engaged by teachers and are therefore bored.

? Really? where does this come from? You cannot even imagine how painful it is for a child to sit 8 hours in a classroom while he/she only needs 5 minutes to figure out how things work. They think differently and more quickly. That is all. And they try to do their best to keep their frustration for themselves. Nothing to do with misbehavior. When they are really lucky, the knowledgeable teacher - or the teacher who manages to make time for it - gives them extra work. Otherwise they stay in their world in the best case, or disturb the class when they are really no longer able to deal with their frustration. Please show a little respect here.

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry, but FSIQ at 158 does not automatically mean that his teachers don't know how to engage him. The fact of the matter is that people with very high IQs tend to be better behaved than most, rather than less. In other words, your child's mediocre classroom behavior is not due to intelligence, but to other factors--and I'm guessing that one of those is your defeatist attitude grounded in the false notion that extremely high IQ kids can't be engaged by teachers and are therefore bored.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry to read. I am the PP accused to be a troll. You are not alone at all - and really do not listen to the people who tell you that you are bragging about your child, that there so many others like him at school who do so well, that you need to feed him with additional activities outside the school etc. Not all children are the same. There is a real pain both for the child and for parents (when they realize that the choice they made for their child was not the right one no matter how excellent the school is). Not easy to realize but so true. You can do something about it. As another PP rightly said there are solutions, look around, unless you are ready to wait until middle school when it goes a little better. Your DC is not screwed for life, he needs to find how to deal with who he is and you can definitely help him. Good luck.

I'm curious, do your children know their IQ scores?

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Sorry to read. I am the PP accused to be a troll. You are not alone at all - and really do not listen to the people who tell you that you are bragging about your child, that there so many others like him at school who do so well, that you need to feed him with additional activities outside the school etc. Not all children are the same. There is a real pain both for the child and for parents (when they realize that the choice they made for their child was not the right one no matter how excellent the school is). Not easy to realize but so true. You can do something about it. As another PP rightly said there are solutions, look around, unless you are ready to wait until middle school when it goes a little better. Your DC is not screwed for life, he needs to find how to deal with who he is and you can definitely help him. Good luck.

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

I'm sorry. This is not uncommon. These are schools and classes where he had peers who can help him feel challenged and accepted, in all aspects. Don't despair.

Anonymous wrote:As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

With an attitude like yours, yes I think he's screwed.

As in life, I suspect admissions are more about optimal intelligence than highest intelligence. My DS tested FSIQ 158. I basically think he's screwed for life. That's too high. (I'm not being falsely modest here; I mean it.) He's in Big 3 primary, and his teachers just don't know how to engage with him. He's bored. He seems like he's in space all day, but he's just thinking about more interesting things. If he were to apply out, his teachers would probably write tepid references. But that's not his fault.

Anonymous wrote:Pp, how am I offensive?

I believe that many, many kids that score in the highest percentages can benefit from differentiation and proper learning environments. I don't know how, as was previously posted, one assumes education in places with peers of similar intellectual abilities is somehow doing them a disservice, socially. This in conjecture, at best.

My apologies - I was responding to the PP who got a 170 at her Stanford Binet and whose three children scored in the 99.9 percentile.
She is lucky to have had such a great experience and so are her children.

PP, I am 100% with you. Learning with peers is such a gift - especially at a young age when they need to build confidence. The latter does not come that easy when those children hear so often how weird they are because they are interested in black holes or know everything about the Roman Empire. Young gifted children remain gifted teenagers and gifted adults - they really do not change in the way they think or approach the world, it is just that the level of readiness to confront the real world is different.