Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To directly answer your question and the follow up.
Yes, I would move to give my kids better opportunities but I feel that I already have done that by picking the house/town that I did. If it came down to it that one of them were gifted in a really standout way, I would do whatever we had to do to help them achieve their potential. However, as others have said, at 4 years old, you really don't know much about your sons true abilities yet.
The second part of your question was more pertinent IMO, would you forego a larger/more expensive home to give yourself greater financial flexibility. The answer to that is absolutely. My wife and I purchased a home that cost roughly 30% less than others that we could have afforded. We made sure it was in the right neighborhood and offered us the space and amenities we needed/wanted. I would personally rather have the money saved in my pocket to be spent living rather than sinking it into a monthly mortgage payment.
Houses are incredibly poor investments and hopefully the past couple of years have taught people that. Buy what you need and nothing more. Put the money saved towards other things. I always laugh to myself when I go and see friends who have much larger homes then I do, though they make less money. Nothing like your nice new tract house with cherry/stainless/granite with nothing more than a TV and couch in it because you can't afford anything else and built in a so-so town/school district, because you HAD TO HAVE the biggest house you could possibly afford.
We were in a very similar situation with our daughter. At age 4, she could not relate to her peers at day care. She was always at least 2-3 developmental stages ahead of her age-mates. Although she was shy in public, she was always very verbal at home. She could have learned to read at age 4, as I did, but we wanted her to spend her time on other things. We ended up putting her in a 1/2 day private kindergarten with 5-year-olds, where the headmistress was very receptive to advancing children in need. She and I had both had the experience of having to skip first grade. We liked having been advanced, but we didn't like missing out on a grade in school. She also knew that the research supported early advancement over later grade-skipping.
The year went very well. Our daughter spent the mornings at kindergarten and the afternoons at day care. She was still very quiet at school, but at home she set her bedroom up with learning centers and made all her dolls and stuffed animals play school. She had no trouble with the academics, even though she didn't really mix in with the other children. We expected her to remain very shy as part of her personality, so that didn't really bother us.
At the end of kindergarten, we had a conference to determine what we should do next. Her teacher and the first grade teacher agreed that she was academically ready, but socially questionable. At the end, we decided with the headmistress and that it would be better for her to start first grade rather than repeat kindergarten. Our reasoning was that if it didn't work, it would be more straightforward to put her in the full-day public school kindergarten. We would not have had the option of starting her in kindergarten and then moving her back to the private school, as the first grade class would have been full. We crossed our fingers and she started first grade at age 5 (birthday in December).
Well, halfway through first grade, she came out of her shell and became a totally social animal. She never had any trouble with the schoolwork, and the only way you could tell she was a different age was that her teeth were falling out on a different schedule from her classmates. At the end of first grade, she transferred to the public school for second grade. Where we live, the public schools would not have allowed her to advance, but once she had finished first grade at an accredited school, they had to take her where she was.
We did not mention to the public school that she was a year young until they sent us a notice saying that they wanted to test her for the gifted program. When she asked why she was going to a special class, we just told her that she learns differently. The whole situation worked out beautifully. The main problems were at puberty, driving and drinking age. She was always the last person to be old enough to (fill in the blank). She is now 21, finishing up her undergraduate coursework--three days to go. She is graduating Magna C*m Laude with two degrees and five internships, and she has also taught an undergraduate course for the last year. She is taking a year off before medical school to work in the lab where she is continuing the research that she did last summer and on which she based her honor's thesis. She just defended the thesis this Monday.
She has the luxury to take the time off because of that year when she skipped four-year-old preschool. We have discussed her situation with her over the years. Even though she was teased for not being allowed to drive or drink, she is very happy with how things turned out. She would not have changed her early start to school.
I write all this to let you know that there is a middle path. Paying for private school for two years hurt, but not badly. We would not have been able to maintain the expense for her entire education. But the half-day kindergarten and first-grade were very manageable. We have excellent public schools here, but as I said, they are not receptive to advancing students. They believe that their curriculum is demanding enough. I disagree, but we side-stepped the whole issue with the choices we made.
If it is possible, see if there is a half-day kindergarten available at this late date. If it doesn't work out, you won't have lost a lot. If it does, then you'll be in the same situation this time next year. Again, it's easier to start private and go public later than it is to do things the other way around.
We were in a very similar situation with our daughter. At age 4, she could not relate to her peers at day care. She was always at least 2-3 developmental stages ahead of her age-mates. Although she was shy in public, she was always very verbal at home. She could have learned to read at age 4, as I did, but we wanted her to spend her time on other things. We ended up putting her in a 1/2 day private kindergarten with 5-year-olds, where the headmistress was very receptive to advancing children in need. She and I had both had the experience of having to skip first grade. We liked having been advanced, but we didn't like missing out on a grade in school. She also knew that the research supported early advancement over later grade-skipping.
.....
If it is possible, see if there is a half-day kindergarten available at this late date. If it doesn't work out, you won't have lost a lot. If it does, then you'll be in the same situation this time next year. Again, it's easier to start private and go public later than it is to do things the other way around.
The real question is, do you honestly think that your daughter would not be the success she is today if you had not skipped her ahead a grade? Obviously your daughter is gifted, but did skipping ahead early and clueing in on the fact that she was intelligent actually make a difference in her future potential?
It seems to me that the result would have been the same, albeit a year later, regardless of the path you took. As many have pointed out, the playing field tends to level out by 1st and 2nd grade and many who appear advanced early often end up average and some who are average or behind end up advanced. Like I said, I think your daughter would be in the same position and I doubt that moving her into 1st grade early really had an impact past that first year. Once she mastered the 1st grade material, her path was linear and the same as her peers.
We went the route of parochial school in a not so great area. The schools arent great so we decided to do the parochial way.
Now coming up to high school, we will probably move out of state. My dh would love to get off Long Island as it is so expensive and I am ok with it. I am researching areas now that have great schools and I will concentrate on that aspect first.
To answer the question...we did move to put our daughter(gifted/advanced) into a school we felt was a better fit for her beginning in 4th grade. In the short term that school did not live up to our expectations, however the different middle school it feeds into is a much better choice for her. To that end, we made a good move.
Our son is an even more gifted/advanced student and we've had many discussions regarding his education with teachers, the GT specialist, the principal and outside people in education. We come back to the same answer each time. If you consider everything about him separate from the academics, he completely fits in with his peers. He is just as much an incoming 2nd grader socially, emotionally, physically and behavior wise. It's his academics that are beyond compare. If we were to move him to where he should be academically, he'd have to go straight to 5th grade. We are not putting a 7 yr old in with 10/11 yr old's where he doesn't fit in all the other ways.
Instead the school accommodates his learning styles when/where they can and we give him ample opportunities to continue to progress at his own level outside of school.
Now, on a different note, while his interest and curiosity may be more than the average 4 yr old, what you've posted about his ability indicates he is actually right on schedule for one who is in a preschool and has a supportive home environment. Perhaps I've missed things you've said besides him associating sounds with letters to give you that indication?
I say this because my career is in Early Childhood Education and after having taught a private K for many years I have a solid understanding of what is gifted, advanced, on level or behind at these ages.
The real question is, do you honestly think that your daughter would not be the success she is today if you had not skipped her ahead a grade? Obviously your daughter is gifted, but did skipping ahead early and clueing in on the fact that she was intelligent actually make a difference in her future potential?
It seems to me that the result would have been the same, albeit a year later, regardless of the path you took. As many have pointed out, the playing field tends to level out by 1st and 2nd grade and many who appear advanced early often end up average and some who are average or behind end up advanced. Like I said, I think your daughter would be in the same position and I doubt that moving her into 1st grade early really had an impact past that first year. Once she mastered the 1st grade material, her path was linear and the same as her peers.
It was a risk we didn't want to take. Our family has a history of having brilliant people, but with a dysfunctional streak, people who don't manage their gifts very well. My mother had tried to do the same thing with me, but the school didn't allow it. So I started first grade at age 6 (birthday in March), with two years of preschool and two full years of kindergarten. I had been reading for 2 years, but I was very shy, and I didn't play willingly with the other children. When first grade started, each day was devoted to learning one single letter--cutting and pasting pictures to go with words. I was floored. I couldn't believe that no one else knew how to read.
On the Friday of the fifth week, I was called up to the front of the room while the other children were still doing their seat work. I remember reading a passage to my teacher. Then she called in the second grade teacher and I read for her too. Then I was sent back to my seat. On Monday, I was in second grade. No transition, no learning my arithmetic facts, no discussion. Nothing. I didn't even get to learn Q and X, the last two letters the class was studying.
It was the beginning of a tragedy. That was the total extent of my gifted education. I took to getting in trouble for reading in class because I didn't take enough time to do my work. By the eighth grade, I was failing every subject because I was so unmotivated after years of learning nothing at school, and I refused to do any more busy work. I never learned to study because it wasn't necessary for me to learn. I dropped out of college because I wasn't experienced in having to struggle in order to learn.
I have never really recovered from having experienced educational neglect and malpractice. I was highly motivated to avoid repeating this mistake with our own children. I went into education to intervene in the lives of other gifted kids. When our own daughter showed signs that she needed a different environment from her peers, we sacrificed to help her. Our son has different needs, and we have sacrificed to provide for him as well. Unfortunately, we are only batting .500, but we aren't done yet.
I know that my daughter was very quiet and withdrawn from her peers when she was very young. I know that part of the reason for this was that she was very verbal at an age where other children are typically not yet talkative. This was very frustrating for her. She did well with adults and older children or much younger children.
I really think that if she had remained in a group of four-year-olds for another year, she would have gone even deeper into her shell, just like I did. The differences between her and them would have been even more evident. As daycare providers in our area were not (at that time) usually college graduates in early childhood education, but rather babysitters, it was unrealistic to think that her teacher could really meet her needs. She was clingy, and didn't like to play with the other children, who weren't interested in the things she liked. The teacher didn't really know what to do with her. She was a lot like what I had been.
So to us, the best solution was the blended one. Remember that if first grade had not gone well, we were going to put her into the full-day public school kindergarten. It would have been a lot cheaper, and she would have been back with kids her own age. Because of my experience, we talked to her about our choices, and we listened to what she said. If she had seemed stressed or unhappy, we would have made different decisions.
AT EVERY AGE, she has preferred being accelerated, even when she hasn't liked the consequences, i. e. losing her front teeth in third grade instead of second, being one of two 11th graders in driver's ed, not being able to go to the clubs her freshman year at college. She has always worked for what she has done--she has definitely been challenged. I don't think she would ever have been challenged had we waited. You can't keep a kid from learning, even if you try. For her, it is working very well. I can't be 100% confident that she would have come out of her shell if she had followed the usual path. My hunch is that she would not have.
As far as making a difference now, she is able to work for a year and gain valuable professional experience, and still begin med school at age 22. If she had wanted to take a year to travel or join the Peace Corps, she could have done that too. We've told her often, while she has been in college, that we basically made that decision then so that she could have this benefit NOW, while she is in college. She had even considered taking an extra year for her undergraduate degree, until she realized that all her friends would be gone, and she could still get it done this year. So day after tomorrow, she will officially be a post-baccalaureate fellow at age 21.
The OP doesn't really have a lot of choices. Boys are also very different from girls in their developmental patterns. That might actually make a bigger difference between him and his age-mates, if he is very advanced for his age. If he is small for his age, that might also be a problem, as it was for me. It was not a concern for our children. Private schools are more conciliatory when parents have special needs. Public schools are bound by rules that don't allow for much flexibility.
I'm just suggesting that they consider putting him in a private school kindergarten to see if it works. If it doesn't, then it is usually very easy to go back to day-care, or to find a more appropriate 4K preschool. It would be nearly impossible to make the reverse change once the school year begins. It sounds as if Montessori program would be very beneficial if one is available, but we didn't have that option. I would suggest talking to a kindergarten teacher to have him evaluated according to their readiness checklist. That will shed more light on whether or not it would be a good idea.
To answer the question...we did move to put our daughter(gifted/advanced) into a school we felt was a better fit for her beginning in 4th grade. In the short term that school did not live up to our expectations, however the different middle school it feeds into is a much better choice for her. To that end, we made a good move.
Our son is an even more gifted/advanced student and we've had many discussions regarding his education with teachers, the GT specialist, the principal and outside people in education. We come back to the same answer each time. If you consider everything about him separate from the academics, he completely fits in with his peers. He is just as much an incoming 2nd grader socially, emotionally, physically and behavior wise. It's his academics that are beyond compare. If we were to move him to where he should be academically, he'd have to go straight to 5th grade. We are not putting a 7 yr old in with 10/11 yr old's where he doesn't fit in all the other ways.
Instead the school accommodates his learning styles when/where they can and we give him ample opportunities to continue to progress at his own level outside of school.
Now, on a different note, while his interest and curiosity may be more than the average 4 yr old, what you've posted about his ability indicates he is actually right on schedule for one who is in a preschool and has a supportive home environment. Perhaps I've missed things you've said besides him associating sounds with letters to give you that indication?
I say this because my career is in Early Childhood Education and after having taught a private K for many years I have a solid understanding of what is gifted, advanced, on level or behind at these ages.
This is why every case needs to be evaluated individually. Unfortunately, many schools are not as helpful as yours. I think a change of environment, as you did with your daughter, is often a very positive thing for a child whose school environment is not very challenging.
Your involvement will likely be the most important part. My parents were completely uninvolved in my schooling. If they had shown any interest whatsoever, I think I would have benefited enormously. As it was, I had no guidance at all, and ended up making decisions which have really hurt me as an adult.
That's one of the reasons that I left my intended career to be a teacher. I could see that things were not any better than they had been when I was a child. I took the adage, "if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself" to heart. In my job as an inner-city school teacher, I see a lot of gifted kids who find themselves educationally neglected. It's emotionally and cosmically rewarding to be the spark that lights their future. It's just that we've gone broke trying to raise a family on a teacher's salary. It's the main reason that our daughter couldn't attend the private school we would have preferred. Its $10K tuition would have taken up half my take-home pay!
I don't understand the push to make them better, smarter, more advanced than other kids their age. It WON'T make a difference if they get into college or the work force a year earlier. Here's a thought, how about we encourage our kids to be both good academics and good citizens? He's doing great in school? Fantastic! Supplement his academic "gifts" with involvement in the arts or in growing a neighborhood garden or even scouting or Habitat for Humanity. Most universities offer all kinds of programs, usually in the summer, for kids. Ours has art, writing, archeology, geology, and many more. These programs will teach the kids life skills that will better prepare them for, well, life. I think well-roundedness is far more important than being ahead academically.
I don't understand the push to make them better, smarter, more advanced than other kids their age. It WON'T make a difference if they get into college or the work force a year earlier. Here's a thought, how about we encourage our kids to be both good academics and good citizens? He's doing great in school? Fantastic! Supplement his academic "gifts" with involvement in the arts or in growing a neighborhood garden or even scouting or Habitat for Humanity. Most universities offer all kinds of programs, usually in the summer, for kids. Ours has art, writing, archeology, geology, and many more. These programs will teach the kids life skills that will better prepare them for, well, life. I think well-roundedness is far more important than being ahead academically.
The OP isn't talking about pushing her 4-year-old son. She's discussing with her mom, a teacher with a great deal of experience, the likelihood of the boy being bored, becoming a discipline problem, and possibly dropping out. (That sounds a lot like exactly what has happened with our son. He is diametrically opposite to our daughter in everything except his intelligence.) Grandma probably has more than a little experience in evaluating her grandson objectively with respect to typical development.
Personally, I don't understand the push to keep kids from learning what they want to learn. I didn't teach my daughter how to read, but she didn't ask me to. I was glad that she waited until she learned in school. Had I been pushy, I'm sure she would have been reading at age four. When a child literally learns nothing in a class at school, having walked in on Day 1 having mastered all the year's objectives, whose fault is that? Many schools lack the resources or inclination to provide what the child needs to progress at what is a natural rate for the child. What is the point for the child to be in that environment? Good social development requires the child to master being bored for six hours a day, sitting immobile in a desk, forbidden to do anything to relieve the boredom, AND not do anything that might disrupt another student? And have a cheerful attitude about it because that's what being a good citizen means?
I also don't understand why being a good citizen or having outside activities is assumed to be exclusive--that kids who are ahead academically are somehow not allowed or disinterested. Most of the highly gifted kids that I know were very involved in community activities with their age mates while they were doing academic work several grade levels higher.
We are talking about a 4-year-old. He is four NOW. All the wonderful programs that the university offers for grade-school children are far in the future. Right now, that boy needs to be around other children who can converse with him in a way that is normal for him and them.
As far as being a year ahead in college, with quickly escalating costs for tuition, books, fees, etc., we are very glad that we are done this year. Every year is about 15% higher than the year before. That's a lot of money. Plus, adding a year's contributions to retirement and investments does amazing things due to the wonders of compounding interest. For our family, the $20K+ or so difference that this will likely make is very sensible.
The OP isn't talking about pushing her 4-year-old son. She's discussing with her mom, a teacher with a great deal of experience, the likelihood of the boy being bored, becoming a discipline problem, and possibly dropping out. (That sounds a lot like exactly what has happened with our son. He is diametrically opposite to our daughter in everything except his intelligence.) Grandma probably has more than a little experience in evaluating her grandson objectively with respect to typical development.
Personally, I don't understand the push to keep kids from learning what they want to learn. I didn't teach my daughter how to read, but she didn't ask me to. I was glad that she waited until she learned in school. Had I been pushy, I'm sure she would have been reading at age four. When a child literally learns nothing in a class at school, having walked in on Day 1 having mastered all the year's objectives, whose fault is that? Many schools lack the resources or inclination to provide what the child needs to progress at what is a natural rate for the child. What is the point for the child to be in that environment? Good social development requires the child to master being bored for six hours a day, sitting immobile in a desk, forbidden to do anything to relieve the boredom, AND not do anything that might disrupt another student? And have a cheerful attitude about it because that's what being a good citizen means?
I also don't understand why being a good citizen or having outside activities is assumed to be exclusive--that kids who are ahead academically are somehow not allowed or disinterested. Most of the highly gifted kids that I know were very involved in community activities with their age mates while they were doing academic work several grade levels higher.
We are talking about a 4-year-old. He is four NOW. All the wonderful programs that the university offers for grade-school children are far in the future. Right now, that boy needs to be around other children who can converse with him in a way that is normal for him and them.
As far as being a year ahead in college, with quickly escalating costs for tuition, books, fees, etc., we are very glad that we are done this year. Every year is about 15% higher than the year before. That's a lot of money. Plus, adding a year's contributions to retirement and investments does amazing things due to the wonders of compounding interest. For our family, the $20K+ or so difference that this will likely make is very sensible.
You seem really defensive. I wasn't speaking directly to you or the op. I'm sorry if you interpreted my post that way. I was speaking more generally about a trend that I've noticed among parents over the past couple of years.
Truth be told, I didn't read your last post, and on this one, I stopped halfway through the first paragraph. The posts were long, and I was lazy.
I'm not interested in a fight with you or anyone. Have a great night!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
