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.
What do you think the term gifted as is used in the psychological/educational context means then?
IMHO, smart/brilliant, whatever term you want to use, children still need to be given the tools to figure things out (how to do basic math, art, ect) Those gifted kids have it in them and do not need anyone to show them how to even begin to do those things (math, art, science, whatever) they just do it and excel at it.
There IS a difference between being gifted and being intelligent/brilliant/smart. Gifted people are very few and far in between. And they generally do not talk about how gifted they are, or even at all. Smart/intelligent people love to let others know how smart/intelligent they are though.
What does this even mean? How is understanding that kids learn differently from one another make them pathological? Learning differently doesn't make them learning disabled. It just means they learn differently. I've recommended this clip in another thread so sorry for the duplicate but Sir Ken Robinson is really onto something.
It means that not everything needs to be seen as a condition that should be treated. It means that it's perfectly good parenting to just send our kids, "gifted" or not, to public school for circle time and spelling bees and holiday pageants. It means that we don't have to spend every moment of every day worrying about every tiny little thought or emotion that our children might have.
Well, they don't have AP in elementary school and if you don't challenge the very bright early they turn off to school. Consequently, I think there is a need for programs at the elementary level that allow for an accellerated curriculum.
Really, I am not trying to be contrary for the sake of irriating people. I just strongly believe that the public school system as it is today doesn't serve a good percentage of studetns because of its one size fits all paradigm. Really, if you have 11 minutes to watch the Ken Robinson clip, it's worthwhile -he doesn't even talk in terms of giftedness. He thinks that every child needs an education that is meaningful to that child.
One last thought, who is it that decides what the student is capable of doing?
Oh come on now. "If you don't challenge the very bright early on they turn off to school?" I'm about to get really base here, but that's crap. And it's excusing bad behavior.
We've come full circle now. It's the snake biting its own tail. Little Emerson doesn't like the classroom because he's just so "gifted" and the school system just isn't designed in a way that is meaningful for him. Crap. Little Emerson needs less micromanaging and higher expectations for his behavior, regardless of whether his IQ is 110 or 145.
It means that not everything needs to be seen as a condition that should be treated. It means that it's perfectly good parenting to just send our kids, "gifted" or not, to public school for circle time and spelling bees and holiday pageants. It means that we don't have to spend every moment of every day worrying about every tiny little thought or emotion that our children might have.
What if they grow depressed and anxious being in that environment? Should we ignore it?
Depressed and anxious in elementary?! Something else is going on and it has little or nothing to do with education
Also, if I was in your shoes and was so against the public school systems and was a member of MENSA, I would just home school my kid. I mean, wouldn't that make more sense?
Oh come on now. "If you don't challenge the very bright early on they turn off to school?" I'm about to get really base here, but that's crap. And it's excusing bad behavior.
We've come full circle now. It's the snake biting its own tail. Little Emerson doesn't like the classroom because he's just so "gifted" and the school system just isn't designed in a way that is meaningful for him. Crap. Little Emerson needs less micromanaging and higher expectations for his behavior, regardless of whether his IQ is 110 or 145.
It kind of sounds like you are equating concern over a child's education with micromanagement. That's simply not accurate.
My kid never had problems in class, he was very well behaved. He would break down in tears when I picked him up from school because he was so bored and lonely. He didn't have that problem when he was in the APP. I took him out of the situation because I didn't feel like putting him on antidepressants.
Well, that's the great thing about this country. We are each entitled to raise our children as we see fit. You are entitled to your opinions and I am mine.
We've only been educating kids the way we do today for the past 100 years or so. We didn't evolve learning in classroom setting. It works for some kids not for others.
Gifted/smart/accelerated children are as capable of good behavior as anyone else. If they are not, then that needs to be addressed not excused.
I agree with this as well. I don't know why so many are reading into my comments that I think gifted children should get a free pass for bad behavior. I've never written that, I've never implied that.
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.
I'd rep you but you know the drill.....
