So Disapointed in Kindergarten

[Aristomommy]

I was thinking about that, too.

Here's my theory (taken with a grain of salt please, LOL)

-Gifted students' parents are often gifted themselves, even if not tested
-The "gifted" often have a heightened sense of imagination
-Those that have a heightened sense of imagination would be naturally attracted to Disney, way beyond childhood
-Therefore some of the Disney fanatics, who may be gifted, find themselves here, immersing themselves in everything Disney.

Like my theory?

I think the problem is with the label "gifted." It naturally makes most people defensive. If some students are "gifted", what does it make the rest of students? Non-gifted? It's a loaded word.

Anyway, my humble thoughts.

I hate the word gifted also. This is the reason I would never say anywhere IRL "my child is gifted" because it causes a reaction in people. There are several great authors on gifted children and they do share common characteristics.

The best way to identify gifted according to the authors I have read and also the psychologist that tested DD is by achievement tests AND IQ tests. Some kids whose IQs are in the normal ranges can be high achievers academically, and the schools will offer them gifted services, however the kids aren't gifted by definition. I know what our test results were and it doesn't make DD special, just means she needs acceleration in her school work. I also learned that while she is highly verbal, she has slow processing speed, so she is not as good in timed tests. So while she is gifted, it doesn't mean she always has it easy in the classroom.

And yes, I like your theory

 

[perkinsrose]

Lots of kids read early but certainly not all. As most of the previous posters mentioned AIG or gifted programs do not typically test until 3rd grade for this very reason. Most kids catch up to the early readers by 3rd grade so early reading does not indicate a "gifted" child. Also early readers often still need or lack other skills. Obviously the parents of these early readers have instilled a love of books/reading and provided good opportunities for their children to mature in this area. I have two boys who are as different as day and night academically...one is very interested in academics and the other could care less...and they were/are raised in the same house! Imagine what vast differences teachers face on a daily basis!

I think not testing before 3rd grade has more to do with funding than reading abiility issues. Certainly there are some kids who are just early readers. However, reading level should not be and isn't the only indicator for giftedness.

DS did not attend daycare or preschool. DS did not read until sometime during kindergarten year. ( He was read to tons and I have teaching degrees but did not "teach" him to read ) Once he started reading--he was quickly reading at 3rd grade level. Kindergarten teacher acknowledged he was very bright however nothing was specifically given/suggested to challenge him in school. Fortunately, he loved school--the novelty and social aspect of it--He'd never been to preschool (We couldn't afford it and i was SAHM). In first grade, he was given a special reading assignment (read a novel and answer question ) once--it lasted a week or two. Otherwise, his "advanced reading" was to read a chapter book for silent reading time. It was during first grade that (after years of prodding from my sister) that I took DS to a local university for IQ testing. He was given the Weschler IQ at 7 yrs, 3 months old.

I knew my child was observant, articulate, inquisitive, and smart. But i also was aware of my parental bias. This was my first child and ofcourse i was going to think he was a special gift to the world.

The test revealed DS is highly gifted and it is estimated there are fewer than 1 in 1000 children in his range for IQ. Paying the $250 for testing outside of public school (with the help of grandparents) was worth it to me. Having the hard numbers as proof that my child's academic needs are different showed i wasn't just another parent who thought my kid deserved something special.

I looked into private schools (found 2 wonderful ones) but ultimately could not afford the tuition (as much as or more than college!!) and wanted the social diversity of population found in public school. In Michigan we have the "schools of choice" program. If a district is part of program, you may choose to send your child there. The district would receive the per-pupil allotment of money that their neighborhood district would have received. As a student teacher before kids, I thought charter schools and schools of choice were creating a business out of education and "going to the dark side". As a parent, I am so grateful to have options and choices. I commute my 2 kids about 20-25 minutes to a MUCH better school/district/situation. The drive time and cost of gasoline is difficult but soo worth it. Though its still not the ideal individualized education that I've had glimpses of, the school Dkids are at is the good. I actually feel comfortable about my children's education now. Quite different from the hours wasted during kindergarten and first grade for my DS.

I know the demands of NCLB & the challenges of a classroom full of students with a spectrum of needs. However, each child should be guided and lifted up from wherever they are--not left in a holding position because they've met benchmarks. Maybe universitites need to do a better job showing teachers how to manage differentiating their teaching? Maybe if NoChildLeftBehind gets left behind, teachers can get back to teaching to guide young minds and not hit quotas.

 

[churchpilot]

I was thinking about that, too.

Here's my theory (taken with a grain of salt please, LOL)

-Gifted students' parents are often gifted themselves, even if not tested
-The "gifted" often have a heightened sense of imagination
-Those that have a heightened sense of imagination would be naturally attracted to Disney, way beyond childhood
-Therefore some of the Disney fanatics, who may be gifted, find themselves here, immersing themselves in everything Disney.

Like my theory?

I think the problem is with the label "gifted." It naturally makes most people defensive. If some students are "gifted", what does it make the rest of students? Non-gifted? It's a loaded word.

Anyway, my humble thoughts.

Humble, now that's a word worth repeating. Is there a saying about not looking a gifted student in the mouth!!!!!!!!! I also think my oldest son might be one of the moron's referred to in an earlier post. Nothing "gifted" about him, but does this child know how to have fun! He brings home mostly B's, but on the playground and at home, he is always surrounded by an entourage of kids wanting to be in his atmosphere (I guess by definition this makes him "socially gifted"). Because of his social nature, it takes his teachers 2-3 weeks to rein him in, so the first couple weeks a teacher spends feeling out their class and setting limits works for our son. Public school makes exceptions for every imaginable child out there because the law says they have to. Sometimes you have to fight for your child's rights and sometimes you need to let kids be kids. My son might never be on the President's honor roll, but he is not a whiner, plays well with others, and knows that the world does not revolve around him. He is considered average and that is just fine with him-----and us too!

 

[tmarquez]

OP here. I didn't mean for this thread to become a "gifted" debate! Heck I don't even know what "gifted" really means. Waaay back when I was a kid, a "gifted" kid was the odd one that they pulled out of class once a week who didn't really have any friends in class (unfair I know, that's just how it was).

I don't think DD is "gifted". I think she is smart, outgoing, eager, unartistic and a bad dancer (shhh...don't tell her!). In other words...just a kid.

All I know is that I personally hate to be bored...it's like torture to me. So, I don't want her to be bored either...especially for a stretch of 7 hours at a time.

The good news is that so far she has not pulled the "I don't want to go to school" routine that I was afraid of. And before the schol year started I was afraid to pull her out for a couple of days to do a long weekend Disney mini-vacation...but not now...so we are leaving Thursday...she can color in the car!

 

[perkinsrose]

I guess its in the wording. Always around this time of year these posts seem to start to pop up alot. I can understand someone coming for help on how to challenge their quick and eager learner. I can understand how someone would ask others for help when they approach the school and are unhappy with the schools response.

But when people just come out and say they cant believe how easy K is or how disappointed they are that the kids arent learning more, I do get a bit defensive. I know kids learn at different rates but it seems many possibly gifted childrens parents dont. I feel they look down on all those kids less academically smart than their child for holding the curriculum back.

And please do not generalize that kids who dont know all their ABC's etc by the time they start K must have parents who didnt send them to preschool or dont have parents who encourage learning. Theres the argument out there that preschool is not necessary. Kids all learn at their own pace. Theres kids out there where you can spend every waking hour teaching them and they just dont learn as quickly. With alot of help my son has caught up to his peers. We are lucky.

Gifted kids are the way they way because thats simply how their brains are wired. Same goes for those kids who struggle. Dont assume its "bad" parenting, their brains just may be different than your childs.

I disagree somewhat. Its that "Nature vs. Nurture" argument. I think most research is in agreement that there is a combination of both nature and nurture--the arguement or question is what is the % of each. There is some evidence that giftedness has a hereditary component. Also IQ can be affected by an enriched enviroment and healthy diet. Breastfeeding can have an impact on IQ. Some research shows breastfed babies average 15 pts higher on IQ testing. IQ scores seem to go up with each generation--mabye better nutrition?? I'm certainly not blaming parenting for kids that struggle. Not sure what i think--maybe its 50-50 Nature/nurture.

 

[mommyof2princesses]

Social skills include way more than socializing. I had a friend whose son was recommended that he not go on to K, with his late summer birthday because he had weak social skills. She was very upset with the pre-k teacher. Now, we could all see what the teacher was talking about and tried to explain it to her. All she kept saying is he is very social, makes friends easily. We kept saying it is about understanding behavior, being able to sit still, being able to not talk out of turn, etc, etc. She didn’t get it. She sent her son. The K teacher kept telling her he was struggling because he lacked social skills. She still didn’t understand/hear it. She sent him on to first. I don’t exactly what his first grade teacher said, but she finally got through to her that her son would not go because of his lack of social skills and it had nothing to do with being able to relate to other kids. That is only one of many, many social skills. Preschool and Kindergarten are *supposed* to have a high emphasis on social skills—learning through social aspects of life. And of course I agree that school isn’t the only place to learn social skills, but they generally aren’t with their peers at the grocery store or eating in a restaurant and being around peers is extremely important.

So, even though this child was ready for the next grade level academically, he was held back because he was immature? This is where we part our ways on thinking. I really disagree about social learning occuring in school. As an adult, I don't know many times I have to act the way I was taught in school. I don't ever raise my hand to talk...I do wait my turn...a lesson learned at home, in church, with friends after school. I do wait in line patiently, but never walk in a line! I don't ever have to sit for hours on end, waiting to be excused to go to the potty, told when to eat lunch, and that I have to finish all my lunch before I can join in on a conversation! Most social behaviors that get us through life are learned through life experiences. Not to mention, most of my friends, if not all, are not my age.

And who said homeschooled students aren't with peers? They, perhaps, are with peers more often in settings where they are allowed to be social...not just sitting next to each other.

I have no problems with parents who send their children to public school. I did it, I taught it! Each parent does what they feel is best for their child. As for the op, she really needs to reach inside deep and decide what she feels is best for her child. I wish I could tell her, but I can't.

 

[Aristomommy]

I disagree somewhat. Its that "Nature vs. Nurture" argument. I think most research is in agreement that there is a combination of both nature and nurture--the arguement or question is what is the % of each. There is some evidence that giftedness has a hereditary component. Also IQ can be affected by an enriched enviroment and healthy diet. Breastfeeding can have an impact on IQ. Some research shows breastfed babies average 15 pts higher on IQ testing. IQ scores seem to go up with each generation--mabye better nutrition?? I'm certainly not blaming parenting for kids that struggle. Not sure what i think--maybe its 50-50 Nature/nurture.

The most convincing compilation of research I have read recently about this is:

http://wilderdom.com/personality/L4-1IntelligenceNatureVsNurture.html

I also have read about the IQ testing instruments and how they bring out better results in some groups than others. Maybe there is a cultural bias to these tests as well. I know when DD took the WISC-IV, some of the questions could be culturally biased or if a child isn't exposed to some aspects of the world or society they would be impossible to know. I was also surprised by the things she didn't know (can't give examples because of test integrity) as I thought she would know. Anyway, don't mean to take the thread into a different direction, but I remembered this link.

 

[Ellester]

I agree.

"The Gifted Children Left Behind"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082600909.html

Excellent article. Locally, only 30 out of 52 schools in the county made their "AYP" (Adequate Yearly Progress), which means 43% failed. Many "honors" students had to attend a mandatory summer session and retake the test before they may progress to the next grade. Yet, one of the local elementary schools had every single child pass, even though most of the students have a C or lower average. That administrator requires her staff to strictly "teach to the test" and they were very successful according to NCLB for following this tact. It is quite the hot topic locally right now.

 

[pooh4evr]

I haven't read all the responses yet so forgive me-- I have a DDin 2nd grade and one who started K 3 weeks ago- they were both reading before school and doing math could/can spout off all kinds of sort of trivia stuff( Pyramid stuff, Presidents 1-10, states...) DD#1 was put into the gifted program in 1st grade -she was IDed in K but have to wait until they are 6 for the testing and then the program starts in first. (she does 4-6 th grade work at home) I would definately have to agree that Kindergarten has changed alot in the last 10-15 years especially since we were all there most kids do come in with some type of academic experience (preschool , daycare) however some do not and it is the schools job to gather all these different levels together to make them function as one group. I would also hesitate to complain to the teacher the first few weeks about the work the kids are doing -- my DD#2 in K comes home exhausted (full day from 9-4) yes they have benn working on the colors - one a day - for the first few weeks but they are also learing where the bus lets them off, how to get to their room how to follow the directions of the classroom everyday, moving to special classes, navigating their way through the lunch line and eating in the cafeteria, making new friends and in general trying to figure out this big new world they are in (we have 8 classes per grade level in our ES) here is so much more going on in the classroom than just coloring-- If your student is gifted or advanced or whatever then hopefully she will be recognized when the time comes and you can go from there . FWIW the term gifted is really overused and labeled on too any kids - I would say DD is a fast learner who works hard, I always pictured gifted as kids who could play Bach at 4 and were doing claculus at 8 or something-- and the gifted program we ar part of is kind of a joke-- I hoped for actual WORK she could do not just making up plays and going on field trips- JMHO

 

[Alysa]

And before the schol year started I was afraid to pull her out for a couple of days to do a long weekend Disney mini-vacation...but not now...so we are leaving Thursday...she can color in the car!

You have a great attitude! One week away! Have an amazing time! I felt and did the exact same thing. One tip that DD loved. We bought one of those big pink autograph book and on each page DD finished one of these two sentences: "Today we…" ""My favourite part was…" She loved it! The characters loved reading them and decorated the rest of the page with their autographs. When Drizella read "Today we went to the Magic Kingdom" My favourite part was riding on Splash Mountain with Auntie Meg" she said in her best whiney voice "Who's Auntie Meg? When my sister confessed, Drizella said "Well aren't you just special!" Hysterical!
When we got back we placed all the photos and she had a great journal to show her teacher who she LOVED!

Cheers!

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I didn't read the whole thread but I did want to add something. Kindergarten is more than academics. A good teacher will know how to teach at different levels. Reading before K does not make a child gifted. Kindergarten teached kids to be part of a community. Yes you can teach that at church and at home etc., but this is strictly with their peers. They learn much more about different personalities and how to navigate them since they spend so much time together. They learn different types of independance, like buying their own lunch at school. They learn patience differently than at home. They learn to work in groups and how to deal with someone in the group not contributing or another person taking over the group. Social dynamics that they will not get in other places on a daily basis. Yes, they will many things, and some children will excel and some might even flounder. They will learn that sometimes you are the bandleader but sometimes you have to be part of the band so to speak. They will forge relationships with different adults and children. Some they will like and some they won't. It is all part of helping them become well rounded. You can do many things at home and this has nothing to do with HS vs. PS etc. but in a school situation there is way more going on than workbooks and projects. Good luck. We all just want the best for our kids.

 

[rt2dz]

I disagree with a lot of this post.....social skills? Really? So throwing a 3 year old into a class of 15 other 3 year olds is going to teach them social skills?

Almost all of the research I have read says that parents are the #1 influence to teach social skills.

Where is this research that shows that if they don't get these labeled social skills by age 8 that they will never get them and struggle throughout life? How do you define "struggling socially?" And how do you determine or label a truly gifted child who ends up being a leading neurosurgeon but prefers not to be with people a "social failure?" You have one example of one person, that does not a study make.

People are different, they have different atributes that make them unique. This is one thing that often cannot be addressed in public school.

In defence of all kids who are not popular but have a LOT to offer the world,

Dawn

I don’t file every article and research paper I read, so I can’t give you exact titles and dates. I’m sure you can Google it if you are so inclined and have the time. I am not asking you to take my word or believe me. I am simply stating what I have read over and over, usually in trade/professional journals. I’m not sure I would really believe it either, *except* I see it in one of my sisters’ kids—she is the only one of us that pushed academics at an early age. I have also used one personal example in a different aspect with my brother. I do not know everybody in this world. I probably could give other examples, but it has very little to do with my point. Additionally, I have never used any all-inclusive words such as “all” or “never”. I believe you are misinterpreting the meaning of what I am writing. I’ve tried to stress that social skills does not equal friendships, and certainly not popularity. Social skills encompass a huge number of things.

I certainly never meant to say that people who choose one career over another do so because they have no social skills, simply people who don’t like/are uncomfortable being around people will choose careers where they do not have to be. No, that does not mean everyone who chooses those careers do so because they don’t like/are uncomfortable/lack social skills. Of course there are millions of reasons people do what they do. Common sense tells us that.

Yes, parents are a great influence, BUT how can you deny that being around peers is a huge factor in how children learn to relate to other peers? Why do you think playgroups are so highly recommended and popular? Yes, it’s great socializing for the parents too, but if it wasn’t so good for the kids do you really think all those people will do it? Kids can’t learn to relate to other kids if they aren’t around other kids. That is why parents of only children have either children that don’t relate well to other kids OR take the time and effort to get them around other children. That is certainly NOT a knock on only children, just a personal observation; one I’ve heard many, many other people have observed also.

No one, especially not me, is saying that you just put 3yo with other 3yo and magic happens. This is, or at least should be (if there isn’t there is a problem), structure within a classroom for 3yo. They learn to take turns, Sit in their seats, listen during story time, move from one activity to another when required. They don’t just run wild. They also find out if they don’t act like a friend, they won’t have a friend. You might still get love from your parents if you bite, but bite another kid and they aren’t going to have much to do with you anymore, KWIM? Heck, a properly socialized dog is taken places, around a variety of people and other animals, especially dogs. That’s why dog parks are so popular.

 

[rt2dz]

I've often wondered about this social skills issue as well. Having 20 kids in the same age group is socializing? How often after high school or college does that happen? At work I have various ages, races, religions, abilities etc. in my work group and patient population. This is nothing my school experience prepared me for. And about taking turns: I work in a hospital and if 5 people need a patient's chart, the Dr. gets it first no matter if "I had it first", LOL. Dr.'s don't have to sit patiently or even have nice manners. I could make a hypothesis that they were never socialized properly.

I understand why we teach these rules to young children, but isn't the end goal of socialization to teach you how this world operates and how to function best in it? I wouldn't expect the schools to be the only place to do this.

I think that is exactly the point. In the majority of life you are not in certain social situations with large groups of people in the way you are when you are little. That is why you have that time to learn certain skills that will carry you into other aspects of life that cannot be made up later. Performing your job isn’t the only place you have to demonstrate skills. What about the job interview? Waiting in line, or anywhere? In a restaurant? Dating? At parties—either social or professional? Meetings? Interacting with people not below you, but above you or your peers at your job? Driving a car (road rage anyone?)? Walking your dog? Taking care of your house?

 

[rt2dz]

So, even though this child was ready for the next grade level academically, he was held back because he was immature? This is where we part our ways on thinking. I really disagree about social learning occuring in school. As an adult, I don't know many times I have to act the way I was taught in school. I don't ever raise my hand to talk...I do wait my turn...a lesson learned at home, in church, with friends after school. I do wait in line patiently, but never walk in a line! I don't ever have to sit for hours on end, waiting to be excused to go to the potty, told when to eat lunch, and that I have to finish all my lunch before I can join in on a conversation! Most social behaviors that get us through life are learned through life experiences. Not to mention, most of my friends, if not all, are not my age.

And who said homeschooled students aren't with peers? They, perhaps, are with peers more often in settings where they are allowed to be social...not just sitting next to each other. When I said not with peers, I was referring to kids not going grocery shopping with friends.

I have no problems with parents who send their children to public school. I did it, I taught it! Each parent does what they feel is best for their child. As for the op, she really needs to reach inside deep and decide what she feels is best for her child. I wish I could tell her, but I can't.

My last post because this isn't at all what I wanted to get into to. I am obviously not coming across correctly. It's my fault, I'm sure. I'm not being clear, expressing myself the way I want. To me, it is obvious that I'm not being understood.

The child wasn't held back simply because he was immature. He was held back because he lacked maturity to learn--learning is more than processing information. He did simply OK in K. He struggled hard and needed extra help in first; with the extra help he did pass, but not in the way that he should have. He is not an "idiot". He is a bright child, but not where he belonged, yet. The teacher was sure he would fail second and kids don't notice being held back in K or 1st much, but they do once they hit second.

I'm a big believer that grades (and, yikes!, IQ mean nothing). My son’s grades aren't bad, but he isn't 100s all the way around. Hence, a bunch of under achiever conferences. I think there is a huge host of factors that make a child. I think there is a bigger host of factors that determine an adult’s successes and failures.

I also do not believe in grouping kids in classes by age; I wish they'd bring back the one room classroom--or an incarnation of it. I think schools that teach by ability are wonderful; wish I could afford to send 3 (hopefully 4) kids to one of those. Most my friends aren’t my age either, never were. Same for my oldest son. I have said before (not this thread, I think) that once you graduate high school, very few of your friends are based on age, but interest and place in life.

I also wish I was cut from a cloth that could homeschool--I think homeschooling is wonderful. I never said they weren't with peers; I am very aware of all the social activities and get togethers that homeschool students have access to in many areas. When I said not with peers, I was referring that people, especially kids, don't go grocery shopping with friends.

On further reading your post, I think our schools are teaching different things. Wow, one point in our schools favor. Maybe I have judged them too harshly. DS does not have to wait to be excused to go to the potty, unless taking a test. He does not have to eat all his meal before he can have a conversation--unless it is a silent lunch and then conversation is mute point. BUT, in my professional & personal life, there are times that I do have to wait until I am called upon to talk (meetings, lectures, tours), I have had to walk in a line, maybe not straight, but that's organization for the teacher, and other things.

 

[perkinsrose]

The most convincing compilation of research I have read recently about this is:

http://wilderdom.com/personality/L4-1IntelligenceNatureVsNurture.html

I also have read about the IQ testing instruments and how they bring out better results in some groups than others. Maybe there is a cultural bias to these tests as well. I know when DD took the WISC-IV, some of the questions could be culturally biased or if a child isn't exposed to some aspects of the world or society they would be impossible to know. I was also surprised by the things she didn't know (can't give examples because of test integrity) as I thought she would know. Anyway, don't mean to take the thread into a different direction, but I remembered this link.

Thanks for the link--its a good comprehensive overview. My undergrad. was in child development. Since having my kids (my own little child-studies) i ponder nature-nurture about so many things!

Yes testing can be biased and affected in many ways. One thing i heard so many times in so many classes is
3 things can affect test results:
1) test itself (bias, etc.)
2) testor
3) testee (sick, tired, hungry, or just a bad day, etc.)

I don't put everything on IQ results--important to consider whole child, performance in school, abilities that don't show up on test, etc.
But i've read you can't score a 130 on a fluke. However, a child may test at 100 when actually may be much higher and in another situation might score 120. So a child that tests 140 could even be higher but their intelligence quotient is at minimum 140. We tested to fascilitate academic planning. Not sure how many situations would be useful to retest.


Were you present for Wecshler testing?? I was in waiting room for 2 hours!

 

[perkinsrose]

My last post because this isn't at all what I wanted to get into to. I am obviously not coming across correctly. It's my fault, I'm sure. I'm not being clear, expressing myself the way I want. To me, it is obvious that I'm not being understood.

The child wasn't held back simply because he was immature. He was held back because he lacked maturity to learn--learning is more than processing information. He did simply OK in K. He struggled hard and needed extra help in first; with the extra help he did pass, but not in the way that he should have. He is not an "idiot". He is a bright child, but not where he belonged, yet. The teacher was sure he would fail second and kids don't notice being held back in K or 1st much, but they do once they hit second.

I'm a big believer that grades (and, yikes!, IQ mean nothing). My son’s grades aren't bad, but he isn't 100s all the way around. Hence, a bunch of under achiever conferences. I think there is a huge host of factors that make a child. I think there is a bigger host of factors that determine an adult’s successes and failures.
I also do not believe in grouping kids in classes by age; I wish they'd bring back the one room classroom--or an incarnation of it. I think schools that teach by ability are wonderful; wish I could afford to send 3 (hopefully 4) kids to one of those. Most my friends aren’t my age either, never were. Same for my oldest son. I have said before (not this thread, I think) that once you graduate high school, very few of your friends are based on age, but interest and place in life.

I also wish I was cut from a cloth that could homeschool--I think homeschooling is wonderful. I never said they weren't with peers; I am very aware of all the social activities and get togethers that homeschool students have access to in many areas. When I said not with peers, I was referring that people, especially kids, don't go grocery shopping with friends.

On further reading your post, I think our schools are teaching different things. Wow, one point in our schools favor. Maybe I have judged them too harshly. DS does not have to wait to be excused to go to the potty, unless taking a test. He does not have to eat all his meal before he can have a conversation--unless it is a silent lunch and then conversation is mute point. BUT, in my professional & personal life, there are times that I do have to wait until I am called upon to talk (meetings, lectures, tours), I have had to walk in a line, maybe not straight, but that's organization for the teacher, and other things.

I completely agree that there are many facets that make up the whole child. While it does NOT determine academic, career or other success, IQ results are one tool to facilitate a child's education.

Average IQ is 85-115. So a child functioning at 70 probably needs some support. A child who scores 145 is testing 2-3 deviations above the norm. The gifted child needs some support too. Just as you wouldn't expect the learning disabled child to do classwork unassisted a few grade levels above her, i can't see asking a highly gifted child to work a few grade levels below her abilities. It can be quite telling if a child is struggling at school and then tested and received an IQ of 150. You can't by luck score high, while you may have an off day and score lower than you're capable of. Some IQ testing shows breakdown of comprehension scores, mathematics, verbal reasoning, processing speed, spatial relationships, etc. so you can see strenghts and areas of need. IQ results are an important snapshot for some students when looking at the whole child.

With my DS, the IQ results were the push I needed to change districts and get him into a better school and one more tool to help teachers understand his academic needs.

 

[Aristomommy]

Thanks for the link--its a good comprehensive overview. My undergrad. was in child development. Since having my kids (my own little child-studies) i ponder nature-nurture about so many things!

Yes testing can be biased and affected in many ways. One thing i heard so many times in so many classes is
3 things can affect test results:
1) test itself (bias, etc.)
2) testor
3) testee (sick, tired, hungry, or just a bad day, etc.)

I don't put everything on IQ results--important to consider whole child, performance in school, abilities that don't show up on test, etc.
But i've read you can't score a 130 on a fluke. However, a child may test at 100 when actually may be much higher and in another situation might score 120. So a child that tests 140 could even be higher but their intelligence quotient is at minimum 140. We tested to fascilitate academic planning. Not sure how many situations would be useful to retest.


Were you present for Wecshler testing?? I was in waiting room for 2 hours!

I totally agree on the fact that you can't fluke a 140+, but I have at times heard that some of the questions are culturally biased to LOWER the the score for some kids.

I was present for the testing, and we were there 2 1/2 hours. DD could recall many many questions (she has good memory) so I could probably write the test now, LOL. We also tested for academic reasons, but it qualified DD for Davidson Young Scholars, which has been a wealth of knowledge and help for us.

 

[Barb D]

In defense of average kids:

I've only read the first page, but feel I have to jump in in defense of average kids.

My DD DID attend preschool, did NOT spend all her time watching videos, and was STILL not ready for K when she was (barely) old enough. She had absolutely no interest in learning her letters or sitting still. She wanted to run and play. We held her back a year, and when she went to K she was smack in the middle of the class. Now she's going into 3rd grade and still pretty much smack in the middle. She's bright (and can sit still!) but no prodigy.

OTOH, DS17 was reading at 2, and fluently at 4.

Same parents, different kids. Both terrific.

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

 

[Debbie7452]

I thought I might add my 2 cents to this thread having tread this road years ago with my DD (now 14). She was reading chapter books going into Kinder and already knew the curriculum top to bottom, but she got a lot out of the year in Kinder anyway. She learned to socialize, since she was very shy. SHe learned to control her emotions. She used to burst into tears if she didn't do "perfect" on something. At the end of the year, her teacher admitted that she could have skipped Kinder academically, but it turned out that she was a late bloomer in puberty and I can only imagine the teasing she would have gotten if she was a year ahead now.

She was allowed to bring her own books to read when she finished material ahead of the other kids. This prevented her from being bored. I hope you can work with the teacher to find a solution that fits your child!

Good Luck!

 

[Emma's Mom 03]

I thought I might add my 2 cents to this thread having tread this road years ago with my DD (now 14). She was reading chapter books going into Kinder and already knew the curriculum top to bottom, but she got a lot out of the year in Kinder anyway. She learned to socialize, since she was very shy. SHe learned to control her emotions. She used to burst into tears if she didn't do "perfect" on something. At the end of the year, her teacher admitted that she could have skipped Kinder academically, but it turned out that she was a late bloomer in puberty and I can only imagine the teasing she would have gotten if she was a year ahead now.

She was allowed to bring her own books to read when she finished material ahead of the other kids. This prevented her from being bored. I hope you can work with the teacher to find a solution that fits your child!

Good Luck!

Debbie, Where did your child go to school? Emma is starting Yeager on the 25th and she will be bored academically, but I am hoping that the gt program at Cy-Fair will help her out. She is a good reader, but also very social and so I have the feeling she will get into a bit of trouble for talking all the time...