Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

IQ in children

153 replies

BaskeyJill · 29/09/2012 19:21

My friend is a teacher and made a comment the other day that made me wonder. She thinks that she can identify which children in her year 4 class could go on to be doctors, solicitors, vets etc and which children would never be capable of achieving the grades needed.

My pfb DS is 7 and has just started year 3. When I look at him I assume he could be anything he wants to be. At the moment he is slightly below average (he is an August birth) but I think he is still so little! He has another 11 years of school until he does his A Levels and I am a bit Sad that my friend thinks he isn't ever going to achieve the 'higher' tier jobs.

OP posts:
Frontpaw · 30/09/2012 17:14

Rubbish. I know thickos at primary who were coached within an inch of their lives and went on to be doctors and surgeons. There was a boy in my year who was always the bottom of the class and never managed to hand in his homework and ended up at Oxford or Cambridge.

I was very very bright, started school a year early and was on work in the year ahead of me... I rest my case!

MummytoKatie · 30/09/2012 18:01

fishwife - presumably the outcome for children in care are better than if the child remained in the biological home but not as good as if they were adopted?

Out of interest how do children in care fare against children whose parents are not abusive or neglectful as such but are just "not very good"?

LaQ this may shock you Wink but there doesn't seem to be that much data on what happens if you take a child out of a a professional middle class home and put it in one less so. Like you, I would suspect again they would be somewhere in the middle but that is mere speculation on my part.

Of course these are just averages so don't tell us a thing about what would happen to our dc if they had grown up in different homes. There were people at Cambridge with no parental support and even parental opposition who in my opinion had got there through sheer bloodymindedness.

Lilka · 30/09/2012 19:07

MummytoKatie - There is plenty of evidence that moving around in care is damaging and very disruptive to development, and the outcomes generally for children in care are abysmal. I think there have actually been studies on this but I can't remember where I've seen them. I would feel pretty confident in saying that the outcomes for children in care are worse than for children in 'mildly' neglectful or abusive homes. People often see children being (not seriously) neglected or abused, and think 'oh, why don't ss take them away'. Unfortunately, you have to balance the damage of remaining with the damage of leaving, and it may well be much better for the child to stay at home

lovebunny · 30/09/2012 19:10

referring to the original post

teachers can spot some characteristics, just from having seen a lot of children, but it isn't foolproof. you don't know how the child's life will change or how s/he will respond to new situations and challenges.

lots of boys don't 'switch on' to education until after their gcses, when they've had the thrill of success and realised they are, actually, capable. some girls are so desperate to be the best they lose sight of their own intrinsic worth and can only be at peace if they are better than everyone else (not you, bean. you are very grounded).

then there are self-fulfilling prophecies, the 'give a dog a bad name' scenario.

i've taught more than a few boys i suspected would turn out to be trouble - and they did. and girls who looked like they'd be early mothers with few aspirations, and they were. but i think that's as much to do with inner city environment and expectations, and a bit about inconsistent nurturing, than with the nature of the child.

harvestvestibule · 30/09/2012 19:28

l i used to work in a primary school in an 11+ area (ie top 28% pass). I could guess which children would pass the 11+ long before the end of reception year and be right over 90% of the time.Not by their attainment, but by the way they latch on to new ideas and extend them, combine them with existing knowledge , and also bytalking to the parents and gauging their intelligence.IME very strong correlation between intelligent mothers and intelligent offspring.

whathasthecatdonenow · 30/09/2012 20:40

This is a jumbled post because I'm not at all sure what I'm trying to say (so much for me being educated!)

I'm a secondary school teacher and all of our Year 7s take CAT tests which then go on, alongside their SATs from KS3, to suggest the grades they should achieve at GCSE. I know that in our dept we see CATs as an early indication and nothing more. I have seen exceptionally able children with a score of 85 because something went wrong on the day. I tend to find talking to a child gives me a good indication of their ability and allows me to plan and differentiate accordingly.

I think that some parents need to be a little more realistic though. I have children in tears sometimes as dad thinks they are going to be a doctor but they are just about scraping a C in double science, so it isn't happening and the child knows it but the parent won't accept it.

At primary school there were four of us who jostled for top spot (in the days when you got a class rank at the end of the year) and of those four I'm the only one to have a degree, post-grad qualifications and professional job. I lived in a council house with disabled parents and qualified for FSM. I was the first in my family to go to university. They all lived on the private estate with educated and professional parents. I was told from being tiny that I was going to university and never questioned the idea - my mum would say that she just knew I had the ability, whereas my siblings had other talents.

SCOTCHandWRY · 30/09/2012 21:21

She was never naughty or beligerant - but admittedly, she is intense about learning and gets vair enthusiastic which can be wearing. And she is always asking 101 questions, and will query your answer if she doesn't agree - so I wonder if her teacher was just thinking 'Oh God, not again, shut up and go away.'

YY LaQueen, there was certainly a lot of "oh god why doesn't this child just shut up and go away". We were actually told not to answer his questions as that made him think his questions would be answered Shock.

Hamishbear, I think you have hit the nail on the head... some teachers may feel threatened by a child that far ahead, they can react by being really nasty tothe child (our experience of several teachers, sadly).

We were called to school to tell off our 5 year old son for correcting the teacher - he was correct BTW but they said that was not the point. I insisted DS left the room and told them he was right, and they should have defused the situation by saying oh you are right scotchDS1, rather than punishing him for knowing something they didn't... it was a lead ballon moment and one of many which lead to such serious school refusal (headache and sore tummy every morning),that we moved school... to one that was not much better but we were able to work with them a bit more effectively.

YY reading "real" books at 5 or 6 but that was not his "specialist" area, that was always science/technology -and it still is! At 4 he was explaining to other kids how car engines work... and the other kids in his class used to call him "stupid" Sad...

LaQueen · 30/09/2012 21:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SCOTCHandWRY · 01/10/2012 11:14

I suspect that because DD2's teacher pretty much blanked her, DD2 responded by trying even harder to win her approval and her attention, and so a vicious circle formed

THIS, YY Laqueen.
In P3 (Scottish system, 7 year old at the time), things came to a massive head for us, when the class teacher outright refused to differentiate work for DS1, despite being told to by her HT (who told us she couldn't force the class teacher to do it!), after the school had arranged iQ testing and other tests (I think their motivation was to prove to us that our kid was an irritating wee shite who was very average but instead he scored many years ahead... translated to iq of 165, not the answer they were looking for!).

The teacher refused to give him work of an appropriate level because he refused to do, and redo the very simple sums the class were working on (ed phy said he was bored literally to tears). his was about 4 weeks before the summer break, and he was crying every day on the way to school and feeling ill. When we got told he was getting the same teacher the next year, we pulled him out of the school.

I think kids at this end of the ability spectrum can have really serious issues and nobody really cares that a lot of them end up falling through the cracks and actually "fail" at school due to lack of the right kind of support.

MrSunshine · 01/10/2012 12:41

Title says IQ in children, post doesn't mention IQ or intelligence.

You can tell which children are more likely to be barristers or doctors. They are the ones with the more expensive shoes. The single biggest predictor for later success is the success and economic background of their parents.

bachsingingmum · 01/10/2012 13:20

That's probably right MrSunshine, but in part because those who have been more successful tend to have higher IQs and on average pass those higher IQs onto their children. The IQ a child is born with is not usually random. Then there are the additional advantages that those parents can offer their children such as being stimulated and supported at home and perhaps being sent to academic schools (fee paying or expensive catchment areas). However, as others have said, those with high IQs will not necessarily do better than those with lower IQs. Surely what we should be aiming to do is make the most of every child according to its abilities so that they can have a fulfilling life doing what they are capable of? Giving up on children in primary school is just horrid.

ginnybag · 01/10/2012 13:24

I'll have the mother's educational level as a good predictor. I think in another generation or so it will be both parents, as childcare arrangements change.

The first people a child talks to are its parents. In the early, vital years, when the brain is geared to learn so much and so quickly, they are its first, primary and possibly only teachers.

So take one reasonably bright child: (and speaking incredibly generally, and not accounting for individual circumstances)

Mum One is educated, has studied, read and talked about lots of subjects over the years, has (mostly) moved cross-country to university, mixed with all those different people, with different specialisms, learned to structure language correctly and professionally, and, crucially, values and likes learning still.

Mum Two left school at 16, having never engaged, works and lives in the same village she was born in, reads a bit, but always the same type of fiction, and watches mostly soaps and light dramas on TV.

Mum One is giving her child an 'advantage' every time she speaks. Her spoken language will be 'better', her vocab generally more broad. She's likely to encourage a greater and earlier appreciation of books and knowledge. She's more likely to able to answer questions. She'll research schools, support homework. She'll also more likely have, or be able to acquire, the skills to teach her own child early maths and literacy.

Effectively, Child One gets 4-5 more years of 'learning-time' than Child Two, and then however many more of more and more-effective support.

It won't change a below-average child into a super-genius or anything like, but between two children equally naturally capable, Child One has a heck of an advantage.

Think about yourselves: When you child was learning to talk, were you talking back? Saying 'yes, DD or DS, that's right', or 'gently correcting pronunciation?' It's automatic, right? Imagine that, all the way through school!

LaQueen · 01/10/2012 13:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LaQueen · 01/10/2012 13:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bonsoir · 01/10/2012 13:37

I think that some teachers are very good at spotting talents in their pupils, even their very young ones.

A lot of teachers are, sadly, no good at evaluating their pupils' potential.

Bonsoir · 01/10/2012 13:43

"But, instead of feeling pleased for the child, and wanting to help them, and be part of something positive...instead they secretly feel resentful, and want to puncture their balloon."

Oh, I very much agree with this sentiment. I encounter it at my DD's school. Some of the teachers seem envious and resentful of children who perform better than their own children.

LaQueen · 01/10/2012 13:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

upsylazy · 01/10/2012 13:55

I do think that intelligence/ability is genetic at least to some degree. DS1 could read fluently by the age of 3 (I mean like an 11 year old), it was just the way he was made, I did read to him lots but I didn't do any kind of hothousing or anything, he just had that kind of brain. DD was slightly above average reading wise and DS2 is probably slightly below average although I've given all of them the same kind of input.
cornzy I totally agree with you about the importance of emotional intelligence. IQ only measures a particular kind of intelligence - you can have an IQ of 150 but you're unlikely to go far if you annoy everyone around you and can't manage your anger. Tempmerant is probably just as important as IQ.
I'm a kind of reverse example to the one that others have given: I was quite a precocious child academically and was seen as some kind of prodigy until I was about 8 when everyone else started catching up with me (and most of them overtook me). Sad

SCOTCHandWRY · 01/10/2012 14:02

LaQueen... I think your DD and my DS may have had the same teacher Wink

On a serious note, I resent the fact that I had to fight for each of my older 3 DS (age from 18 to 15, no 4 is still pre-school), for adequate provision (adequate, not fantastic), for their individual needs (including Dyslexia and AS) to be met. Probably NONE of that help would have happened without parental input.

All children should be working towards reaching their full potential, whatever that potential is, but this is not happening for a lot of kids who don't have strong parent advocates - this is very unfair and I think kids do get written off for not conforming and engaging.

In the case of nonconforming very bright kids I think the schools perception of "bright kids will do well whatever we do" is wrong - I think many just switch off, fall behind and end up with average/below average exam results. I am pretty sure that is exactly what would have happened with my eldest 2 who are now at Uni,if they were growing up in a household with no strong pro-education ethos.

We, as parents, can balance out a lot of the things that go wrong (or don't go right!) at school, but I really feel for those kids who don't have that extra input...they are left to sink or swim and too many sink.

ginnybag · 01/10/2012 14:16

SCOTCH - and there again is the educational level influence.

If academia and schools baffled and upset you as a child, and you never engaged, if forms and writing and 'officialese' with complicated technical terms confuse you, there's virtually no chance of you being able to challenge the 'establishment' on something you know isn't good enough.

I've had just this with my childminder. School wasn't her thing, and it shows now that she's hitting problems with her children's school. We make a 'joke' of the whole 'I'll be that parent' thing but I'm deadly serious. I'm not intimidated by teachers, and she is, and it shows.

Too, she doesn't quite grasp what 'work' her children should be doing, so can't back them, and so the eldest is slipping.

She's a really, truly lovely woman, but her eldest, particularly, is working (or should be) beyond her parents' reach, but is very young in other ways so needs support she's not getting.

Simplified, I guess it comes down to how do you teach something you don't know?

LaQueen - yes, exactly. Your DD's are learning beyond the curriculum, their minds are active all the time and it all helps!

SCOTCHandWRY · 01/10/2012 15:59

GINNYBAG, I agree with what you are saying, absolutely the parents educational level and educational aspirations have a big influence on how children use their natural (genetic) abilities.

But it's not just parental input, some kids do sink at school but manage to get to the level they should have been at, maybe after a detour of many years... I'm one of those people and my very negative experiences of education are what drives me to fight hard for my kids to have their needs met - I'm sure more than one teacher has my photo on their dart board - and to compound my sins against the dept of Ed, I also took a couple of DS1 and DS2's friends under my wing with advice and help - I am fairly certain that one of those kids would not be at uni now without my input (parents very intimidated by school teachers and management).

I'm Dyslexic (as is one of my DS's), I left school at age 15, there was no understanding about the condition at all. My parents were not interested in education and stood by and let the school destroy my educational experience.
A few years later I took exams and got into university - I knew I wasn't as stupid or as lazy as my teachers had told me (30years later I can still see and hear those teachers in my minds eye, that's how badly it affected me!). My uni offered dyslexia screening to all "mature students" as they had realised a large% of their mature students were dyslexic... I took the screening and was found to be very high iq and profoundly dyslexic... my parents reaction to this was "but you can't be, you can read!"

So... I had no parental input, and significant problems but still got an education in the end... and yes my kids have benefited from that, no argument there.
But my story is not typical. Most people with my kind of educational experience probably stay "sunk"and are unlikely to engage with the school on their kids behalf either, due to feeling intimidated in the school environment - like your child minder; and my friend (whose DS I advised, and who has just started uni).

I suffered a lot at school, was told I was stupid and lazy, and it has made me really a huge pita for any school that has my kids to educate because I am just not going sit back and let history repeat. And I'm pretty angry that not much seems to have changed (otherwise why has it been so difficult to get the needs of my DS's met?). Like I said previously, my kids are going to do fine - the thing that upsets me most is the fact that I can see kids like ME (without parental support), 30 years down the line still getting written off at an early age. Wrong, wrong ,wrong.

Prarieflower · 01/10/2012 16:25

Scotch we're going through a bit of a tough time atm(it's like banging your head against a brick wall and I'm getting fed up with the look every time I walk in).I have just read your posts with interest,one of my sons sounds like yours.

Where do you find a good ed pych(who won't rip you off)?Do schools have to take notice of a private report?

TIA

SCOTCHandWRY · 01/10/2012 17:34

Prarieflower,

I'm in Scotland, it's less common to "go private" up here but I know of someone who did, it cost about £500... and the school was very sniffy about it being a private report - I think the situation is different in England - if you post on SN thread, with your area, you will probably get some recomendations.

Our Ed Pych was NHS and had a special interest in exceptionally high iq children and AS children and used to work in a no. of schools in our area... but resigned from the role to take up a new position - privately she told us this decision was influenced by her treatment by my DS1's class teacher Shock , and the teachers refusal to accept her recommendations for DS1.

With my other DS.. (again in England it would be different as I think you get no help without a statement), he is dyslexic, and obviously so even at pre school yet our LA refused to do a formal diagnostic test (£500, would be the typical cost), as they just provide the "dyslexia program" to who ever the school decides, on the basis of screening (not the same as diagnosis!), and similar'y the exam provision in later school year is by in school screening not diagnostic testing... consequently DS2 was only finally diagnosed dyslexic last month during his first week at universiy (student support had set all this up as soon as he confirmed his place). The result was he same as mine - very high iq, significant Dyslexia... we feel vindicated after a decade of school meetings being told he had "some" dyslexic traits but was just a bit "average"... he got some help, and was able to use a computer in some exams but we were also told we were being pushy and he was only getting the help because of that!

Be prepared to fight your DS corner - and move school if you need to. One thing you can do for you child is discuss their issues with them - in a really positive way - not to excuse bad behaviour or anything like that but to empower them with the knowledge that you are on their side, not the schools, and to give them the confidence to speak out... ime this help self esteem but does not necessarily go down well with the school!

Fishwife1949 · 01/10/2012 19:39

What we did was phone the La and ask if any of them did private work

Of they shaft you then you can report them to the La

LaQueen · 01/10/2012 20:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swipe left for the next trending thread