To think everyone's children can't be "very bright"

[DrinkFromMyFountain]

Because a good 80% or posters/people in RL seem to refer to their kids as "very bright", surely 80% of kids can't be above average?

As the proud mother of a three month old I'm not fussed if my DS is "bright" or not, if he isn't academic I'm sure he will have other talents!

I hereby declare I shan't constantly boast about how bright he is unless he is a full in genius . As my mother always said, there is nothing wrong with being average.

I always wondered that Parma how and why would you get your child's IQ tested and what difference does it make? Does a child with a high IQ automatically turn into an adult with one?

My SIL was talking to me about my DS the other day and began comparing her 4 month old granddaughter and how 'advanced' she is. My DS was only 10 days old!

I predict my SIL is going to be a bloody nightmare!

Truly "gifted" (Extremely high IQ) is a type of special need. The child may present as troubled or challenging and the parents are seeking help. The test is a means of diagnosis.

A child with an IQ of, say, 165, is less likely to be successful and happy than a child with an average IQ, unless they get special support.

So, it's not really a bragging thing.

Oh that's interesting Katy. So you would need a reason to test the IQ?

I was asking, as only my SEN boy has ever had his IQ tested as part of his assessment.

My other boy, who I think is very bright has never had an IQ test ( not even when the teacher said he was a genius ), it just never occurred to me ( but now I'm curious!)

It's surely like everyone's baby is the most beautiful baby in the world...logic would perhaps say this cannot be so, but as we all know reality says this is in fact absolutely true.

All I can say is that none of those very bright children grew up and came to work at my office. You couldn't find a bigger pool of averagely intelligent people if you tried.

Sparklingbrook, I don't think you have to have a reason. Someone can do it out of mere curiosity. But if someone says their child tested at 160,I would guess they had the kid tested because they were struggling to deal with the child on some level.

That makes sense Katy. I wonder if DS1 (14) backchats and strops because he has a high IQ.

I really wrestle with the question of whether labelling a child as "bright" is helpful or not (regardless of whether its accurate.)

I hear those people who say that low self esteem is an issue and that parents have low expectations of children etc. Making a child feel good about things they are good at and encouraging them in areas where they are less sure footed seems self evidently sensible.

On the other hand I think parents (and teachers) can go too far with the relentless positivity and children can smell an untruth a mile off. My mum used to go on and on about how bright we were (in fact I was above average at some things, distinctly below in others.) not being given a realistic appraisal in the areas I was weak led at some points to my doubting my ability in the strong areas at some points.

I am under no illusion that my dd is not very bright, it has took me 6 years of primary school to accept this, she is funny, popular, sporty but academically her light is not switched on!

My three boys (men) are doing great but if you really want to know brilliance then just look at my little Jack Russell terrier, she is AMAZING!!!

Define bright.

I know people with First Class Degrees who have come out with classic lines like, "Well penguins are fish anyway". Said with complete seriousness and honesty.

They might be academic but they are, in my opinion, as thick as pig shit, unless they have studied it and learn it by heart and can splurge it out in a exam. They are just good at repeating stuff once they have memorised it.

They lack any awareness of the world and they lack the ability to think for themselves.

Equally, you might be as thick as cow dung yourself so when your child can add 3 + 2 at age 6 without the aid of a calculator you might think they are bright because compared to your standards they are streets ahead of you.

In short, its all relative and depends on what you are actually trying to measure.

On another note, you are less likely to have a parent say their child is average than bright or has learning difficulties. Average is really the thing that everyone avoids saying, because that seems to suggest that there isn't a reason for their mediocrity and how they don't stand out from the crowd in some way.

Oh and IQ tests, don't measure intelligence in the way you think. They measure how good you are at doing IQ tests under those particular conditions. They don't take into account certain types of intelligence and they don't take into account how you may be affected by the conditions under which you might take the test (you might be a person who is anxious under exam type conditions for exam but might otherwise thrive under more 'natural' conditions even though they might be high stress situations).

Not to mention you might have an exceptionally high IQ but because you are useless at reading and responding to other people, its about as useful as a chocolate teapot as you can't use this intelligence in a way which is helpful and ultimately productive because you lack skills in other areas.

Emotional intelligence is essential to being bright in my honest opinion. You might not be academic but if you have the ability to do the most with what you have got and use it in a way that can achieve more than your 'more intelligent' peers, then surely you are brighter than they are?

I'd say my DD (3) is average at nursery except when it comes to sports. Then I would say she's above average :D

IQ tests are a load of toss.

Loada wank, agreed.
I have a "Blow your Mind" IQ and I never get mentioned in the list of wise, useful or popular MNers.

MrsD - I score around 140 but am, to everyone's agreement, as thick as fuck when it comes to almost anything not involving an IQ test.

I know supposedly intelligent people with degrees who have no common sense whatsoever Red, so to me they aren't 'bright' at all.

Also ds1's is above 140 (proper assessment that took HOURS) and he is all set not to get into grammar...school doesn't think he is dyslexic, I do, because he is 10 and can't read a clock, but there you go.

Bright is a word that fits him but academic is not. NO one would ever believe he has such a high IQ in everyday life.

I know ds2 is clever as he is better at sums than ds1 and is only 6...he just has a more organised brain perhaps.

Ds3 is an unknown quantity but I hope he isn't totally stupid.

Has someone posted this already ?

Quote from Lake Wobegon by Garrison Keillor

"Welcome to Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average."

seems bright children are international!

Ds1 is.
Ds2 is not.
I had no idea that ds1 was. Reception teacher td me that he wasn't just average , as I had said, but was exceptionally bright.

Ds2 is barely average.
Who cares.
Bet ds2 will end up earning more than ds1 !!

One of mine is extremely bright.

The other has severe language delays and learning difficulties.