do I really only know parents of bright dc?

[m0therofdragons]

Judging by fb posts after parents evening, everyone's dc are classed by the teacher as very bright. How is everyone above average - clearly that makes no sense! I don't mention that kind of thing on fb but teacher always seems surprised that I'm not delighted my Dd is very bright. Well of course I am but I just don't know if it means anything. Yes I know her levels but maybe the rest of the class is doing better so it's hard to know what it really means. It all sounds good but maybe I'm just an excited proud parent like everyone else. Or maybe I just know a lot of geniuses .

Both of my children are disabled with the same disorder, although affected quite differently.

I have a DS who tested at "very superior" (above 99th %ile) levels in pure academics at 9yo, and again at 12 and 16. These tests were a small portion of neuropsychological testing batteries he has gone through over the years, and I can tell you that the rest of the picture is hardly as encouraging - as the areas he tests as "profoundly deficient" affect his life far more significantly.

I often think that the word "bright" is bandied around far too easily - my DD (who is developmentally disabled and at 9 is still learning to count and do basic YR maths) has often been described as bright. She has incredible coping and adaptive abilities, but I am sorry to say that "bright" is not the right word to describe her.

All parents want to think their children are brilliant - it is human nature, but there is a top, middle and bottom third to everything.

I had many pupils who were 'above average' for their class or year, but 'below average' nationally , due to a) being bright and b) being inner city children from a very deprived area

I'm in the midst of a debate about to what extent a university department should be flexible about entry qualifications when bright applicants have been mid-advised (ie, aren't doing the right subjects) or are at schools which are historically weak (ie, even if they are doing the right subjects, won't get the grades). The question really is whether three years of university or, more problematically, the first term of university can fix problems which have been four years in the making. If the cohort is mostly kids who have A+ at A Level maths, and we let someone it without A Level maths (this for a subject where maths is very, very useful but not quite essential, and the maths they need isn't actually in A Level so A Level more proves ability to learn than actually the knowledge itself), is that a bold piece of social inclusion, or just setting someone up to fail? Is it possible to bring someone who has a B at GCSE maths from a bad school up to undergraduate standard in eight weeks? Your heart says "yes", but your head, and we think the statistics, say "unlikely".

I have three boys. My eldest (10yo) is genuinely very bright. I don't need to be told this as it was obvious when he was an infant. He's also a bit of a jerk. Teachers acknowledge he's bright but mostly focus on his behaviour in school.

My second son (7yo) was lagging far behind at school and had a verbal delay that worried us. We were thrilled with his report last year because he suddenly blossomed and caught up with his grade level. The teacher did gush about this and her excitement over this development was obvious. But, I know that he's special because he is such a loving little boy with a beautiful heart. He's very empathetic and can be wonderfully selfless. He saved his baby brother from drowning when he was three years old. No teacher can tell me anything about his character that I don't already know.

My youngest (5yo) has similar speech issues to the middle boy, but more severe. We're anxiously watching his development and hoping he has a similar jump in development sometime soon. Being the youngest of three (and with the eldest being a pain in the arse) he is extremely assertive. I am still trying to figure him out. Now that he's coming along a bit verbally, I am starting to learn what sort of person he is. He's definitely no genius and he doesn't seem particularly interested in playing with other children at school. I think he's adorable and funny, but that's because I'm his mother.

I think most children can fairly be described as bright. I don't think it just means academically able. I would describe the vast majority of children I know as bright.

I had this yesterday with a mum telling me how her son was top of the class that my d is in
She was talking about his scores which were all 10+ points lower than my d's. I smiled and let her rattle on. It is important to her. She puts his reports on FB etc.

They've asked two of my girls to be on the G&T scheme as their marks indicate that they must. I refused on the basis that they are young and I want them to arse about and want to learn/think.
They are learning things at home...that they are interested in via the internet, play cards, board games and read. TThey seem happy which is my goal.
Plenty of people who were bright at PS don't fulfil their potential post PS
Better that they learn to think/question and organise themselves imo

Going back to the OP a bit... I'm divorced, my parents are dead, I do occasionally boast about my DSs' successes on FB, because I feel I have nobody else to share them with. My three DSs are geeky, all are much better at maths than English but in different ways. DS1 and DS3 are great at maths within their comprehensives, they both won the best achievement in year award for maths. DS2 has ASD and is decidedly average academically, but still manages set 2 for maths and ICT.

None of them are all rounders, they are crap at sport, struggle socially and my friends know this. They don't seem to mind my occasional boasting posts. Or am I kidding myself?

also if G&T kicks in if scores are above a certain level is it really g&t? seems daft to me

different for truly gifted but they must number very few
there do seem to be a lot on mn/fb

Our infant and junior school got rid of the G and T label

They felt that that it didn't mean anything and some parents got a bit overexcited about it, parents also couldn't understand why one year their child was G and T and the next year they weren't

That is obviously not to say that the school didn't support their "G and T" students or that there weren't any children who were G and T in either one subject or across the board, it's just that they stopped using the label

It's just cultural. Some groups of people show off to others about their brilliant children. The traditional English way is the opposite - self deprecation and I suppose child deprecation if that's the word.

Ds got a special award for showing exceptional kindness towards little ones at last year's good work assembly. I was so chuffed with that. It never went on fb though.

The use of the word bright is interesting. Who would ever describe their child as dull and not be emotionally damaging/abusive. Bright doesn't just mean educationally intelligent. It means something else entirely.

Perhaps the child brightens the day in some non-definable way. My children are average at school, probably at the 50% point +/- 10%, and when I hear the word bright I think 'well what does that make mine? Pick a word from below and define them as that if you dare '

Antonyms for bright:

*cloudy dark dim dull gloomy black depressed depressing doleful

dreary dusky horrible murky normal obscure pale pastel somber

stupid threatening typical unaware unhappy unintelligent*

(Thank you theasurus.com)

But I have no problem with people being proud of their child. I think it's nice that people say good things about their children as the opposite is unpleasant. I just like words and the use of this one is incorrect, and it makes me do a slight eyebrow raise.

Hilarious thread. It's just like Lake Wobegon, where all the children are above average.

Some years ago I read a fascinating book by a man who teaches in a low-income community in Los Angeles. The children are nearly all children of immigrants, virtually none of their parents speak English. These are children who could easily be written off as incapable of achieving much academically, and that is sadly what happens to so many children in similar schools in the US and the UK (and elsewhere). And yet this teacher makes such a commitment to his students, and the students themselves work hard enough that they achieve far beyond their peers, learn high school level mathematics, perform a full-length Shakespeare play every year, etc.

Are all these children gifted and talented? No. They aren't hand-picked from a pool of geniuses. And they face every disadvantage in the world, the sort of challenges that would make many adults fold up like umbrellas. These children are exceptional. But they shouldn't be. If they can reach these levels of attainment, it doesn't really indicate that there is something remarkable about them. It says rather that most schools simply haven't managed to tap into the potential that is alive in so many children.

I know of a school locally with something like 70% of the children attending G&T classes. Not surprisingly, it is located in an affluent area with wealthy parents. Are all of those children gifted and talented? No. But they have received all sorts of advantages. As we say in the US, some people are born on third base and spend their lives thinking they hit a triple. Sorry for the baseball metaphor, but I imagine the idea is clear even for those uninitiated in the grand sport of baseball.

Just wanted to add that the teacher in LA teaches fifth grade (10-year-olds).

Sorry to keep adding to my post, but I want to make it clear how far ahead the children in LA are working as compared to their peers. In the US, high school begins in 9th grade (age 14).

I find FB post-parents evening bragging toe-curlingly awful. But I'm old (44). I think perhaps younger people see it differently.

I'm a teacher and we are not allowed to send out negative reports. We get emails telling us to 're-word' them, i.e., lie.

Yes, LaQ the Americans can be a bit loud and going on about the brilliance of their children. The English tend not to although different groups of different English people will have different values on that point. I was at a dinner a few years ago with two men whose sons had both got 11 A* at GCSE - one boy at St Paul's and one at Haberdashers' boys - they should have known better but both saw fit to mention it. In true English fashion I hereby declare my child's most recent test result : 31% and their unerring ability to gain the pass mark 100 in many a music exam up to and including grade 8. Long may they maintain their laid back approaches and internal satisfaction and happiness say I....

Ds is average academically so I don't mention that but have a bit of a brag about how well behaved and sporty he is. No kids are perfect, people just miss the bad bits out and illuminate the good bits.

I hate fb bragging so cringeworthy
And I think a sign, not if high intellect!!

Over achiever here who focuses on the negative things. Not programmed to focus on the good things. My children are all In top sets but any thing anyone ever says negative,god help them