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 .

In and my 4 year old is writing adult literature and my 11year old searching for a cure for Ebola . Obviously

Having had many years of glowing parents evening reports as I was growing up, I went to my first end-of-term report appointment at uni without a care in the world.

My tutor turned to the head of college and said "she has a fairly good grasp of the basic principles."

That was a fairly solid coming down to earth for me. (It was also true.)

I do find online bragging about parents evenings to be rather bizarre. Actual achievements, I get. But a teacher's assessment? Why would anyone else care that Little Johnny does his homework and participates well in lessons? My parents would be bemused if I shared DS's parents evening reports with them, and they're ex teachers! They ask about what he's been doing, not whether he was patted on the head for it.

oh bless.

at 6 my eldest DD had a reading age of 10. as a teen she could not be arsed, scraped her GCSEs by the smallest of margins

dd2 at 6 could not read and write. she worked her socks off and got same GCSEs as her sister and is now doing well at college

dd3 is 6 now and reads averagely and cannot write.

what i have learnt

only praise and reward effort.

Coolas, yes, it was Rafe Esquith's book. There's also a delightful film about him and his students.

Perhaps it all boils down to what we all think the word 'bright' means, and how it is interpreted.

Some will think it means 'gifted' or 'exceptionally intelligent', others will think it means 'probably a bit cleverer than average' or even 'anyone who isn't dim'. It could be used to describe most children in one way or another.

A friend of mine posts about her ds on Facebook regularly, but I'm glad she does - we don't see each other very often, and it is the only way I could ever keep up with where he is competing this week.

I don't think I've ever said anything on FB about my dd at all.

Quote from Wikipedia page about Garrison Keillor

The Lake Wobegon effect, a natural human tendency to overestimate one's capabilities, is named after the town. The characterization of the fictional location, where "all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average," has been used to describe a real and pervasive human tendency to overestimate one's achievements and capabilities in relation to others. The Lake Wobegon effect, where all or nearly all of a group claim to be above average, has been observed in high school students' appraisal of their leadership,[8] drivers' assessments of their driving skill,[9] and cancer patients' expectations of survival.

"Most clever people never mention it and I think the same applies to parents of genuinely clever children."

Was going to say that none of my friends on Fb really mention this kind of thing, maybe for a sporting achievement but not academically - but realised the post above is probably why no one mentions it - haar, haar!

I wonder what percentage of the young high-achievers who are average or failing when older have had all the sparkle crushed out of them by teachers and a school system who don't let them rush ahead with their learning. Kids are repressed by the dreary inflexibility of the system.

Hard to tell what percentage. These days children can go on the internet to get free courses in subjects in which they are interested. I spent a lot of time as a teenager in the public library which was a similar exercise.

I would be interested in comparing the outcomes of children in a school ike my daughters' old schools which are top 20 academically selective private from age 5 and what those girls go on to achieve and instead taking the top 20% of the class in a non selective state primary. There may be no different but I wasn't prepared to risk it so I paid fees. I have now been paying school fees for over 25 years continuously.

25 years of school fees? Jesus.

Yes I started when the youngest was 3 actually. She's 30 now so that's 27 years and I've 3 more years to go and I'll probably fund the last ones at university too so perhaps 6 - 8 years if you count that too. So possibly 35 years in all by the end of it. Worth every penny. Nothing nicer than to spend your earnings on the education of your children and to have a large family.

Agree with that Greengrow.

I have a friend who does/knows all the education statistics and he says that the irony is that parents who are in a high socio economic bracket, and more importantly, with a good university education themselves, will have children who will do equally well in state or private.

The value-add in private school is only significant for children whose parents did not go to Uni themselves.

Your children would probably have done just as well in the stare system, with your support.

Then again, education is not just about grades, and private school is not just a safer bet, it also offers better extracurricular activities. And better future networking contacts....I guess!