to get titsed off with parents believing their children are the academic elite?

[tallyhoho]

I am fed up with those people who bleat on about how children are either talented academically or not and about how IQ is largely inherited.

I believe extreme talent someone may be born with eg that 16 year old black swimmer, however, all you need to do is look at private schools to see that drumming exam technique into someone will lead to good grades.

I believe there are some children who are genuinely academically gifted but they are few and far between. All other children fall somewhere on a spectrum where given the right encouragement and environment can do well.

Our children are all doing well at school but I don't believe it is down to me and DH.

Quattro, I understand what I am titsed off about, other people understand what I am titsed off about, I have clearly indicated to you what I am titsed off about and it seems to me that you are the only one who does not get my titsed offness. I can do no more .

KitKats, I entirely accept that you didn't intend to be boastful and you don't feel your post is boastful, rather stating the facts. And I think your point about the British having a tendency to self deprecation is right.

FWIW the reasons I saw it as (a little) boastful were that: you children haven't had IQ tests but if they had you state the results would be 'probably high'; you state that the home environment you have provided 'should allow them every chance to fulfil their academic potential', as will the choice of school you have made for them. I guess what I meant was these are not facts, they are judgements you are making, in advance, about as yet unfulfilled academic potential.

In terms of environment, I think it boils down to what one perceives as 'nurturing'. Fairly uncontroversial that a child will reach the best of its individual potential in a 'nurturing environment', but what that means to different people is a political/ social/ moral judgement, rather than a fact.

I find it sad that achievement is almost something to be ashamed of, for fear of being accused of boasting when you acknowledge it or tell anyone about it.

WidowW, no-one has suggested that anyone should be ashamed of achievement.

The original point the OP made was that it gets on her nerves when people feel that their dc's achievement is purely down to their genetic heritage from their parents, rather than also influenced by a host of other factors.

I see it as this- I have a masters and a doctorate- fact. I'm rightly proud of this achievement. But if I were to tell you this, AND to state/ imply that this means my dc is likely to do significantly better than the average academically, this isn't fact. Rather, statistically it is, but I've no way of looking in to the future and seeing what will unfold for my actual child. So I'd be boasting if I was to tell you about their inherited brilliance and bright future. I bloody hope it turns out like that, but I'm not in control of it.

Well what one person is proud of someone else wouldn't be which is why it's best not to show off. My other thread is about an article in today's Times - should we be glad internally that others are better and we can show them we are worse because then that makes the other person happier (I think that's so) or instead be envious.

i don't see what athletics have to do with education. that is a totally different type of talent, and like most educational achievement has an awful lot to do with extreme practice too.

WidowWadman, achievement is never something to be ashamed of at all. Boasting related to individual genes is IMO.

EffieB puts it much more effortlessly than i can [envy}

Sorry clicked too soon.

Of course bright parents are more likely to have bright children, ditto less bright parents and their children.

When kids do well at anything it's usually because of a combination of factors, most important of which is parental encouragement.

Why does this tits you off?

chandellina, I agree there are a lot of external factors relating to education and other talents and to continue practising combined with other external elements will result in achievement.

MZ, parental encouragement in no way titses me off. I think you have misread my posts.

I thought you were titsed off that when people's children did well, people thought it was because of them.

Which largely, it is.

If my kid manages to be very bright (like me) or very sporty (like DP) it won't be rocket science to work out why. I'll try not to brag about it, but I will be justly proud of my child's achievements if they do well.

Is it just the bragging that annoys? Or the linking of the parent's skills with the childrens?

By the way I have never met anybody thus far who uses the term 'academic elite' unless being ironic. Most people just say 'aye she's doing great' or whatever.

We all know that the ones about whom the parents show off are likely to be those who then end up failing in one way or another. Pride comes before a fall is not an old saying for nothing.

If the child is born with music genes or a high IQ or was lucky enough to have parents who give it attention and it does well I'm not sure we should be proud as such as it's hardly surprising they've done well at XYZ. If you're very into female careers and they up some kind of fundamentalist religious nutter housewife or you're very musical and they end up devoting their life to keeping snakes or you wanted them to go to university and they leave school at 16 to sweet the street - those are th emore interesting issues - can you love them and be proud of them for taking decisions which might not have been those you would have made for them.

My children do well at school because they are bright. Not geniuses, which I think is what you mean by "academically gifted". You can't make a non-bright child achieve well just by paying.

I pay to make sure my children have decent science lessons taught by teachers with a degree in the subject, enough resources to run experiments as and when needed, and the clout to remove badly behaved disruptive children from lessons and/or the school. I pay to make sure the lessons are being taught at their level because they do not have the maturity to teach themselves at a higher level. In my experience of teaching (in about 10 different state schools), there are maybe two to three bright, mature self-starters per year group of 150, who will do very well no matter what is happening around them, and plenty of bright kids who would do a lot better if they were in a calmer, more learning- rather than behaviour-focused environment. 2 of my 3 are unfortunately in the second category, and the middle one could have gone either way at 11.

And fwiw I do believe that IQ is largely inherited, sorry. OBVIOUSLY this does not mean that there are not bright children in otherwise rather dull families, nor less bright children in clever families, just that on balance there tends to be a correlation between parental and offsprings' IQs. And the higher your IQ, the better on the whole you tend to be able to arrange living conditions for your own children, causing them to have better environmental conditions and so on. Not sure what to do about that to make it fairer apart from taking all children from their parents at birth, mixing them up and redistributing them.

What it's important than is to ensure that children's life chances are not damaged by their environment, particularly in the early years. It's too late by 11 to fully catch up any early damage. And that is what governmental focus is coming around to, with the sure-start family help and healthy living programmes that are being run for families with young children. Studies suggest it's too late even by the time they start primary school to catch up if they've been fed chicken nuggets and chips all their weaned life, and been sat in front of the telly since birth or lived in very conflicted situations.

I personally wouldn't want to bring up a genius!

Too right. I have a child who is so bright his IQ can't actually be accurately measured.

I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

He is hard work and very different to other kids. Note I said different, not better. He has a lot of traits that are very simular to the most challenging traits associated with asd. It is a fact that this is due to his IQ. What is wrong with saying that? It is not bleating it is stating an irrefutable fact. And it brings huge problems and makes life very difficult.
We are very poor and he goes to a state school. He is this way in spite of me.

Not all very bright children are academically inclined. Some of them just live in their own little place, following their own interests and passions.

I am not quite sure what the op is complaining about.

I think it is good to encourage your child. But I do take the point others make about how some people think their child is the cleverest thing in the universe. I was always told to be careful about boasting as there is always someone better than you are.

Keep checking in on this thread with a sort of sickly fascination, but can't decide whether to weigh in on the side of the academic elite or not. Have a dc of either kind and a very mixed family, so could go either way really.

Both my DS and DD are at a very competitive school (state primary) so hear the comments you're referring to on an almost daily basis. I would just humour them and then have a laugh about it later with a friend with similar views.

My eldest has SEN (but neither dh or i do). My youngest appears bright (but my barometer is probably set quite low!). I'm just happy that ds is healthy (unlike DD who spends much of time hospitalised) and enjoys school. I'm also with muminthemiddle - one child could be academically brilliant compared to peers in one school, but fairly average in another.

We will be going private for secondary but only because they will provide the support my DD needs and the state won't.

I'm not whinging but would love to be in a position of wondering whether my child is academically brilliant rather than battling for her to receive an education at all. If i didn't have a close friend with a SEN DD, i'd probably leave the school gates in tears every day, but at least we can have a laugh about the brilliant children competitive talk together.

That must be hard. I remember a mumsnet thread a while back when I said one aspect I enjoyed with reasonably bright children was the conversations with them. I would still enjoy the cuddles etc with a down's syndrome child or a child who couldn't see or hear etc but I would miss that intellectual sparking side.

I have two points; hopefully not repeating anyone else's.

Re 'G&Tness' - which is not an umbrella term encompassing all tinkly middle class discussions held whilst drinking gin and tonic, as I initially visualised - I have been led to believe (by my DH - a primary deputy) that it's pretty much all about securing funding to meet the needs of the above average children. Stating the obvious here, but ... historically, additional funding was allocated for those performing belowing the national average (to deal with the issues that arose from the inclusion policies). The standard lesson was pitched at the average children, which left the above average children not catered for in the public school system. I think the phrase 'Gifted and Talented' flatters to deceive.

Re private schools - I won a scholarship to a single sex private school and the combination of smaller class sizes, middle class peers and a HUGE emphasis on academic achievement definitely dragged my arse over the exam hurdle, and set me up nicely for a First in a rather fusty subject at university. However, I have never put my (somewhat pointless) degree to use and floundered like a bastard after university.

For me, academic achievement is over-rated. I wonder how I would have fared if given a more rounded education and not encouraged to base my entire self-worth on exam results. For that reason, I am not so bothered by the boasting and competitiveness ... I want happy, well balanced children. We will support, but I don't think we'll be pushing too much.

xenia, my brother is, in theory, a genius. I love him very much but you would struggle to have an 'intellectually sparkling' conversation with him unless you only want to talk about the finer points of a very specific branch of pure mathematics. And no, he doesn't have ASD as far as we know.

Not all 'bright' people are thrillingly exciting to talk to.

I know. I want children who are interested in loads of different subjects - a very broad education; renaissance people in a way. I have met a lot of bright people who only know about one area of physics etc.