Does everyone on MN have very advanced children or are mine just backward????

[VictorVictoria]

I keep reading all these threads about pncy things that three year olds say. DS (3.5) can talk in sentences, knows numbers, letters, colours etc. But he not chatty as such - I am amazed by some of his friends and indeed most of the children I seem tor ead about on MN who seem to be having elaborate conversations about abstract concepts. DS can converse happily. But its usually restricted to topics such as how many more episodes of charlie and Lola or Dora he can watch or whats for tea or the attributes of aeroplanes (favourite thing).

LOL, the perenial MN dilemna.
Have you seen the threads about DC who read Harry Potter at age 6? That really makes one feel inadequate.
My 3 DC missed all the usual early language milestones, none of them knew any letters before age 4.5yo (if even then), the height of our conversational complexity at 3.5yo would have been something like "Oooh look!! It's a tractor!".
Fast forward to primary school, DD is on the G&T register, DS1 is in the top set for everything, DS2 -- okay, fair enough, DS2 may turn out quite ordinary. Which is a perfectly okay thing to be, too.

aw don't call him backward . i know what you mean though, my ds(7) has been struggling ever since he started school.

and he is among the bottom set in everything. still he's lovely and cute and kind which is worth tons more to me than academic achievement at this stage.

plus...my DD (often stroppy and demanding, so FAR FROM PERFECT, but yes, did take to reading early) may have been able to read harry potter at 6, this was last year, but she was scared half to death by it by chapter 4 and had nightmares for a week before we banned it until she is at least 8. so - advantage of being able, cognitively, to read HP at 6? zero! DS is much more laid-back and has far less anxiety! (and gets fewer certificates at school but hey...if he's 'ordinary' i am fine with that as you say pbkid!)

exactly south-east - i would willingly exchange a few of my highly-strung DD brain cells for the gift of simple contentment, which so far eludes her much of the time, bless her darkly complex little soul!!

I suspect that only mothers who believe their child(ren) to be exceptionally bright post on those threads. For every one MNer who posts saying that their 12 mo knows all the colours, counts to 1000, can write their own name I bet there are another 99 lurking and reading and fretting that their dc doesn't.

FWIW, the brightest child I know in RL didn't walk until she was 2 and didn't say anything comprehensible until well after 3. People used to speculate as to whether she was 'a bit simple' (their words not mine).

My mum always used to say that early developers usually run out of steam!! Better to be a tortoise than a hare - my DS1 is perfectly average and that is why I love him so

I would say my ds is average too. He's only young (15 months) but I know I've read some posts on here about toddlers of the same age and thought, wtf???! My ds could never do that!

He doesn't have many real words as such, just babbles and points. He is probably below average so far as language skills go but I think he is just a walker instead of a talker! Or maybe he's a bit 'dim' but who cares?? Plenty of time to catch up and he is adorable which is all that matters.

I think people put far too much emphasis on academic stuff when really it's not that important.

The nature of a internet bullitin board is that you can post whatever you like. I suspect that many Mumsnetters are out right liers or they are a little bit deluded about their children's ablities.

I don't think many people start posts saying "guess what my totally average child did today!" so you only get to see what the gloaters proud mummies post(which is a fraction of total MNers)

There do seem to be a lot of very bright kids on mumsnet though. Lots of possible explanations including:

1. There are lots of bright kids in the world - being advanced isn't really all that unusual, there just is a big spread of abilities.

2. People are more likely to mention it if they think their child is unusually bright.

3. People exagerate ('tis the internet after all).

4. For some reason parents of bright kids are drawn to mumsnet (but why?).

I would also take some of it (not all, of course - I'm sure that some MN'ers have genius children ) with a pinch of salt.

I know mums who have told me that their 7/8/9 month old can say 'mummy'. Now, my 6mo isn't even close to verbalising, though she coos and garbles all day long. However, on hearing these little ones, what I hear when they 'speak' is "Mmmmmmmmmm". 'There!', their mothers say excitedly! "He just said 'mummy'". "Ok....", say I. I think you get my point.

"For some reason parents of bright kids are drawn to mumsnet (but why?)."

People who are drawn to mumsnet are more-than-averagely interested in parenting. Since intellectual development is a product of both nature and nurture, it follows that children with parents who nurture them more will in all probability be more advanced than the average child.

"3) People exagerate ('tis the internet after all)."

I agree, lots of mums on mumsnet and in RL life are pathological liers/

"4) For some reason parents of bright kids are drawn to mumsnet (but why?). "

To access mumsnet you need to be to read and write. I doult there are many mumsnetter with serious learning difficulties or even severe dyslexia posting. If the mother can read then it is easier to produce academically sucessful kids.

My brother goes on about how bright his kids are and "read all the Harry Potter at age 7".
A few weeks ago they were down and I happened to be reading HP and my niece (now 13) said "oh, I hate those books, only read a chapter"

!!!!!!!!

My DD is 5 and composes sonnets, writes in iambic pentameter, reads the Times daily, converses with the dalai lama, advises government on policy...

exaggerate

I have RL friends whose children are currently making me feel distinctly inadequate on the hot-housing front.

DS is 3.5 and frankly couldn't give a tiny rats ass about letters, can only be bothered to count to 10, and spends much of his time speaking in tongues.

By contrast his friend (3 in Jan) can type his name on the PC and practically tell the time. Best friend 3.5 years is some sort of artistic genius with a remarkable talent for drawing fruit.

However, DS is gorgeous. More gorgeous than them.

So I am resisting hideous middle class competitive twattery with all my might.

It's always Harry bleeding Potter isn't it?

I do wonder about some of the ORT reading level threads with six year olds on level 12+ are accepted as the norm.
I help out with reading and in our primary school , generally 1 or 2 children are way ahead, all the others pootle along pretty much as expected.

DS is a happy pootler.

lol Mabana, it appears to be the only book that Terribly Advanced Readers ever read, it's the only one mentioned on these threads.

my dds are doing fine in real life but utterly backward by mumsnet standards. Especially my (oh the shame) 4.5 year old non reader who doens't even know her letters of the alphabet.

Social skills are more important in pre schoolers than learning how to read.

We overcame an ever so middle class frustration of having an average child by moving back to the continent, when no one is expected to read before 6

If the mother can read then it is easier to produce academically sucessful kids

^^^^^^^^^^

Pffff. I was reading Proust at 14 (no gifted and talented register then but I was BRILLIANT ). I've produced a dd who is off the scale academically... but hey not at the end you'd expect as she has sld.

Backward, forward... what a load of arse

I suppose Harry Potter has sort of become shorthand. I have an Harry Potter reader, mind you, but what I am really proud of him for is moving up to the next swimming grade after one course of lessons for the first time. He was in beginners for a year and grade one for a year, but managed grade two in 3 months. Saved me money as well. But while reading is natural to him, he has really tried at swimming, and built up his stamina and overcome his fear of going under etc even though he is still a grade behind his younger, less academically able best friend.

I don't think it is all about academic ability though, that is DS's strong point, but IME the most popular children are more likely to be the sporty types.

And re that last paragraph I speak as an academically able, non-sporty type myself.

ejb1976, I said easier, but its not guarenteed.

Anyway a kid who is unfortunate enough to have severe learning difficulties benefits from having parents who can read. They can be better advocate, find information and are less likely to get fobbed off. They can fight the LEA when the LEA gives the child a statement that commits the school to nothing.

I would still argue that if you educate the mother you educate the family.