Intelligent toddler = intelligent children??

[tryingtobemarrypoppins2]

True or not??

I know that early walkers don't always go on to do everything else early, but what about those toddlers that can name all their colours/shapes etc by 2 and a bit etc??? Is there any evidence??

Ha ha!! Clearly I am NOT intelligent! Post headline should read: Intelligent toddler = intelligent child

far from it in our household! Plus I've read (years ago) that everyone averages out in the end unless they are super intelligent and then they usually lack in other areas eg being social/able to get on with others their own age.

My DD was a very early talker, speaking clearly in sentences at 18months, and knew her colours/numbers/shapes etc early.

She is only 3 and it is already noticeable how much her peers have caught up!

There is no evidence that says that children who achieve earlier are any more clever than those that don't.
The EPPE project does say that early experiences do help children achieve better results at Key Stage 1, but the jury is still out on whether the effects are long term.
The High Scope project in America does show that those adults who were on the program as toddlers have done better than those who were not, in terms of having a job, not doing drugs and having good social skills. But they are no more intelligent.
On the other hand, research in Sweden, where children start formal education much later than us, at 6 or 7, shows that their children perform better st achool. Sweden tops the league for literacy and numeracy skills in older children despite the later start to schooling.
Gives us all something to think about.
Personally, I think children do even out and that teaching children social skills at an early age is much more important than teaching them to read and write.

Obviously my DCs are geniuses but yours, I am afraid, will eventually level out.

ummmm, that raises my worry at the moment! Do I keep DS in a VERY swedish style nursery which is very very very play based, with amazing resources (they use real tools in the construction area!!) or go for a more Britsh traditional nursery which is far more in keeping with local schools sadly???

I had a friend whose DS was exactly as you describe- waaaaay ahead of his peers. By about 4 they'd caught up with him.

one of mine, who was a very late talker - & had no pre-school social skills despite my best efforts - showed some startlingly intelligent characteristics (non-verbal, obviously ) early on & did end up being a noticeably more original thinker than my others.

FWIW.

Sometimes, sometimes not. I was far cleverer aged 2 than my younger brother at the same age, but he has outshone me by far as an academic.

In our toddler group, there were two children who were very advanced. One of them, I believe, is still doing very well at secondary; the other one seems to have dropped behind. Otoh two children who seemed quite behind at the toddler stage have moved up the sets in school and are now doing very well.

Maybe, certainly not always. At the end of the day, we all (touch wood) learn to read and count. Does it matter what age we actually picked it up?

It does show a certain focus in that child though ...

Thankfully (as my 3 were all late talkers who specialised in nothing greater than putting sticklebricks up their noses), I do think that most kids even out - they may excel early at numbers or colours or reading, but apart from one or two genuinely brilliant children, most "gifted" toddlers will find their peers catch up sometime during primary school. That's not to say that it isn't nice to have a bright, chatty, communicative 2 yr old, just don't assume that they are on a path to academic glory and Nobel prizes.

I think most bright toddlers stay bright. Some others will catch up too, but most of those 2 year old toddlers who can name all their colours, dinosaurs etc. have the capacity at least to go on to do well at school though not all of them do. Of the toddlers that aren't overtly bright early on I think probably the majority of them also have the capacity to do well, but perhaps more of them don't but quite a lot will. It's an interesting question, but I think there is some doubt over the oft repeated 'they all even out' statement - certainly it's seen as a myth by some.

Of course parents can be very lacking in objectivity in determining if their own toddler is bright!

xxxxx

Dunno. Didn't measure their development with a microscope in the early years. Never went to a healthcheck thing after six weeks - seemed pointless and uncomfortable. They both chuckled a lot (DS more than DD) so I figured they were okay.

I really would encourage people not to be anxious or competitive about this stuff during the early years.

One of DS's friends was in the bottom class for English and Maths throughout year 3, climbed up to the middle class in year 4 and has just been promoted to the top set in year 5. This was entirely due to DS's friend being a very late summer born. They develop at different rates and summer born children will always take a while to catch up, I think.

My DS knows some things that I have no idea how he knows! he does not attend nursery or anything either, his Dad is very intelligent (I am not btw!!) and sometimes he scares me a little in his thinking - he does not hardly talk by the way. Not even two words together yet. he is 2yrs 7 months oh and he has no medical condition either btw, just realised reading back that made him sound a little "ah I see!"

No, not true.

And if you think intelligence is any indication of future financial success or happiness, well, that's not true, either.

everyone doesn't average out though - there have always been smart people and not so smart people.

Agree with Expat, as I almost always do

The trouble with intelligence is that it is overrated IMO. If what you are looking for is indicators of future financial success, you need to look for singlemindedness, shrewdness and/or conviviality. IME anyway.

Point 3.4 states obtain Nobel prize by aged 4 and Point 6.4 rule the world aged 7.

DH often says he think DS and DD are v forward for their years 3.5 and 1.5 and think he gets fed up with me shrugging and saying I hope they are happy!'

"The trouble with intelligence is that it is overrated IMO. If what you are looking for is indicators of future financial success, you need to look for singlemindedness, shrewdness and/or conviviality."

wise words quattro. Not sure that financial success always equates to happiness, but I don't think happiness correlates that well with intelligence either.

Can i add my little two pence worth? My ds was super forward as a baby, he walked at 9 months and knew his shapes and colours at 18 months, although his pronunciation of the words were off iykwim, but her knew what they were. I was a sahm though and spent my day playing with him. He is 5 now and a bright boy but nothing extroadinary and his peers had caught up by 3.

My mum always makes an interesting point that there were a couple singled out in my brothers class at school as being very clever, favoured by the teachers etc and one of them has done nothing more than working in asda. Nothing wro g with that but not exactly led to riches.

My neice is scarily clever and she is 14. I say to her to her all the time to think carefully about the options she chooses at school and what job she wants as like someone said being clever doesn't mean you will make lots of money.

Another voice agreeing with Quattro. There are so many different ways of being bright: some of them will stand out early on, other ones may develop later or just not be so obvious in a toddler. Even in the academic world, being able to get on with people, to stick to the job (and to get the admin done!) can matter almost as much as sheer academic ability: there are very few ivory tower jobs around these days.

I think what all parents really want is for their kids to be in the top 30%. Not the top 10% because they suffer socially, and not below the top 30% because they just fall under the radar and don't get attention from the teachers because they plod along.

Also, I think everyone thinks their first child is a genius, until along comes number two who does everything ever quicker and they wonder whether they got it wrong first time. But I think it's just different skillsets in different children.

I think it's impossible to tell at toddler age as, surely, it depends on the things that the parent/carer has focussed on - wether consciously or subconsciously. I talk all the time and I love language and tend to use a wide vocabulary so, not surprisingly, my DD (2.7) is very chatty and has a wide vocabuloary for her age.

She goes to a very good Montessori school nursery full time and is able to recite/remember nearly everything she's told or read (I used to be like this too). Consequently, I get the "oh she's very bright" comments. I don't think this indicates intelligence though - it just indicates that she is able to remember and recite. Did that ramble even make sense?

Don't you think being able to remember & recite is a key enabler to doing well at school later on BDSM?

I remember a friend's ds had a Thomas the Tank Engine fixation when he was 3 - He could recite every single story verbatim - phenominal memory! He's now at a very competitive grammar school & likely to get an excellent set of GCSEs this year. My own ds seemed fairly ordinary by comparison (but on the bright side of ordinary ). At age 3 his nursery teacher told me he was the sort of child who would get a scholarship to an independent school, which at the time I thought a bit of a presumptious comment, but come 11 & he was offered scholarships - maybe a lucky guess on her part, or maybe it is possible to spot intelligence early on?