Gifted or 'just' bright?...

[bubbleymummy]

As they've gotten older, what has set your child apart from their peers? I think that when they are young it is easier to notice children who are doing things earlier/to a greater extent than other children their age, but as they get older skills such as numeracy/literacy etc obviously don't stand out as much. While my son seems gifted in these areas at age 4, he may not seem so in a few years! So what do you think it is that 'defines' your child's giftedness as such?

Hmmm... Well if giftedness can be age dependent can it wear off then? :)

Just to use your example SOH, a 3 yo knowing the alphabet could be considered bright, but not exceptional. DS could recognise all the letters of the alphabet by 18 months, some would say this is exceptional but does that necessarily = gifted. He's 4 now, still very bright and certainly being interested in letters from an early age would explain his reading ability but I don't think that he could be classed as gifted solely based on that now iykwim. That's one of the things I was trying to get at in my OP. Giftedness v brightness in relation to age if that makes sense!

excuse rambling and typing - N(a very squirmy toddler)AK!

bubbley, that was my point, recognising the alphabet not being a sign of giftedness but a sign of being bright and interest. I think we're agreeing with each other.

DS was obviously very bright at 4 - he learnt to read quickly, got the whole school thing and went to the class above for phonics and numeracy but apart from being seeming more mature in his thinking than the other children I wouldn't have said he was gifted. The most common word teachers used to describe him at primary school was "sensible" (he had a long string of naughty boys sitting next to him). But in a way I don't think the teachers "got him" and it was only once he got to secondary school that he was able to actually show his ability.

Not sure if that answers your point but maybe there are different expectations at different ages. So a child who can learn things quickly will be thought gifted at the start of their school career but later on it will be their understanding and insight into things that will set them apart.

I think so SOH :)

webwiz, I think you're right. As they get older, the definition will change. I guess that is the danger of 'defining' children too young. What could potentially be giftedness could also be 'just' brightness or could turn out to be nothing at all except an ability to grasp letters and/or counting at an early age!

My kids are bright but not "gifted". Gifted to me is something very special (and in many cases not always a good thing), like getting your degree age 12 or as somone said like Mozart writign piano concertos at a very young age. Reciting the alphabet aged two is IMO just a "party trick" any bright child could pick up.

I am not sure I would want my kid to be "gifted" if it meant they were a social misfit though.

My DS isn't a social misfit, in fact now the others have caught up he has a good circle of friends and outside of school most of his friends are a year or two above him. In fact it was his 15th birthday last week and he put his pictures on facebook. Someone commented that shouldn't that be his 16th birthday. He said no he was year 10. They answered they would never have guessed, he was much too "cool" for a year 10

He did miss out that silly boy stage you get in the preteen/early teen age and when he was in Year 7 was in clubs such as 6th form electonics.
Inciidently he didn't really get reading until he was 7 and passed those that were reading fluently in reception (I used to help out at the school listening to reading)
Like Webwiz ds it wasn't really until secondary that his true abilities showed, mainly because what he is good at is "recorded" in primary ie the ability to analyse events.

I think my dd is "bright" rather than "gifted" - yes, she did everything very early as a toddler, but she is not a genius of any kind. Thankfully.

If she has a gift for anything, I think it is for being happy. :)

I think there is a perception that giftedness has to be paired with social problems when in fact you can be gifted and have high emotional intelligence as well. DS stands out not just because of the way he thinks but because he gets on well with everyone as well. He has a good circle of friends, isn't afraid of talking to girls (most of the other year 9 boys won't) and he can have some banter with the teachers too. I wouldn't mind a bit of that ability to get on so well with others myself! And yes he's thought of as "cool" as well so he sounds alot like your DS Bruffin.

Yes, webwiz, my dd has very good social skills too, and she is super-confident - she'll talk to anyone about anything, and she seems to build a rapport with other children and adults extraordinarily quickly.

In fact, one of things that made her stand out in the toddler years was a very early capacity for empathy and an amazingly perceptive understanding of what other people were feeling. These were the things at the age of two that made me feel that she was "different" from the other kids we knew - not her ability to identify letters and numbers or her bizarre familiarity with every detail of the world map!!

I get the puzzling "bright" comments, too, but by ShowofHand's criteria DC are barely scraping "normal" .

I'll always remember Martianbishop's definition of what constitutes a truly gifted child (truly gifted being something different from the G&T label applied)

She said that a truly gifted child self-starts and has a thirst for knowledge.

By that definition my two are merely bright. A bit curious, but not sitting down and teaching themselves ancient greek the better to read Homer in the original.

If a truly gifted child self-starts and has a thirst for knowledge, then I definitely have a gifted one. Constantly self-teaching and usually ends up teaching mummy as well.

But I would still say that I'd describe her as "bright".

'bright' just seems a less pretentious term than 'gifted'. People have fixed ideas about what gifted means which may well not align with what you mean if you use the term. It could mean anything from einstein/mozart to top 10% really, but if you use the term 'bright' most people accept that could mean anything in that range, so it's less controversial and also less cringeworthy. My ds is bright - gifted on a few people's metrics but not on most.

Pixie, from what you've said, I think your ds probably is gifted. Or at least, what I might call gifted. I think it's reasonable to use this term for children who are working 5+ years ahead of their age, but personally, I wouldn't use it for those who are perhaps just two or three years ahead.

But it's all semantics really. I have had my dd called a genius on a number of occasions, which would be laughable if it wasn't so annoying that people are stupid enough to say it in front of her.

I think I'll stick to 'bright' for now - it does sound less pretentious! :)

Ds also has that thirst for knowledge and picks things up very quickly. He loves letters, numbers and symbols and has learned the Greek alphabet, Hiragana alphabet, Hebrew alphabet and I think DH printed out the Russian alphabet for him over the summer! I have no idea what use they will all be to him but he enjoys writing them out and spelling words with them so whatever!

He also loves reading, maps, Lego, painting and tormenting his younger brother. :) He knows some basic words in French and Spanish and his Grandad has been teaching him a bit of Dutch (he's South African - apparently Dutch is v similar to Afrikaans). He has a fantastic memory - it seems photographic at times - so I think that has helped with things like the alphabets and reading etc but in so many other ways he is just a normal little boy (wonderful in every way to me of course! :))

I'm not sure exactly what level he is working at in relation to his peers really (he is HEd) but I do know he is a couple of years ahead at least (from teachers and other parents). I don't know how long that will last but for now I'll just keep letting him work away at whatever interests him and see where it takes us. It's an interesting journey anyway!

I'd love to have a really gifted child musician to play the piano for me every evening while I sipped a cool glass of white wine......sigh...... :) Maybe DS2? hehe

Yes Pixie, I agree labels are not good. Although I'm sure people just mean them as compliments....

hmmm...don't think it would be quite the same - unless it was a very BIG glass of wine :) thanks for the offer though!

I know what you mean about not wanting him to be full of himself. I don't think it's nice for a child to feel 'different' in any way - either above or below others.

I hate it when db calls ds Einstein too. Not true, not helpful and with just a hint of real or imagined sarcasm not kind.

I think that's as good a definition as we'll get - the number of years ahead.

To me one or two years ahead in early primary is bright/ very bright. More than that is properly gifted and more of a challenge to deal with in schools presumably.

He does have a couple of freaky talents though that make people go wow.

Badly edited post there - was meant to say ds is borderline but has a freaky talent etc