What makes your child 'GnT'?

[CURIOUSMIND]

I am just wondering, everybody come to this topic with some reason.So, what makes your child GnT, registered or not( so we don't need to consider the difference between schools).
Not for boasting for sure, but for helping us to look at the world from some distance.

I would expect children (especially only children) who have SAHMs who take education seriously (and are equally bright/brighter than career mums) to be far ahead academically of those who attended nurery with limited 1-2-1 and learning opportunities. I would be VERY surprised (SEN aside) if they could NOT at least read and write simple words.

Seems mad they wouldn't be well ahead as they have had more opportunities.

Well ds wasn't an only, one of three then and one of five now. I didn't hothouse him I read to them all he taught himself to read. I taught him to write his name because he wanted to, he quickly picked up how to write other words and then sentences and then stories. He was always mad for numbers could buy his own sweets when he was only a toddler and pay with the right money or know what change he needed and he discovered for himself multiplication, division. In actual fact I can't really take much credit for any of his abilities he had the drive to learn and taught himself mostly

I took care not to mention hothousing I do not believe that would happen (or have to happen!) just talking (an adult speaks better than another toddler ) reading a few books each day and individually to the child so they get loads of mummytime. Also to be able to tell when they want to learn to do something (eg write their names).

I think some people confuse 'gifted' with 'reading and counting at an early age'. Those people may be disappointed a few years down the line, as the others may well catch up!
As iggly2 says, home environment pre-school and in the child's early years can have an enormous effect on academic performance in Foundation and Y1.

I had two other early readers a ds and a dd who have autism. I wouldn't say either were gifted academically although HT maintains dd is exceptionally able. I suppose coming after ds I'm more sceptical because she isn't as able as he was.
I then have a dd who didn't actually reach average levels until aged 9 but then flew and was declared G&T. I would say though that she is a conscientious hard worker rather than having a natural ability.
So for me I don't think early reading or counting constitutes gifted.
I'm always surprised at the number of "gifted " children who do Kumon and reading chest tbh, it seems to be an awful lot of coaching for children with supposed giftedness.
I think I am more in the camp of allowing them to explore and discover for themselves rather than coaching tbh (or maybe I'm just a lazy parent ).

My dd does kumon and reading chest insanity and is on the 99.9th percentile for IQ.
we do these for a number of reasons including the fact dd enjoys both,she likes getting a package of books addressed to her through the letter box,we are lucky if we get 1 reading book home from school in a month too so we have taken matters into our own hands somewhat,dd reads lots of her own books from home also but i do think she is still at the age where the reading scheme books are of benefit to her.
Kumon is mainly for confidence and enjoyment.

I should add dd also does lots of her own self discovered activities too,the latest one being origami

I suppose I just wonder why there's the need We never used any reading schemes ds learned to read using the books we had the Reverend Audry books were a favourite and he chose what he wanted in the library. The others did the same dd started with Hairy Maclary and other ds used the teletext on the TV to teach himself. They never read reading scheme books at school either, it was obvious when they started that they were beyond them and so they chose their own in the library.
As for maths I'm not sure there's much value in repetition when a child has a natural aptitude for something. Ds never wanted to repeat anything he wanted to push his knowledge further instead. I suppose I'd worry that they'd soon switch off. I suppose if worksheets entertain then that's ok we just focussed on more practical application of numbers.I suppose it's horses for courses at the end of the day.
Not saying there's anything wrong with either Kumon or reading chest just that I assumed they were more for children who needed extra practise of what was taught in school rather than to extend a gifted child that's all.

I spent time teaching dd before she went to school. I was told others would soon catch up and that you were either born academically gifted or you were not. Luckily I listened more to those who argued nurture rather than nature determined intelligence. I now think it's a mixture, but nurture is discredited with accusations of hothousing. I kept learning fun and brief.
Doing KS3 science and maths at 8, I'll have to wait until she is 12 to see if the others catch up. She still loves learning as much as when she was younger.

It's always hard to find anybody around to understand, believe me(so, we don't talk about these at all).Now found here is a really good place!
I don't believe repetition does any good for maths training unless you are behind. But, quality questions ,to sort out where there is no routine to follow, no similiar to copy, the only method is maths itself, will help real gifted mathmatitian, just I can hardly see any.I sometime made up myself to entertain my boys.
I heard reading chest for the first time.Don'w know how could this extra reading book is necessary. My Ds2's writing is actually better than Ds1.Ds1 followed reading scheme ,from stage 1.Ds2 didn't read any reading book(free reader since school), just read with me all the library picture books. Now, I can see what helped his writing is not the reading book but the real book, picture book.You know picture books are naturl in language, dramatic in storyline, just what they need to in writing.
Just proved Igglys's point, quality 1-2-1 time can improve child's early performance a great deal.

Richmal,
Doing KS3 science and maths at 8,obviouly your Dd is very clever.Do you think it's down to your teaching or her self taught?
I am thinking about learning something parens don't know, or not interested in.Your opinion?

Curious it seems like you and I are on the same page

Absolutely!Insanity,lovely to see somebody understand me.

Sometimes I think repetition can help especially if confidence is an issue (ie they can do the maths but need to believe they can). On the other hand some can loath repetiton. Every child is unique.

Ds is category 2 (will jump about computer programs etc so he likes a mix of games/problems). I found it interesting looking at some of his school workbooks from last year. They had large gaps where he had got the hang of things reasonably quickly and his teacher had not made him repeat similar questions. I saw this as a sign that his (superb) teacher really knew him.

She would certainly not have her present abilities without being taught them. I doubt she would have insisted on reading science books, or even reading without my encouragement.

i don't know if some are born with vastly more ability, but from my experience, children can be taught many thing a lot sooner than the present education system thinks they can.

"children can be taught many thing a lot sooner than the present education system thinks they can."

Very true. A school in Wales put their primary school children in for GCSE maths all passed. Parents said they all enjoyed it .

Personally I would not be for the above scenario but I do think children are amazing (esp at a young age) and can be encouraged and obtain more for themselves than is normally expected .

I don't think everything has to be taught though. When ds entered senior school he entered the whole school maths challenge. Naturally as they went further through the elimination rounds the younger pupils were knocked out seeing as they hadn't been taught up to GCSE level which was the level of the later questions. Through ks1 and 2 ds had been taught with children three years older than himself. Towards the end of ks2 he had had free reign to explore maths in the way he chose with weekly input from senior school. In the final of the maths challenge he was the youngest pupil by three years, he'd had none of the formal teaching that the others had but won by five clear points. He had worked it out for himself in the most part.

Richmal, natual ablity or not, you are amazing!

Dispite the natuual ability difference, there is nothing wrong with working hard and encouragement. I believe natual ability+hard work.You can't do anything with your initial natual ability, but hard work can develop your brain, improve your ability.

I didn't teach my Ds1 before y1, thought our school was amazing, then gradually realized that it was him. I found later although he could sort out many problems at first sight, he still need a guidance .I guided him to look at things in different way, to self teach, to teach others, so I still taught him many things.But I am kind of following him, like a motorbike instructor.

Anyway, I totally agree'' children can be taught many thing a lot sooner than the present education system thinks they can." It could be faily easy sit on the list without giftness.

Not only can children learn things a lot sooner, but some of them really want to as well.

Several children in DD's reception class are just raring to be taught a lot more than they are getting through 'learning through play', it's not just her. While DD is enjoying her ballet class more than almost anything else she does at the moment, because they take the children seriously and are trying to teach them properly? Not every child wants this, but quite a few do, I thnk.

So agree about some children wanting to learn in a more formal way earlier than others. And being capable of more than the education system expects - but then so much of our education system is based on Piaget's theories of child development, and it is accepted now that much of his work is flawed in terms of the abilities he believed children developed at certain ages.
However there is definitely a much wider range of 'abilities' in early years than in many other stages of education. I think that is what makes being a good early years teacher so hard. My DD will happily sit for well over an hour and do maths if I let her. She has a huge concentration span and would love - and benefit from - a far more formal teaching style of reading than she gets. Of course there are just as many - if not more - in her class that can't do this. They need a totally different style and would not be able to sit, work, concentrate and discuss at the level she can. Fortunately DD does love - and get a lot from - all the 'less formal' methods of learning like making things, acting out stories etc. The dressing up and acting really is beneficial which is why so many are now keenly looking at Vygotsky's methodologies for use in class. Whilst in some ways I would like to see DD getting the formal instruction which would 'bring her on' as I know she is capable of this, I also think it is important to let her have the freedom of learning in this more creative and imaginative way. Just because she can sit behind a desk and learn doesn't mean she should or that is is good or necessary. She'll have years ahead of her for that. There is far less interaction between children once you formalise the learning so they do engage in less spontaneous creative problem solving, team work etc. So yes she could be making more progress in her reading or maths etc but whilst she is happy, engaged and finding joy in all these other things I will be happy too. She'd also happily learn more 'stuff' at home if I put it in place but at the moment I do not see that as necessary with dancing, music and horse riding, play dates and life already taking up plenty time.

I always associate being gifted as something really rare, so I wouldn't say any of my children are gifted, although I come to these forums sometimes as two of them appear different from their cohort and that's all I can go on.

Certainly in the case of my son he has an unusual interest in books and knowledge and no I don't think it has much to do with us, as the other children don't share that at all and have been raised in the same family!

All of my children loved books as tots as they lived in a house full of books and we have always read to them, but by 5 my DS1 was in fact exactly like I was at that age, taking himself away to read most of the time, all sorts of things and just having an unquenchable thirst for knowledge.

This obviously makes him look exceptional as he has huge knowledge and vocabulary as well as very deep understanding of the written word - it's not something you can impose on a 4/5 year old, is something in-built. My other children would read under duresse at that age!!!

The school have never said he is gifted, although it is obvious to anyone looking that he is hugely advanced in literacy, its so obvious it doesn't really need commenting on!! Strangely I don't take a huge interest in his "levels" or reading books as I know he is so self motivated that he doesn't really need challenging in that respect...

My dd's enthusiasm comes and goes. TBH I think it is a case of balance. Socialising and imaginative play are just as important in her development. But there ae a lot of hours in a day and so some time can be spent teaching. I always try to make learning fun. Though I use books a lot more now I started with games.
It must be wonderful to have children who teach themselves, but I'm not going to stop dd realising her capabilities because she dosen't.

Richmal I don't think I'm anywhere near as dedicated to the cause as you seem to be. I also have five children and two of them have disabilities so don't really have time to teach. I think mine have experienced healthy neglect in lots of ways and so the oldest three became very independent very quickly.To be honest if ds hadn't taught himself he'd have had to make do with what school could manage to give him. I gave him the odd pointer when needed but that was as far as my teaching went.