What's wrong with telling a child they're "gifted"

[EyeOfNewtToeOfFrog]

Just wondering, really.

I know most people are dead against it, but how do parents then explain to DC why they are so different from their peers? The kids are not stupid (by definition!) :o so they are aware of being different/academically miles ahead.

"How would you honestly explain why and how they are different and able to study on a different level from their peers? "

Children like adults are capable of noticing differences in everyone and everything I think they could realise without things being spelt out using certain phrases (du jour).

Telling a child they are gifted?Then what's next? What are you expecting?

Beautifully put Curiousmind

EyeofNewt,

I would like to know where you draw the line between bright and gifted: top 10%, 5%, 1%, .1%?

Amongst my friends who have pupils in the state sector, their children seem to sometimes be on the G&T register and sometimes not. When I went to Uni, only 5-10% of the country went to Uni at all. Were they all gifted? Is everyone who goes to Oxbridge gifted (maybe top 0.1% of population) or only those who are capable of truly original thought?

I think the word "gifted" has become a devalued term. You only need to see the number of posters on these boards. There just aren't that many truly "gifted" children in the sense of the word as I undersand it.

I think that if a child is truly gifted, as in composing original music or doing GCSE maths below the age of 11, of course you have to give them some kind of explanation, although I suspect that they will have grasped it themselves anyway. If they are reading or doing maths a couple of years ahead of their contemporaries, they are just bright and will be hugely disappointed if they are led to believe that they have some exceptional talent.

Larry - I really agree with what you have said.

Bright / academically able has been mixed up with gifted. When I did 'O' levels it was quite usual to take your maths O level a year early to free up time for other subjects and reduce the exam burden in the next year. I was in a bog standard State comprehensive and quite a few (at least a dozen) of us took Maths a year early. I am a summer birthday so I passed my Maths O level (grade B ) at 14 and this was not exceptional nor worthy of comment.

I am not gifted at Maths and neither were the vast majority of people who took maths early but I am academically inclined.

I think it's decidedly unwise because there is such variation both in intelligence and how it manifests, and in how a child changes over its childhood. The "gifted" 6yo may be pretty bog-standard at 16, and vice versa. "Gifted" implies a set, particularly unusual ability, and I would be very wary of applying it to a child. It's setting you and them up for frustration, possible disappointment, or a lifelong sense of failed potential. Wiser to see a small child doing well as "bright, doing well, perhaps needing extra work to challenge them". That's all you need, IMO.

i would simply go with saying that you're lucky that your brain works well. you still have to work hard and you can always do better but you're lucky that some of what others find difficult has come to you easily so far - that's if an explanation was needed at all.

i'd also always condition it with references to other things that others find easier than them, are better at than them and that they have to work harder at. i'd be reminding them of their weaknesses re: if they're poor at sport use that as an example of something they have to work harder at to get the basics than others. emphasising the diversity of human skills and aptitudes is really important imo because being great at school work is really only one of many skills and strengths that are all important.

I know exactly what the OP means. At DD1's school, they praise the effort rather than the achievement which can be quite confusing. So, DD1 wasn't really sure whether or not she was doing well or not.

Should be a combination of perhaps both?

I think DCs that are bright should be praised and encouraged, I just don't like the term "gifted and talented" especially in primary school. There are some very bright 7 year old children and I think they should be given extra work if they are finding things too easy or if they have very curious minds and love to learn. I just think the "g&t" label at that young age is more for the parents benefit, my DS has no idea what it means, just that his homework says g&t on the top and at 8 he doesn't really care but other parents feel compelled to tell their kids, our kids and every other patent their kids are g&t. Just let them be bright 7&8 year olds please. We don't really need the label.

picking up on what chaz has said i too find that schools frequently confuse
being bright/able with being gifted.
My dd is on the 99.9th percentile for IQ and highly gifted but school are reluctant (although this is getting better) to view her as being gifted,i believe this has alot to do with the fact she is an introvert,certainly not a crowd pleaser or teacher pleaser for that matter and we feel she is intrinsically motivated giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/intrinsic.htm and tbh can be a tricky customer.
I think >> puts on flame proof jacket

agree mrs but when I think of gifted and talented, for some reason I think of music/art rather than academic subjects. Maybe maths though.

There are several input here I totally agree with.
I agree with the term gifted was abused.I believe hardly any chilldren on the list are truly gifted. Even you are truly gifted, well, you are lucky and you might feel something is much easier for you than for others, but , there is a such long way to go.We are talking about still children on this site!
The 8 years old youngest grade 8 pianist will certainly have a career like his Mother?

Schools usually put top 1%-5% on the list, but I feel people who are working on the geniue gifted children are aware of this, maybe they just want to give more children a chance for extensive work(I don't really think this actually happened.)In my area, our LA got somebody to assess the children when you are at least 4 years ahead in some subjest.Even so, I still don't think that means you are gifted.
I prefer to live in the reality, well use the the 1% gift if your eally got some then put 100% effort in.
Yes, hardwok, great effort should be highly encouraged and praised at this stage.

I don't know where the "Gifted" and academically able division sits TBH.

My eldest was labelled G+T when it first started (8yrs ago) but the school didn't really rate it TBH. After all in a super selective grammar all the kids fit the then definition.

I'm still not sure they are "gifted" but I'm aware and they are too that they just find academic work easier than others of their age and are working way above age averages- BUT that is innate ability, they then have to look at ensuring progress is made at the expected rate or faster. School has been really good at this as they are used to this sort of child. Also swimming in a sea of academically able kids has meant they don't get big headed as it's just normal for them.

But that's the whole point of selective schools, they are all very academic, and it is not an issue. How many so called g&t kids sat the entrance exam and didn't get in and how many kids not labelled as g&t did get in? This is why I don't like the label and tbh I don't see the point.

The only point for me about the lable is your child may get a chance to work on his/her level.

iggly2 - the person who was not told as a child about their giftedness took an IQ test at uni, and was surprised to be in the top 0.2% of the population. By this time they were failing in life already (long story) as they had gone through several schools with the giftedness issues completely unsupported, so they ended up depressed, miserable, dropping out of society and scraping a hand-to-mouth living. Not nice to see in someone you're close to. There were a few people with similar patterns in that family. I also have distant family members who almost certainly were exceptionally intelligent children, who also had no support as children and ended up shooting heroin by 15.

Just that I would really really like to avoid such a fate for DD1! (That's what I'm hoping to achieve, if not exactly 'expecting', Curiousmind :) I'm expecting DD to have a realistic view of herself and know what she needs to do to succeed in life - which means not just 'being gifted' but putting in lots of hard work to succeed. I'm only too aware that being gifted is not enough in itself.)

Larrygrylls - I totally agree with "I think the word "gifted" has become a devalued term" - and I think schools in particular are responsible for confusing "gifted" and "bright". I'm talking about gifted here, but TBH am not sure exactly where the line should be drawn - maybe the top 1% or 2% of the population? I'm sure there are definitions out there! As Mrsshears also knows these kids are typically anything but stereotypical bright, compliant high-achievers. Schools often miss them completely from their G&T lists.

Fennel - I'm not quite as sure about intelligence typically "levelling out" as they grow up. IME this is not usually the case.

swallowedAfly - you're definitely right - it's all about HOW you present it and the context!

ilovemydogandMrObama - thanks for agreeing :) yes, I think a combination might be a good idea!

Curiousmind - the trouble is that if a school does not realise the child is actually capable of working at a much higher level, the child will find everything very easy and will never learn proper study skills - which they will definitely need at secondary/6th form/university level. That's why so many gifted children "level out" or worse, drop out altogether - because suddenly they don't know how to work out answers to much more complex questions. That's why gifted (and bright!) children need to be stretched to work on the right level from the start.

In our case school raised concerns about DD1's behaviour in KS1, so we had her assessed, and it turned out the only thing "wrong" with her was an exceptionally bright mind (99+ percentile) (which, incidentally, I already suspected) If we hadn't had the assessment, the school would still be treating her as a problem kid with severe behavioural issues, and she certainly wouldn't have access to extended and enriched learning - so her self-image would still be at rock bottom. I can't begin to tell you how much it has boosted her confidence to know that the reason she feels so different from everyone else is because she's bright, and it has also made it so much easier for us to discuss school problems with her. (We also make it very clear to her that she must not talk about it to her friends or anyone outside to family - but that it's ok to show it through her work.)

If you had to choose between your child believing they are different because they're "bad/naughty" and believing they are different because they're "special"..... would you not do the same?

I did not say intelligence levels out, certainly many very clever small children will be very clever adults.

But quite a few won't be as outstanding as they seem at 6, and vv, quite a few very bright adult were not showing amazing promise at 6. I have a number of very clever adult friends who were late developers in this sense. One was non-verbal at 4, and super-bright at university level, another the last in his class to learn to read, mediocre at everything through primary, ended up a maths and physics whizz.

It is sad what happened to your friend eyeofnewt but what assurance is there that things would be different if they had been told as a child. Depression, addiction, self harm, suicide, low self worth can all run in families (nature and nurture implications) as can intelligence. Your friend may sadly have suffered regardless of being told (and maybe feeling that they are never good enough or excelling enough) nobody can tell.

I don't care if people use the word "gifted" to refer (in a formal context, or for statistic keeping) to merely "bright" children. For me the word "Bright" is even more impossible to define or defend than G&T label, too.

But if you're talking to your own DC I think you'd need to tell them just what "gifted" does and doesn't mean for them. And since it can mean so little, best to avoid. In this house it's a bit of a joke; once when DD said something bonehead I chipped in with "Are you sure you're on the G&T register?" She often recalled that comment when she said or did something daft thereafter, for a few years anyway.

DD said recently "It's tough being the best at everything"; she isn't best at everything (many things, really), but her real meaning is that she's very nervous about strong expectations to deliver on things she has a reputation for excelling at. She's only 10. I don't like her feeling that kind of pressure. A formal label would make it worse.

I didn't tell ds he was gifted I told him he was good at maths. It dawned on him he was very good at maths when he did maths lessons with the children three years older than him and as he got to the top end of primary he had a lesson a week with secondary. In year seven he won the whole school maths challenge and was known as Dexter boy genius (after this cartoon) and the name stuck. So he wasn't known as gifted but as genius

If you had to choose between your child believing they are different because they're "bad/naughty" and believing they are different because they're "special"..... would you not do the same?

Dim & disturbed kids also often act up from boredom & are therefore naughty. And yet plenty of the very clever/dim/unhappy kids manage to tolerate a bit (or a lot) of boredom in lessons without acting up. Tolerating boredom is probably one of life's essential skills. So telling someone they struggle because they're "special" doesn't sound like a solution in itself, to me. However formal assessment can be a good thing, I'm all for formal assessment in difficult cases, but whether to pass on full conclusions to young children is another question.

Nevertheless I'm glad you found a solution that worked for you OP. :) And that you have a clue what "bright" means!

Not sure about this as a general thing but when my DD aged 10 (who has struggled at school, lacks confidence, didnt read until whe was 8 and says she is rubbish at everything) came home after being put on the G&T for singing/perfoming arts her little life just changed and she just has an inner glow that simply wasnt there before.

We just say it is her special talent and everyone has one you just have to find it and she is soooo much happier now she thinks she has found hers. She will quite happily sing in front of the whole school and cares not one jot if the boys laugh at her (but they dont anymore because she does sing quite beautifully).

So for us, it has been a force for good - but not told anyone outside the family before now!

I am glad for OP found the solution.But I doubt there is any realationshop between giftness-bordom-naughty.
I think gifted children are much more able to find the fun bits because they are looking at things on a deeper level rather than just get it done .
There is a common problem that very advanced children are not challenged in school, but usually they are also well behaved children.

I have to agree to disagree with you curiousmind
There is a huge relationship between boredom and bad behaviour in gifted children.

I'm wary of this G&T label. In state schools, it seems to mean ordinarily bright, whereas to the gal on the Clapham omnibus, it would mean something extraordinary ...

If you have bright children, why not educate them alongside other bright children? They'll soon develop a sense of perspective.