I always said I didn't want a gifted child!

[mnistooaddictive]

As a teacher I have seen how hard life is for gifted children and how they often struggle to fit in. Having done research into asd and ADHD I came across a definition of a gifted child and it is like they were describing my dd. Even down to the love of physically demanding sports such as rock climbing!
I knew she was 'bright' but I guess she is a bit more! Struggling really as I can't talk about it really as if you mention your child is gifted people think you are arrogant and superior. It is a special need like any other but you don't get the support from others you would if you told them your child had ADHD.

She is just 5 and in reception.
Any advice? Do I get a formal diagnosis? She has the compulsive movement thing I have seen described as common of gifted children. Will she need help with this?
I would love to hear other people's stories and the pitfalls to avoid.
I really really don't want to push her. She will learn in her own time when she is ready.

Some mothers take on a second job to pay school fees or pick a career which pays more.

That's an uncharacterstically sexist statement of you, Xenia. Or don't some fathers take on 2nd jobs, too?

Why would a very clever child be better off in a class where children are all sorts of different IQs and other children are disruptive?

Because dealing with disruption is a lifeskill and would you believe, the very clever kids can be the most disruptive?! And not because they're "bored", either.

I find that DS1 needs a kick up the butt & rises to a challenge; however DD is better being average or near the top of her group, and DS2 definitely needs to be the top dog to have any confidence. Being mixed with lots of very bright kids would be iffy for DD & very bad for DS2. It's individual, no one rule for all.

Ah, Xenia. Bless

xenia

Your social skills are lacking maybe you should seek some help with that

Btw im sp on benfits in h/a housing so everything in your eyes that means my dc will fail

and guess what ds2 has got his sights set on cambridge and its felt by his teachers he get there without the hot housing needed . He is doing it becuase he wants it not becuase it is expected

' Luckily I can pay to ensure that damage is not inflicted on my children.'

Hope your kids dont go to Oxbridge then Xenia and mix with mine. SN and benefits. The horror.

The reason that you should really get out an see some state schools is that good comprehensives don't do mixed ability teaching. I wouldn't mind your views Xenia if you knew anything about schools outside the private, selective sector-but you don't. It is all based on the worst kind of prejudice.

I feel for you. In my experience the best thing you can do (apart from the research you are clearly already doing) is ensure that she gets a firm diagnosis. Once she has the diagnosis she will get lots of support (or should!) from her state school and you will finally be able to get some support for yourself with various helpgroups/parentforums. But getting that diagnosis can be a stuggle as many schools don't want to have to pay for it.

It can sometimes take years for schools to take action (usually not before year 2 unless there are serious, physical behavioural issues!). You wouldn't want her to have to wait around that long. If at all possible fork out the cash to see someone yourself...

In the meantime, however, I would focus on exercise, exercise, exercise - this should help to alleviate some symptoms. If at all possible take your daughter swimming BEFORE school every day as it will give her muscles a chance to get tired out.

Good luck!

sorry my last message was not meant for this thread! it is getting really late sorry!

My advice would be the same in any case!

xenia - your ignorance of the state sector is laughable and your logic is flawed. Of course schools which select on academic ability will get better results and send more pupils to top universities, but that doesn't say anything about the quality of the outcomes for each individual student. I say this as someone who went to a bog-standard state comprehensive and then went on to Cambridge. I had many friends who had attended "top" private schools but I am not convinced that their education was any better than mine.

The last laugh will be on us anyway, as you will have wasted thousands of pounds on buying the perceived advantages of a private education when we'll have got it all for free. And what's more, our kids might even have picked up some social skills into the bargain.

Now off you toddle, there's a dear.

I used to like Xenia and her view - never on schools but certainly on women however after reading her posts on this thread I can't think anything other than she is simply not a nice person.

I don't object to Xenia's views on selective education-(not that I agree with them)
I have a huge issue with her spouting personal prejudices on state education, and comprehensives in particular, when she has never set foot in a good one. She has seen the worst examples on TV and lumps them all together as if a Comprehensive in inner London is going to be anything like a Comprehensive in Ascot.

High flying parents are simply not going to put up with mixed teaching or poor practice in a Comprehensive. On parent's meetings you will find them asking exactly the same sorts of questions about Oxbridge as parents in the private,selective sector. They have experience themselves and they expect their DCs to go-and the do.

sorry-they do

All I said is that (i) children in a class do better if everyone has a similar IQ and (ii) that they do not benefit from having children disrupting the lessons.

One way to ensure children avoid disruption can be to pay fees. I have never said there are not good state schools. About 50% of good university places go to the 93% of children in state schools although many of those are comps in leafy suburbs and state grammars.

And of course if everyone in the class has an IQ of 120+ you are going to get better exam results. My point is simply that as bright children do best in selective schools it behoves parents to choose such schools for their chidlren and if that means you don't pick a career as a teaching assistant or care home worker or housewife then that may be the route you have to take. There are plenty of state schools for chidlren with low IQs too. I never said otherwise.

I looked at ragged's list and it fits ds perfectly. His teacher views him as average to above average (she said he was below average at parents' evening and failing but then denied it when queried by the head). He doesn't make any effort at school but in the areas that interest him he is outstanding. I wish I'd got an EP assessment done when he was 5 as I think it would have made schooling a bit easier (and had something to wave at the teacher when ds gets told off for talking too much and questioning everything). Having said that it seems that an EP report is not much use unless you have the support of the school in getting it done, even then it depends on the teacher to implement what has been agreed (which doesn't always happen).

Rabbitstew - I am still not engaging with you.

The problem with keeping children with high IQs together and entirely separate from those with average and low IQs from a very early age, is that the people with high IQs then go on to have very unrealistic expectations of how to get things done and how to manage people they've never before had anything to do with. At some point, in order to become effective and useful to the whole of society, they need to understand what the rest of humanity is like...

Don't worry, mnistooaddictive. I had noticed. Your problem, not mine.

Mnistooaddictive- why are you not prepared to engage with people who don't 100% agree with you?

I don't agree. Grammar school children were as good if not better than those educated with the 80% with lower IQs. In fact they went on to do well in all kinds of jobs just as the selective priviate school pupils do today. I can talk to people with a low IQ. Also it would never be entirely separate. You go into shops. You are in clubs out of school. No one is totally isolated.

I don't find it hard to manage people who aren't very bright. However the lack of separation of teh bright is one of the biggest causes of our decline in social mobility in the UK.

So long as you don't assume when you go into shops that everyone serving you is thick and treat them as such. And those who benefited from a grammar school education in the past had gone through a mixed ability state primary school, first.

There is still the question of the age at which you separate people out and how you separate them, and what particular skills you are trying to identify. The problem with grammar schools was that the alternative wasn't supposed to be the dumping ground it became (originally it wasn't supposed to be a one-size-fits-all-the-rest alternative, anyway), but nobody wanted to spend much money on the alternative once they thought they'd picked off the cream. The result was the raising of a minority but a continued stupid waste of other talents. So going back to the past isn't the answer to all our problems.

I think the thing I really learnt from going to a comprehensive school was that academic achievement isn't everything. Yes, there were kids who had lower IQs than I did, but some of them were fantastic artists, musicians or sports players. And some were just really kind, lovely people with whom I could have a lot of fun. I learnt to value people as individuals, and that has served me well.

DD is very bright academically, and there are a number of other very bright children at her state primary. However, there are other children who are less academic but have other fantastic qualities. I want dd to understand and appreciate this from an early age, and would hate for her to demonstrate the sort of superiority compex exhibited by Xenia.

Of course not. In fact I judge people no how they treat people who don't matter to them. It's an acid test for me and I certainly hope I treat everyone well.

On grammar schools how come we have decide the children of Kent and Bucks are such a special kindo f child that the grammar school system works right for them but genes in children in other parts of the country are so different that those children don't have grammar schools?

If the past worked better then surely it makes sense to go back to the past.

'I can talk to people with a low IQ. Also it would never be entirely separate. You go into shops. You are in clubs out of school. No one is totally isolated.'

Please dont assume people in shops have low IQ's.