Seeking some perspective

[LondonGirl83]

Hi all-- my daughter has hit all her milestones (cognitive and physical) early since birth and has just turned 18 months. My husband and I were largely the same and so while we are often told how advanced she is by nursery, health visitor checks, friends and family etc I haven't thought much about it. My husband and I both have reasonably high IQs and so felt she would be like us and we'd generally be able to anticipate her needs (social / emotional / academic).

However, in the last month her development seems to have accelerated. I'm not sure how common the below is- she seems to be ahead of our NCT group and and other kids we know but that's a fairly small sample. If it does seem highly unusual, what if anything do parents whose children had a similar profile wish they'd known? I guess I'm just looking for some perspective and any words of wisdom anyone has to share:

1. She speaks in 3-4 word sentences (this started when she was 16 months old) and has a vocabulary of circa 500 words - her nursery keep track as part of mapping her development. She uses pronouns and the possessive "s", plurals, the gerund and spatial concepts (over, under, on, in, etc)
2. She knows her colours (10 main ones)
3. She can count to 15 reliably and up to 20 occasionally
4. She can enumerate small sets up to 5 though most reliably to 3 accurately
5. She knows some common shapes- circle, triangle, diamond, star etc
6. Can put together a 6 piece jigsaw puzzle
7. Has memorised scores of books
8. Can tell left from right- this is recent but happened out of nowhere
9. Knows the entire alphabet both upper and lower case (has done from around 16 months)

10. Likes to be read 10-15 books a day 11. She picks out her own clothes in the morning and asks me to buy clothes she sees when we go shopping that she likes 12. Knows several songs by heart and sings them regularly to and with us

Physically she is also moderately advanced walked at 9 months, sat up at 4 months, pincer grip at 4 months, could stack high tower blocks at 8 months etc. Loves being very active playground, swimming and Gymboree are favourite activities and she needs lots of exercise everyday. She plays well with other kids and is 'special playmates' with two other toddlers at nursery and one of our friends' kid.

Most people do not teach their child half the things you have listed, so if you have, she will be ahead. AFAIK, the ability to talk depends on the vocal tract development, so is not a sign of anything really. If both her parents have high IQs, then there is a good chance she will be a good way up the bell curve of intelligence genetically. With my own dd, I never wondered whether or not she was gifted, I just kept looking for the next thing she could learn. As people tend not to do this, she soon moved ahead of her peers in reading, maths and science.

You seem to be doing this intuitively, so I would not worry about assessing intelligence and just carry on doing what you are doing as it is working well.

I think it's far too early to say, and for the time being, you should just relax and enjoy watching her learn.

Looking back, my own dd had significantly more advanced language skills at that age, but physically, she was a long way behind your daughter. These days, as a teenager, dd is still exceptionally talented with language, and well ahead of her peers in all academic areas....and she is still distinctly mediocre with regard to sport.

Having said that, I remember other kids who were slow to acquire language who turned out to be very academically able, and others who were precocious toddlers who turned out to be very average as they get older. It's impossible to tell.

Being fairly advanced at 18 months could be a sign of intelligence, or it could just be the result of precocious development that comes to nothing. As long as she is healthy and happy, it doesn't really matter either way.

And as for most people not teaching their kids this stuff, it may not be that the OP is teaching anything. I still have no idea how my dd learnt the alphabet or many of the other random things she seemed to know when she was tiny. I certainly never tried to teach her, but she must have been exposed to them through the TV/toys or whatever. Kids are like sponges!

She knows her colours (10 main ones)

this is unusual, the other things you list, not so much

We aren't actually teaching her anything. Most of what she learns she learns from her books and conversation. For instance, 'Where's Bear' has the characters play hide-and-seek and count to 10. From that she learned to count and recognise number symbols. I didn't realise she recognised the symbols until she pointed them out in the lift accurately.

She doesn't watch TV as I'm an American expat and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no TV or media use before 18 months and she has just reached that age.

Advanced early speaking is a sign of intelligence but not speaking is not a definite sign of anything and many very intelligent people are late speakers.

I posted here not because I'm worried about anything but just to understand how unusual her pace of development is from people who may have some insight. I know all these things are advanced from her nursery and health visitor but I don't fully understand the degree and if its really unusual if there is anything I should be aware of.

The reason children's books have counting in them is so that children learn to count. Children learn from all different sources, but they do learn it from somewhere. You may not think you are teaching her, but her environment of being read to and talked to about the world is teaching her a lot. They are not born knowing the names of colours, they have to be told them.
I decided to actively teach dd by making up games, getting her preschool books consciously teaching her to read. I could not see what the problem was in giving a bit of structure to teaching her. So long as it is balanced with other things throughout the day. It may not have the kudos of "my dd taught themselves", but as every child is taught in some way or form, it is more accurate.

You obviously read to her a lot which would explain most of the things you have listed. You cant underestimate the power of reading to very young children.

I didn't let my DD choose her own clothes until she was about 10!

Enjoy your daughter and don't worry about comparing her. Young children can vary enormously in what they can do, but it pretty much evens out as they get older.

Well she clearly is ahead of the average 18mo old child but there isn't much you can do it about it other than keep nurturing her through reading, counting and playing which it sounds like you already do.

My dd now nearly 6 had similar abilities at the same age. She is a very bright girl and we nurture this at home. At school they take no notice of it, and the headteacher said that they won't give reception age children (she just finished reception) above an 'expected' incase they can't keep it up later. Even for a free reader ...so anyway I digress. Nurture it yourself and don't expect a state Funded school here to go to any lengths to nurture her ability. You'll have to do that.

Just I think I've completely acknowledged that. We aren't actively teaching her but she is learning from her books is pretty much exactly what I said.

My point about not actively teaching her is that almost everyone I know reads books to their kids that incorporate these concepts (as all good children books do) and none of them have learned to count simply through exposure to said books. I just mean, we aren't doing anything unusual compared to other parents we know for her to develop her knowledge.

I'm sure her love of books (she's got about 50 plus additional library books) has helped her loads which is why its so strongly recommended for little ones.

I think I might just ask her health visitor at the next check as this might not be the right forum for my question though I really appreciate everyone who has taken the time to post.

Tom we crossed posted. That's helpful to know. I was really bored in primary school and daydreamed loads and got into trouble for chatting etc. I didn't really become a good student until I was streamed in middle school and then later attended a highly selective academic secondary school- most kids in the top 99.9% based test results.

My husband was the same except he never became challenged enough is school despite going to a grammar and basically didn't develop a good work ethic until his 30s. He pretty much coasted in life doing the bare minimum to get decent but not amazing results, didn't try so couldn't fail and focused more on the social aspects of life. We have a good life but my husband has significant regrets about how lazy he was in school and life in general now he gets that effort more than smarts gets you what you may want in life.

That's just what we know from our own life experience though.

My daughter could count 1-2-1 to 10 and by rote to 30+, talk in sentences and potty trained herself etc before 18 months - she walked at 7 months. Nursery were always saying how bright she was.

She is pretty average academically now. Exceeds in maths. Good at memorizing things. Otherwise though just happy to be there learning! Which I’m happy with- being the sister of a gifted brother I knew the pressure on him to perform contributed to an unhealthy mental state.

My daughter was way ahead of her peers until about 3.5 then they all caught up. She is still very articulate comparatively but that’s because I talk too much..... one child who was prem is exceedingly bright but obviously missed many milestones as a baby.

I was way ahead of other kids. It was very isolating. Especially once I started formal schooling and was bored silly because I could already do what they were teaching the others. I spent most of my early years stuck in the book corner on my own while the teacher taught the other kids. The school told my parents to stop teaching me because I was unable to integrate with my peer group.

I’d recommend looking for schools and playgroups that can support your child’s advanced development, and leisure activities to help her integrate with other kids. Intelligence is a curse if it makes you lonely.

Big that's interesting. I was bored but both my husband and I didn't have the social integration issues.

Grand that's interesting. My parents would probably said the same about me up until the age of 11 when my official scores came in and showed I was underperforming academically compared to my ability and I was moved to higher set everything. I actually fought to stay where I was because I didn't want to be separated from my friends but the school refused to keep me in the main set. That move completely changed my life. My parents were never pushy though so I never felt any pressure at any point in my life.

I've got an 18 month old boy and his development is checked regularly. His doctors are very happy with his progress and yet he can't do hardly any of the stuff on that list. So I would say that your daughter is unusual.

Yes definitely not the norm developmentally. But I’m in what sounds like a very similar boat to you (although my DS is now 2.5.) The colour phase was hilarious. He loved the Fired Earth tile catalogue for a while, and insisted we read it to him. So lots of ‘teal’ ‘turquoise’ etc in amongst the usual colour suspects 😂 But yes I think a lot of it just went in from reading to him loads. Numbers are his first love though. Which is a funny one for me as I’m an English lit grad. Go figure.

I am not so sure about no recommendation of TV or other media. I let my ds watch tv from early age, and it had only positive effect on him.

I do agree with Richmal, it's a myth that child taught themselves xxx. They are exposed to the resources, even though parents aren't actively teaching them. And that's the best thing that can happen to receptive child who is willing to learn.

My DD was very like yours at that age. Super quick to pick up everything, achieved all milestones in advance of timeline - as an example she could explain what gravity was and why we needed it at age 22 months. She asked questions, we answered and she absorbed.

Fast forward to now age 10 she is very bright, her vocabulary and comprehension still well ahead of her peers, she learns with absolute ease (puts in very little effort) but overall she’s nothing exceptional. And she appeared very exceptional when she was a toddler. Other kids catch up, an early bloomer isn’t a sign of anything out of the ordinary more often than not. My advice would be keep doing what you’re doing and see what happens. My DD has 2 or 3 other kids as bright as her in the year and another 2 or 3 who achieve the same results but by really working hard to get there.

Celebrate her talents with her but work on her skills as a person as well - kindness and consideration and temper control are skills that are hard learned for my hot headed DD, but I value these ahead of any academic achievement so we make them our primary focus and reward accordingly.

My ds went different way to Piggy's dc. He was very advanced in number sense as a toddler, still quite exceptional at maths at age 10.
So, I don't believe it's always the case they level out, or other's catch up, though I don't know what happens when he becomes a teenager yet.

Thanks that's all very helpful. Peggy I would still consider your daughter exceptionally bright- not once in a lifetime but unusually so nonetheless. Being extremely (1 in 1,000) bright has nothing to really do with academic achievement or genius (which requires a combination of drive, curiosity and creativity/insight which can easily be missing from someone with a high IQ). However, context (depending on personality) IMO has a huge impact on how people this bright behave academically and the habits they develop in life-- fear of trying / failure, laziness, underachievement, coasting etc which is why I think any of this matters.

Irvine the recommendation regarding digital media use is an official medical guideline in the US. You can google it (AAP media use) and read the explanation and research that led to it and then of course do whatever you think is best for your family. FaceTime for relatives is the only exception within the recommendation. The summary is that before 18 months babies not only learn vocabulary, concepts etc best through human interaction but also they need tons of interpersonal interaction to develop emotional intelligence (which is declining among young people). Also, it makes them more sedentary. Toddlers need 3 hours a day of physical activity (the NHS agrees on that). After 18 months the guideline switches to 30 min max a day of high quality educational programming watched with a carer to make it more interactive. There has been a lot of press on this in the US where I'm from originally.

Piggy my daughter is incredibly social and plays very well with others, shares etc. She has a very short temper though-- only with us it seems. Its something I'm trying to work on and does seem to be improving.
I'm not really worried about balance-- we sing and dance and do art everyday and she does lots of physical activities and socialising.

Also, I've never said she taught herself anything, just that we aren't actively teaching her many of the things she knows. I don't think when people suggest very young children are teaching themselves something, they mean without any access to information or knowledge as that would be patently absurd.

My husband "taught" himself to read as a toddler / pre-schooler. By that, I mean, through exposure to books he learned to read and his parents didn't realise he could read until he started school and his teacher informed them as they never tried to teach him. They told the teacher he just memorised his favourite books and she had to explain that he was reading passages from the bible out loud to the class (Church of England school but non-religious family). In those circumstances, the common use of a child teaching themselves makes sense, as it means learning something that most people need to be actively taught without any external instruction. I'm really not sure why the "teaching" point keeps being raised.

Irvine I do wonder how many of the kids who "level out" are really average based on my personal experience. Academically, I looked very average, including to my teachers and parents and like a kid with good behaviour except not paying attention and chatting in class occasionally. I didn't think I was much above average until my standardised placement tests came back and placed in the 99.9% percentile at 11 and my entire schooling regime changed and put me on a totally different path academically. I should add, I was very happy before that change and initially it was an unpleasant shock to my social life.

I've actually learned a lot from this thread about how schools may or may not be supportive and how different kids have responded to the education system here.

My ds was quite exceptional with reading too, before starting school. But he was less interested in literacy related things, though he is still above average in his year group. Though he isn't exceptional as he used to be. So in a way, he leveled out. But not as much as to become average yet.

As for Tv, maybe it's different for people like me who speaks to their child in second language. He picked up most of English through TV, since I wasn't able to give him enough daily exposure to rich conversation in English.

Like I said, advice like that is always generic. Personal views and circumstances mean people should do what makes sense for them. One of my best friends in primary school learned English from Sesame Street (her parents were Cuban) and it helped incredibly with her school readiness as otherwise she'd have started school speaking no English.

In those circumstances, the common use of a child teaching themselves makes sense, as it means learning something that most people need to be actively taught without any external instruction. I'm really not sure why the "teaching" point keeps being raised.

The common use of "someone taught themselves", is that they did it without help. Reading to, counting to, finding a computer programme, Cbeebies and a myriad of other things people do for their children is external instruction. So we are just talking about degree of teaching and whether or not it is structured. The phrase, "taught themselves to read", seems as much of a challenge as a child working out what the squiggles on the Rosetta Stone meant just by staring at it. It clearly is absurd. I have no problem with "picked up the ability to read".

I disagree that's what people generally mean but that's fine. People often interpret and use words differently.

I think when people say that phrase, what they mean is to learn something without the formal instruction most people require to acquire the ability / knowledge.

When adults say they taught themselves a language or to fix a bike etc, they don't mean without any access to books or reference material. They simply mean without formal instruction.

Or off their own initiative, rather than someone else putting the information in front of them. However, we will agree to disagree, but I do still think "My two year old taught themselves to read," sounds boastful and ridiculous.