Gifted adults

[missmem]

Does anyone have kids who were exceptionally gifted who are now adults. Did they actually go on to do anything amazing or get paid a fortune or are they now just average?

[Kathyis6incheshigh]

DH was gifted and is now a happy and well-adjusted adult
He had sensible parents who did all the right things: they rewarded effort not achievement, and made sure he knew that academic achievement wasn't the only thing in life that mattered (eg at one point they encouraged him to think about whether doing an apprenticeship might be a better career route for him than going to university.) When he had the option of going to boarding school (he could have had a scholarship to somewhere v good) he decided he was happy where he was and chose to stay with his friends.
He had strategies for not getting bullied, which basically meant buying popularity through humiliating unpopular teachers () - tbh I think this has left him with Ishoos about authority which he is only just starting to get over.
He's now a maths lecturer. He had a conversation with a bunch of colleagues once about whether they'd been gifted children and about half of them had, half hadn't.

[finefatmama]

I was G & T but was bullied for being a smartass by classmates. Punished by teachers for challenging whatever they said or pointing out that the textbooks were old and had been superceded or answering questions with multiple choice answers because the outcome should depend on may variables which the questions weren't very specific about.

I didn't make too many friends as there were very few people I could converse with on an intellectual level (they generally prferred to talk about boys and kissing) .I was encouraged by 2 subject teachers whose classes I attended till I was 16. i stopped attending other classes at 14 but since I promised my mum very good O'level results, I went to the library to read up on all the subjects and got straight A's. Attendance didn't count in those days. Being in a 50's style boarding school helped in that I had no choice but to go to either the library or the chapel. My mum was a single mum who was working really hard to pay bills and raise 4 kids so being at home may have made things worse. Being bullied meant that I didn't quite develop socially and still have massive issues with attending parties and social events.

I'm doing ok happily married with lovely lively kids but nothing so stellar. I think what all children really need is love and encouragement. A quality relationship with an adult parent or mentor figure will make a difference more than anything else IMO

[arionater]

Like you cory I worked continuously out of school - in fact, I think I was about 15 before I realised properly that what I was doing outside school (that is, actually learning) was what school was supposed to be about. I was perhaps a bit less well-supported by my parents than you were - I come from a very large family and there were lots of other demands - but we had plenty of books and they were very happy for me to get on with it. I did feel tremendously lonely about it all though - both at school and at home. But temperamentally I couldn't relax and see school as "time off", I was too tormented by the sense of wasted time for that. And whereas I think a lot of children in that position are able to focus on other things at school - the social aspects for example - as I've said I wasn't really capable of being socially happy until I was intellectually less miserable.

To be honest I think I could have been a lot happier either in a school/wider intellectual context better suited to me or by being taught how to manage my own feelings better. I felt very alone with them, sometimes quite mad, and I didn't feel able to talk about it. My rather unusual over-sensitivity to 'wasting time' was definitely at least partly circumstantial as much as temperamental (my eldest sister nearly died repeatedly when I was small, so I was horribly conscious that sometimes we don't have very long). Possibly good counseling on this point (whether formally or just informally through friendship and support from a sympathetic adult) might have made almost as much difference as more appropriate educational provision. Obviously that's a very particular set of circumstances, but I do think it's awfully hard to generalise and to distinguish IQ from personality, circumstance and emotional temperament.

[cory]

But at the end of it, I was far better educated than a school in a small market town could possibly have provided for. Where would they have got a tutor to teach me Old English? And why is it failure if my education put me at an advantage compared to my peers? And if it left me with a feeling of continuous excitement at the thought of learning? Of course, it was mainly my parents' attitude that made the difference.

Dd's primary school did fail her (though mainly on the disability count, not G&T). But she still knows that I would never accept that as an excuse to give up. Her greatgrandfather starved himself to get an education. She sometimes goes in crying with pain. But she still knows that the only person who would lose out if she failed to get an education would be her, not the teacher, not her former headteacher of evil memory.

[DadAtLarge]

"just regard school as a place where I came to put my feet up"
It's great that you are happy and comfortable with that, cory. I believe your school failed you even if you weren't frustrated in class.

[cory]

agree that arionater's post makes a lot of sense

though I don't think it need be a straight choice between lowering your aspirations or ending up frustrated

I was fortunate enough (thanks to parental support and the nature of my interests) to be able to drive myself out of school hours and just regard school as a place where I came to put my feet up (while doing just enough work to stay top of the class), so there was never that sense of frustration

school was my leisure so to speak

[iheartdusty]

that's a very interesting post, arionater. I think your point about temperament is spot on.

[Litchick]

Yes Cory there is that. I'm sure my DCs get very frustrated during games and PElessons at school but we teach them to be patient and well mannered about it. And we do sport outside of school to the level they need.

[arionater]

I would probably have been considered gifted at school had I been assessed in those terms (I was accelerated and so on, and had a generally rough time). I am now an academic, which makes me happy. My main 'problem' educationally wasn't so much high IQ as a kind of intellectual greed that I wasn't able to manage very well. I'm pretty sure my younger sister has just as high an IQ and was probably just as understimulated at school a lot of the time. But she didn't seem to suffer from it as I did. I just couldn't bear the terrible waste of time, it drove me (pretty literally) mad and the frustration and resentment made me a very difficult person too. I am actually perfectly socially competent - maybe even more than average - but I was miserable and friendless until I was less bored and frustrated (after a move to a very academic sixth form). The social and intellectual issues were very closely bound up for me, and still are - obviously I am a bit better at handling it now (!), but I am still impossible when I'm bored. I am an academic largely because how much work I do, and on how many different topics, is entirely up to me (and also because I enjoy teaching). So I think whether or not being "gifted" is a problem - educationally, socially, emotionally - is as much about temperament as it is about IQ (though of course that very driven temperament may also contribute to high achievement - my calmer and happier sister is much less driven than I am and career wise I suppose would seem less "successful").

[cory]

I also know of one girl who may well end up at the Olympics, but the school has no facilities to coach her: any coaching is orgnanised and paid for by the parents. Presumably she finds PE lessons boring, but the enjoyment of after school activities makes up for it.

[Litchick]

Through one of my children, I know quite a lot of other kids who are gifted at sport. They love it and are allowed to take it as far as they want. Soem of them will definitely end up at the Olympics etc - many of the coaches have done so in the past and now love nothing better than to be around the next generation.
Many of course will not get that far, but at this moment they are enjoying it so perhaps that's enough.

[DadAtLarge]

"As for unwanted pressure I believe that it is a general symptom of the current system. "

I think this may be true of the average class but I don't believe that gifted children are under any pressure. If a Year 2 child can comfortably clear a Level 5 they are largely ignored so the teacher can focus on those she can push up to a Level 3 'cause that's what she and the school are judged on.

[cory]

I have met some people in academe who seriously have brains the size of a planet and they have not all been troubled or in mental hospital; a lot of them have had happy family lives and been popular with their colleagues.

otoh one of the saddest cases I knew was a friend who had very high expectations of herself- top marks at school in all subjects etc- but really didn't have the brains that she needed to do it. I helped her with her school work and never saw any evidence that she was more than fairly bright. Her capacity just did not match her expectations. She dropped out of college and eventually ended up in a mental hospital.

Missmem, I'd say the important thing is that your ds gets the help- whether from you or the school- to make his giftedness an enjoyable thing now, rather than either of you worrying about the future.

[Quattrocento]

I'd like to add that I was talking about truly gifted people not the 10% who get labelled g&t by every state school.

[Quattrocento]

Wasn't gifted, just bright and that's fine. Every seriously gifted person I've ever met has been troubled. One has spent time drifting in and out of mental hospitals and clinics.

[oneforward20back]

Chill. what will be will be. The only thing we can do as parents of g&T children of potentially great children is to make sure it is for good. Christ knows what mischief my ds could scheme up if not kept on straight and narrow

[missmem]

Wasn't expecting so many replies!

I do have a very gifted child so was wondering if any expectations a parent might have may come to nothing. Of course his happiness is of paramount importance (as long as he pulls his weight in society) but sometimes when we find out the amazing things our gifted kids can do it may be easy to expect them to be amazing in adult life, whether that be high paid or well regarded intellectually. So if it's unlikely that a gifted child does amazingly I may as well chill!

[DadAtLarge]

Moving on...

"I think that G&T program is design to avoid the behaviour problems that can accompany G&T children at school."

I don't believe that's one of the aims. G&T exists, ostensibly, to identify the very gifted and talented individuals. The logic in choosing 10% stems from the belief that the most able are most likely to lie in this bracket. Some teaching staff confuse this figure to mean the top 10% of achievers but the program is very clear in that it's the top 10% of ability (which is a fairer identification and would recognise oneforward20back through her dyslexia).

singersgirl, the optimum gifted range sounds initially like a good idea, but it wouldn't pick up exceptional skills that lie outside of the narrow IQ testing methodologies.

[lijaco]

dadatlarge you have a Big problem! Becauase I was responding to your thread here;

You refer to me in it below;

Reality and NationalFlight, my story is very similar. As I've posted elsewhere on here, I was considered gifted in school but ended up being really bored. I got disruptive, set new records for truancy, started smoking at 12, started drugs at 13 ... and it went downhill from there. I left school at 16 and, after a spell of homelessless and other problems, I eventually picked myself up and sorted myself out. I went into business, found interesting and challenging work and am happy with what I do today. It was a long struggle though.

I have a DS who's gifted in maths and who loves working with numbers. No, he has a passion for it! It really annoys me when the bleeding hearts come out to argue he should be given no encouragement ("because" there are disadvantaged kids out there). Worse, they argue that any special provision made for him or any catering for this keen interest of his is "making jack a dull boy". They'd have him sit in the class and do his one times tables all week long.

Not all gifted children go off the rails if not provided for adequately, some just take it in their stride and have perfectly "normal" lives. But the risks are very real here: don't provide enough stimulation for the gifted and they are far more likely to have behaviour and other problems. It takes a particularly ignorant teacher to argue that no gifted children have any "special needs".

People often get lost in the argument of whether it's the top 10% or 1% or 0.01%... but that's not what's important: it's finding the really gifted (rather than just the clever) and monitoring them to see if they have special needs. It's not so they can go on to make a fortune or cure cancer; for many gifted children we need to help them just so they can grow up to lead normal lives.

The next thread after this that you posted is not what I have said. I am responding to this thread now. I am not trying to turn this into a stop gifted and talented copy. Get over yourself. You are twisted nobody has supperior claims to resources. Respond to threads without bringing me into it please. Stop g & t is old news.

[FlappyCake]

You have me, hands up - I am actually, yes, Bill Clinton

[oneforward20back]

[singersgirl]

Isn't there some kind of 'optimally gifted' range into which most obviously highly successful people fall - something in the 135 - 150 IQ range? I guess, clever enough to be able to do most things if you're interested in them, but not necessarily so clever that you're not on the same wavelength as other people. I'm sure I saw some study hypothesising the IQs of US presidents and most were in that range.

But that's beside the point, really. We shouldn't only provide appropriate provision for children based on how much they might earn or how famous they might become - we should be giving them the resources they need to help them learn now, so that later they can do whatever they want to do. Which might mean stopping them going off the rails or becoming happy and fulfilled stay at home mothers or becoming research scientists or builders or whatever.

[oneforward20back]

I think that G&T program is design to avoid the behaviour problems that can accompany G&T children at school. I was not classed as G&T but have a G&T IQ. This was hidden by my dyslexia and cause multiple problems throught out my education. My sister was classed as G&T and never had to work for any exam. Interestingly enough she is a primary teacher and I want to teach 2ndry science.

As for unwanted pressure I believe that it is a general symptom of the current system. I was the last year to avoid SATs and didn't suffer the presurisation that children today get put under to do well. The best piece of advice I was given was that to fail an exam wasn't the end of the world because there was alternative routes. Kids today believe the world will end because they don't get the right grade

Getting back on track the best balanced G&T grownups probably do something they love and are focused on that. It is the reality that money doesn't come from academic brilliance -more enterprenuer genius. The main point is that it doesn't matter what you do as long as you are happy. Plus some of the careers considered less desirable are the most important to society. I respect the bin men for what they do - I couldn't do it.

[Jux]

My parents had kids who were exceptionally gifted. We are all incredibly rich and famous.

[DadAtLarge]

lijaco, it's not about my DS. Or you. It's about a mindless association of gifted provision with stress and pressure on the child. It's about the insulting assessment of parents as being so moronic that none of them can tell between clever and really gifted (even when it's explained to them). It's about the assertion that being disadvantaged confers some sort of superior claim on resources to the exclusion of everyone else. It's about using the government's arbitrary cut-off point as an argument for having no cut-off point. It's about using equal opportunities as a screen for redistribution of advantage. It's about a misplaced class war and dismissing high academic achievers as just reflections of their parents' money and demands.

And that's exactly what some teachers do. Feel free to join my condemnation of them.

Sorry for the rant, everyone. Maybe someone can get this back on topic and prevent the thread from becoming a "stop G&T" copy.