What is your definition of a 'bright' child?

[roadkillbunny]

As always reading through the threads in primary eduction I am struck by the fact everybody seems to describe their child as 'bright' and I am left wondering what peoples definition of 'bright' really is!

For me a 'bright' child is one who is exited by learning, enthusiastic and inquisitive. I believe that being 'bright' has no relation to any specific academic level for example the 'bottom' group in a class may well have 'bright' children who are achieving to the best of their own personal ability and the 'top' table may have children who are achieving beyond the national average for their age group but may not be naturally enthused and exited about learning but simply have natural academic ability so are able to achieve higher academic levels without having a natural enthusiasm and excitement for learning. (hoping that makes sense outside my head)

What is your definition of a 'bright' child?

Very gifted children are classed as having Additional Educational Needs.

Agree with leQ - we studied SEN in psychology A level and the three we looked at were dyslexia, autistic spectrum and giftedness. It made sense to me that they included it.

Teachers use the term "bright" a lot. I take it to mean a child who is highly verbal, inquisitive, shows capabilities in all areas, is interested in learning and generally is a pleasure to teach!!!

Intelligent children can be quiet and sometimes they may get overlooked by the more talkative ones....remember "empty vessels make most noise!!"

Oh I think you can describe your dd however you like LeQueen! It's just that she sounds fairly exceptional and bright, even very bright doesn't bring that degree of giftedness to my mind.

My ds is currently being assessed for giftedness because his dyslexia isn't holding him back enough anymore to get the extra support he needs (mainly now just permission to use a computer/ have extra time or a scribe in the exams he'll be sitting in a few years). He is very bright, but can't get his verbal thinking onto paper (he is great at speeches!), however as he's learned to use short words when writing because he's more sure of their spelling he doesn't look behind, just not very advanced.

It's interesting what people say re that interest in learning being so important when identifying a "bright" child.
DS2 is very clever - G&T etc (not that that label makes an iota of difference to any part of his daily life) and has got there, I think, because he's just fascinated by things. He's always wanted to learn. I'm sure there are equally clever children in his year, but they just don't have that "I want to find stuff out" thing sussed yet. They'll get there in the end - it didn't kick in with DS1 until he reached University.

Hassled, your ds2 has got it right hasn't he! I think that desire to learn is so important in bringing on a bright child, like you said that's what's set him up to achieve.

Of course a child needs a certain level of intelligence to succeed but it's their drive & determination that leads to success & makes them 'bright'. My eldest 2 dcs are a bit different in this respect. Ds1 is perhaps 'cleverer' in the traditional sense of the word & driven in his own way, (questions things, reads incessantly,) but he's more interested in devoting his time to match attacks and beyblades, than getting his thoughts down on paper or finding out more about a history project or whatever (but he is only 8). Meanwhile dd1, (6yrs) is already driven in a way that is helping her succeed at school; to investigate things she's studying at school, write about them, create things, practise spellings & times tables & she doesn't stop until something is finished to her satisfaction. So while they are both clever and both bright, my own opinion is that ds could have the higher iq, but dd1 seems to have school sussed & might be better at using her academic gifts.

When my dd was in primary school she was always being labelled as "very bright" or "very gifted" by teachers. She is on G&T. She was a lot more advanced in her work than friends and was doing high school work etc. But a lot of the time she was left alone to do extra work or sometimes help children to read or do maths. I didn't think it was right. Yes she does like school a lot and always wants to learn and everything has always revolved around school. Its school this and school that. She is reading and writing all the time. Sometimes it makes me feel sad looking at her but she says it is ok. Now she is at high school the teachers at parents evening don't say bright or gifted. They told me that is something that is said at primary and at high school they say "very able" or "very academic". G&T does nothing though! All top set are labelled G&T by their teachers.

ALL top set are labelled G&T by the teachers? How many children out of the year, ibizagirl?

My ds is described as either very bright or exceptionally clever. I describe him as clever, because he is.

Personally. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. It has caused nothing but stress and unhappiness.

Once he started school, he lost his "brightness", I.e his love of learning and his curiosity and inquisitiveness for a while. It was tragic.

To me a bright child is curious and easy to engage in learning, they work hard, are eager to please and ask questions. A gifted child needs learning new experiences like a drug addict needs a fix and woe betide anyone who stands in his or her way, will self learn independently and always questions the answers.

Iamnotminterested.
Not sure about how many children out of the year but each subject dd is set 1 in (all apart from pe and dance), the teacher labels them as G&T. A lot of the same children are with dd so it it is hard to gauge numbers. When doing things at school the school will say "our G&T maths group" or "our G&T english group" etc if you understand me. I know of only one girl in dd's maths group who is on the G&T register but apparently the others are not and are just labelled so because of being in top sets. Hope this makes sense.

The suggestion is that the top 5-10% of pupils in a class are labelled G&T which is utter rubbish really.

I agree with Evilclown. Those of you on this thread who are delighted that your DC is gifted, I've got news for you...they probably aren't. They are most probably bright though .

Do you think there is anyone on here who doesn't think their kids are bright?

Me! I wouldn't use the term... although it's been used once or twice about DC by other folk (long time ago now). But even after reading this thread I still don't know what they were thinking or why it was said.

Ooh, interesting. Agree that it's not a specific term to use. I'd say bright meant interested in learning, asking questions about how things work, wanting to learn, interested in stuff generally!

A bright child to me is one who is curious and can think for themselves without being spoonfed, who can work out the answer to a problem and enjous this. I should think many schools stifle this these days.

I despair of bright ... was with a man at the weekend who was bemoaning the fact that his 16 year old wasn't bright ... because she "only" got 9A*s and 5 As at GCSE ... far worse results than her "bright" brothers.

My children are both bright not academically but about the world around them. My 3 yr old woke up this morning after remebembering thurs was xmas calender day yet his friend who can write sentences and read a simple book has no clue about the days of the week. My 5 yr old is only reading simple words and her writing is nothing special but she can tell you exactly where somewhere is directions ie turn left, right and exactly what a nun is yet her friend who is academically gifted has no idea about anything that goes on around her as she is so focused on the academic learning!!! x

My middle DD will go off and do "Projects" off her own back, completely random stuff from whales - after reading The Longest Whale Song - to Egyptians to maths stuff, whatever takes her fancy; she is a whizz at finding facts in the library and on the computer, googles for England, prints, writes, reads, researches, all the time...and yes I would describe her as bright.

Ha ha! Just sent DD3 off to find a book for bedtime, she has just presented me with "How To Cheat A Dragon's Curse" by Cressida Cowell!

They must get their brains from their mother...

Great post chocolatchaud

"There's nothing wrong with the word 'bright' when it is used in conjunction with an outgoing, cheerful, happy, talkative, positive, inquisitive child (and lots, if not most, children are like this!)

But I don't think it has any place in describing academic ability - there are other words such as academic, intelligent, clever etc which are more accurate, no?"

Personally I think the use of the word is changing. I think it used to be the first definition but actually now I seem to hear it used more for "academic, clever, intelligent" . It somehow seems less boastful.

But really, personal preference aside, I don't understand why people are objecting to the word. It's hardly new or contentious. I've now bothered to find my 20 year old Collins Dictionary which tells me 'bright' was even in 1991 defined as follows:

1. emitting or reflecting much light; shining
2. (of colours) intense or vivid
3. full of promise
4. full of animation; cheerful
5. quick witted or intelligent

There are a further 8 definitions given, so it's not even an obscure definition.

I guess a bright child can be any or all of numbers 3, 4 and 5. But 'intelligent' is a valid use of the word.

I agree with other posters that it sounds somehow less bald than 'intelligent' or 'clever'.

I think most children are bright. Unfortunately some are mentally impaired. But even that doesn't mean that they're not bright. Sometimes it's the adults who are slow on the uptake.

All baby animals, including humans, learn instinctively.

And what they learn is supposed to help them to survive. They also learn lots from their parents and neighbours. So, if a five year old can hotwire a car, open a safe and tell counterfeit notes from real ones, but can't complete the alphabet, read or write his name, it doesn't mean he's not bright. But he'll probably have a tough time at school. He'll get on fabulously in young offenders institutions though.

But then again, maybe he did already learn what he needs to know to survive.