If your DC are "clever" - was it obvious from the start?

[SpaceOP]

I'm not talking gifted and talented/prodigy type clever, just more general, day-to-day academic "clever" as in as they then went through school they did well academically, didn't find school difficult etc. if they went to grammar school or other selective type schools, when did you figure out that they probably would be able to do this?

To be clear, I'm fully aware that intelligence can be measured in many different ways. DS, who is, I think, quite intelligent, has never really performed at school. His intelligence is far more about emotional intelligence and street smarts - both of which are regularly commented on by teachers/other parents - but his understanding of academic subjects is relatively low.

DD appears to be quite traditionally clever - she reads very well, seems to do okay with numbers, comes home and tells me about things she's learning and is able to apply this knowledge etc etc. In our area, high schools for girls are a little limited, so in time, we'll consider grammar school or see if she can get a scholarship for a private school but obviously, at 6, she's a bit young to really assess that. But I'm trying to figure out if this sort of academic smarts is obvious from the start or not? Entirely for my own interest as clearly there is nothing we can or will do right now besides continue to send her to school!

My younger one was reading sat/pin words at 3 and talked early.....she is just an information hoover. She reads and reads and is one of those kids who is interested in lots of things. Motivated. She is exceeding age related expectations despite being and end of July baby. Suspect we will be looking at 11+ for her.

Elder one is bright but lazy boy. Missed grammar school place by 2 points,mainly because he couldn't be arsed with working hard. Loving his comp school and seems to have finally found some drive. Once he's found his thing though, he will thrive.

20 yes in secondary teaching and it's interesting the most academic kids don't always end up successful. Attitude to hard work, resilience and an ability to get on with lots of different people is the key.

With my DD it wasn’t apparent until the last couple of years of primary. In KS1 was always a keen reader but not unusually young or top of the class, her spag was fine but nothing more and her maths was middling to poor. In y4 she started to get really upset about being bad at maths so we got her some sessions with a private tutor. We live in an 11plus area so I asked the tutor what he thought her chances were, he told me her English was probably good enough but she’d be lucky to pass with her maths skills. Fast forward a few years and she got full marks in English in the 11plus and a decent maths score, certainly more than scraping a pass in maths, and is now in y8 doing really well in a grammar school.

I don’t know what made the difference other than the tutor, I don’t know how she went from an average student to a very good one, it was like something just clicked in her brain. What I will say is she’s a hard worker, she likes a challenge and rises to it so grammar school suits her very well.

I do wonder if in a big, noisy very mixed abilities primary class she just got lost in the crowd and that a well behaved, quite, hitting but not exceeding targets child simply was overlooked.

My dd was
Her favourite TV show was the Numberjacks (typical)

Haha
I mean, I think she is clever, but I don’t know if I am being biased!!

I agree that reading is a massive predictor

Reading and intelligence are not linked if you have a dyslexic child. You know the one who sits in the corner struggling because the teacher thinks they’re stupid.

My youngest dc also seems to be very clever. She picked up reading by herself by just watching me read to her.
I didn’t know she was doing that until she stopped me once while I was reading to her (she was 3) and said ‘show me the word giant’ so I pointed to it. She looked very thoughtful and said ‘why does it not start with a j?’
She just has a curiosity and an attitude to learning that I haven’t seen with the older dc.

There is no fixed pattern imo. In my dd's case, it was pretty obvious from a very early age that she was highly intelligent. People were constantly commenting on it, even when she was a baby. She is still exceptional within her peer group at 15.

However, I know of other kids who showed early promise but later levelled out, so I guess they were just precocious rather than exceptionally intelligent....or perhaps some of them are exceptionally intelligent and the school system has failed them?

I also know of kids who were decidedly average in their early years who suddenly blossomed and came into their own in their teens. Late starters, if you want to call them that. They are among the many reasons why I'm opposed to selective education.

There are so many different factors at play. Innate intelligence. Environment. Natural differences in development. Personality and areas of interest. Early education. Parental values and focus. I think we should stay open-minded about all children and let their potential unfold naturally as they mature.

@AlexaShutUp I think these are all good points. And with two DC who are incredibly different, I have tried to be very conscious of not applying a "one size fits all" approach. I am also more aware than most that a child's intelligence should not be based on their success at school academically as on that basis, DS stands no chance of ever achieving anything and you just have to spend 5 minutes talking to him to know that's not likely to be the case.

However, as DH and I often marvel to each other, DD just seems to be so "normal" and standard in terms of how she is as a child. You know in movies where there's the sweet little kid who is smart but not a genius, can be talked to etc? That's DD. As neither DH, me nor DS went through traditional schooling in a smooth manner, we find it very difficult to assess!

I think 'intelligence' is obvious pretty early, certainly at around age 6, but academic achievement may be very variable.

I was classic academic child, picked up reading very very quickly, always getting top marks in tests in primary school, got into grammar school, lots of private school scholarships, full set of A* GCSEs, First from Oxbridge. My brother was much slower off the mark, didn't really perform amazingly until A levels, didn't get into the grammar school, yet also got a First from Oxbridge.

My sister was less academic, struggled through A levels and GCSEs, and I think my parents expected this from a fairly young age, certainly by age 8 - she just wasn't as engaged with reading, homework etc. and much more interested in socialising. She's still intelligent though, just in a different way.

It obviously varies, but I think teachers can probably give you more of an insight to if they think a child is just a slow developer but very intelligent, or more 'middle of the road'. Boys tend to be slower off the mark...

DC1 always obvious, DC2 not so much. He blossomed very gradually, probably secondary school before we realised he was bright.

This is probably because one has my sort of brain and one is much more mathematical/slightly dyslexic.

DS was in the top set / top table in infants & the majority of the children he was with then went to the grammar schools so I would guess the infant teachers could predict 11+ passers with over 80% accuracy.

At his eight week check the GP commented that DS1 was more alert than you would expect for babies of that age. At twenty months he pointed "they're daddy's keys" and at nursery aged two they commented on how 'clever' he was. He was high maintenance though and wouldn't entertain himself for long.
DS2 was a summer born baby and at nursery placed in a toddler room for the younger half of the year group. Within a few weeks they'd moved him to be with the older ones as he was more 'advanced'. Whatever that meant.
They were both top set teens at school, now doing A levels so bright kids, but certainly not exceptional.

Not from the very start, no. In fact we thought ds2 might have SEN because he was so bloody slow to talk. But then when he did talk, it was in sentences. His reception teacher at his first parent's evening was talking about "when he goes to university" and at that point I thought, OK, I am not just a proud parent, he really does appear to be very capable academically. Then again I was marked out as some sort of super capable high flyer in primary and secondary but more or less burned out by university so went on to have spectacular breakdowns and failures instead of being the congratulatory first achieving type people had always expected, so my main concern will always be that the dc are happy and safe, everything else is just gravy.

I am also more aware than most that a child's intelligence should not be based on their success at school academically as on that basis, DS stands no chance of ever achieving anything and you just have to spend 5 minutes talking to him to know that's not likely to be the case.

Yeah, intelligence is so much broader than academic ability. I should know as I was very much an academic outlier but really struggled with social anxiety, lack of confidence etc. Still do to some extent, though I've learnt to deal with it. Emotional intelligence is way more important than academic intelligence in my view.

The marvel of my dd is that, a bit like yours, she seems to combine both. Other people are bowled over by her academic ability, but that seems pretty normal to me as I was the same. It's her emotional intelligence and people skills that impress me!

My mum always used to say that every child was gifted at something. I think that's a good way to look at it.

@Lindy2

My younger DD is clever. Even from a very young age I could see she had a very logical way of thinking.

When she was very young and only just starting to talk she wanted a tangerine for her lunch. She didn't know the correct word so pointed and said "juice ball". I thought then that she had the ability to problem solve and use her initiative. She's 9 now and becoming very academic.

That's really interesting. DD1 has SEN and part of that has been speech and language delays. When she was young, she had her own vocabulary to get what she wanted. "It pink and it go weee" for slide. "Chicken and handle" for satay stick. "Bowl eat" for food. She's year 10 now. Very obviously behind peers (just getting to grips with division, for example), but her determination has always been evident, and I think she'd be much further behind if she had a different personality.

I’ve got 2, now adult, children. First was bright and learnt well at primary, top sets at secondary but never top of the class. She has never been a keen reader and still isn’t. However, she did well and got in to a good university to do a vocational degree, got a first and is now a specialist in her field and ambitious to be promoted etc in her work. She worked very hard at secondary and university to get to where she is now.

Her brother was obviously very bright from an early age, loved doing number puzzles with his accountant grandad from the age of 4, and was recognised as gifted at primary for maths. He also loves reading. Went to local comp (no grammar here, private not an option for us) and did very very well. He would admit himself he never had to work hard at school, but still got all A* at A level. Went on to a RG university to do a maths based degree and has a very good job earning more money than I could ever hope to.

Both of us parents did the same degree which is known to be hard and competitive so maybe we encouraged them more, certainly always had the expectation they would go to university. This sounds like a boasting post but genuinely is just the facts. We always did read to them and encourage homework etc so I think that is definitely a help.

Well everyone thought dd was soooo clever as a toddler. Talked early, read early, read loads. She jokes and says she peaked in year 6. She’s at a good uni now but she wasn’t ever going to make Oxford.

Ds1 didn’t talk till he was 3.5, didn’t read until the end of year 2, did better in ks2 Sats than his big sister. GCSEs? Well I think he’ll do as well as her in spite of putting in less work. If he gets to sit them, obvs.

Ds2 gets no attention from anyone, poor neglected third baby, but fuckme I think he’s properly clever. Just need to get him interested in something other than warhammer now

I have 2 sons, now 18 & 21 and at top universities. Eldest one - yes, read early top tables/sets all the way and was always full of curiosity. Youngest - he was very behind all through the infant stage, and was (still is) a very laid back personality, much quieter than eldest. Towards the end of Year 2 something clicked and he then started to excel and outdid his brother in GCSEs and A levels. No grammars here (absolute bliss not having to worry about that, as I grew up in a grammar area and went to one) so they both went to a comprehensive school.

So it definitely varies. I know families where children have been clearly very bright from a young age but then they lose interest and rebel and then underachieve. I would say anecdotally this is linked to too much parental pressure and desperation for them to follow an academic path.

Yes with DS1 - he's not a genius by any stretch but it was obvious he was bright from a very young age. He's just finished school with a majority 7-9's in GCSE's

Yes

My older 3 kids all “academic” aka top sets. Eldest DD it was obvious from 8 months when she started trying to talk, speaking in full sentences at 12-13 months and just very good at concentrating on toys from babyhood (but her gross motor skills weren’t great and we have really had to work on that- fine from about 9 onwards). She has scholarships and got into superselective grammar schools without much prep and always tops the cat scores pretty much, but really she just has an excellent memory and tries her best at things/wants to please teachers. She is also a leader. I have no doubt she will do well. Second DS from 2 when he would sit and just do a 100 piece puzzle aka excellent memory and concentration skills. He started reading at about 3.5 and never stopped. By 4.5 he was whizzing through stuff like Harry Potter books. He can also just figure out maths. He does try quite hard academically but is not a perfectionist nor a pleaser so whilst he is naturally very able who knows how he will do in his a levels which require much preparation and hard work. As I live in a area with grammar schools and some superselective ones I can tell you that to me in most cases it was obvious from preschool/reception who would get in. It is not just the kids but also the parents - as in the ones who really value educational activities, lots of reading etc./maths websites/games - focus on kumon/chess/instruments rather than just football. My year 2 DS has been much slower to develop but is also in top sets and reading came very easily to him. I don’t think he is as naturally smart as my older 2 but he works hard and is a grafter, he doesn’t have the natural confidence in his own abilities but I reckon he will do as well as he tries his best. None of my kids ever has to practise spellings - one look and full marks, just that kind of memory. I do know some kids though how are naturally very clever but don’t try hard and are floundering at GCSE/a level. In the end being academic means being clever and being interested in academics and hard working, you can’t separate the three. Some naturally bright kids are late developers and only start working hard later, some naturally bright kids struggle with dyslexia so need to learn to cope with that first. Also as an adult to make it professionally you need common sense and good social skills and inspire confidence in others. DH and I (met at Oxbridge) have tons of uni friends who haven’t fulfilled their potential - some were hailed as child geniuses and it isn’t great to peak early. Better to focus on well rounded kids who make good decisions. Op in our State primary teachers seem to think Year 2 Sats are a good indicator for grammar.

I have a very bright child - bursary place at a private school.

He was very average throughout early primary, girls noticeably ahead. Somewhere along the way he started overtaking people. We couldn't believe his CAT scores at the end of primary. Some of them were top marks.

However, at the same point it became obvious he was very clever, social problems started to emerge and he is now being assessed for asd. I do think the two things were linked

@BluebellsGreenbells

I agree that reading is a massive predictor

Reading and intelligence are not linked if you have a dyslexic child. You know the one who sits in the corner struggling because the teacher thinks they’re stupid.

This. Reading may be a possible predictor, but a child that struggles to read doesn't mean they arent intelligent in other ways. I was firmly "stupid" at primary. DS1 failed the Y1 phonics screen. While neither of us are the next Einstein (well, DS1 could yet be, but I'm not), both of us are bright. Dyslexic sucks.

Two now adult DDs, both clever, one exceptionally so. Both have the equivalent of first class degrees from prestigious universities and on post-graduate studies.

I'm a terrible mother but I genuinely don't remember if they were obviously smart when they were very young. We read to them every night but I couldn't tell you if they were super early readers. By the time they were in the equivalent of year 2 they were in gifted and talented streams and never looked back. Never tutored, always did their homework on their own. Whatever intelligence they have they were born with, as far as I can see.

My dd has just done GCSEs and got mostly 9s from a bog standard comp. She only learned to read in year 2 and spent the first 3 years at school in lower attaining tables. However, her very experienced teacher at nursery has spoken to me about how advanced she was in maths and an experienced supply teacher in year 2 had told me she thought dd was very bright. Her teachers just didn't spot it. I guess I was pretty sure from very early on that she was very bright, despite lots of evidence to the contrary.

Sometimes it's relative in families, pun intended. My eldest niece was speaking in sentences before she was two, incredibly bright, all A stars at a top grammar, medical degree from Cambridge and is a doctor. My DD seemed much more normal and I was so convinced that she wouldn't pass the eleven plus that I enthused about the non selective school that I thought she'd go to. No tutoring but she scored full marks, sailed through grammar school so was either more academic than her early years suggested, or I was too conscious of not putting pressure on her and so underestimated her ability.