Child genius -which bright spark decided to put it on on a Tuesday???

[Emochild]

Anyone watching?

Thomas wasn't the only one asking others what they got. That was pretty standard in those rounds where the kids are in another room and they come in one by one after their round. We've seen it on previous series too. I don't know why they do it for some rounds and not others.

The noise while others were working was him trying to learn the stuff using the method he knows works for him. It wasn't like Hugo and the cards last year when he was just pissing around. The other kids had noise cancelling headphones so they clearly hadn't been told they needed to be silent. That he disturbed the others while learning was the fault of the organisers, not him.

I think if I had to be one of the mothers, I'd opt to be Sasha's mum. The glimpse was of a stable, conventional family set up - perhaps part of a larger (Jewish) community with other siblings who were likely to be similarly bright and able.

While it was clear that Thomas's mum adored him and was proud of him, the family dynamics seemed complicated. (A dead partner/father who continued to be very missed, and whose son would probably have no memories of him.) Some stepchildren who didn't seem to be very much like their brother. So a 'not very blended ' set up. Plus the kind of abilities and personality which meant a son who was very much a fish out of water socially. While it might be that he'd find his feet more as an adult and able student in the right university department, personal relationships might continue to be a difficult area. And adolescence might well be harder than usual.

"Plus the kind of abilities and personality which meant a son who was very much a fish out of water socially"

Why did his abilities mean that? I wish people wouldn't assume that being very clever also means you can't have social skills! He had a very ebullient personality- and nobody seemed to be making the slightest effort to rein it in. norhing to do with his abilities- which are obviously amazing.

For most of us social life revolves to an extent around shared interests and experience. If your main interests are - for example - advanced mathematics and cryptography - your circle of potential friends is somewhat more limited. It may be that your most interesting conversations are with university teachers and people in special interest chatrooms, rather than with your schoolmates and siblings.

I think many parents whose children are precocious and/or have unusual gifts do have to grapple with this one.

Really? I am very interested in Renaissance church music, horses, baking, golden age detective fiction, girl's school stories and theology. I have some friends I talk about that stuff to, but not most of them.

What's wrong with an ebullient personality? It's actually really nice to see a kid so enthusiastic and excited about studying. It was also really good to see him getting plenty of exercise.

And the snippet of dinner table conversation they showed us seemed perfectly normal to me- apart form the fact that nobody told Thomas to shut up and let his younger siblings have their say.

But they were there to film Thomas! Maybe the bit where Thomas shut up and let his siblings talk is on the floor of the editing suite.
And a parent is going to be naturally reluctant to chastise their kid on national television.

Having a sibling who is a bit of a genius when you are growing up is actually quite a burden if they are made to be the all important one. (I know this from experience. It is very important that parents deal with it - and the rest of the family - in the right way)

Have been reading this thread like. Noble is exactly right; I have a family member who is a TV producer making these type of reality programmes, and can assure you there'll be hours of footage of the behaviours people are saying they didn't see in these kids/parents, good and not so good, all on the cutting room floor. People really shouldn't be judging 12 yr olds (or anyone) based on a few isolated minutes in very specific situations.

I find it very uncomfortable that people are talking about these children's 'likeability' - they've gone on TV to try to do well in an 'intelligence test', not to have the added pressure of making millions of viewers like them. I doubt any of us, trying our hardest, could do that, without any control of the editing.

My father was very into bringing home IQ tests and testing us. My scores were announced and I was constantly being told told I was the clever one. I was encouraged and praised for any example of precocious behaviour, using long words, for instance. I don't think this was a particularly pleasant situation for my brothers - in particular the one who was nearest me in age.

I also made the incorrect assumption that the behaviour my parents - and to some extent my teachers - praised would go down equally well with my peers. It didn't and as a result my schooldays were rather uncomfortable.

Totally agree theliverpoolone - absolutely shocking that people have made such unpleasant remarks about these children. 'Brat','cock', 'hardly Miss lovely' comments on the type of schools they go to - just appalling.

I am sure such bright children will be capable of googling and finding out what people think of the programme they were on. I hope they are able to brush off this abuse if they see it - but they are very young so perhaps they will take it to heart - I hope not.

I imagine they and their parents would be surprised and a little shocked to find such a level of nastiness about children on a parenting site - where surely people should be able to understand that children react in different ways to new situations and that taking a small snapshot out of a child's life is hardly going to be representative in any way of what that child is truly like.

Shameful.

Oh and it's difficult re the question of viewers wondering about the personalities of the chidlren. It's what's done in all the knockout type programmes on TV - whether it's harsh Simon Cowell stuff or gentler productions like Bake Off. It's voyeuristic and it's about seeing young people in situations which expose potential vulnerability.

Perhaps the problem is not with our comments, but that such stuff is commissioned and screened - because there's a part of us which enjoys all this for the wrong reasons....

I think Sasha's uniform was Henrietta Barnett, which would make sense (North London girls grammar). It is extremely competitive to get it into. I would be interesting to know if she stands out as very bright in that school, or whether there are lots of a similar ability level.

I also thought Thomas's personality changed this episode. But I think its prob more the fact that sometimes its easy to forget he is a kid as he generally seems more grown up. So when he gets all over excited and acts like a 12yr old it comes as a surprise. I think he was just over excited and had been stuck in that room for ages.
He wasn't the only one to ask for results. The others did too. It was only sasha who made an issue out of it-and that was because she was happy to hear his results(she actually asked Thomas what he got before he asked her) but didn't want to reveal hers.

I'm shocked about the comments about the children's' personalities. There was only one this series that I thought was very big-headed, but I won't be saying their name. They are CHILDREN. And tbh, with their achievements one can excuse them for a bit of big-headedness. And I would imagine this is a quality that one needs to be told/shown isn't desirable, not something that you are born knowing. Like saying please and thank you. So if they don't know this, I'd be blaming the parents rather than the child. Anyway, Thomas came across as lovely and just excited to me. Maybe to someone jealous of him it might be annoying.

"Maybe to someone jealous of him it might be annoying"

Ah, yes, the old jealousy card!

Maybe to someone who has high expectations of 12 year olds it might be annoying............

You're awfully invested in finding him annoying. Let it go.

No I'm not. What I am a bit invested in is the idea that being very bright lets you off the social niceties- if you are a boy. If you are a girl you are expected to deal with it, manage it- and one wrong word condemns you.

Yes, but it's a bit of a wasted emotion, isn't it? You're unlikely to ever meet the wee lad, and if you did I would hope you would be grown-up enough to keep your musings to yourself. So it's a bit like grasping hot coals with the intent of throwing it at someone else. You're the one who gets burned!

"Yes, but it's a bit of a wasted emotion, isn't it?"
Of course it is. But that's mumsnet for you!

I do think it's important though. It's all about how we deal with bright children, and girls and boys- it's a bigger debate than just a hideous TV programme.

A child that at 12 already has an A in A level maths, though. I don't think that is matter we as a nation have to debate as a matter of urgency, as I am sure it doesn't happen very often!

Not so extreme, obviously. But comparable situations, about bright children and about girls and boys happen all time.

I just think a child who is doing Further Maths at 12, which most adults wouldn't be able to do, is allowed to say 'what did you get?' as the one competitive question we saw him ask! Let him enjoy his success! It's a truly remarkable achievement. I'm out of words, bc I can't believe someone would describe him as an awful goady child or whatever it was you said.

What lovely children in the final - almost the nicest two and with a natural genius rather than products of overly pushy fathers like some of the others.

Thomas is an amazing boy and such a lovely personality and nice smile, a real credit to his mother, step father and late father.