___WEDNESDAY___CH 4___UPDATE___"CHILD GENIUS"___UPDATE___CH 4___

[RTKangaMummy]

WEDNESDAY

CHANNEL 4

AN UPDATE ON THE CHILDREN FROM LAST YEAR

x x x

Documentary
Child Genius Wednesday 16 April
9:00pm - 10:00pm
Channel 4
1/2
The subtitle of this series about megabrained children is "young and gifted", but by the end you half-wonder if it should be "young and cursed". We're catching up with kids we met in the last series - chess champ Peter (11), who wears a "genius in training" T-shirt, Adam (eight), who dissects rats in the kitchen, and Mikhail (five), who as Britain's youngest Mensa member has appeared on Oprah and Countdown. We also meet Georgia, who toppled Mikhail as Britain's youngest Mensa member. At two, she was measured with an IQ of 152 - impressive given that, being a toddler, she fell asleep halfway through the test. Her mother notes that "a lot of the pictures we take of Georgia have this white light around her . . ." That's the thing: inevitably, parents become caught up in making their gifted children into mini-celebrities, especially when TV crews get involved. It makes for fascinating TV; whether it's great for the pressure-cooker kids is another matter.

x x x

Thanks to yall for those sane and welcoming replies. Now a posting as long as War and Peace

Really not wanting to be Big Chief on how-to-raise a g and t kid, as I make new mistakes daily and it looks to me as if many of you have lots of experience. But some really important stuff is raised here...

avenap, I totally agree on the programme's scope. As well as the issue of family shape, there's also the question of class. With the first programme I spent a wasted hour urging the director to try to find some G and T kids getting free school meals and suggested some schools he could approach - think it was Too Much Work. But I think an earlier poster said that g and t kids might face an even bigger struggle in those circs - SOME of them, anyway... thinking of Andrea Ashworth's amazing autobiography Once In A House on Fire.

Kerrymum, you're obviously one of the mums with a gt kid. What do you think of the terminology? As viewers will know, Michael hates it. I prefer just to say simple words like bright, and clever. This is in part because I don't really respect IQ tests as a measure of anything; you might like to know that we never had Michael tested till the programme more-or-less forced it on us. I think most sane parents know if their kid is bright just as they know if their kid is sick. There are REALLY obvious signs - most obvious is total impatience with basics of schoolwork, handing in hugely loooong work or a haiku or something on current obsession instead of the set topic.

Obsessions! You REALLY can't push these kids BECAUSE they are always in pursuit of their own things. (The only pressure we've ever applied is of the kind I'm betting everyone here applies - homework before tv, take out the garbage, write a thankyou note to Grandma, those clothes probably won't get to the laundrybag all by themselves.) Michael is always in pursuit of some obsession. Just now it's Sanskrit. When the programme was taped it was particle physics, and in the summer it was neuroscience. Now, you are RIGHT, avenap - we are really lucky in that we can help him pursue all that. And I myself sometimes feel a faint pang of envy of my own kids.... we live in the southeast, we live near one of the world's great universities. If you don't - well, there's the internet and the public library - and then you will be more like me as a child. I grew up in a leafy suburb, lots of money and swimming pools but only a modicum of books. But obviously - without too much blather - I still managed to get to Oxford and get a doctorate and blah blah - and I am not actually as bright as Michael. (Nowhere near.) This I think is because my parents really loved me and even though I must have been a pain to raise they never said so.

So agree about sport, pofaced - in Oz where I grew up you could hear the parents SCREAMING at the kids as they thrashed up and down the family pool. Faster! Faster! My kids are - erm - themselves about sport - Michael does two kinds of fencing (European and Japanese) and Mione does netball and riding. All I'm interested in is whether they enjoy it. It's been a good way to make friends, too.

MrsWeasley, two quick things: one, it was Blackwells who suddenly sprang the reading on Michael and not the director (or me) and two, you are right on the editing - I think I hug My much more than Michael (because Michael like many gt kids has Dabrowski's and doesn't much like hugs - nor by the way do Dan and Peter) but the programme doesn't show even one hug.

She IS sometimes left out. Sometimes he is left out. All fmailies with two kids probably face this. FWIW, we started doing the Corydon books because I wanted to do something with Michael - she was a baby at the time and a big feeder so I ended up writing stories with him and making imaginary worlds to get him over the feeding sessions. So it was worry he was being neglected that kicked off our authorship.

peapod, I just want to say that yes, Dan is challenging, but he's also funny, wry, lovable, amusing and has been a good and loyal friend to my son. Michael won't stand much nonsense from him and Dan has begun I think to see what works with someone his own age.

Itsybitsy, I feel real sympathy with your problem because I am myself REALLY divided about the documentary and its inevitable distortions. I guess I could respond by saying yes, your concerns are totally reasonable, and I share them for all the kids on the programme, but on the other hand these kids can't 'pass' unnoticed anyway! Most will be famous if not notorious in their schools/communities if profoundly gt - and there's really no way for them not to be. IF they are good kids in other ways - eg kind and polite - people will put up with them but they are never going to be Joe Average and it may be that tv doesn't hugely impact on this. We as a family thought for a loooong time about whether to let Corydon be published and whether to take part in CG - and what swayed us in the end is that the PROBLEMS these kids face are almost totally invisible, which would be outrageous if it were another special need, but educators often assume these kids will just somehow be fine, and they aren't. They really aren't. One thing that often goes wrong is that they are bored at school and stop listening altogether.

That said, I think it depends a bit on the kid. If it had been Hermione, I would have said no, because she is very shy - Michael is generally very outgoing. So different strokes...

Difference and normality - think Michael does pretty well for himself on this score. Some of the friends you can see at the party are absolutely not academic high fliers, though some are. Am constantly nagging kids to see people's diverse virtues - was really amused at the way you all assumed Emma (Adam's mum) could easily paint her house when every time I do this the paint falls off the wall. At 13 kids are often intolerant but if one of my children said the kinds of things Aimee says about people who aren't intellectual they would be in heaps of trouble. Avenap's summary is true for Michael too - one of the MANY things I said that didn't make the programme was that kids like this are in the end KIDS, with the same needs as other KIDS - social stuff, hanging out, learning how to be comfortable in their skins. But those goals are a lot harder to attain if you are obviously different in other ways, if some kids don't understand what you say etc.

If anyone wants to email me my email address is easily available from the Oxford webpages, in the public domain. Thanks to all of you for listening to my rants! Nag me if anyone feels their question wasn't addressed. I'll only be around once a day because of work pressure

Crunchie, your post crossed with mine so I just spotted it as mine went up. So nice of you to say you found the kids lovable.

Me too - and I also find all the PARENTS lovable because it's such a slog to do parenting and having a kid who is in any way different does make it harder. I've been consistently blown away by how loving the families are. I know some MNers thought Peter's family cold, for instance - but actually Peter hates to be hugged and they have to rein themselves in all the time, which must be really hard. Michael was like this as a baby, and so was Dante. Ask me about Dabrowski's?

NB Of course Michael is a prig. He's a don's child.... But you are right that he's learned more about what can and can't be said since the first programme.

I've come to this thread late having taped the show and only watched it last night. I'm so pleased you've posted Jane, I really liked your family, you came across as the happiest in your own skins. I loved Michael and Dante's conversation in Paris, it's exactly the kind of discussion dh tries to draw me into (and I flee from, screaming)

Ooh, since we have Michael's mum here, can I ask a sneaky question that's been bothering me since the first series?

Did none of the parents (apart from the G-Cs who clearly are mad as a box of frogs) have issues around the children's IQ scores being measured and discussed so publicly? We took dd1 to an EdPsych when she was 9 because of the endless battles she was having with the school, and in fact her scores were somewhere northwards of 150, but it would never have occurred to me to share that information with her. She knows she's bright and that she got the highest mark in grammar school entrance exams (though I was actually slightly cross they shared that information with the kids), but I've always steered very very clear of the whole G&C terminology.

I thought Joan Freeman had done a study in which children who had been identified as gifted (Mensa membership, special G&T streams at school, blahdiblah) were matched with kids of similar IQ who had not been so identified. My understanding was that her research showed that the outcomes were significantly worse on all sorts of measures of success, happiness etc for the kids who had been identified as gifted, which she put down to a combination of parental pressure and the kids' own expectations of themselves. Given that, the whole basis of the TV program seemed highly ethically dubious to me.

I also liked the older kids, btw, though I did think that Aimee needed to be Told a bit more, and that Dante's parents needed a slap over the whole brain scan thing. I think the impression of priggishness is largely to do with accent -- my dd can hold forth very similarly, but because she's been through the inner-London primary school mill, she can also tone it down a bit more, which is probably no bad thing.

This whole series has been fascinating. I thoroughly enjoyed the first programme as it is more relevant to me (I have a 3.1yr DD).
The thing that stood out most for me was the education side. It seems that schools just can't cope with these 'super-bright' children. I wonder how many have had the chance to be put up a year or several. Several looked to be being homeschooled which means that the Englsih Education system has failed them. What hope is there for the bright youngsters coming through the system?
When Michael goes back to school, will he be with his peers receiving highly differentiated work, or will be skipped a few years. The same for Dante, I wonder if he plays up so much at school becasue nothing being taught is relevant or is past him. What good is it for Dante learning basic biology when a lecture in neuro-science would suit him so much better!

Actually, I thought Michael's family looked like a really, happy, closely knit family that they could all be proud of being part of.

I don't think Michael lacks social skills at all, he clearly has lots of friends and is not isolated from his peer group by his intelligence.

Having a reading age of 12 at aged 6 (as one of the posters above mentioned) does not, in my opinion, make a child gifted - just good at reading. Seeing the talents of the children in this programme highlight the extent of a "real" gift, one which has the potential to be very problematic. In the case of Michael's family, I think they are deadling with his gifts very well (and those of his sister who is also very intelligent).

I will follow this series with interest.

Jane - tell us about Dabrowski's please

Kerrymum, we have cats (two) a dog (as seen on tv) and hens (seven). I'd quite like a little milch cow but dh balks. Don't flee. They are all nice. And I think they provide some ballast.

Dabrowski's overexcitability syndrome (readily blackleable) is a sensory, emotional intellectual spectrum - kids can be overexcitable in all areas or only one. GT kids are intellectually excitable - this is what I meant earlier about pursuing obsessions - but also often really hate eg labels in clothing. Most of the CG kids really hated the radio mikes, and you can see both Michael and Dan fiddling with them. Michael and Dan both hated being held close as babies and would fight to get away. Lousy sleep cycles are also part of Dabrowski's. It correlates well wiht g/t, tho' not all gt kids have it.

On classifying kids as g/t - it's really difficult and a good question. I was v. against IQ testing and still don't think it predicts much beyond ability to do IQ tests. If it were useful we'd be using it at Oxford for admissions because we're uttelry desperate to find a way of distinguishing between 40 good applicants for 10 places.

HOWEVER it was also clear that NOT having Michael tested would bracket us as a bit fraudulent (and the family who wouldn't agree to it has been so criticised) and it was proposed at a VERY late stage in filming. Probably if it had been clear form the getgo we might have said no to the whole thing. As well, I only read Joan's book after we learned we woudl be meeting her, because I'd never really thought of giftedness as a subject to explore. We don't belong to Mensa or NAGT or any of those. So we only learned about the drawbacks BY committing ourselves to the test!

So what we tried to do was this. We played it donw hugely before and after, tried to treat it on the same level as any other minor achievment. Just because we've played it down so much I'm hoping Michael will be less affected than if we congratulated him on it all the time.

CG were very keen to test Mione too this time, and I said no because I think she's too young - when Michael was tested he had lots of ballast, including the Corydon books, but she's too little for it not to overwhelm her sense of who she is.

I asked Joan why she was involved in a programme that her own work suggested would be bad for the children involved, but they didn't include her reply. (which was shrug, and probably not good tv)

OTOH, Michael has also always known he's different in some respects from most kids, though he also knows he's the same in many other respects, and SOMETIMES it helps to be different in a way that can be named. Like -'I have an IQ, but it does not have me'.

Hi. My ds didn't sleep much when he was small, the GP even gave me some medication so that I could sedate him but I never gave it to him. He was a cuddly, affectionate child, always smiling. You don't see them as different when they are younger. I didn't think of it as odd when he could read the alphabet, count etc at 14 months. It could have been the lack of sleep though. He's 9 now, he sleeps well but rolls around alot. He always looks exhausted in the morning and has permanent bags under his eyes. He's always been interedted in philosophy, I don't know alot about this though so it can be tough. He's quite happy playing with Lego, which is great. He has alot of friends at school because he's a bit of a clown. He doesn't have a friend like him though so he saves his discussions for me, which is nice but exhausting. It's a challenge for parents, I joined this site to get some ideas and support. He's such a different child that I don't have any help with him because people don't really understand what it's like. One minute he can be building or reading, then he'll want to talk about something really obscure, it was how infinity must be impossible to reach because he can always think of a higher number and how infinity must be different for different people because what I think a high number is won't be the same as what he thinks (I just nodded and agreed at this). It's very exhausting. I'd appreciate some tips though. I have sent him off to look at the internet but I think he likes the discussion.

Hi Jane, it has been nice to read more about your background in relation to the social questions that always surround G+T kids - they seem to believe the children are only present in a middle or upper class context.

I am particularly keen on the limits ones situation places on ones children.

My interest stems from my experiences with my son. Now aged 14.

I was frustrated that in his reception year he was labelled "retarded" YES they used that word, as he was unable to draw over the letter shapes.

They never thought to discuss their concerns. He was writing his own poems and stories at home!

Even with the school finally conceding that actually he was very bright and not "retarded", there was nothing in place for him within the education system.

Now for me not such an issue as I am well educated and able to access sources to engage my son myself. So we travelled and did much more to stimulate his mind.
But what about parents without the knowledge or resources? The state does or does not have a duty towards G+T children?

I mean I tried my best! I even have ended up marrying a physicist, a choice made with all of us in mind!

But when my son watched the programme, he longingly wished I was an Oxford bod.
Infact when he saw that Michael was off to boarding school, and then later that Michael's mother posted on here, he asked if you did holiday programmes So envious of the opportunities was he!

So you can only work within your ability I guess

The Dabrowskis info is very interesting.
As a baby my son slept 20 mins out of every hour. At 5 mths (and suicidal not to mention homicidal) I begged doctors for help. One did mention that very bright children do struggle with sleep patterns. He thought this applied to him. Have to confess at the time I was not very open to that assessment...
The obsessions too. Oh oh oh. Drawing churches, bus timetable memorising, now it is all ART ART ART. He is a very gifted artist, despite me being an absolute philistine in that area. He is self motivated indeed.

He is a fiddler, constantly tapping, twitching, fiddling. That microphone thing that you mentioned. That is HIM!

He loves Dante, says he identifies with him massively... Interestingly I think.

Anyway I'm about to start rambling. I also must point out that I agree with Kerry about how we cannot talk about our G+T children.

I very rarely get to, hence splurging somewhat here

And the IQ- concur thoroughly with Janes assessment of its value. Yes Max has an IQ of 170 as well. But if only he could remember his bus pass and PE kit...
It is all so relative!

Michael thinks the programme didn't have enough of his friends in it. He thinks several of his friends are just as gifted as he is in diverse ways - music, academicals.. and he did interview several of them, but I bet that the producers didn't want to muddy the waters.

Like all of us, there are bits he winces at. Hermione is upset that she was shown crying over the wretched Ramayana, but really likes the Knights Game scene and the scene with her writing - with her customary fierce secrecy because she's LIKE that - I do get to help from time to time, but only when she invites me, and she didn't that day or week IIRC.

So sorry the Gt board didn't work out well for you, Kerrymum. On sleep, I think cotton sheets help some Dabrowski's kids. Most GT kids need less sleep than others - I know one who only needs 4 hours a night.

I think some of the rubbishing we all get is perfectly natural incomprehension. Realistically, we and our kids MUST always be in a tiny minority. Most TEACHERS are only going to have ONE profoundly gifted kid in an entire career, statistically speaking. Most people won't have met one. Not even one. Equally, most who do meet Michael and Dante soon twig.

To respond to a different question, NO school can really cope and you just have to accept the limits of the system to an extent and do what you can to pat and soothe and encourage at home. And also encourage the school not to give up on grounding the kid. GT kids need just as much grounding as others. That's kinda what I meant about the way they stop listening, which is why is IS actually harmful to sit at the back of the class reading - this might have happened to your DS - these kids often need a passion outside school to keep them moving or they go to sleep. In rural Ireland I guess there'd be the internet and also there'd be nature, and maybe legends and stuff. How old is ds1? Tell me more!

exactly! My son was sent outside the class to free read in yr1 and 2!
He was therefore placed outside socially and made to stand out.
He has been badly bullied, (broken arm/nose/finger) but set up a wonderful buddy system in yr6 that exists to this day.
His character is solid and wonderful.

We do get told gorgeous things by teachers nowadays
His maths teacher in yr7 said
"It is children like yours that keep me wanting to teach."

And for English this year
" I could put him in a 6th form class and he'd be top of that too, quite frankly he is astonishing"

This is at a good state grammar, which just manages to cater for him.
A relief after 9 yrs of wilderness.
Max aspires to Cambridge one day
But now heading in arty direction I'm unsure as to where will best serve him when the time comes.
We shall see, I refuse to urge him one way or another!

exactly! My son was sent outside the class to free read in yr1 and 2!
He was therefore placed outside socially and made to stand out.
He has been badly bullied, (broken arm/nose/finger) but set up a wonderful buddy system in yr6 that exists to this day.
His character is solid and wonderful.

We do get told gorgeous things by teachers nowadays
His maths teacher in yr7 said
"It is children like yours that keep me wanting to teach."

And for English this year
" I could put him in a 6th form class and he'd be top of that too, quite frankly he is astonishing"

This is at a good state grammar, which just manages to cater for him.
A relief after 9 yrs of wilderness.
Max aspires to Cambridge one day
But now heading in arty direction I'm unsure as to where will best serve him when the time comes.
We shall see, I refuse to urge him one way or another!

The sleep problems, oh the sleep problems...DD (3.1yrs) was living off 8hours sleep a night with no daytime nap...that was a hard phase. Now we do 2 things before bed...run her round the block (1.5miles) and give her something academic (very OE here) to do to help her brain switch off. If we don't she is leaping around on her bed at 10.30pm. She now reads herself to sleep and also sleeps much better because she is physically and mentally worn out.

Jane- when did Hermione start writing? DD likes to type a story a day. She doesn't have the fine motor skills to hand write a story yet. Was she an early reader like her brother? My DD is currently churning her way through those 'delightful' Rainbow magic books!

Ds has always read to sleep. Hubby thinks ds should be lights out at 8 9 10 ever since joining our family! But ds is self regulating and manages with far less sleep than we ever could!

Thanks for info about Dabrowski, Kerry & Jane. That's v interesting.

ds has coasted kerry. He still is. The higher the challenge the higher he achieves. I do wonder about if he had really been tested and extended how much might he have achieved. But he is a happy beautiful boy and that tells me... I've done the right things by him.
he is gifted at maths, English, French, Chinese,Spanish, all sciences, tech, art and IT.
mind boggles really. I know I would have been classed g+t in my schooldays, but he is simply amazing to me.
dd is 5 and also on the g+t register. She is desperate for facts and figures.

Also jane, do you have an opinion on the weight of nature versus nurture?
I'm sick of being told I'm lucky for having such a clever kid!
luck!
luck!
huh?

Wow, nature versus nurture... IMHO profound G is nature and there's some evidence two moderately bright parents will be needed to have a profoundly gifted child. Smirks modeslty - but some modesty definitely required since both my kids AND Dh are brighter than I am. But whether profound gt ever comes to anything other than alienation is PARTLY nurture. Every year I see 550 or so of the uk's brightest arrive at my college. Some do brill8iantly academically, some make a lot of friends and discover a nonacademic metier, some go home in a state. Brains aren't everything.

Kerrymum, piffle - heartbroken about the bullying. I really feel for you. It did happen to Michael but only when the first Corydon book came out and headmaster unwisely made a big fuss of him. Mostly he's been good at keeping a low profile.

It was so lovely and reassuring to read Michael's mum's posts. I thought as I watched the programme that they seemed a lovely family. Michael and Hermione suffer a bit from what is known in my family as "Don's disease" (!) but basically just a family. And I was so pleased to see that certain standards of behaviour were expected - regardless of IQ! I have so often come across people who excuse/explain hideous behaviour because it's "how gifted children are" Michael proves this is not true.

And I find it extraordinary that Aimee's parents put up with her rudeness - if she had been mine she wouldn't have been at that premiere!

And a brief aside - I still do my dd's hair sometimes -is that a problem?!

Thankyou for the info. It sounds like my ds, he is over sensitive (will make a big deal if he bumps himself, says it hurts if I tickle him even lightly). Rolls around in his sleep. He used to have some of the social problems until another mnetter recommended a book which had strategies for him to use. It really worked. I'm grateful for the info. Thankyou

Wow...what sort of person has the IQ of their toddler tested? Really.....sigh....Tells me that person is in it for themselves.