___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

Sorry to hear about what happened, Kerrymum. Horrible. Agree early reading doesn't necessarily imply anything, but also agree that it's fun. But do other mums of early readers feel obliged to manage reading choices ie rule out 'unsuitable' things? People always ask me this - inevitable press question. I notice children's books in the UK are now going to come with age classification - 9+, 11+ etc. What do people think?

Ah now that's an interesting question as ds2 wanted to read The Simpsons, which I thought unsuitable. DH said it was fine so I relented (and it was being sold through a school book fair - I had to order it so couldn't check it first). Having seen it, I would say that actually yes I do think it's unsuitable for a 6 year old, but hey ho- not frighteningly so.

I went to Oxford from a state grammar school 6th form (following the bulk of my secondary education in an independent school). Both schools offered a great education (although the independent school offered more in the way of extra-curricular activities), but perhaps state grammars perhaps open a whole other debate. I was at a college in the north of the city (this was back in 89-92) where - for Oxford- there was a pretty good state/independent mix. I took the entrance exam by the way and thought that was a good way to assess. The problem at the time (it may have changed) was sometimes the attitudes in the state sector. My friend wanted to apply from a comprehensive. Her teacher refused to fill in the application, held onto it until after the closing date and told her that 'people don't go to Oxford from schools like this'. Utterly ridiculous. I hope things have changed.

A statement is issued after a 'statutory assessment'. It's a legal document which identifies a child's educational needs and will state hours of support, access to services etc. You have to be careful though, even if the LEA agree to write a statement they will automatically put things like speech and language therapy in part 5 - where it can be ignored - it needs to be in part 3 - then the LEA have to pay for it if none is available on the NHS. It has been used for children with giftedness and there's no reason why it shouldn't if a child is so far apart from their peers that their needs can't be met with the usual resources.

I don't think that this would be the case for the majority of future Oxbridge students though. A(nother!) change to the A levels could make them more challenging and also less stressful for all (thank goodness I missed the days of repeating modules). In the days of league tables schools do have to worry about getting as many passes at A level, GCSE's at grade C and above etc. I suppose a lot are moving onto the IB.

The parents of the boy in the spelling comp worried me avenanap. It seemed to be important to them that he 'demonstrated' giftedness. Being able to spell 'hat' isn't necessarily the same as understanding its meaning. Such a lot of pressure for a small boy.

Just to add - a parent can apply for a statement - it doesn't have to come from the school.

agree comprehension is as vital as reading ability to know. Child is truly reading well.
I recall vividly ds1 reading Chronicles of Narnia in yr1 the teacher said " but he will not understand them no point in reading them"
I knew from that point on I was fighting a losing battle.
jane your first post this morning.
totally concur.
heaven knows how we improve things?

Apologies for shocking grammar in my previous post. Am typing from tiny iPod thing while being hunted down by t toddler after his weetabix.
yurt. Dd is 5 and has several areas of SN most thinkfully minor but her eyesight is problematic. She is also on the G+T register. She was declined a statement despite having firm diagnosis.
Her paediatrician is horrified and disappointed.
I despair at times and although dd is very happy in her small village school, I can see a need one day, one that private school may fulfill.

DD (3.1yrs) maxed out the Salford reading test recently giving her a reading age of 10.6yr+...she certainly doesn't comprehend likea 10yr old though. She is very happily reading 'Rainbow Magic' books though, then acting them out afterwards. Finding books with appropriate content is hard...at least the Fairy books are harmless. Having an age guide would be good especially as she gets older. BTW, she was self taught...started asking us at 18ms old to write her words, we obliged thinking nothing of it...by 22ms she was reading Ginn level 2....and then took off! She loves to read her 'EyeWonder' books and spouts off facts all day long!

She wrote (typed) her first 'story' (I go in daddy bo cr...I go in daddy's blue car) at the age of 24months. She now likes to type stories up to a side of A4. Yet, next year in Nursery she will have to sit through 'letter of the week' again! Maths wise she is certainly not a Mikael (little boy in the programme) but she has been adding/subtracting since 25ms, and wouldn't be out of place in a Y1 classroom.

She goes to Nursery a few mornings a week where she gets to play, have fun and be social (she loves her social life)! I am not worried about school yet as she is only 3, but I am worried about her getting bored in a year's time when she has to stay down in the Nursery class with a teacher that wants us to slow her progress down. When she is bored, her behaviour takes a turn for the worse.

There seems such a fine line to cross between advocating for your child and looking like a pushy parent. I hate being labelled as a hot-houser when that is the last thing I would ever want to do.

Avenanap...your DS sounds similar to my DD at the same age, what did you do about Nursery class and Reception etc?

Piffle- lots of children with SN are turned down for statements. There's are several horrific stores surrounding education for SN on the SN board at the moment. That was my point really, that it's not a case of it being taken away from one group and given to another- the other group are having to do battle for it as well.

I absolutely agree that being a good reader doesn't mean you need to do anything with a child - it just gives them more possibilities. I was feeling irritable last night as I'd had half a bottle of wine. I do find it strange that people seem so dismissive of reading on here, when actually for a child to read fluently with understanding opens up the world for them - exactly as you said, Yurt.

I too am not surprised that my children are reasonably academically able as DH and I are also both Oxbridge educated (one of us with the top 1st in our year, though by no means profoundly gifted). DS1 seems 'spectrummy' at times and is sensory seeking - spins, chews, twitters, obsesses. My children are fine at school, with the occasional blip for DS2 because his tolerance for work he considers pointless is very low. There seems to be less opportunity for 'sideways' work than there was when I was at school. School assessments also seem to rely on a lot of box ticking.

I haven't really screened reading material - my parents didn't for me and I don't remember being too traumatised by anything I read, though no doubt would have appreciated some of it more when I was older.

I thought that all the parents in the first programme seemed to have allowed their lives to become completely dominated by their children's 'giftedness' and I agree entirely about the spelling bee boy.

I have done some editing of reading choices, as the next level up for an 8yo reader who has 'done' all the classic and modern kids' lit is the teenage fiction which has an unpleasant subgenre majoring in sex and drugs and teenage pregnancy.

Robert Swindells is particularly unsavoury in this department, as is the Melvyn Burgess-type stuff -- really nasty for the sake of it, nihilistic and pointless. I'm also not keen on the kiddie-horror genre, Goosebumps and Point Horror etc and the teenagey follow-ons.

I'd rather they read proper adult stuff --- dd1 (13) has read The Bell Jar, for example, which is pretty explicit but somehow more authentic than the self-conscious teenage shock-o-rama.

There's no completely easy answer though -- I'm sure some unsuitable stuff has slipped through the net. I only realised that the Alex Rider books aren't really suitable for a 7yo once ds was onto about Book 3.

tiger: Both nursery and reception were an absolute nightmare. In Nursery he had already reached the benchmarks for reception so spent alot of time painting and being disruptive. When he was 3 and a half they decided to try him on a book as he used to sit in the book corner with a book. They sent him home with an ORT stage 1. I took it back the next day as he was reading Mr Men books, I had taught him how to read 'it' and 'the', he did the rest himself. He had alot of problems there, he was always unhappy. I moved him to another nursery, he was only there for a short while then he started school. I did warn the school that he was bright and would become troublesome if he was bored. They tried their hardest but they had never had a child like him before. The teacher spent a long time trying to find him something to read, he ended up with books from the junior school (a few pages more then fantastic Mr Fox), which he could read in an hour. I ended up sending him in with his own book from home as they were giving him books with children fighting, bullying etc. Not very suitable for a 4 year old. The teacher could manage him maths wise, he'd do literacy with the year 1 class. He would spend alot of his time in other classes, talking to the teachers etc. He was bored though. The point of reception is to integrate them into school, he didn't want this, he wanted to learn. I used to give him work books to do to keep him occupied, at 4 he could do the Key stage 1 books and some of key stage 2. By the end of the year he had developed a reputation for being naughty and answering back.He was getting told off for stepping out of the line, all sorts of things. He was showing signs of anxiety, he would sit and cry because he didn't want to go to school, he was having diarhhoea (max 20 times a day) and abdominal pain. I could see him becoming depressed, he said that he wished he wasn't here, which is deeply destressing for any parent to hear so I pulled him out until I found him somewhere else. I moved him to a private school because the head had experience and training in America on children with special needs and gifted children. He had picked up alot of bad habbits from reception (shouting out, inappropriate comments, attention seeking) which have taken a while to get rid of. He's not as bad now, the work's harder but it has taken him along time to settle down. It saddens me that he has this availiable because I can pay for it and there are so many children that can't access this. It's an unfair system.

The age certificates are a good idea. I have been guilty of giving him a book that is not appropriate (content wise). He has a fantastic understanding but I don't want him reading books with violence etc. He's not interested in Alex Rider so he's avoided those. He's read alot though. In the 4 and a half years he's been at school he's read 100,000 pages (I have to write down what he's read and how many pages). Series of Unfortunate events were good, he read these at 5 but are good for a 7 year old. Can be a bit dark though. He found Hitchikers guide very ammusing.

Ave. It is children like yours that scream out for help. The system cannot cope.
We had the same. School was glorified daycare. After school it was museums, travel, bit of kumon maths, drama, dance, violin lessons just massive breadth of experiences to determine what floated his boat.
The schools just smiled. Luckily ds1 was never disruptive but Christ he was tested.
Narnia, harry potter, some classics.
but knex Lego meccano were all fab.
he actually wrote to knex after getting cyber knex and offered some solutions to a glitch.
he go a letter and voucher!
think of school as the hobby and yourself as the teacher at least up to yr4
we got shag all from primary. One hopes it is better a decade on...

He's fine now but I've had to pay for him to get the help he needed. I wouldn't even call it glorified daycare, it left him in a mess emotionally. I just can't help but think about the other children loke him who are still in this system. We've had to miss the holidays to pay for the school. It makes me so .

I am also a child of an oxford don and also the parent of a very bright child. I work with children who are at the bottom of the social heap and end up too at the bottom of the academic heap so through seeing both ends of the spectrum I can see how the ones at the bottom really do so much worse. While keeping in mind that these are real families with real children and so comments on sights such as these can be hurtful and have real impact, I want to say that I found all of the children worrying. I do not think it's helpful or as simple as saying that anyone should be blamed but I think probably with the best motivation, identifying these kids as super bright (which they are) has not helped them with intergrating with the rest of the world. Jane, you must know that the world of oxford dons is not the most balanced world for your kids to grow up in! I think your son is lovely and could see you want the most for him but I felt very worried for him. I felt that intelligence is a big deal in your family and almost wanted you to tone it down. He appeared not to lack stimulation but learning to cope without it may be more of a chalenge but one that may (however painful) help him to find his place in the world.
This may be too much, but I wonder what brought you to the world of academia- sometimes when other areas in life are too difficult being intelligent and surrounding yourself in academic thought can provide a haven, but this can be at a cost.
I felt for your daughter too, being the sibling of a SN child of any description is very difficult. I am NOT trying to say that anything you are doing is bad but I do think it is healthier for children not to have too much made of their differences. Acknowledged and accepted yes but more than that can lead the way to intelligence taking the place of genuine emotional development.
BTW I thought that Aimmee's rudeness was very healthy and can't believe how adults can be so mean about these kids!

Hi, Ra - interesting questions. We can't entirely help being a bookish and slightly odd family - but we do do lots of not-very-bookish things we like, mainly involving all our animals - Coco the dog, the cats, and the ten chickens. I think or hope my children know Life is not all about academicals. My own fantasy is often to give up being a don and be a baker instead (only on bad days). I have huge respect for people who work with their hands. I doubt this will be Michael since he's a bit clumsy, but he's got a persona he enjoys as Mik the Farm Boy and can look after all the animals and dig etc. You actually see him do this on the programme.

Totally agree about not making too much of my children's intellectual differences - I don't actually know what these are and have no intention of finding out.

Michael always knew he was different and it has helped him to be able to name one of the differences. It hasn't made him intolerant. But he does find the criticisms puzzling. He can't really help himself any more than a sn kid of any other kind. He DOESN'T do Sanskrit all day and presumably you saw the Knights Game on the programme as well as the chickens??? He also plays two instruments but presumably you would not think of this as leisure?

They actually have a lot of friends, not all of whom are in any way donnish or from donnish families. (We do, too, and one of the fake things about the programme was its tendency to show all the families in isolation). Agree too that main thing is for children to be children - a thing I said for BOTH programmes which didn't get included in EITHER was that whatever a child's abilities s/he is still a child and has to learn allt he same stuff as the others - manners, social stuff, emotional stuff, coping with success and failure....

I don't think I'm taking refuge from anything in the academy - I just like research and teaching. I don't feel I really need to prove anything. I'd really like to learn how to paint my house.

Why is it good to cope without stimulation? Why not seek it out? Just wondered if this was about your life, somehow... and I wonder if your reaction would be the same if we were a family of dirt-bike riders or hikers. Most families have hobbies (which then bore the children at adolescence). Ours happens to be books, but my bet is that children's rebellious energies will be more than a match for any parental plans!

You obviously do a very important job, Ra - and a very tough one. I'm curious - positioned as you are, do you really think the children on the programe are especially a worry? My bet is that ALL of them will eventually be fine because they ALL have very loving families.

My view is that Aimee and Michael will both be fine- because they both already fit into their future social & work world (if that's what they want). Academia is obviously a home for Michael already, and I was impressed with how polite Aimee was to the pianist playing her piece.

I worried about Dante because I couldn't quite see what he'll do.

I agree that all the families were loving and I felt that the families in last week's programme were all sensible and grounded and well sane I warmed to all of them.

I worried more about the younger children on the programme. There seemed to be more of a mania about proving how gifted these children were and an unhealthy obsession with IQ testing etc. I loved Georgia's siblings and hope they can keep her mother in check as Georgia grows. Incidentally I think Georgia's mother may have misunderstood the primary admission rules. Children with SN can be given priority admission to a school if they have a statement (the statement names a school, the school it names has to accept them) - I think looked after children come first, then statemented children then closest to the school etc etc. Children aren't just given admission because the mother decides they have SN iyswim. If she was serious about playing the school admission game in the way she tried, she should have asked for a statutory assessment (although I doubt she would have got it at 4).

I missed the previous series and so I watched the second programme expecting to see a bit of a freak show. I didn't see that at all. I just saw a bunch of 'normal', but clever kids with happy 'normal', well-adjusted families.

Why is it healthy to be rude?

My bet is that Dante will be something creative, like a games designer or something in the film-and-tv Minghellsa bizzes, or maybe something entrepreneurial (also a family thing - the ice-cream)... he's good at reflex things, so maybe surgery? One day he'll suddenly wake up and know he wants to do x and he'll do it with Dante-esque determination.

Seeker, I really felt for both Aimee and her parents - I've known a lot of kids - me, my students - with parents with lower educational attainments than theirs. My parents have always dreaded that I would feel that way, thoghh actually I DON'T, and my sense is that a few MNers might share that fear. My kids would be in heaps of trouble if they ever said anything like that about anyone, but in fact they never have.... I think rudeness should always be rebuked, which probably makes me evil and controlling, whereas if I didn't I'd be a spineless liberal......

Yurt1 - just to respond to your point about the potentially unhealthy obsession with IQ amongst the families of the young children in CG - I agree that IQ should not be a focus for parents at such a young age - at any age really. Except.... where you need to ensure a child is appropriately supported by a school. There are enough personal, sad stories on this thread that demonstrate how distressing it is for parents when their children are not well supported.

Just supposing...if you lived in a fairly deprived area with local schools that focused on supporting families that were struggling - so their ofsted reports state how well they do giving children routine and structure becasue so many of the children at the school have fractured home lives. Drugs/unemployment are big issues. If those reports also stated clearly that the children with higher abilities were not being appropriately served by the school etc, etc. and you had this gut instinct that your 2 yr old was bright, sparkly, quick to learn but also sensitive and 'high need' - would you not do practically anything to try and ensure that your child was able to attend a school that could stimulate and encourage your child to love learning and enjoy books etc. rather than just have your child sit at the back of a class quietly, while the teachers put all their energies into dealing with possibly upset children whose biggest need was for the introduction of routine.

I worry about placing emphasis on IQ, especially given that IQ testing is just not reliable. But I take confidence from Jane's comment that these children will do fine, because they are surrounded by love at home.

TBH itsybitsy I'd bve more likely to look for the school that was good at supporting families who were struggling - because ime they tend to be a whole lot better at dealing with children who are square pegs.

I would (and have- for ds2 and ds3) avoid the top of the league table schools without further digging around - for any child really- it often means they have an unhealthy obsession with SATS and ime (of the local top of the league table school) are not good with the square pegs of this world.

Yes, I can see that. And actually with a child who is very sensitive you don't want a pushy school, but at the same time you don't want a school where they spend a lot of time trying to convince the majority of parents that reading each night is good for a child and please can they try-even though it's hard - to make the time to read and/or hear their child read once a week. That would be so at odds with this child's experience that I can understand a parent thinking that wasn't a good match for their child.
But appreciate what you say about SAT - my own son who is 7yrs is doing SATs now at a fairly pushy state school and they have stepped aside from all 'normal' activities it seems to just concentrate on tests - horrid. For the first time ever - yes I know I'm lucky - for first time, he came home saying school was boring as it was just sitting still working through books - boring, boring, boring. Quite depressing really for a 7 yr old who used to love learning new things. I am so fed up with UK educ system I have just spent hours on home education websites today - will test this idea on DH tonight!

Just to give a real concrete example illustrating why a parent of a bright child might go to all manner of lengths to avoid certain schools - G is at a sure start nursery, in a deprived area and the nursery is in the grounds of an infant school. The nursery manager felt she needed advice about how best to engage the bright children so she had a meeting with the reception teacher of the school. The manager was told to do nothing extra, to just keep the bright ones ticking along because otherwise the reception teacher would have a problem on her hands, with children having too broad a range of experience of reading, say, and with only 1 classroom teacher for 28 children, it would not work well. What an awful acceptance of mediocrity! Surely any parent of a bright child would try to avoid that. If you then got in with a Psychologist who was not publicity shy to say the least, I can see how you might get encouraged along that road into having an agent and then being part of a documentary....
BTW, the older siblings are lovely Yurt1, very friendly, well mannered, engaging and they've been through (to varying degrees) stages of teenage rudeness but 3 of them have emerged as great adults, 2 still to go!

oooh do you know the family?

Really I thought the siblings were great, but the IQ testing made me nervous. I can see why you would do it privately for the reasons you mentioned (indeed my son was IQ tested- well he wasn't as he refused to do it- but it was attempted as part of his assessment and statementing) , but then to go public with it eek- misguided I think.

I dreamed up all sorts of armchair psychology explanations for the frankly bizarre behaviour shown towards the younger child when the older siblings seemed to lovely and sane and balanced.