Violina I saw that progamme last night on Genius Children and I have to be careful as I know that extreme editing takes place and 90% of what is filmed ends up on the floor. However, the point about these children not beng socially able within thier per group was the consistent theme throughout the programme.

I found this so sad and all so unecessary. The amount of money that is spent on trying stimulate these children academically, e.g. moving from school to school etc is crazy. None of the parents seem to offer their children run of the mill opportunities like camping, swimming, choir , cricket or football or something that wasnt competitive! The boy who played football with his grandad and dad, why didnt he go to a sat morning football with kids his own age? Grandad looked like he would keel over any minute (or was that set up for TV) In their determination to stimulate them they all concentrated on the academia, with the exception of the girl who did music but then again she did competitions and was looking to be a concert pianist at the age of 10 why? Were these necessary for her scholarship? The family where the 11 year was filmed receiving her 11+ exam results on a silver platter - I wasnt sure what the point was but for the record my siblings and I who all passed the 11+ each got a bicycle (2nd hand raleigh for me & sis, bro got brand new!) and a watch - late 1960s this was a BIG DEAL!!! However we were never isolated from other activities and other people. The entire street popped in to say congrats, there was certainly no jealously that I can remember - maybe I missed it.

I know that our youngest is extremely bright and has very high IQ, so I keep her busy with loads of non-competitive, non academic stuff. She has taken the national Maths Challenge for fun and doesnt ask about the results. If she did one or two musical instruments she would be very very good, but we emphasise fun and the grade xams are not taken seriously at all. She gets As in all her academic work (bar French) and then we very carefully turn a blind eye when she wants to watch Home & Away. As a parent you have a duty to strike a balance in your childs life, and allow them to veg out sometimes. Childhood is so brief!

I passed the 11+ in the 60's and was given a second-hand bike, which I loved to bits. Nobody in our street could have cared less if I passed or not and anything else would have seemed weird.

I still think we should go overboard in valuing our children for who they are, warts and all, and not over-emphasise their intelligence above their other qualities. Yes intelligence is important but hard work will get you further, and a secure personality and a healthy self esteeem further still.

A girl at my son's school had two Cambridge graduates for parents and high-level maths skills, yet fell apart completely at Y6 camp. She was completely unused to coping without her parents constantly hovering over her out of school and didn't have the social skills to be able to muck in with the others. Excessive worry about our children's development can do far more harm than good. Some of the best-adjusted people I know were brought up in an atmosphere of 'healthy neglect' though nowadays in some circles this would be seen as tantamount to abuse.

Violinia

This sort of happened to me at secondary school.
I went to a comprehensive where we were streamed from the start and in the first year I got a prize for top of the year at speech day. It later came out (my parents knew at the time) that I was also top in the 2nd year but someone else was awarded it as it wouldn't be fair for the same person to get it twice.

I'm a little unsure about the term 'hot-housing'. It's a sort of newish, trendy expression, which seems to suit when wanting to disparage parents who want to do their best for their talented children, and I'm not sure exactly what it means. ???

My post earlier about the need to make very bright children put in as much effort as the weaker ones was not me suggesting that they be 'hot-housed', as I understand the expression. If we require our children to put in a certain amount of effort per day on their school homework, then why should the homework only be tailord toward the ones who will need to spend 20 mins (random) on it? What about the ones who'll complete it in 5? It is not 'hot-housing' to give these children something a little more taxing in order that they, too, will spend 20 minutes on their homework, thereby fullfilling their potential to the same extent as the others.

In fact I think it is morally wrong of us to neglect the needs of these brighter children in order not to offend the sensitivities of a few others. Everyone needs to learn to deal with the fact that we are not all the same, and accept that - or life will not be easy! If it is major issue, at the age of 6, that another child is taller, runs faster, gets more in maths test/music exam - then I would suggest that somebody who has influence over that child has put the wrong priorities in place in that child's mind.




EDIT - to use the age '6' here is not connected to, Violinia, to your earlier description of the 6-year-old who didn't get into the group because of not having the exam. This was a unique case.

Regarding hothousing, I go to a school which very much has a "hothouse" description. However, I and most of my friends don't find it at all academically pressured - it's strong academically, yes, but not the extent of pushing us too hard at all.

However, I know some people do find it academically pressured. These are mainly the people who are in the school because their parents had them coached to pass the entrance exam (because they wouldn't otherwise) and who have therefore struggled all the way up. If any of them had been at a different, slightly less academic school, they would have been in a far better position at school, and would have enjoyed their lessons instead of struggling and eventually giving up on education, as more than a few have.

Parents want their children to be "gifted and/or talented", so they push them to go the best schools, go to ballet lessons, join sports teams, learn musical instruments.

While some of this must be a good thing - after all, a five year old doesn't know they can learn to play the piano until someone tells them - it makes me wonder.

Is it better to push a child to learn and to achieve ABOVE what they would have done on their own? How far should you go?

I think the answer to 'how far should you go?' is simply 'make them put in the same effort as everybody else.' This is a different thing to giving them the same goals as everybody else, which would mean putting in considerably less effort; they should be given a goal which is realistically obtainable within a reasonable amount of time and effort.

No parent would ever want to disparage other parents who want to do their best for their talented children - what a curious idea.

To me hot-housing means pushing children into learning more quickly and earlier than is appropriate for their cognitive age, and often at the expense of other activities which would be much more suitable for them.

Don't you think children who are naturally 'bright' will find their way to university even without gifted and talented schemes? If not, perhaps they're not so 'bright' after all, or perhaps academic studies weren't for them anyway? Or they'd like to do it later, but not straight after school? I can think of many children of my acquaintance who were of just average intelligence yet worked hard and ended up in medical school, or studying law, or getting PhD's in any subject you care to name. What more could any ambitious parent want for their child? None of these children were the beneficiaries of any 'gifted and talented' scheme but just went through an average comprehensive, deciding for themselves along the way what they wanted to to with their lives. Also, comprehensives are streamed so the highest achievers will find their way into the top sets.

One girl in particular springs to mind; she was the product of a very laid-back childhood - so late back in fact that some people I know even thought the children were a bit neglected. I used to help the oldest girl with her English as she went to a very laid-back primary school where country walks were considered more important than spelling tests. Anyway, the parents would often let the kids stay home from school or take extended weekends with relatives - in other words they missed a lot of school days what with one thing and another. Sometimes the schools would send angry letters.

Anyway, once at the local comp, the oldest started to work really hard, specialising eventually in sciences and made it into medical school five years ago. She's just qualified as a doctor and is now doing her 2-year stint as a junior doc. The second daughter did American studies, and third got into Edinburgh last Autumn and the youngest was allowed a day off the other day to play in the snow. No doubt she'll do as well as her sisters.

I teach a boy of 14 who's a delightful personality and great to talk to. He fits in well with his peers at school, plays in a rock band etc etc. I had no idea but his mother mentioned to me in passing the other day that he's in the gifted and talented scheme at school as he's in the top 2%, as is his sister. But the mum sets no or very little store by this, as it's far more important to her that he has an enquiring mind and is a nice person. She would be the last person ever to brag about her son's achievements - perish the thought. He'd be furious with her anyway as they're his achievements, not hers. Oh and they often take their children out of school for Woodcraft camping trips and the like.

In other words, both these families have produced high-achieving kids but in a quiet way - never even mentioning it at the school gate, and not balking when their kids choose to spend hours watching Simpsons re-runs if that's how they choose to unwind after working hard at school.

When I was a kid I remember taking a friend of mine to the ballet with us. I recall the hot-housing-type mother of my friend calling out 'learn a lot, Helen!' as we got into the car. Helen (not her real name) ended up at university and then became an English teacher, moving to the top of her department. Now, however. she is a very flaky 'alternative healer', selling very dubious mumbo jumbo cures to anyone who will listen to her. Her sister has suffered years of anorexia and we reckon it all goes back to their having parents who loved them more for their achievements than for themselves.

Also, by calling some children 'bright' are you suggesting the others are 'stupid' or 'thick'? By bright, do you mean bright in all ways, socially as well? Is a child who is incredibly socially skilled but less hot academically 'not bright'? Why should bright usually be taken to mean academically? There's plenty of evidence that emotional intelligence will get you further in work and in the happiness stakes than academic intelligence alone, so why all this emphasis on the academic side? I find it all a bit disturbing.

Violinia

I also watched the gifted children programme and found it disturbing because it brought back memories for me. I am quite embarrassed talking about this so please bear with me and don't think i'm bragging because i'm definitely not.

I was one of these "gifted" children. I read at 3, was an amazing artist and picked up everything that was taught to me. I was given a keyboard for christmas 2 weeks after my 5th birthday and by boxing day had taught myself to play the whole book without help. I then learnt to play the recorder in the back of a taxi and played by ear, I remember doing Ravel's bolero around the time of Torvill and Dean. I went to school and was immediately put in the top group for recorder. I then played piano in a school concert at the age of 7 because a school helper had told me where middle C was and I worked the rest out myself. I crazed my parents for a piano but they wouldn't let me. I took an IQ test at 10 and scored 177 (although on the programme their scores must have been on a different system) but was told that this was higher than 99.9% of the population, I finally got a piano at 12 and got to grade 8 in just under 2 1/2 years. I was also top of the class in all other subjects. My parents were both farm workers, I taught my dad his alphabet as he actually didn't know it and had left school at the age of 12 to go shooting with his father! I had no help from my parents and to this day no-one know's how I came to be so intelligent!

My parents were also both in their 40's and I was premature which the doctors had said could have meant I was braindamaged but luckily not. When I became a teenager everything became very difficult to cope with. I became obsessed with nuclear physics and was convinced the world was going to end so had to have a form of communication with me at all times such as a radio or I would panic. My parents were oblivious to this and I was too embarrassed to say anything. My childhood up until then was really not very nice at all, I was bullied due to being clever and different and worried about absolutely everything because my brain had absorbed so much and I wasn't emotionally mature enough to deal with it. At high school I did earn some respect for my piano playing and used my intelligence to fit in with the other girls which did help. Unfortunately I didn't try at GCSE or A level because by then I was trying to fit in and education didn't matter to me because I thought we'd all be blown up soon enough anyway!!! I then went on to a very bad marriage and was ill and realised that actually we are still all here and it was worth giving life another go. I am now married to a great guy (average intelligence and job) have 2 children and my work as a music teacher helps me a lot. I love the fact that I can use how I felt as a teenager to help and encourage the children I teach even though now and again i'm filled with abit of regret and what if's. My parents didn't hot-house me, but then again they didn't help me achieve the social skills that I needed either so I had to figure it out myself and I wouldn't want that for anyone, it's very tough. I'm glad that I am well adjusted enough now not to let it happen to my children.

Phew, glad I got that off my chest!!!

I am evidence of this. I stopped trying as already mentioned at high school, I passed 10 GCSE's and 3 A levels without trying. For my English A level I didn't read the books, and started and completed my English coursework on the day that it had to be in! I completely gave up because I couldn't be bothered. I went to university and dropped out. It was partly due to the fact that I had come to the conclusion that education was pointless and secondly because I was ill at this point.

2nd point, I was a gifted child that sprang out of nowhere.

3rd point, I agree social skills are incredibly important, more important than that is self-esteem. That's where my parents went wrong. I was wrapped in cotton wool due to them being in their 40's when they had me and old fashioned and was subjected to the bragging about me in public but not encouraging me behind closed doors.

There are so many different stories here, everyone is "special needs" to some extent because everyone is special. We spend far too much time these days trying to put everyone in different boxes when mainly what children need is to believe in themselves and to try to the best of their ability which is something everyone is capable of with the right support. I would love to be one of these teachers in a school but the current education system puts me off going down this road, instead I settle with my 20 or so a week and make sure they learn to work and hard and feel special.

A very important aspect of being a teenager is to 'belong', and to be able to see parallels between yourself and others around you - to know that you're not 'odd' and not 'different'. It's discouraging - for want of a better word - to feel that you're struggling to keep up with others, but equally disheartening to feel that your abilities and potential are not recognised. Eventually you'll think, 'What's the point?'

Short post and inadequate response, but my point is that whilst water finds its own level eventually, this will happen more easily, leaving the individual with less emotional baggage, if the water is properly channeled from the source of the stream, allowing to flow freely. A little parental nudging and encouragement goes a long way in this, but, as parents, we also need to know when to let it flow unhindered and without interference.

It's a hard job to be a parent!

On the subject of the Child Genius programme...I didn't watch it, but I hate the whole concept of it and it sounds like it was exactly what I expected it to be! I think the whole culture around being intelligent, coupled with programmes like this, create a self-fulfilling prophecy:

- Some gifted children do have social problems, so programmes portray all gifted children as having social problems.
- People in turn treat gifted children like they have social problems because that's what the programmes have portrayed them as.
- This gets to the point where A lot more of them WILL have social problems because people aren't receptive to being friends with them.
- Then in turn TV makers see that more and more gifted children have social problems and the cycle continues!

However, I can see that to be able to make the programme, they probably had to take the children of pushy parents - I can't imagine too many non-pushy parents would've agreed to their children being portrayed that way. So the view shown on the programme, while skewed of the whole population, is probably true of some of those children. And I think that's sad, for all the reasons other people have mentioned

I also watched the 'Child Genius' programme, and I felt so sad for them, particularly the girl who went to the Royal College of Music. Yes she was incredibly intelligent for her age, and yes she had an unbelieveable talent for music, but her only free time was when she slept. She quite clearly told the cameras this, and she seemed indifferent to it; as if this is what all 10 year olds do.
I agree entirely that to be a teenager there is pressure to fit in, but to me, my school work comes first, then I'll make time for my friends later. Possom is right, everyone is special in their own way, and with some it just takes time to realise it.

Lucky you! I'd love a good G&T right now!

I have to admit, I wasn't sure if she was fantastically talented at all - I was expecting grade 6 at age 7 or something.........

Possum, thanks so much for telling your story in your previous post - I found it very moving. I totally agree with what you say about every child being special and that what each and every child needs above all is to believe in themselves and to try to the best of their ability. You sound like you've been through a lot and it's so good that you've come through and are now happy doing something you love.

Violinia

Thank-you That was quite a lot to get off my chest but after watching the programme it brought back a lot of memories for me, I can appreciate now that i'm one of the lucky ones.

*applause*


True.


No kidding - even apparent from "outside".


That seems very sad to me

I am the mum of an extremely able six year old. However I also know what neuroses can develop as the result of hot housing. I'm sure my son will maximise his potential. However for now I'm more concerned that he learns to be a six year old and interact like a six year old rather than stand out like a sore thumb.

He has plenty of time on his side after all.

Possum - Just came on line. Mega thanks for sharing that very personal experience with all of us on the Forum. Glad to hear your life is a happy one now, may it continue to be so.

I wouldn't worry too much if your pupil is not on the Talented and Gifted list at school. We have the same system at my school, and although the purpose is to push those who are more talented, it doesn't always reflect people's true abilities. The pupils are chosen by reccomendation to the head of department, and then the final lst is decided, but this system means that often the better pupils are overlooked (if they are quieter etc.). Similarly, i know some people at school who have been added to the list for a particular subject, when they are nowhere near as good as others.

If your pupil is talented, just encourage them and tell them that they have ability. Schools often dont recognise the talents of the students there, and people chosen to be on the lists are not always the most "talented or gifted".

I know that having the lists can cause a lot of upset and sometimes animosity between students at school..those who aren't on the lists feel that they should be, and hold it against the ones who are. It's good to help the more able, but for the people who aren't on the lists, they can feel completely useless and unappreciated.

Thank-you

That seems a dense way of doing it - sometimes the bright children are also those who end up in personality clashes with teachers, so if the HOD chooses the candidates some of the bright ones could get ignored (I can think of at least one teacher at my school who would not have hesitated to ignore those she didn't like even if they were good).

About the piano student!!!

Discussed this with son Viohazard (not becaused G&T just because he was L&L - Learning & Loving - music at that age).

Extras that he liked or would have liked

*recommended listening (this was a BIG point, according to him)
*attention to details of posture, hand-holds etc, but not excessive please (he says) - some things take time
* extemporising e.g. play a little theme and then work around it (easy), look at a picture and play what you think (harder if you are old enough to worry about what the teacher thinks)
* harmonizing - cunning teacher frequently told Viohazard that she'd "lost the 2nd violin part" (harmony) and got him to improvise an accompaniment as she played. Took him years to twig...

Yes, I would agree with this - the little we heard of her performance of the Mozart D minor Fantasia sounded quite wooden. Leaving aside the question of what, as a 6 year old, she could have gained from the JD programme rather than from private teachers, her motivation seemd to be a list of competitions that she wanted to enter. Then, almost as a casual aside, we learnt that she wasn't playing much at the moment , as she had tendonitis - aged 10! Now, what could possibly have caused that?

Excellent, what a great idea!


That's terrible

OK, maybe she wasn't so talented after all... What grade was she? (I can't remember so shows how much I know really!) Ouch, tendonitis. No wonder if she was playing in so many competitions

FAO ALL EARS

- love the ideas, especially the one about losing the violin 2 part........ i use alot of duets in my teaching as i feel this develops the "keeping in time" issue. I would say that i had mislaid the secondo part......

My no2 quite enjoys transposing his piano pieces into different key. To him it's a game and will transpose from major to minor keys as well. She might find it fun too.