Should gifted kids learn to do work that is "regular"? - Page 6

[tarasam]

I agree with you about number theory. It's much more interesting, challenging and real.

Probably the best math courses out there in those terms are the ones offer by AoPS.

Tara

[moominmamma]

Originally Posted by JollyGG

See I still don't get why you couldn't do multi-digit arithmetic without understanding place value. But I'm a verbal languages and science person. ... I either grab a calculator. Or more often figure it out.

But the technique you described for "figuring it out," where you round up to the nearest dollar, multiply that, then subtract of the correction for cents (eg. 198 x 3 = 600 - 6), that belies as clear understanding of place value. You may not be comfortable using the same terminology as was described above, but you're using the fact that hundreds are constructed from ones in your mental math.

Miranda

[A&A]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

With regards to skipping ahead......

I think it can and often should be done - but there are some foundational skills that really should be learned or ones understanding is superficial.

I have met children, for example, that do not understand that 43 means 4 goup of 10's and 3 groups of 1's. I have met children who have memorised the answer to 3x4, but do not understand that "X" means "groups of". Seriously.

With regards to math, I do think there is a foundation that one should have before one can goes off on the tangent of choice.

My dd skipped and easily understands these math concepts, even though math isn't even her best subject. It's not that hard for a gifted child to intuitively understand something she/he hasn't specifically been taught. You're underestimating some of our children.

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by A&A

My dd skipped and easily understands these math concepts, even though math isn't even her best subject. It's not that hard for a gifted child to intuitively understand something she/he hasn't specifically been taught. You're underestimating some of our children.

And perhaps you are overestimating them.

There are many levels of giftedness, moreover "math" is not everyone's thing. Some people do have a strong intuitive understanding of numbers, but some don't. I am not so keen on making assumptions.

Even among those who do have a strong feel for numbers, I see nothing wrong with gently pointing out that 4+3=3+4. Maybe they do not need it pointed out - which is fine, you would quickly move on, but maybe they do.

I will share a little true story.

I am gifted (just). I like math - and I like it more every day. I was in advanced math in school, and even took a few classes at University in math.

Anyhow, up until a few years ago I did not know that you could find the decmial/percentage of a fraction by dividing. I literally did not know that 3/4 meant 3 divided by 4- and that you could use that to get percentage. I would covert 3/4 to 75/100 to create percentages.

So even though I was able to convert fractions to percentages - the process was longer than it need be. I would have liked to have known that you can simply do 3 divided by 4 - but no one told me. I did eventually figure it out - but I was well into my 30's by then, lol.

Sometimes when people are gifted they use other skills to compensate for their defecits. It can be hard (for someone helping them - or even for the person themselves) to figure out what the defecit is exactly, as the compensatory skills are so strong. Sometimes it doesn't matter that they lack the skill, but sometimes it does.

peace,

Kathy

[eepster]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

Anyhow, up until a few years ago I did not know that you could find the decmial/percentage of a fraction by dividing. I literally did not know that 3/4 meant 3 divided by 4- and that you could use that to get decimal/percentage. I would covert 3/4 to 75/100 to create decimals/percentages.

So even though I was able to convert fractions to decimals/percentages - the process was longer than it need be. I would have liked to have known that you can simply do 3 divided by 4 - but no one told me. I did eventually figure it out - but I was well into my 30's by then, lol.

How did you get through algebra without it becoming obvious?

[purslaine]

No idea. It seems clear now, but truly, I did not get this fact till recently.

The human mind is a weird thing

[A&A]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

And perhaps you are overestimating them.

I know my own child better than you do.

[purslaine]

I have something to say and then I am going to bow out of this conversation......

I openned my mouth (or hit the keys) sometime on the fifth page with an unpopular opinion.

Since then there have been 3 incidences where people have questionned my examples - and while some of it is definatley due to my own lack of clear writing (perhaps I missed a foundational idea in writing), some of it seems quite nitpicky.

I think I know where the nitpickyness is coming from (I have seen it before on MDC). You do not like the idea, but rather than refute the idea you discredit the writer by picking on the example.

I really do not mind if people disagree with the idea - but that isn't only what has been happenning.


Ciao,

Kathy

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by A&A

I know my own child better than you do.

Reread your post. You said:

"you are underestimating some of our children"

which is a general , collective type statement - not specific to your child.

Ergo, I did not say you were overestimating your child.

Kathy

[JollyGG]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

I have something to say and then I am going to bow out of this conversation......

I openned my mouth (or hit the keys) sometime on the fifth page with an unpopular opinion.

Since then there have been 3 incidences where people have questionned my examples - and while some of it is definatley due to my own lack of clear writing (perhaps I missed a foundational idea in writing), some of it seems quite nitpicky.

I think I know where the nitpickyness is coming from (I have seen it before on MDC). You do not like the idea, but rather than refute the idea you discredit the writer by picking on the example.

I really do not mind if people disagree with the idea - but that isn't only what has been happenning.

I am a little concerned that this has been happenning on the gifted forum - it actually seems a little elitist. It is using intellect to "one up" someone (me) and it's not nice nor does it make it feel like a safe place to post.

Ciao,

Kathy

I don't feel people are discrediting the author by picking on the example. I think that others are trying to use the same examples you gave to show a different point of view. So while you gave your examples to support the idea that we need to cover all the fundamentals before we can move on with a subject. Others have taken the same examples that you gave and show different ways that you could progress without that information. Or where a student may figure out the fundamental on their own and therefore do fine in subsequent learning. I really do see where learning things in a certain order or way would make learning later steps easier. I don't see it as absolutely necessity. I think people are picking on your examples not to be elitist, or to discredit you but to put those some examples into a different framework and thereby articulate their thoughts.
I also think that some people are questioning your example just to get you to explain it so they can understand your perspective better.
I guess I rarely see posters on this forum being elitist. While many parents of gifted children are gifted themselves I don't think any of us always know the right way to proceed. For a matter of fact some of us who have dealt with giftedness growing up (I was raised with a profoundly gifted brother) question ourselves even more because we wonder how much our own upbringing colors our parenting and perception of our children. I don't think any of us would be reading this board if we weren't looking for support, answers, and help.

[Tigerchild]

Yes and no.

I would say no, until they're at the developmental stage where they are starting to learn and understand personal responsibility. If they don't understand the concept of "Sometimes everyone must do things that aren't particularly valueable to them," then I think it does more harm than good.

Once the kid reaches that stage, which is different for everyone, I think it's *essential* to teach that sometimes yeah, you do actually have to do the paperwork even though it's tedious.

I know so many gifted young people who have bombed out of college and good jobs because they never got it. And granted, there are some folks that it's going to be particularly difficult to get because of their neurological/developmental makeup. I'm very grateful for a teacher-mentor who sat me down and explained the whys, when I was ready. I believe that was essential to my later success even when people with higher levels of giftedness than I were having great difficulty.

Some gifted folks don't learn that and act as if they're entitled to always do what moves them and slub the small stuff. Some it just never occurs to them. Some are a mix of that (I was one of those). Others it comes naturally to (if they're born organized, for example).

But I do think it does kids a disservice if people assume that they know that it's part of life, instead of making sure that they understand that. How to teach it is going to be different for each child, but I think most would benefit more from explanation and actual need vs. busywork for busywork's sake.

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by JollyGG

I don't feel people are discrediting the author by picking on the example. I think that others are trying to use the same examples you gave to show a different point of view. So while you gave your examples to support the idea that we need to cover all the fundamentals before we can move on with a subject. Others have taken the same examples that you gave and show different ways that you could progress without that information. Or where a student may figure out the fundamental on their own and therefore do fine in subsequent learning. I really do see where learning things in a certain order or way would make learning later steps easier. I don't see it as absolutely necessity. I think people are picking on your examples not to be elitist, or to discredit you but to put those some examples into a different framework and thereby articulate their thoughts.
I also think that some people are questioning your example just to get you to explain it so they can understand your perspective better.
I guess I rarely see posters on this forum being elitist. While many parents of gifted children are gifted themselves I don't think any of us always know the right way to proceed. For a matter of fact some of us who have dealt with giftedness growing up (raised with a profoundly gifted brother) question ourselves even more because we wonder how much our own upbringing colors our parenting and perception of our children. I don't think any of us would be reading this board if we weren't looking for support, answers, and help.

Thanks.

I am going to pm you - I think I have hijacked enough.

Kathy

[PreggieUBA2C]

Kathymuggle, I've been reading through this thread. You seem to be feeling 'put on the spot,' but it really isn't you personally being questioned, nor is it likely that anyone here could care any less about what is popular. Most gifties have a high need for precision. This means that especially in this forum, whatever you post is going to be nit-picked until you are expressing/others are understanding precisely the principles and ideas you intend. It may take a while, and some argumentation before everyone is clear on what the idea/principle is that we're discussing, but you can be reasonably assured that unclear or ambiguous ideas will be fleshed out to their core here. This is why the posts here tend to be long, as do the threads.

There is also the reality that even though we may express ourselves as concisely as possible, because of the variety of experience represented here, there may still be much discussion for clarification. I don't doubt the same might happen with this post. It's not comprehensive, so there's lots of room to clarify. I won't take that personally, but I will enjoy the opportunity to learn what others think and how we can share our experiences; we all benefit from this process.

For example: If you said that you think that the circle is the best shape in a room with 50 people listening, there would be a barrage of questions and comments requesting clarification of more sorts than each individual's experiences may be able to consider initially. That is what happens here. Unlike some other forums on MDC, though, there is very, very little personal evaluation or elitism here.

I hope you'll have a re-read of the responses you received and realise that (before the under/overestimation comments, possibly emotionally triggered) there was a real discussion happening, requests for clarification, experiences shared (vulnerability to you by the posters, showing willingness to engage you and your ideas, even if there is disagreement), requests for you to evaluate your ideas and conclusions while considering what might be new information to you (we're all learning all the time), and what seems to me to be genuine desire for mutual understanding. I think that the direction of the discussion with your participation remains potentially fruitful and certainly worthwhile pursuing.

I think most if not all of the mums who post here do so for many reasons, one of which being a desire to work out what we're dealing with in our own lives, the definition of education, learning, philosophical and practical conclusions or options for what we're trying or have decided for our own families, etc... I think the only thing we all usually agree upon is that there simply isn't one way to do anything that suits every child, and with gifties and their typical intensities in the mix, this becomes an even more pressing issue with faster and sometimes further-reaching results than most families experience with neuro-typical children. That's why we have a forum.

Nobody here nit-picks to show off. We've all been accused of that our whole lives, and for some (certainly me), this is the only place where I am reasonably safe from that accusation. I hope it can stay that way and that at the same time, you can feel safe to work through/express whatever interests you here too.

[OTMomma]

Thank you to everyone who has responded on this thread- it has given me personally a lot to think about. It took me a while to get back here and read everything and respond.

I do want to say that I intentionally made the OP very vague about the positions of freewind and myself- because I wanted to hear what others had to say on the topic. I didn't want to rehash our disagreement, I wanted to gain some insight into the different ways to educate a gifted child, and why some choose one path and others another. I don't expect everyone to do the same thing I do- but that doesn't mean I understand why others choose what they choose- and I wanted to understand that more.


Freewind- I appolgize about how you found this thread and that it was hurtful to you. It wasn't meant to be. I gave almost no information about you and your child and how you homeschool- because I didn't want to make the thread about you - but about the ideas of different ways to go about educating a gifted child. I came here to look for more understanding where I lacked it in our conversation. I did not come here to create a thread to say I'm doing things right and you are doing them wrong or to bash you in any way. I wouldn't do that. I find that when I come here, I can often gain a lot of insight from the women here, that's all I was trying to do.

I appologize to everyone who feels hurt by this thread- I thought I might be starting a debate, but I had no clue how strongly people felt about this topic and that it could become ugly in any way. I believe most people here at MDC offer their opinions from their lives and experiences so that we can all grow in understanding of each other- though some feel so strongly about an issue they want to convert everyone else to the way they see things.

Peace,

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C

Kathymuggle, I've been reading through this thread. You seem to be feeling 'put on the spot,' but it really isn't you personally being questioned, nor is it likely that anyone here could care any less about what is popular. Most gifties have a high need for precision. This means that especially in this forum, whatever you post is going to be nit-picked until you are expressing/others are understanding precisely the principles and ideas you intend. It may take a while, and some argumentation before everyone is clear on what the idea/principle is that we're discussing, but you can be reasonably assured that unclear or ambiguous ideas will be fleshed out to their core here. This is why the posts here tend to be long, as do the threads.

This is undoubtably true.

None-the -less, I still felt nitpicked even if the intent was clarification.

ex: (and please forgive the paraphrasing - it is a long thread to look back through!)

me: 3X4= 3 groups of 4
poster: why is it important to know x means groups of?

me: we skipped division and headed straight towards fraction
poster: but isn't fraction division?

me: I did not grasp the relationship between fraction/decimals/ until adulthood
poster: then how did you do algebra?

I started out answerring the questions to clarify - but by the end of this thread, I was like "enough already!"

I felt like anything I was saying was being lost by dissection.

I think we have to look at the whole of what people are saying - and not hyper-focus on brief little parts (i.e. be more wholistic). I get that asking for clarification is a gifted trait - but I for one learned that I need to make sure my need for clarification does not get in the way of the big picture.




There is also the reality that even though we may express ourselves as concisely as possible, because of the variety of experience represented here, there may still be much discussion for clarification. I don't doubt the same might happen with this post. It's not comprehensive, so there's lots of room to clarify. I won't take that personally, but I will enjoy the opportunity to learn what others think and how we can share our experiences; we all benefit from this process.

For example: If you said that you think that the circle is the best shape in a room with 50 people listening, there would be a barrage of questions and comments requesting clarification of more sorts than each individual's experiences may be able to consider initially. That is what happens here. Unlike some other forums on MDC, though, there is very, very little personal evaluation or elitism here.

I hope you'll have a re-read of the responses you received and realise that (before the under/overestimation comments, possibly emotionally triggered) there was a real discussion happening, requests for clarification, experiences shared (vulnerability to you by the posters, showing willingness to engage you and your ideas, even if there is disagreement), requests for you to evaluate your ideas and conclusions while considering what might be new information to you (we're all learning all the time), and what seems to me to be genuine desire for mutual understanding. I think that the direction of the discussion with your participation remains potentially fruitful and certainly worthwhile pursuing.

I will re-read.

I think most if not all of the mums who post here do so for many reasons, one of which being a desire to work out what we're dealing with in our own lives, the definition of education, learning, philosophical and practical conclusions or options for what we're trying or have decided for our own families, etc... I think the only thing we all usually agree upon is that there simply isn't one way to do anything that suits every child, and with gifties and their typical intensities in the mix, this becomes an even more pressing issue with faster and sometimes further-reaching results than most families experience with neuro-typical children. That's why we have a forum.

Nobody here nit-picks to show off. We've all been accused of that our whole lives, and for some (certainly me), this is the only place where I am reasonably safe from that accusation. I hope it can stay that way and that at the same time, you can feel safe to work through/express whatever interests you here too.

I don't think you (or anyone here, really) is nit-picking to show off. My earlier post mentionned elitism - but I removed it as I think I was wrong.

Nice post!

My comments are in blue - however if the OP or a mod think I should start a new post - let me know and I will.

[eepster]

Kathymuggle: I think the we have been pulling apart and exploring your example quite so throughly, is b/c we've been having so many discussions abou the value or lack of value in memorizing multiplication tables. Also there was the thread where eliowy was panicking b/c bean wanted to learn algebra and she had no algebra texts or materials. So you happened to stumble into something that's been on our minds and a point of contention already.

[purslaine]

TBH - I just reread the thread - and taken as a whole it does not seem like I was being flamed and I may have over-reacted.

Non-the-less I think my concern over people picking apart details and missing the whole stands.

I was thinking yesterday that we almost need a forum for math - we discuss it here so often!

I was also thinking that the whole debate has over-tones of Unschooling versus not unschooling. The whole "let them move ahead and they will figure out any gaps as they go along/need it is" definitely an Unschooly thought.

Kathy

[eilonwy]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

I was also thinking that the whole debate has over-tones of Unschooling versus not unschooling. The whole "let them move ahead and they will figure out any gaps as they go along/need it is" definitely an Unschooly thought.

In a way, I agree with this. I'm definately not an unschooler (about as far as that as you can get, really), so my initial thought is often, "Is this just a matter of a different homeschooling style?" I think that it's probably easier for parents of gifted kids, particularly older kids, to espouse a more unschoolish outlook. They've already seen that their kids have filled in holes, or that gaps in knowledge were less noticeable/important than they realized initially.

That said, saying that a child can follow an atypical path to complete understanding is somewhat different, in my opinion. I don't believe that it's necessary for a child to fully understand parts of speech and syntax in order to write a story-- for some children that path (letters --> words --> parts of speech --> syntax --> stories) is valid, even necessary, but for others it won't make sense. Relegating any child to the path that makes the parent most comfortable can fail, but doing it to a gifted child can do so on a much grander scale. I don't think there's anything less valid about a whole-to-parts learning style just because it's outside of my personal comfort zone. It makes no sense to me, but that certainly doesn't invalidate it.

And of course, there's the "Let's suddenly and rapidly absorb this information to which I've been exposed and demand to move on" thing that so many gifted children do. I'm not entirely convinced that steps are always skipped-- particularly in my own kiddo's case. He has these huge leaps in understanding, but when I sit down and ask him how/when/where he learned something, he always has an answer for me. It's not like he has been doing step six and never learned step three... it's more like he learned step one, saw steps two through six, went to sleep and woke up understanding all of them and bits of step seven. I can ask him about step three and even though I never had before, he'll explain it perfectly well, as well as 'when' he learned it (usually when he was first exposed to the idea). I don't know hot to explain it, it's like some kind of percolation process... and now that I"m moving into coffee analogies, I know it's time for bed.

I'm not sure if I've articulated this well... I'll try again when I'm actually awake.

[A&A]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

Reread your post. You said:

"you are underestimating some of our children"

which is a general , collective type statement - not specific to your child.

Ergo, I did not say you were overestimating your child.

Kathy

I meant both. You are underestimating my child, who skipped, by your comment that skipped children often have incomplete understanding of fundamentals. You also may be underestimating other children of MDC mamas who have skipped, as well. It's a subject that's near and dear to my heart because I see SO MANY misconceptions about grade skipping, and yet it was the best thing that happened to my daughter, in terms of her schooling.

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by A&A

I meant both. You are underestimating my child, who skipped, by your comment that skipped children often have incomplete understanding of fundamentals. You also may be underestimating other children of MDC mamas who have skipped, as well. It's a subject that's near and dear to my heart because I see SO MANY misconceptions about grade skipping, and yet it was the best thing that happened to my daughter, in terms of her schooling.

Ah, don't you love the internet and the potential for miscommunication?

I did use the word "skip" (checked the post that was a bone of contention) but I meant it within the context of a subject, and more generally, within Homeschooling.

I was not making a comment about grade skipping.

I have nothing against grade skipping - I do think there are potential pitfalls - but the pros probably outweigh the cons in many cases.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on whether I am underestimating gifted children While I agree that many gifted kids a) often know fundamentals on an intuitive level and often figure things out on their own and b) often make up any gaps later on when it becomes necessary, I also know some gifted children may appreciate hearing a fundamental and getting it "now".

I really do not see anything wrong with pointing out fundamentals (what addition, subtraction, etc - actually mean) in a gentle way - if the kid knows it - we move on quickly.

Kathy