The average child - Page 11

[Roar]

Originally Posted by Lillian J

I'm not going to participate in a debate here, but I want to state that I heartily agree with what FourLittleBirds said. I've been around a lot of unschoolers for a lot of years, and I know for a fact that it's generally a strong philosophical decision more than anything else. .

It strikes me as really odd to suggest that as a group unschoolers would not be learning from their own personal experience as students. It seems so contrary to the philosophy itself that learning would be coming primarily from philosophical writings rather than lived experience. Silly me I thought unschoolers were learning all the time and that would include learning from their own life experiences as students.

[NoHiddenFees]

Originally Posted by Dar

Really? What isues would those be, that don't come up for "average" (whatever that is) children? Are you saying that average children are never intense, or perfectionistic, or quirky? They're never obsessed with topics that are generally only of interest to people far older? They never learn things more rapidly than most? They're never called "weird" by their age-mates? If that's your definition of "average", then apparently every child I know is "gifted"....

Oh please. It's sooooo nice to be able to participate in a forum in which I can ask for reading recs for my 4.5 yo (that are appropriate in content for a 4.5yo) without having someone chime in disbelievingly, "she's reading what? You mean you're reading it aloud, right?" Or accuse me of being pushy because we happen to be homeschooling her at HER request. I'm not saying that participation in other forums is not valuable -- of course it is. I read and participate in general forums -- heck, I post here. However, I frequent specific ones as well: TWTM boards, a secular classical list , a gifted classical list (slow) and a gifted homeschooling list (TAGMAX). I don't see that as elitist or exclusionary, I see it as utilitarian. I occasionally get good info from each and hope I can make at least a small contribution as well.

As for the characteristics you mention, saying gifted children are more likely to exhibit characteristic X than does the general population is not the same as saying only gifted children exhibit X. It's disingenuous to suggest anyone thinks that way. Is it not OK to share experiences in a forum of parents with children more likely to display these traits? Or should we stick to more general boards only? [Disclosure: I don't actually participate in the gifted support thread on MDC anymore -- I don't have time to keep up with it.]

[mijumom]

I want to remind everyone od the original post-

"Ok, maybe I'm just PMSing, and feeling rather cranky.
But, please someone tell me that I am not the only person with run of the mill, average intelligence children! They didn't learn too read until I taught them. They don't always jump for joy whenever I show up with an educational DVD. Math problems will send them diving for cover! But they are bright, friendly, fun loving kids. Which is what I want for them to be at this point.
Please,no offense too those who have gifted, highly intelligent children. That is wonderful! But, lately it seems that is what most of the posts are for.
Tell me there are some other children out there that if given the choice would rather watch Sponge Bob all day than do something "educational"!

P.S.-No, they don't get too watch Sponge Bob all day!"



It seems to me that she was looking for support, not a defensive reponse from the "gifted" crowd.

It is so disingenuous for anyone to suggest that we don't live in a society where labels like "gifted" are used to differentiate children via very narrow criteria. I think that overall there is an obsession with academic superiority, or just for superiority in general. If you don't think these labels contribute negatively to many children's educational experience and self-esteem on both ends of the spectrum, then we can just agree to disagree.

If I spend 5 minutes explaining just about anything to my 6 year old, he gets it (almost always has) whether it is math concepts or language etc. When left to his own devices he only dabbles and challenges himself a little. Could he be gifted? Could he learn at an accelerated pace? Maybe. I just don't know yet and I prefer he get there later than sooner. I have no idea if MDC happens to have the few parents that don't have a personal stake in having the smartest kid on the block. You all seem very thoughtful and articulate. My interpretation was that the OP was feeling hormonal and insecure about her own kid and was looking for reassurance from other parents of supposedly "average" kids.

The only appropriate response to this mom IMO is to say yes your child is normal and special and is still "gifted" in the broader sense and potentially "gifted" in the narrow academic sense (sometimes you don't know until they're older).

So, while I really do think all of these posts have been valid, I think that much of the "gifted" group has generally missed the whole point of the OP. Some of us aren't interested in the labels. Some of us just want to feel secure raising our kids in a different mode and seeing as that is contrary to the mainstream emphasis, it can breed insecurity and sometimes even a little hostility. So a mom comes to MDC to get ressurance from alternative, consciencious moms and she ends up with this. I'm not invalidating the conversation (I've been a part of it too) but in retrospect, it seems to have missed the point.
__________________________

[LeftField]

Originally Posted by mijumom

I want to remind everyone od the original post-

"Ok, maybe I'm just PMSing, and feeling rather cranky.
But, please someone tell me that I am not the only person with run of the mill, average intelligence children! They didn't learn too read until I taught them. They don't always jump for joy whenever I show up with an educational DVD. Math problems will send them diving for cover! But they are bright, friendly, fun loving kids. Which is what I want for them to be at this point.
Please,no offense too those who have gifted, highly intelligent children. That is wonderful! But, lately it seems that is what most of the posts are for.
Tell me there are some other children out there that if given the choice would rather watch Sponge Bob all day than do something "educational"!

So, while I really do think all of these posts have been valid, I think that much of the "gifted" group has generally missed the whole point of the OP. Some of us aren't interested in the labels. Some of us just want to feel secure raising our kids in a different mode and seeing as that is contrary to the mainstream emphasis, it can breed insecurity and sometimes even a little hostility. So a mom comes to MDC to get ressurance from alternative, consciencious moms and she ends up with this. I'm not invalidating the conversation (I've been a part of it too) but in retrospect, it seems to have missed the point.
__________________________

Ok, I honestly stepped away from the thread at some point, so please forgive me if I'm missing something. I'm simply responding to the OP and this last post. I can respect someone not being interested in labels. I can respect someone who is. I can respect people who formally teach their own (OP reference) and those who do not (this last post). I see the OP and the last as referring to two different types and often conflicting types of homeschooling: 1. I teach my kids and 2. I do child-led learning. At any rate, I can respect all this. But please do not assume that all academically focused children are coming from a home where labels are used and where the parent is invested in academic achievement. There are, obviously, all kinds of homeschoolers, all kinds of people and all kinds of related opinions. Some people do school-at-home from toddler or preschool age and have kids who are not really interested in academics (and vice-versa). Some of the most mellow unschoolers have kids who are driven to do academic pursuits (and vice-versa). Personally, I perceive that a LOT of people formally educate toddlers on this forum and a LOT unschool. The diversity in this forum is wonderful. I think people should just talk about their kids and their interests and we should celebrate that. I don't think anyone should be afraid to talk about their kids, I don't think anyone should take someone else's situation as a judgement on their own, and I think we should all be open-minded and happy homeschoolers. So many kids, so many types of learning, so many types of homeschooling, so many personal interests, etc....all good.

Signed,

an alternative unschooling mother of one very academically driven child and one who would rather play, both of whom are very happy and fun-loving kids having a real childhood

[mijumom]

"academically driven"- I really like the sound of that...much better than "gifted" and much more informative to me.

[oceanbaby]

The special need many feel for any child to be able to function without artificially imposed structure and expectations is the one that draws so many to unschooling. They largely consider it a matter of trust and respect for their children's uniqueness and abilities. To assume that they've been movitivated by trying to work around variations of learning difficulties or memories of their own difficulties is to project that they would have had vastly different philosophical opinions otherwise. That's simply not the case, and they would be insulted, or more likely amused, to see their philosophy minimized in that way. Not that there would be anything wrong with someone picking a particular path to provide for special needs, but that this happens to be a lifestyle that goes way beyond that and is generally chosen for much broader reasons.

Thank you for saying this Lillian. I really cringed when I read the comment that demographics for unschoolers would be skewed because most of them were probably unschooling because their children wouldn't do well in a traditional school environment (or something like that). That misperception is one of the biggest fears I have about homeschooling at all, let alone unschooling. Ds1 would do very well in a traditional school environment. He has no problems with structure, he follows directions, he is generally on the same page as most kids his age (advanced in some areas, slower in others, but generally "on par"), etc. We are choosing to homeschool, and probably unschool, because I think it is a superior way to not only learn but also live.

[Lillian J]

Originally Posted by oceanbaby

We are choosing to homeschool, and probably unschool, because I think it is a superior way to not only learn but also live. It literally makes me sick to my stomach (and yes, I mean literally in the correct sense) when I think that there are going to be people that will assume he is "weird" or "unable to deal with school" when they hear that we homeschool/unschool.

Well, for whatever it's worth, I don't think anyone ever had that perception about us in all the years we homeschooled. I haven't heard of it happening to any of my friends either. To the contrary, there was the more common misperception that we were homeschooling in order to do a more thorough job of methodically pounding in academics than the schools do. Fortunately, people didn't tend to go on too much about that, but there were plenty of pats on the back, so to speak, and often rolling eyes and shaking of the heads about the sad state of education in the schools. It got uncomfortable and downright awkward in the later years especially, when I'd be standing there next to this big ol' young man, a mature and self-motivated learner of things I had no part in, and people would look at me admiringly and say, "And you teach him yourself? Gee, that's great." I'd say "No, actually he teaches himself," but I don't think many people got that.

And when he was applying for colleges, it was also also very validating, because, instead of fussing over whether he had jumped through all the right hoops, admissions directors were impressed with the way he spoke of the educational freedom he'd had and the positive effect it had on him.

So don't worry about that one. Anyone who thinks you're homeschooling because of deficits has been living on another planet somewhere - the benefits of homeschooling are being extolled everywhere these days. Lillian

[Britishmum]

Originally Posted by Dar

Really? What isues would those be, that don't come up for "average" (whatever that is) children? Are you saying that average children are never intense, or perfectionistic, or quirky? They're never obsessed with topics that are generally only of interest to people far older? They never learn things more rapidly than most? They're never called "weird" by their age-mates? If that's your definition of "average", then apparently every child I know is "gifted".... dar

It's not a question of issues that pertain to only gifted children! Of course every child at some time may be perfectionist about something, or obsessed with a topic, or intense.

The difference is the frequency and intensity of these issues.

I do not believe that every child you know has 'quirks' such as refusing to recognise any birthday of anyone that they know, including themselves, because at the age of two they have worked out that one year older = one year closer to death.

Or that every child you know can manage to confine his/her family to the house for weeks on end because of their intensity of emotions that make outings impossible.

Or that every child you have ever known cannot attend any organised activity with their own age group because they cannot act in an 'age appropriate manner'. If they ever do reach 'age appropriate', it's two years too late for them to attend that class.

Or that every child you have ever known would remember the exact order that the magic markers were in their packet when they were purchase, and have a total meltdown if another child inadvertently put them back in the wrong order.

Or that every child you have ever known would have to be protected by his/her mother at the pool on Saturday from the ten year old who, very understandably, asked her why her kid wasnt talking to her, and what was wrong with her.

I could go on. But this sort of comment makes it clear to me that you have not experienced life with a challenging or twice-exceptional gifted child. Believe me, as much as I would not want to change one hair on any of my kids' heads, there are times that I would give my eye-teeth for just one waking hour of 'average' experience.

[mijumom]

Britishmum- I was trying to stay out of this but how in the world does "gifted" even come close to comprehensively describing your child?

I have a friend who's child is developmentally delayed that exhibits almost identical behavior to what you've described.

I think you have stunningly and surprisingly illustrated how completely insufficient any one label would be in relaying your child's particular quirks and attributes.

Do you really think that other parents of "gifted" children would typically describe their children in this fashion? I highly doubt it. I certainly would never have made those assumptions based solely on someone telling me their child had been formally determined to be gifted.

I really thought that "academically driven" was a wonderful phrase for describing some children in contrast to those that would rather hang out or play. Again, this better captures the spirit of the OP IMO.

BTW- There is no average. Challenging can be applicable to a whole variety of children from autistic to gifted. I honestly don't think I've ever actually met an average child...really. "Average" is just another label we have been using in contrast to "gifted", neither of which apparently tells us much about the child on the whole.

I just googled "twice-exceptional gifted" and I do recognize as I hope you will that yours is a special situation. I still think that label alone would be woefully inadequate in expressing to any other person what your child's needs are and in which ways he/she is gifted or challenged or challenging.

As an aside, I hope you are finding the resources and support you need.

[Britishmum]

Originally Posted by mijumom

Britishmum- I was trying to stay out of this but how in the world does "gifted" even come close to comprehensively describing your child?

I have a friend who's child is developmentally delayed that exhibits almost identical behavior to what you've described.

I think you have stunningly and surprisingly illustrated how completely insufficient any one label would be in relaying your child's particular quirks and attributes.

Do you really think that other parents of "gifted" children would typically describe their children in this fashion? I highly doubt it. I certainly would never have made those assumptions based solely on someone telling me their child had been formally determined to be gifted.

I really thought that "academically driven" was a wonderful phrase for describing some children in contrast to those that would rather hang out or play. Again, this better captures the spirit of the OP IMO.

BTW- There is no average. Challenging can be applicable to a whole variety of children from autistic to gifted. I honestly don't think I've ever actually met an average child...really. "Average" is just another label we have been using in contrast to "gifted", neither of which apparently tells us much about the child on the whole.

I just googled "twice-exceptional gifted" and I do recognize as I hope you will that yours is a special situation. I still think that label alone would be woefully inadequate in expressing to any other person what your child's needs are and in which ways he/she is gifted or challenged or challenging.

As an aside, I hope you are finding the resources and support you need.

Of course just the word 'gifted' does not give a whole picture of a gifted child like mine. But it comes closest to a one-word explanation of my child's needs out of all the 'labels' that I might need to use.

The truth is that many, many gifted children exhibit similar behaviours to mine. It took me a long time to realise that it was giftedness that was the root of most of my child's unusual development.

There are times when the label 'gifted' is extremely useful to me. If I am talking with someone who is familiar with the challenges of giftedness, often all I need to say is 'my child is gifted and comes with many of the quirks of giftedness.'

That's it. If you really have experience with gifted children, you will understand what those quirks might be. If I visit a gifted forum, I know that people there will have experience of similar challenges to mine.

So, my child is not that unusual, in the gifted world, anyway. Which was my point - it might sound extreme to you, but it would not sound extreme to many parents of gifted children.

The word 'gifted' does come close to describing my child - if I am talking with someone who really understands giftedness. It would not, however, come close if I were talking with someone who simply holds the stereotypical pushy-parent in mind when they hear the word 'gifted'.

As for 'academically driven', that doesnt really describe my children. They love to hang out and play, but their play is not often compatible with the play of average children. They learn simply by existing. I honestly don't know how they have a lot of the knowledge and understanding that they have. I have no idea how my dd knew at the age of two how her pack of magic markers was arranged, but she did. She wasn't driven in any way to learn the order of colours, she just knew them. Like my toddler doesnt seem driven to understand the twoness of two or the threeness of three. He just knows. (I only discovered that today when he gave me 'three fish mama'. )

I guess that for many parents of gifted kids, the label works. It gives us a common ground for understanding the issues that each of us face. For example, until the gifted forum started on mdc, I hadnt met another parent whose toddler had grasped the concept of death in the way that mine had. I hadnt realised that this was a fairly common issue for gifted children, who often grasp facts before having the emotional maturity to deal with them.

So actually, the label 'gifted' is very useful for me in describing my kids. It is useful when dealing with people who understand giftedness. It is also useful in some contexts with people who are clueless. For example, I far prefer to come out and explain to people that they are gifted than have strangers assume that they are developmentally delayed and treat them as such.

[quaz]

Originally Posted by mijumom

Britishmum- I was trying to stay out of this but how in the world does "gifted" even come close to comprehensively describing your child?

I have a friend who's child is developmentally delayed that exhibits almost identical behavior to what you've described.

I think you have stunningly and surprisingly illustrated how completely insufficient any one label would be in relaying your child's particular quirks and attributes.

Do you really think that other parents of "gifted" children would typically describe their children in this fashion? I highly doubt it. I certainly would never have made those assumptions based solely on someone telling me their child had been formally determined to be gifted.

Originally Posted by Britishmum

Of course just the word 'gifted' does not give a whole picture of a gifted child like mine. But it comes closest to a one-word explanation of my child's needs out of all the 'labels' that I might need to use.

The truth is that many, many gifted children exhibit similar behaviours to mine. It took me a long time to realise that it was giftedness that was the root of most of my child's unusual development.

There are times when the label 'gifted' is extremely useful to me. If I am talking with someone who is familiar with the challenges of giftedness, often all I need to say is 'my child is gifted and comes with many of the quirks of giftedness.'

That's it. If you really have experience with gifted children, you will understand what those quirks might be. If I visit a gifted forum, I know that people there will have experience of similar challenges to mine.

So, my child is not that unusual, in the gifted world, anyway. Which was my point - it might sound extreme to you, but it would not sound extreme to many parents of gifted children.

The word 'gifted' does come close to describing my child - if I am talking with someone who really understands giftedness. It would not, however, come close if I were talking with someone who simply holds the stereotypical pushy-parent in mind when they hear the word 'gifted'.

As for 'academically driven', that doesnt really describe my children. They love to hang out and play, but their play is not often compatible with the play of average children. They learn simply by existing. I honestly don't know how they have a lot of the knowledge and understanding that they have. I have no idea how my dd knew at the age of two how her pack of magic markers was arranged, but she did. She wasn't driven in any way to learn the order of colours, she just knew them. Like my toddler doesnt seem driven to understand the twoness of two or the threeness of three. He just knows. (I only discovered that today when he gave me 'three fish mama'. )

I guess that for many parents of gifted kids, the label works. It gives us a common ground for understanding the issues that each of us face. For example, until the gifted forum started on mdc, I hadnt met another parent whose toddler had grasped the concept of death in the way that mine had. I hadnt realised that this was a fairly common issue for gifted children, who often grasp facts before having the emotional maturity to deal with them.

Oooh, see this is exactly what I've been trying to get across. These exact two posts.

Mijumom, on the part in pink, yes, these characteristics that Britishmum describes, comes as absolultely NO surprise to me. These sort of characteristics do come up commonly with kids that have been identified as gifted. The description on death that Britishmum gave... I mean it's hard not to be in tears when your 3 year old is running around with her favorite puppies yelling, mommy when I die I want to be holding my favorite puppies, and HAS to have the acknowledgement several times that YES, when you die, I'll be sure that you are holding your favorite puppies. The marker thing... while dd doesn't exhibit that, I've heard about that many times with kids that are gifted.

So... would I make the 'exact' assumptions about Britishmum's dc that she described? No... BUT at the same time, these items are all quite familiar to me b/c of 'gifted' boards, and b/c some I have experienced.


Of course, there are plenty of other kids that exhibit some of the characteristics that Britishmum describes that aren't academically gifted, but I do know that when I find a group of people that are familiar with giftedness they also understand some of these quirks that are prevalent, and wouldn't bat an eye at what was described, b/c they have heard the similar stories numerous times.

Yes, the term is absolutely inadequete to describe what Britishmum did... but at the same time for me, it's the one reason I 'use' the label. I know if someone truly understand the term, I can find advice/support and answers on some of those common 'gifted' quirks that I've been encountering.... b/c many of the parents have already had to deal with it.

It's also why the term 'gifted' is annoying. B/c of the debates it causes like this thread... where there are those that think parents are implying that others that aren't 'gifted', aren't gifted/talented.... just call the term oogle-schmuggle or something.

The whole idea of pushy parent, my kid did x,y,z at age 1 and is better than everyone else.... and MY kid is oooooh 'gifted' and your child is oh, just average.... that to me is ludicrous, and is not why many used this label.... in fact, my most likely 'academically gifted' child has NO interest in academics. Her passions are completely pretend, stories, building complex structures.... learning via living. The idea of a parent simply using the label as a 'status' symbol, or as a one-upmanship thing, is annoying.


Goodness, my 'mom' is 'average', and I find that term ridiculous when describing her. She isn't average, she is my mom. She has an amazing gift of caring for others, which is far more important in life than who cares what IQ.

It's why in a way the whole idea of a thread on an 'average' child almost feels silly.... just as I'm sure that there are those that feel the whole concept of 'gifted' is silly b/c of the idea of 'setting apart a specific item'.... but when I go with what Britishmum expressed, and I've been trying to, it's why it isn't 'silly' for me.... I know there is a far, far higher chance I'll find the answer on how to deal with some of these 'quirks' than I would elsewhere.


And, yah I know there are those that disagree with the whole concept of any label, or even the belief that there are 'quirks', 'characterisitics' associated with kids that are academically gifted... but it's what I've experienced...

Each of us have our own experiences, and there is nothing wrong with that.

*shrug*

Tammy

[Roar]

Originally Posted by mijumom

"academically driven"- I really like the sound of that...much better than "gifted" and much more informative to me.

It describes something totally different. It is quite possible to have a child who learns at a very typical rate who is academically driven. And, quite possible to have a gifted child who is drawn to nothing academic at all.

[NoHiddenFees]

Originally Posted by Roar

It describes something totally different. It is quite possible to have a child who learns at a very typical rate who is academically driven. And, quite possible to have a gifted child who is drawn to nothing academic at all.

It also equates giftedness with academic success. This is not necessarily the case, especially for highly gifted children. Questions of motivation and interest aside, most gifted kids aren't globally gifted.

[cottonwood]

Originally Posted by Roar

I'd expect the unschooling community to be full of more kids at the extremes because many people choose to unschool precisely because school wasn't a good fit for them and many of those reasons are genetic (dyslexia, etc.)

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds

I don't know about that. That might be true for homeschooling in general, but the people I know who unschool (we have a fairly large group here in our community) do it not because their children were having trouble with a structured learning environment but because philosophically they believe it best. Most of the unschooling families I know have never used a structured learning environment.

Originally Posted by Roar

The majority of unschoolers you know are second generation and the parents didn't attend school either?

My suggestion was that we all develop theories and embrace philsophies in large measure based on our own personal experience. Many people find unschooling appealing because they themselves had the experience as kids of being one of the extremes who didn't fit neatly.

I'm sorry, I read you wrong the first time. Let me amend my reply:

That might be true for homeschooling in general (I can't really say) but the people I know who unschool (we have a fairly large group here in our community) do it not because their children or they themselves had trouble with a structured learning environment but because philosophically they believe it best.

For the most part the unschoolers I know are college-educated (as am I) and work in professional fields. We were able to handle school just fine, at least in the superficial sense of being able to sit still and pay attention and get good grades and test well. We don't have learning disabilities, we are not unusual in any discernible sense except perhaps in questioning the necessity of school, and we are not opposed to learning from others even in a structured setting. What we are opposed to is coercion in education, and the myriad aspects of a schooling approach that have nothing to do with education and so detract from learning. You don't have to be at the "extremes" (whatever that means) or have disabilities to perceive the problems with schooling.

Originally Posted by Roar

It strikes me as really odd to suggest that as a group unschoolers would not be learning from their own personal experience as students. It seems so contrary to the philosophy itself that learning would be coming primarily from philosophical writings rather than lived experience. Silly me I thought unschoolers were learning all the time and that would include learning from their own life experiences as students.

No one is suggesting that, and the sarcasm really isn't necessary.

Of course unschoolers learn from their own life experiences, and that is partly what informs the philosophy. Philosophy doesn't emerge out of a vacuum.

[LeftField]

Originally Posted by NoHiddenFees

It also equates giftedness with academic success. This is not necessarily the case, especially for highly gifted children. Questions of motivation and interest aside, most gifted kids aren't globally gifted.

You both beat me to it. I didn't get a chance to post a follow-up to my last post. I feel as though the spirit of the OP has to do with being academically driven, not gifted. People do assume that the academically driven child is intellectually gifted and the non-academic child is not. Clearly, this is not true. That's why, in an earlier post or two, I said that you can't compare toddlers easily because development is variable. Compliance and an interest in academics may lead to early milestones, but does not make one gifted. It may look gifted in the toddler years, depending on the level of advancement, but it excludes the non-academic toddler who is a "late bloomer" by societal standards.

My oldest is really academically driven and my youngest is not. My youngest is only 2, but my oldest was academically driven at this age. People seem to value the academic drive. People seem to assume that it's more important. It is not. Based on various things that I won't get into here, we believe our happy-go-lucky youngest is as intellectualy capable as his brother, but it doesn't look that way to most people. That's why I object to the assumption that a compliant toddler who tolerates instruction must be demonstrating a gifted capability. THere are lots of non academic kids who are as intellectually able, but it doesn't show that way.

Anyway, even though this thread has gone down this path, I don't think the OP meant to refer to IQ. I think she was talking about the prevalence of academic drive, whether internally or externally motivated, among homeschooled children. I think she was really asking if she was the only one who had kids would were not incredibly academically driven, which is not the same thing as native intelligence. And I have one who is not particularly academically driven at this point. And the one I have who has been academically driven since 1 has never been the type to tolerate instruction; it must come from his own whims or he's not going along with it. And both of them would probably rather watch the Backyardigans on many days. :-) Thats' why I signed my last post with a reference to an academically driven child, because I think the OP is looking for support on that, not on anything to do with IQ.

I have more to say, but we're about to leave for my parents and I have a few other things to take care of. I'll be back later...

[cottonwood]

Originally Posted by LeftField

People do assume that the academically driven child is intellectually gifted and the non-academic child is not. Clearly, this is not true.

Yes, yes, yes. ITA with your whole post.

[quaz]

My oldest is really academically driven and my youngest is not. My youngest is only 2, but my oldest was academically driven at this age. People seem to value the academic drive. People seem to assume that it's more important. It is not. Based on various things that I won't get into here, we believe our happy-go-lucky youngest is as intellectualy capable as his brother, but it doesn't look that way to most people. That's why I object to the assumption that a compliant toddler who tolerates instruction must be demonstrating a gifted capability. THere are lots of non academic kids who are as intellectually able, but it doesn't show that way.

Yup, yup, yup!!

This describes both my girls. There are many reasons I believe they are 'intellectually capable' and probably have high IQ that fall in the gifted range, but academically driven?? Oh, goodness, no.

It's why this thread has been interesting to me. It's why I find myself hilariously both vehemently agreeing and disagreeing with Dar at the same time! And OP, I know your original post has been trampled on to death, but ignoring some of the cattiness, it still has been interesting.

People too often in society seem to think that academic drive is more important.... along with 'social skills'. I find many times, folks notice my youngest more b/c she was an 'early' talker....and assume she must be 'bright'.... yet, my oldest with phonological issues and who is more a 'thinker' sometimes doesn't get 'noticed' in that way. As a mom, I find it highly annoying that a stranger will pre-judge my kids based on a quick observation, which all comes down to their preceived notion of what it means to be 'intelligent', which for young kids too often are verbal skills or ability to spout a memorized set of letters... yet a kid who doesn't 'comply' to that standard is overlooked.


Anyway, even though this thread has gone down this path, I don't think the OP meant to refer to IQ. I think she was talking about the prevalence of academic drive, whether internally or externally motivated, among homeschooled children. I think she was really asking if she was the only one who had kids would were not incredibly academically driven, which is not the same thing as native intelligence. And I have one who is not particularly academically driven at this point. And the one I have who has been academically driven since 1 has never been the type to tolerate instruction; it must come from his own whims or he's not going along with it. And both of them would probably rather watch the Backyardigans on many days. :-) Thats' why I signed my last post with a reference to an academically driven child, because I think the OP is looking for support on that, not on anything to do with IQ.


I'd be interested in hearing from the OP, although don't know if your still reading, if this was your thought process, or if you was just tired of hearing about 'gifted' kids. LOL!! I know I did initially respond to the OP's post, b/c I thought the idea of my kids jumping for joy at an educational DVD was hilarious... but throw on Disney?? My oldest is happy as a clam. And for learning? Right now she is too busy exploring her world, which to me is what she should be doing. Living and learning.


Tammy

[Lillian J]

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds

No one is suggesting that, and the sarcasm really isn't necessary.

Of course unschoolers learn from their own life experiences, and that is partly what informs the philosophy. Philosophy doesn't emerge out of a vacuum.

Thanks, fourlittlebirds for noting that. My post had even cited various examples of people learning from their own life experiences, including those as classroom teachers, but specifically their life experiences with their children, the people this is all about. As some here have already stated, there are unschoolers who did well in school and enjoyed it but want something different for their children, based on things they've learned from various sources, their own thinking through of the options, and experience with their children.

- Lillian

[my3monkees]

Originally Posted by quaz

t must come from his own whims or he's not going along with it. And both of them would probably rather watch the Backyardigans on many days. :-) Thats' why I signed my last post with a reference to an academically driven child, because I think the OP is looking for support on that, not on anything to do with IQ.


I'd be interested in hearing from the OP, although don't know if your still reading, if this was your thought process, or if you was just tired of hearing about 'gifted' kids. LOL!! I know I did initially respond to the OP's post, b/c I thought the idea of my kids jumping for joy at an educational DVD was hilarious... but throw on Disney?? My oldest is happy as a clam. And for learning? Right now she is too busy exploring her world, which to me is what she should be doing. Living and learning.


Tammy

Still here! Attempting too follow along, unfortunately my computer went crazy so I am using dh old Mac!
I don't even know, if I remember what my original point was anymore!
When I was refering to average, I wasn't really speaking of IQ. I have no concerns about my dk's intelligence, trust me they are quite intelligent.
But so many of the posts I have been reading lately have been talking about children learning to read at a very early age, or an interest in highly academic subjects at an early age. Emphasis on doing pre-school work. None of my kids at this point at least has shown a real interest in academics. Honestly I never did either. I read everything I could get my hands on, as long as it wasn't deemed educational! LOL My dd is the same way. She has been known to read novels well above her "grade level", but let me suggest she read something about science or history
I was just feeling somewhat insecure that day, over weather my children were learnng what they should be.
I have since reminded myself that is why we homeschool, so that our kids can learn their own pace whatever that may be.
Hope that clarifies a bit. I would explain further. But this puter only types about 1 letter per 5 sec.!:

[quaz]

Originally Posted by my3monkees

Still here! Attempting too follow along, unfortunately my computer went crazy so I am using dh old Mac!
I don't even know, if I remember what my original point was anymore!
When I was refering to average, I wasn't really speaking of IQ. I have no concerns about my dk's intelligence, trust me they are quite intelligent.
But so many of the posts I have been reading lately have been talking about children learning to read at a very early age, or an interest in highly academic subjects at an early age. Emphasis on doing pre-school work. None of my kids at this point at least has shown a real interest in academics. Honestly I never did either. I read everything I could get my hands on, as long as it wasn't deemed educational! LOL My dd is the same way. She has been known to read novels well above her "grade level", but let me suggest she read something about science or history
I was just feeling somewhat insecure that day, over weather my children were learnng what they should be.
I have since reminded myself that is why we homeschool, so that our kids can learn their own pace whatever that may be.
Hope that clarifies a bit. I would explain further. But this puter only types about 1 letter per 5 sec.!:

Thanks for the reply. LOL! It's what I thought when I first replied, but with the monster long thread, who thought I'd be nice to verify your original post.

It's what I've seen with my own kids, and even in school for me despite being 'gifted'.

I ALWAYS had my nose in a book. In 'honors chemistry' in high school the teacher would get made I wasn't listening to his lectures and was reading instead, but if I was acing his class, he couldn't complain much.

With my own kids..... oh, they are SOOOOO not into academics. While I suspect/believe both kids fall on the 'gifted scale' IQ wise, but noone would know it. I do read/participate in a 'gifted' board on the internet, which does help me get ideas for some of the 'quirks' that show up.

My almost 4 year old still doesn't recognize all her letters, and that is ok. :-) She can only count to 12. That is ok. She will spend hours inventing stories and plots while playing with playdoh, she spends most her day in imaginary play. We do have a shelf with 'educational toys', but educational toys I define as dominoes, a set of counting bears that are used more for sorting and having grand parties and picnics, jigsaw puzzles, tangrams that both my 4 and 2 year old love, etc. That shelf I set up for the sole reason that they have NO interest in academics, and decided at home we'll go with an unschooling, eclectic, montessoresque type approach. Unit blocks and groovy girls go a long way at this age. ;-) Books... she'd listen to me read for 2 hours if my voice lasted that long. (and she has)


I have many days where I wonder if my children are learnng what they 'should' be, but I also know trying to 'teach' my oldest abc's right now, would be a complete disaster, and she doesn't need it yet. The interest isn't there. Occasionally, I still have that 'panic attack' thinking "UH she is almost to the ripe old age of 4 ;-) and HAS to know it." Then I come back to the real world, and realize, it's fine, she is NOT 4!! LOL!!

I will try to introduce letters from her from time to time... every few months, but when it becomes quite apparent the interest isn't there still (usually within 60 seconds), we drop it. I only do that, b/c I do like the philosophy of exposing them to different things at different time to see where their interests have changed, and 'catching' them when their interest is beginning to bud.

My favorite and latest... I had a few fridge magnets on the fridge. She saw them. I asked if she wanted the rest. She did. She 'spelled' words and asked me what they were. pga and yeb. LOL!! That last a whole 60 seconds. She then took all the magnets to the play area, where all the letters had a massive party complete with pretend cake.

Anyway, thanks for the explanation. I know exactly where you are coming from.

Tammy