Who are the gifted experts here? - Page 5

[Roar]

Originally Posted by eilonwy

I'm interested in where people have been and what they've learned as well, but I guess I see is as something entirely separate from expertise.

Exactly. And, I'm very willing to say the person who stumbles on this board today (you know the dreaded "novice") having never read a thing about giftedness before, may well post something far more personally meaningful or thought provoking to me than a person who has worked in the field for twenty years. Recognizing how time spent in bureaucracies can dull innovation, this may even be more likely to be the case.

[LiamnEmma]

Originally Posted by Leftfield

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar
I have no idea who are posting to but I never identified giftedness as brain dysfunction and specifically disagreed with the suggestion that it is.

I *think* that was LadyMarmalade.

__________________________

Yep, that's my point exactly. Roar also strikes me as an expert, as someone having a wealth of knowledge and the ability to impart it articulately and compassionately. Passionately as well. Yet, apparently no degree. While I, on the other hand, have a list of degrees, credentials and licenses yet I'd say I know far less than Roar. I'd take Roar's advice over my own any day.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by boongirl

B I started this thread wanting to know who had expertise working with gifted and I find it completely interesting that the mamas typing here who do not have expertise are the ones who are the most offended by my words.

Well, I don't know if I have enough experience to count for you or not, but I can see how some here could be offended. I don't have a masters in GT ed. I don't have a doctorate in gt ed. However I am much more knowledgable than many who do. As a pp said, I'll judge someone's experience by what they write/say and how they present themselves rather than what degrees or certifications they have. I've known far too many stupid and ignorant people with degrees and certifications.

-Angela

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by Roar

I have no idea who are posting to but I never identified giftedness as brain dysfunction and specifically disagreed with the suggestion that it is.

oops. sorry

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by Roar

You didn't at all answer my question.

Given we have ZERO idea here if anyone is telling the truth about their qualifications... Why does it mean more to you what people SAY about themselves than what people have to say? Why is it easier for you to judge based on statement of qualifications than it is on the way in which a person expresses themselves and supports their ideas?

Well, I did not say it was easier. I have never really thought about it this way but I would say that I believe what people are saying online, for the most part, until they are proven to be full of BS. Of course, that does not mean I am naive but rather I don't find it useful to me to question the validity of every word that everyone online has written. If I post a question at mdc, I don't read the answers wondering if they are really written by mothers or imposters. But, at the same time, I would never take the advice of someone online without first using good judgement about it and I do not give away any private details about myself that I feel could be used to harm me or my family in real life. I guess I am trying to say that I am cautiously trusting of the mamas here.

That being said, I find knowing people's area of expertise, especially as it relates to my area of career expertise, very interesting. I have long found CB's statements to be useful and seemingly well founded. To learn more about her, that she is a high school teacher who works with many gifted kids and has taken coursework (albeit useless in her opinion) sounds really interesting to me. She could be totally full of BS and really be a 13 year old boy pulling an elaborate charade on us, for all I know, but I find it more useful and enjoyable to assume she is truthful until such time as something happens to prove otherwise. Presumption of innocence until proven otherwise.

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by Roar

Since it is defined as education or experience I guess we are just fine then...

Is there anyone here who isn't at least one of these: a former gifted child, an gifted adult, the parent of a gifted child, an educator, a person who works with gifted kids in any capacity, a person who has studied giftedness, etc. I didn't think so. So,that pretty much sums up everyone that is posting here so goody - everyone is an "expert".

It is my understanding that there were some problems with people posting about giftedness in the special needs forum that warranted this forum being founded. I knwo that there are those who have no experience or training in giftedness who find it necessary to post remarks belittling gifted education and giftedness and making remarks about its elitism. I have read remarks by people who know nothing about giftedness nor gifted education and yet feel they have the right to say that it is all bunk. So, knowing that everyone who has posted so far in this thread is on board, at the very least, with the idea that giftedness does indeed exist and that gifted education is at least a bit important makes me feel better about conversing with y'all.

Now that a statement of purpose has been written and approved by Cynthia Mosher, I feel better, also, about discussing giftedness with others at MDC since those who are against it or doubtful about it or just in general unsupportive of it will find, in that statement of purpose, that that is not the focus of this forum. This thread came out before that statement was finalized.

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by LeftField

I *think* that was LadyMarmalade.

yes, I think that is the right name. Thanks

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by Roar

Exactly. And, I'm very willing to say the person who stumbles on this board today (you know the dreaded "novice") having never read a thing about giftedness before, may well post something far more personally meaningful or thought provoking to me than a person who has worked in the field for twenty years. Recognizing how time spent in bureaucracies can dull innovation, this may even be more likely to be the case.

Or, they may say something full of bunk about giftedness being a made up construct that is not worthy of the funds it depletes from school programs and that giftedness is elitist and classicist. They know absolutely nothing about giftedness, brain research, or gifted programs. Unfortunately, I have met a lot of people in my life who are like this. Many of them have been teachers who have actually lobbied against gifted programming, for one reason or another, knowing absolutely nothing about the needs of gifted kids, the laws, funding issues, etc. Educating such a person can be fruitful or completely futile. But, at least it helps to understand where they are coming from.

[eilonwy]

Originally Posted by boongirl

Or, they may say something full of bunk about giftedness being a made up construct that is not worthy of the funds it depletes from school programs and that giftedness is elitist and classicist. They know absolutely nothing about giftedness, brain research, or gifted programs

That's just it, though-- something about the post wouldn't ring true, it would immediately be recognized by many of us as pure horse. I don't need to know "where they're coming from" to know that the post is coming either from a place of ignorance or a place of malice (or maybe both). It's very obvious to me that many of the people who've posted about giftedness not being a special need, for example, have no idea what they're talking about. If they turned out to have degrees in gifted education, or experience working with gifted children, I'd not only be surprised but extremely disappointed-- such people only highlight the need for more research, and for the research that exists to be more thoroughly disseminated.

ETA: A few days ago, someone posted to the Support thread in this forum. I didn't like the post, it seemed very trollish to me, so I reported it. I may have been incorrect, but the moderator who reviewed the post obviously agreed with me, because it was removed before the thread was returned. For all I know, that poster really was the parent of an exceptionally gifted child, or perhaps was a gifted child him/herself, but the post didn't read that way to me or, apparently, to the moderator of this forum.

[Roar]

Originally Posted by boongirl

Or, they may say something full of bunk about giftedness being a made up construct that is not worthy of the funds it depletes from school programs and that giftedness is elitist and classicist. They know absolutely nothing about giftedness, brain research, or gifted programs. Unfortunately, I have met a lot of people in my life who are like this. Many of them have been teachers who have actually lobbied against gifted programming, for one reason or another, knowing absolutely nothing about the needs of gifted kids, the laws, funding issues, etc. Educating such a person can be fruitful or completely futile. But, at least it helps to understand where they are coming from.

I'm not clear on what you are saying. When people post something "full of bunk" you want to not just conclude it is full of bunk, but you want to know their qualifications so you can determine if you should educate them. I'm not clear is it better in that situation for them to be an "expert" or not?

[Roar]

Originally Posted by LiamnEmma

I'd take Roar's advice over my own any day.

Aw shucks.

[LadyMarmalade]

Originally Posted by eilonwy

I've learned in my (albeit short) 29 years on this planet is that so-called "expertise" usually means "I've got a degree in this" and not much else.

Exactly. And it's already been made abundantly clear that degrees obtained from different parts of the world have different theories and ideas - so even among 'experts' there are differences of opinion.

According to my experience and Boongirl's (ever changing ) definition I could be an 'expert'. However, some of the comments (from a number of posters) in this forum make me feel as though - because my expertise is different to that of others - it's inferior. By the way - there's a reason I don't give out personal information on the internet. I won't be telling you where I live, what university I worked for, where I studied or where I'm currently working. If you can't accept that, it's your problem - dismiss me as a liar who is "full of bunk" and is creating wild theories with no foundation in current research if you wish ... it's of little consequence to me. That's why I haven't been posting here ... this is meant to be a support forum, not a place with accusations that someone might be unworthy of your personal opinion of them and whether they're worthy of you deeming them an expert or not. I don't come here to find insinuations that my knowledge or professionally obtained opinions and experience aren't valid. I haven't had time to dig out journal articles or books for you - I've been extremely busy with work and my family. I had intended to do it last week. But, to tell the truth, I now have no interest in spending time and effort doing it. Perhaps if you were asking from a position of interest rather than abrasive disbelief I'd be more inclined towards being gracious.

If I'm going to be 'refreshingly honest', I don't have much respect for the CogAt test and I don't think it should be administered in isolation to gauge giftedness in children. So obviously there's a conflict between us there - two 'experts' who both have valid training and experience. My career involves working against it because I believe (and so do my colleagues) that type of work with gifted children sets it back and creates misunderstandings. So truthfully, it doesn't matter if someone is an 'expert', in my eyes ... the crux of the matter is whether they advocate for gifted children. There's no degree in that.

It might seem "pretty clear" to you, Boongirl - but your demand for people, if they're an expert, to just say so isn't so easy for me when your posts seem to aim to discredit my expertise. And yeah, if might also be difficult for you to understand why I took it personally. But your lack of understanding of just how offensive some of the things you've said doesn't mean others can't see it. Why won't I identify myself as an expert? Because I have a sneaking suspicion that if I do, I'll be jumped on by a few people here claiming that they've never heard of what I'm talking about, so therefore it mustn't be true. I'm not interested in having those types of challenges thrown at me here. I shouldn't have to 'prove myself' in a place of support.

[LiamnEmma]

Oh Lady Marmalade, I hope I haven't been one of the posters that has insinuated something regarding your credentials. If I have, I am truly sorry.

[LadyMarmalade]

Oh absolutely not!!!

[orca]

I’m also someone with a lot of letters after my name, but would hesitate to call myself an expert. I have three degrees and, while this is not true in real life, It’s entirely possible that I am one of the “stupid & ignorant” degree holders according to some of you online. (Well, at least that’s how I’ve been made to feel in particular threads I’ve participated in.)

The truth is, I mostly lurk here on MDC- I find there is so much to learn! I feel relatively qualified to post in threads relating to gifted education since my B.Ed was in Special Education and I have a decade of experience behind me working with all levels of learners, including the highly gifted in inclusive classrooms. I also spent several years teaching at my new school board’s “Gifted” school. (All students are tested in Grade 3 board wide and then bussed to this particular school for a more intensive curriculum. Every child in every class has an IEP and is in the 98% percentile, or higher)

I suspect any shortcomings I have here are due to my relative inexperience writing in this genre. I am a “virtual virgin”, if you will, and MDC is my first crack at this type of communication. : Check out my lame user name if you doubt that! Maybe it’s my low post count that discredits me, maybe I really have nothing valuable to add to the discussion. Either way, it certainly limits the conversation if and when participants fear they will be hung and quartered every time they present an opposing view point or make themselves vulnerable with real life suggestions for hypothetical scenarios. (This is made in reference to another thread...)

I’m reading this over and wondering what the point of writing this was.... I hope it makes sense to someone because I’m starting to feel like this is not my best mode of communication.

[LiamnEmma]

newmom I like you already.

[Roar]

Originally Posted by newmom22

I suspect any shortcomings I have here are due to my relative inexperience writing in this genre. I am a “virtual virgin”, if you will, and MDC is my first crack at this type of communication. : Check out my lame user name if you doubt that! o

I hope you speak up more, I enjoyed your post. And, your comment about your screen name made me chuckle. There are some great screen names on MDC. Good time to say LadyMarmalade - what a cool name.

[oldcrunchymom]

Hey newmom, I've been a netizen for 14 years and my usernames are still boring... no worries. Welcome to the board!

[WuWei]

Another fascinating glimpse into the resources on this forum. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Pat