Anyone wanna talk about the conception of "gifted" status in children? - Page 31 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-16-2006, 03:34 PM
Banned
 
boongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: a place where freedom lives
Posts: 4,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
A statement that controversial deserves it's own thread.
Why? Do you really think all people are equal in every way? When you are in a crowd, do you look out at the faces in front of you and value them all equally? I think it is totally naive to try to say that you would. First of all, you probably do not even know most of them. So, right there, you would value them less than your close friends and family. And, perhaps many of them do not share your ideals. I value conservative, right wingers less than liberal, left wingers. I value my friends and family more than strangers. I value my child more than a stranger's child. Believing this way does not mean that there are people who are inherently less valuable than others in every way. I do not look out into a crowd and say to myself that those poeple over there are less valuable than I and will always be so. But, as a social construct, I do recognize that my brain ranks things and people and that if I was in a crowd and a car started barreling towards us, I would grab my child first and run away as fast a possible. My child, in that situation, has more value to me than those other people.

American society values high IQ when it comes to most things. This is not necessarily an example of elitism. Americans value independence. People with high IQ have a tendency to be more independent than people with very low IQ. Sadly, the lower your IQ, the more help you need to live your life. Americans do not value this as much as they should, granted, but that does not mean that this is elitist. (Americans have a problem seeing past whatever the media is currently labelling as worthy - but that is another thread.) We all have values and we all value those values in others more than we value other values. There is nothing wrong with admitting this. I value organic gardening, attachment parenting, my family, literature, my pets, my health and that of my family. We all place value on things. This is human nature. Do you really think that we can exist without valuation? Do you really think a school system can exist without valuation? Without some sort of system of ordering children so as to better teach them?
boongirl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-16-2006, 03:35 PM
Banned
 
boongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: a place where freedom lives
Posts: 4,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHiddenFees
There is some cultural bias in IQ tests. However, the cultural factors (like reading aloud, exposure to environmental toxis) we're talking about aren't tangential to the idea of intelligence, they actually help form it: Our experiences literally help shape our brains. Inherited intelligence is a range of potential.
Well put.
boongirl is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 03:39 PM
Banned
 
boongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: a place where freedom lives
Posts: 4,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHiddenFees
Do other children only know who the "smart kids" are because they've had their IQ tested? Likewise for "slow" kids?
When you spend as much time on playgrounds as I have in 10 years of teaching, you come to realize that children are closer to their animal behaviors than we are as adults. There is a pecking order on every playground and every school I have ever worked or taught at has been trying to teach the kids to respect each other and treat each other as equals at the same time as the pecking order is establishing itself and creating hierarchies amongst groups of kids. These hierarchies ebb and flow; they are not necessarily consistent. But, children rank themselves and group themselves and there is, in my opinion, nothing we can do about it. It is human nature. We can try to teach them respect each other and value each other but we are never going to be able to teach them to value each other equally all the time. We adults do not value each other equally all the time. Watch a group of animals sometime. They do not value each other equally. There is a pecking order.
boongirl is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 03:44 PM
 
LeftField's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of well-adjusted weird people
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
Then I guess we just see this differently. I was geek. But I had the comfort of straight A's and the approval of intelligent adults to inspire me. I was teased and unpopular, but nobody actually looked the other way in embarassment or shame when they walked passed me. The way people glance away from people mental handicaps. If they aren't teased, it's usually because nobody can bear to look at them or consider they are worth bothering with in the first place.

Really, I am not buying the idea that it's all happening to an equal degree. I know which end of the spectrum I'd rather be seen at if I had to be. Very few people would choose to a low IQ over a high one if they could....
No, it's terrible. It's a really terrible thing. Kids, in particular, can be so cruel and I often wonder where or who they learn in from. : I remember kids in 8th grade homeroom physically assaulting a Vietnamese boy and saying, "Hey, do you know karate?" My homeroom teacher was trying very hard to ignore us by reading his newspaper. I wish I were lying about this.

And I agree that no one would choose a lower IQ over a higher one. But I do not believe, for one minute, that most people would chose an astronomically high IQ over a regular or moderately high one, if they knew what it meant. I was a geek too and I was bullied as well, but not anywhere near the degree the mentally disabled were. But, I did not have an astronomically high IQ, like the very few I've met in my life have (not even knowing their IQ, it was glaringly obvious). I did not have idiosyncratic behaviors. I was not unaware of social cues. I did not forget to change my clothes because my brain was too engaged in other things. I did not have any of the variety of legitimate disorders that often affect the profoundly gifted. To use my earlier analogy, I was not the equivalent of the 7ft tall guy. I still maintain that idiosyncratic behaviors are tolerated poorly in whoever demonstrates them, whether disabled or profoundly gifted.

Anyway, we can agree that kids can be really mean to other kids.
LeftField is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 03:50 PM
 
LeftField's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of well-adjusted weird people
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by boongirl
When you spend as much time on playgrounds as I have in 10 years of teaching, you come to realize that children are closer to their animal behaviors than we are as adults. There is a pecking order on every playground and every school I have ever worked or taught at has been trying to teach the kids to respect each other and treat each other as equals at the same time as the pecking order is establishing itself and creating hierarchies amongst groups of kids. These hierarchies ebb and flow; they are not necessarily consistent. But, children rank themselves and group themselves and there is, in my opinion, nothing we can do about it. It is human nature. We can try to teach them respect each other and value each other but we are never going to be able to teach them to value each other equally all the time. We adults do not value each other equally all the time. Watch a group of animals sometime. They do not value each other equally. There is a pecking order.
This is completely OT so I shouldn't derail this, but I wanted to say that I think the ranking that occurs in children is the result of being put in large groups of children with limited adult attention. My kids have a 2:1 ratio during the day and I've never had to teach them to avoid ranking others. The homeschooled children I've met so far have been completely unaware of or disinterested in age groupings and gender groupings and many of the pecking order stuff I've seen elsewhere. I have seen children change from being very gregarious to being very cliquish right after starting preschool, however. I think it's learned, adaptive behavior that results from being in a large group of kids that end up devising their own rules of order. I think we see this as "natural" because early schooling has been the default for so long.
LeftField is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 04:08 PM
 
heartmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with Irishmommy
Posts: 5,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
There is some cultural bias in IQ tests. However, the cultural factors (like reading aloud, exposure to environmental toxis) we're talking about aren't tangential to the idea of intelligence, they actually help form it:
Help form *what* exactly? The ability to score more points on an IQ test? You are still blaming the environment of black children here, rather than asking yourself what kind of test would lead us to suspect the environment of black children in the first place.

A minute ago I ran through my head the words "White children score lower on IQ tests than other races".

How popular would IQ tests be if that were true....obviously, something is wrong with the test....

Mother is the word for God on the hearts and lips of all little children--William Makepeace Thackeray
heartmama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 04:10 PM
 
heartmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with Irishmommy
Posts: 5,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
but I wanted to say that I think the ranking that occurs in children is the result of being put in large groups of children with limited adult attention. My kids have a 2:1 ratio during the day and I've never had to teach them to avoid ranking others. The homeschooled children I've met so far have been completely unaware of or disinterested in age groupings and gender groupings and many of the pecking order stuff I've seen elsewhere. I have seen children change from being very gregarious to being very cliquish right after starting preschool, however. I think it's learned, adaptive behavior that results from being in a large group of kids that end up devising their own rules of order. I think we see this as "natural" because early schooling has been the default for so long.
I agree.

Mother is the word for God on the hearts and lips of all little children--William Makepeace Thackeray
heartmama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 04:15 PM
 
NoHiddenFees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
Help form *what* exactly?
The brain. Literally. Connections in the brain. The more reinforcement, the stronger the connection, connections that don't get used get pruned, literally. It's like sculpture, except it is your life experiences doing the sculpting.
NoHiddenFees is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 04:24 PM
 
heartmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with Irishmommy
Posts: 5,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Do you really think that we can exist without valuation? Do you really think a school system can exist without valuation? Without some sort of system of ordering children so as to better teach them?
Your original statement was controversial. "Why should we avoid giving value to things? All people are not equal."

If you want to clarify that, it's probably a good idea. It sounds like you mean all people are not equal in value.

As to the above, yes it is entirely possible to approach education without someone "ordering" children. That is teacher-centric thinking. If the goal is simply to assist each child in learning where they are at, while small natural groups may assemble (and naturally disband once new abilities take them in new directions), I guarantee it would become counter productive for a teacher to waste time anticipating where children belonged long enough to put them in order. Children change too quickly for that kind of approach do keep up. It's just more efficient to let children move to whatever level they are ready to work at, without judging or qualifying it to fit a predetermined order in your head.

Mother is the word for God on the hearts and lips of all little children--William Makepeace Thackeray
heartmama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 04:38 PM
 
heartmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with Irishmommy
Posts: 5,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
The brain. Literally. Connections in the brain. The more reinforcement, the stronger the connection, connections that don't get used get pruned, literally. It's like sculpture, except it is your life experiences doing the sculpting.
But don't you see, this is a self reinforcing paradigm? Unless you are saying black children generally form fewer brain connections than whites. In which case that idea deserves it's own thread. At best I think you are really saying that the kinds of experiences common to certain socio-ethic groups form a response (brain connections) compatible to this test. It's a big leap to say the remedy lies in changing the life experiences of other socio-economic groups so they do better on this precious test. Seems much simpler to say "The test is biased. Let's scrap it and start over".

Mother is the word for God on the hearts and lips of all little children--William Makepeace Thackeray
heartmama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 04:55 PM
 
NoHiddenFees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
But don't you see, this is a self reinforcing paradigm? Unless you are saying black children generally form fewer brain connections than whites. In which case that idea deserves it's own thread. At best I think you are really saying that the kinds of experiences common to certain socio-ethic groups form a response (brain connections) compatible to this test. It's a big leap to say the remedy lies in changing the life experiences of other socio-economic groups so they do better on this precious test. Seems much simpler to say "The test is biased. Let's scrap it and start over".
Hello!?! I'm not even talking about the "precious test" nor what "is" is. I'm talking about life experiences and life opportunities. Race isn't a factor, except as disproportionately represented at lower SES levels. There's a big difference between advocating (or accepting) the use of IQ tests to find highly gifted children who may be in need of specialized education and saying all kids should be tested and slotted, alpha-ed, gamma-ed or beta-ed for life. Poverty, not genes in this case is the enemy. No amount of side stepping or political correctness on my part is going to change the fact that kids who start school coming from an intellectually stimulating environment will tend to perform better than kids who don't. When you further consider that the quality of schools is often substandard for the poorest kids, that's a travesty.

Not all poor kids grow up in an intellectually impoverished environment (my best friend is an example of someone who didn't), but they are far more likely to.
NoHiddenFees is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 06:06 PM
 
Dechen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
One of the biggest reasons I am leery of sending my dd to a conventional school is because of the distorted "values" inherent in the current American educational environment.

I strive to value all people equally. While I may not be the greatest at the follow through, it is one of my moral values that all people are of equal worth. Period.

We are not all the same, and we not have equal stengths and weaknesses.

We are all of equal value, and deserve equal respect, kindness, and consideration.

Grades are like money. It can be convenient to have good grades or a lot of money, but neither says a thing about who you are as a person, or what your worth is. Neither does achievement.

I'm not anti-money, good grades, or achievement *when* they are taken for what they are and not invested with extra meaning. They are societal tokens that ultimately mean nothing, and you can cause yourself a lot of unhappiness if you take any one of them too seriously.

Which leads to IQ tests. I'm not against IQ tests. I'm not against IQ tests being a part of how we discover what a child's needs are. I don't think an IQ test should be used as the end-all be-all, and I don't like the way IQ is being used to define gifted.

If we allow a test to tell us what we are, we just allowed the test-creator to invent our reality. Tests don't tell a truth, they point towards qualities. This is true for any test. Tests measure "reality" as conceived by human beings. All tests are biased.

- - -

Heartmama, the biology of humans (and other animals) is such that the environment of babies and young children has a profound effect on brain development. This is a totally different issue from IQ. All kids deserve a rich and stimulating environment.
Dechen is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 08:03 PM
 
LeftField's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of well-adjusted weird people
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHiddenFees
No amount of side stepping or political correctness on my part is going to change the fact that kids who start school coming from an intellectually stimulating environment will tend to perform better than kids who don't. When you further consider that the quality of schools is often substandard for the poorest kids, that's a travesty.

Not all poor kids grow up in an intellectually impoverished environment (my best friend is an example of someone who didn't), but they are far more likely to.
Here's an interesting link with a reference to the 32 million word difference:
http://www.trelease-on-reading.com/r...ul_differences

And another:
http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/amer...tastrophe.html

If children hear more vocabulary in their first years of life, the brain creates more synapses, which puts them closer to the ceiling of their inherited range of intelligence. The root cause is not race. The root cause is poverty. You can then look at the distribution of race in socio-economic levels, but poverty is the root problem. Children who hear less vocabulary and who have limited life experiences do not have the same opportunities to stretch their brains to grow within their genetic range of intelligence. It's like height. Children who eat a limited diet of junk food are not going to grow as tall as those who eat a balanced diet. The kids who are not hearing as much vocabulary, who are not being taken to interesting places like the art museum, who are not read to very often, who don't have many books in their home, who don't have access to developmental toys and art supplies and who do not get the 1:1 attention of an adult...those children are not less intelligent, but they are simply not getting the same chance to stretch their brains to their genetic potential.
LeftField is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 08:09 PM
 
Charles Baudelaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
I've venture to guess that white people forbidding black slaves to read, and later forbidding them to use decent public schools or public facilities (like libraries) might have shaped the attitude in black culture towards reading...
Okay, for the record, I am not black and that being so, I'm probably not qualified to give an opinion, however remote, on this issue, but that being said, I recall that one of the most literate and well-spoken of Americans, Frederick Douglass, was a man who had a direct and painful experience with slavery and thought it absolutely crucial that he and other people of color become literate. He did so by dribs and drabs, taking into his incredibly expansive mind whatever teeny grains of education from his white mistress and from white children he could possibly glean and multiplying it tenfold. A magnificent role model for anyone, I would think, and particularly for black Americans.

If that weren't enough, what about the more modern and (in some ways) more powerful example of Martin Luther King, Jr., whose power as a rhetoretician came from his ability to assimilate and manipulate discourse as diverse as the Bible, the Constitution, and the black Baptist tradition? Clearly a highly literate man in all senses of the word, as any of the briefest examinations of his writing will show.

Now if THAT weren't enough, what about the practical reality that says that in any "first world" society, whether black, white, Asian, or other, literacy is fundamental to success within that culture regardless of color?

Last but not least, though I'm by no means discounting the considerable lingering effects of slavery and segregation in this society, not one black American living today has had the direct experience of slavery practiced in this country, nor have their parents or their parents' parents. Segregation from good public schools and libraries is of course more recent, but the counterargument could be made that black people would use them with a vengeance when desegregation made that outrageous mistreatment illegal.

In short, I am not sure I buy it as a reason, but as I said before, I am not black and my perspective on this issue is limited by my experience.
Quote:


Then there is the very real phenomenon today of the "black part of town" (especially in the south) which tends to be aka "the worst schools in town".
Yes, but why would one's neighborhood necessarily prevent one from reading to one's child? We live in a lower middle-class neighborhood with a school that's been on the "watch list" now for three or four years, very low SES, and very high free lunch and ESL population -- all earmarks of "the worst schools in town." That doesn't stop us from reading to our kids.
Quote:
So, the fact remains that blacks routine score lower in IQ tests than whites. "Fixing" this by changing their culture so that they do BETTER on the IQ test tiptoes around the question of WHY an intelligence test COULD be influence by culture...and WHY the culture it seems to oppress is the one historically held down by whites.
Wow, it's like I never posted what I posted earlier: "First of all, I don't believe she was claiming anything to the effect of, "Black people score lower on IQ tests because they don't read to their children." You are implying a false causality here."
For what it's worth, perhaps we all need to be studying Asian culture, because Asian people routinely outperform Europeans on measures of intelligence.
Charles Baudelaire is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 08:23 PM
 
Charles Baudelaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftField
One day in a club meeting, someone made a joke about something being the word for something or other in Ukranian. It was a really silly joke and everyone laughed. The math guy spoke up and said, "Actually the word for (whatever it was) in Ukranian is <xyz>." There was stunned silence, a bit of staring and then everyone abruptly changed subject. .
This sounds like something I would do. Except not in Ukranian.
Charles Baudelaire is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 08:30 PM
 
Charles Baudelaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
Help form *what* exactly? The ability to score more points on an IQ test? You are still blaming the environment of black children here, rather than asking yourself what kind of test would lead us to suspect the environment of black children in the first place.

A minute ago I ran through my head the words "White children score lower on IQ tests than other races".

How popular would IQ tests be if that were true....obviously, something is wrong with the test....
Apparently popular enough. As I said before, whites score lower, on the whole, than Asians -- on a test designed, as I believe, by white people.

Interesting.
Charles Baudelaire is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 08:36 PM
 
Charles Baudelaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftField
Here's an interesting link with a reference to the 32 million word difference:
http://www.trelease-on-reading.com/r...ul_differences

And another:
http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/amer...tastrophe.html

If children hear more vocabulary in their first years of life, the brain creates more synapses, which puts them closer to the ceiling of their inherited range of intelligence. The root cause is not race. The root cause is poverty. You can then look at the distribution of race in socio-economic levels, but poverty is the root problem. Children who hear less vocabulary and who have limited life experiences do not have the same opportunities to stretch their brains to grow within their genetic range of intelligence. It's like height. Children who eat a limited diet of junk food are not going to grow as tall as those who eat a balanced diet. The kids who are not hearing as much vocabulary, who are not being taken to interesting places like the art museum, who are not read to very often, who don't have many books in their home, who don't have access to developmental toys and art supplies and who do not get the 1:1 attention of an adult...those children are not less intelligent, but they are simply not getting the same chance to stretch their brains to their genetic potential.
Playing devil's advocate for a second, are you sure it's poverty as the sole cause and not social values? It costs nothing to not have a television or not turn it on if you do have one. It costs nothing to use the public library. It costs nothing to read the free public library books.
Charles Baudelaire is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 08:51 PM
 
LeftField's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of well-adjusted weird people
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Baudelaire
Playing devil's advocate for a second, are you sure it's poverty as the sole cause and not social values? It costs nothing to not have a television or not turn it on if you do have one. It costs nothing to use the public library. It costs nothing to read the free public library books.
No, no, no, you are right. I wonder the same thing. In my town, the art museum is free, but we rarely see other children there unless they are on a school field trip. We have tons of library branches all over town with free storytime programs. I agree that the opporunity is there. I was incorrect in saying that poverty was the root cause, when it's a strong correlation instead.

But OTOH, if one comes from a poor family, I would imagine that both parents are probably working one or more jobs full-time and therefore have less time to do these things. Some things are puzzling to me, however. We have a free parenting magazine that advertised a series of free children's concerts at the library on Saturdays. I think they were doing a second location at the mall on Saturday as well. Do you know who attends? The overwhelming majority of people who go are white and appear to be well-off. There was an amazing African drums concert on one of those Saturdays, performed by black people who came from the very worst neighborhood in town. They gave this inspiring talk about what it means to come from "the hood" and how there is much love in the hood and how people should not be afraid of it. It was so moving. Do you know who the overwhelming majority of audience members?--white people who looked very well-off. It's puzzling to me. I don't know the answer to that, nor am I implying anything at all. It's just an observation that I'm making.

Anyway, I would guess that the biggest factor in poor families not utilizing the library and museums as much comes down to working multiple jobs and not being at home as much. I'm just guessing.
LeftField is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 09:25 PM
 
heartmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with Irishmommy
Posts: 5,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Not all poor kids grow up in an intellectually impoverished environment (my best friend is an example of someone who didn't), but they are far more likely to.
For Charles Baudelaire too...

This is worthy of it's own thread. When we get close to talking about race we turn it into a talk about poverty. I do not believe these are unrelated issues. The relationship between blacks, whites, views towards intelligence, and poverty is just too important and serious for me to do justice to it alone in this thread. You can't tease out one issue from the other and let it stand alone as a clinical view of this issue.

It's true that no blacks alive in America were slaves. It's also true that my immediate family can remember the years before segregation fondly and wish for all white schools again. We have not crawled out from under the rock of racism far enough to look back collectively and appreciate how far reaching it is, how vast, how deeply entrenched in our culture.

Just sitting here talking about this as one white person to (at least one other) white person makes me feel kind of shallow; grotesquely priveleged. Like I'm being part of the problem, sitting here at my computer dissecting and discussing something I'll never have to really experience. That I would not want myself, or my kids, to ever have to experience. I really don't know what else to say without sounding like a jackass.

Mother is the word for God on the hearts and lips of all little children--William Makepeace Thackeray
heartmama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 09:29 PM
 
heartmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with Irishmommy
Posts: 5,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Heartmama, the biology of humans (and other animals) is such that the environment of babies and young children has a profound effect on brain development. This is a totally different issue from IQ. All kids deserve a rich and stimulating environment.
I had no idea. I guess you are telling me this because I've been arguing otherwise. Thank you for reading my posts so carefully.

: :

Mother is the word for God on the hearts and lips of all little children--William Makepeace Thackeray
heartmama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 09:46 PM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Aha! And the "gifted child thread" has entered into conversation the ever-fascinating favorite topic of pseudo-sociologists everywhere on the 'net, the "Culture of Poverty Argument" or "why can't those poor people just not be so darn poor? What in the world is wrong with them? It's their own fault gifted programs are full of the white and the rich."

It has officially jumped the shark.

I'm unsubscribing from this train wreck completely, lest ever-more repulsive arguments be offered as to why some kids just can't seem to score high enough on IQ tests, or be as intellectually gifted as the middle-class white people. Gosh, I just can't imagine. These kinds of arguments are exactly why I don't want to hang with the "gifted" community, nor have my child associate exclusively with the children of these parents. Have fun in the small-minded, exclusive soup of one's own definitions, comprised of comparisons, and heavily spiced with insecurity.
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 11:14 PM
Banned
 
boongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: a place where freedom lives
Posts: 4,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
Your original statement was controversial. "Why should we avoid giving value to things? All people are not equal."

If you want to clarify that, it's probably a good idea. It sounds like you mean all people are not equal in value.
All people are not equal but I did not mean in value. I mean that we are all different and we all have value, but not necessarily to each other. We give value to that which is important to us and we value our friends and family more than strangers. That is perfectly human. That is what I meant.
boongirl is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 11:21 PM
Banned
 
boongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: a place where freedom lives
Posts: 4,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingspaghettimama
These kinds of arguments are exactly why I don't want to hang with the "gifted" community, nor have my child associate exclusively with the children of these parents. Have fun in the small-minded, exclusive soup of one's own definitions, comprised of comparisons, and heavily spiced with insecurity.
While this is probably an astute statement and a bit humorous, it is also most likely a violation of the UA. But, I do see the point FSP is trying to make. I just hope she does not move to Issaquah or Sammamish (near Seattle). I used to work there and nearly 30% of those public school kids score in the 97th percentile or higher on the CogAt. That means one in three parents is the parent of a gifted kid there. A place to avoid if you are leary of the gifted child gang.
boongirl is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 11:22 PM
 
LeftField's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of well-adjusted weird people
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingspaghettimama
Aha! And the "gifted child thread" has entered into conversation the ever-fascinating favorite topic of pseudo-sociologists everywhere on the 'net, the "Culture of Poverty Argument" or "why can't those poor people just not be so darn poor? What in the world is wrong with them? It's their own fault gifted programs are full of the white and the rich."

It has officially jumped the shark.

I'm unsubscribing from this train wreck completely, lest ever-more repulsive arguments be offered as to why some kids just can't seem to score high enough on IQ tests, or be as intellectually gifted as the middle-class white people. Gosh, I just can't imagine. These kinds of arguments are exactly why I don't want to hang with the "gifted" community, nor have my child associate exclusively with the children of these parents. Have fun in the small-minded, exclusive soup of one's own definitions, comprised of comparisons, and heavily spiced with insecurity.
Honestly, the caustic sarcasm and oversimplification of pages of thoughtful posts makes it almost impossible to reply to a post like this.
LeftField is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 11:24 PM
 
LeftField's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of well-adjusted weird people
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
For Charles Baudelaire too...

This is worthy of it's own thread. When we get close to talking about race we turn it into a talk about poverty. I do not believe these are unrelated issues. The relationship between blacks, whites, views towards intelligence, and poverty is just too important and serious for me to do justice to it alone in this thread. You can't tease out one issue from the other and let it stand alone as a clinical view of this issue.

It's true that no blacks alive in America were slaves. It's also true that my immediate family can remember the years before segregation fondly and wish for all white schools again. We have not crawled out from under the rock of racism far enough to look back collectively and appreciate how far reaching it is, how vast, how deeply entrenched in our culture.

Just sitting here talking about this as one white person to (at least one other) white person makes me feel kind of shallow; grotesquely priveleged. Like I'm being part of the problem, sitting here at my computer dissecting and discussing something I'll never have to really experience. That I would not want myself, or my kids, to ever have to experience. I really don't know what else to say without sounding like a jackass.
You are right and I totally know what you're saying in the last paragraph. I'm going to step out of this specific portion of the thread, because it is really too complex to address here.
LeftField is offline  
Old 08-17-2006, 12:35 AM
 
darien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingspaghettimama
These kinds of arguments are exactly why I don't want to hang with the "gifted" community, nor have my child associate exclusively with the children of these parents. Have fun in the small-minded, exclusive soup of one's own definitions, comprised of comparisons, and heavily spiced with insecurity.
Oh, for pete's sake. Do you exit every discussion in this manner?
darien is offline  
Old 08-17-2006, 12:45 AM
 
NoHiddenFees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartmama
When we get close to talking about race we turn it into a talk about poverty.
IIRC, you are the one who started talking about race. Since inherited intelligence doesn't vary as to race, there have to be other factors.

FSM: Blame poor people?
NoHiddenFees is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off