[HPFGU-OTChatter] Gifted children

[Laura Huntley]

*sighs* who am I to argue against "years of experience here, personal knowledge of over 50 cases, detailed 
knowledge of another 200 cases, and an intimate knowledge of 60 years of research"...ah, someone who doesn't know when to quit, you say?  Oh well, there's definitely an argument for that.  But I stand by the opinions I expressed earlier. 

Shaun:
>What research has shown - and I've seen it personally in over 50 cases, with only 1 
>exception - is that the type of cruelty you describe is only likely if there is a less than 
>two year age gap between the older kids and the younger one. If the gap is larger 
>than that, cruelty is exceedingly rare.

Exactly.  Kids that are that much older than a given gifted child are unlikely to be cruel to him/her.  

But they will *never* look at that child as an equal or a peer -- even if they are friends with him or her.  

And that, IMO, is almost worse than the "cruelty" you were speaking of.  In actuality, this type of treatment, although neither hostile nor intentionally harmful, will make a kid feel just as alienated as they had with less "mature" kids of their same age.  And don't think a gifted kid in this position wouldn't notice that his friends don't quite treat/see him the same way they do each other.  Children, whether gifted or not, generally are *allot* more aware than most adults will give them credit for.

Shaun:
>Well, no, it doesn't - older, as a general rule, does mean more mature (the two 
>terms are synonyms) but there are exceptions.

*big sigh* Honestly.  Of *course* "mature" is a synonym for "older" in a literal context.

When comparing the *emotional* maturity of kids around 8 yrs. old and kids around 12 yrs. old, however, the biggest difference you are going to find is the awareness of sex.

In some ways, it can be argued that the average 8 yr. old is more mature than the average 12 yr. old when it comes to such things as being accepting of people who are different than they are and being more sympathetic to those in pain.  When kids hit the 11-13 year old range they get *very* aware of the differences between people -- and they are very, very likely to be hostile towards those who are different than them.

And to kids who are, by definition, "different", this means allot.

The only way the average 12 yr. old is going to be nice to another child whom they perceive "different" is if that child is young enough that he or she is no longer perceived as a peer, but as a "little kid"...which is why you don't find regular students who are 4 or 5 years older than a PG kid being "cruel" to that child -- they may be hormonal, insecure preteens -- but they aren't monsters.  Most of them aren't going to be intentionally malicious to someone they think of as a little kid.  Esp. the girls will want to play "parent" to someone that young.  IMO, this is *not* a healthy relationship for a PG kid who needs REAL friends.

BTW, I'm not trying to say that 12 yr. olds are all awful people.  Their ostracism of freaks/weirdoes/etc. is an important part of their own development and discovery of their individuality.  This is also the time when they start to become "disrespectful" towards their parents.  It's all part of growing up and learning to be an adult.  However, IMO, kids in this age bracket are about as far as they will ever get from being a healthy adult.  

Therefore, while I agree that PG kids are VERY likely to have natural, comfortable relationships with truly mature adults, and from that fact it's natural to come to the conclusion that since adults=older=better relationships for gifted kids, then 11 yr. old=older=better relationship for a 6 or 7 year old gifted child, this is simply not the case.

And I know you're going to say that such and such number of studies dispute this -- to which I have no defense except to say that it's very easy to make the results of any study come out to what you want/expect them to be...unintentionally or otherwise.

>When it comes to profoundly gifted children, these kids do to tend to be more 
>mature, more emotionally and socially developed than their chronological age would 
>indicate, in the vast majority of cases. 

Emotionally and socially, sure.  But the things that make me feel that kids in the 12ish age bracket are such unsuitable peers for someone around 8 years of age are strongly influenced by *physical* factors.  The personalities, emotions, etc. of kids approaching/going through puberty are *so* influenced by *physical* (esp. hormonal) changes that parents of such kids often complain that they don't recognize the person who has suddenly and inexplicably taken over their child's body.

Also, I don't know about just PG kids, but *all* the gifted kids I know tended to have a different experience of puberty than their peers anyway.  From my own experience and the stories that the other gifted girls I know tell me now, we tend to experience the change into adolescence as a period of deep depression and/or indifference or annoyance at the antics of our peers...as opposed to said peers, who spent most of their puberty years being quite MAD about boys.

Now, don't get me wrong, I like boys and I've had my fair share of lunatic crushes.  If anything, I may have "noticed" boys as sexual beings before any of my friends -- but there has been no point in my life where you could have caught me DEAD giggling over a picture of some baby-faced celebrity or engaging in any of the other activities that so characterize most pre-adolescent/adolescent girls' discovery of their sexuality.  When my friends were going through this stage I felt completely alienated and depressed...I can't imagine how confused and left-out I would have felt if I was 8 or so when my classmates entered into this stage.       


Shaun:
>This is part of the problem I have to deal with in advocating for these kids - people 
>just *assume* they know what will happen, sometimes based on their experiences - 
>unless their experiences have been with PG kids, they really do not know what will 
>work and what is needed.
<snip>
>Please - don't assume your experience is complete. It's not fair on these kids - 
>because most people do not experience what they have to go through.

Now, wait a second.

What (I think) you are trying to say is that putting a PG kid a more than 3 grades ahead of their age group is more beneficial than leaving them with kids their own age.  *I* am trying to say that neither sounds like a very good option to me.  I have no clue whether I would be considered PG or not -- probably not.  I'm smart..but..I don't know..  I would definitely be uncomfortable with that label -- probably develop some of the feelings of being a fraud and needing to live up to other people's expectations such as another listie mentioned earlier in this discussion.

And, either way, it's definitely unfair of me to base all my opinions on my *own* experience..first, because I am, obviously, just one example...and I would have probably been miserable anywhere they put me for reasons entirely unrelated to my "gifted" status.

But I *have* met a number of kids who -- if they aren't PG, I don't know who is.  Being part of a magnet school (which, BTW is just about the only place gifted kids can go in Maine)...I also probably come in more contact with these people than average person...And, yes, they do tend to be more mature than other kids their age -- even other "gifted" kids...(I was surprised when I came here at the number of very smart kids who were just as immature as my old set of peers...I had always equated "intelligent" with "mature") And I do see the difference between them and kids that are "gifted", but not EG/PG.  However, I still think my arguments against putting them, as 8 yr. olds, in 7th or 8th grade are just as, if not more, valid.

*sigh* Gifted or not, I'm probably the only person on this list stupid enough to try to argue with the amount of research that backs up your claims..but, there it is.  

laura


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]