GPA reality check

[axialpac]

This was a joke right? Haha sounds like torture!

I'm signing my kids up for a bunch of sports and music-related activities at an early age

No, I'm serious. I promise I'll make it fun. There's nothing more enjoyable than math put to use ---> i.e. physics. My child's first sentence will be "I wuv fweezikss" ... haha

 

I never really understood those "gifted" programs. How exactly do they determine that a child is "gifted"?? The term really pisses me off too, as if they are implying that other children are stupid or something. And to think, the greatest minds in our history weren't exactly child prodigies so the program hints of arrogance, in my opinion.

[thehumanmacbook]

No, I'm serious. I promise I'll make it fun. There's nothing more enjoyable than math put to use ---> i.e. physics. My child's first sentence will be "I wuv fweezikss" ... haha

 

I never really understood those "gifted" programs. How exactly do they determine that a child is "gifted"?? The term really pisses me off too, as if they are implying that other children are stupid or something.

 

In my old school, I think it was a standardized IQ test.

[axialpac]

In my old school, I think it was a standardized IQ test.

 

Is there some sort of statistic that proves that children in "gifted" programs go on to do greater things than the other children?

[thehumanmacbook]

Is there some sort of statistic that proves that children in "gifted" programs go on to do greater things than the other children?

 

Unfortunately, I'm not sure. But perhaps they have greater opportunities in the program to do "greater" (not sure how you define that) things than other children in other programs and then subsequently, the gifted program advertises how their students are better accomplished than the "average" kid.

 

You see this a lot in different university programs as well. I don't advocate it at all, but it is an unfortunate and indirect reality sometimes.

[futurepediatric]

No, I'm serious. I promise I'll make it fun. There's nothing more enjoyable than math put to use ---> i.e. physics. My child's first sentence will be "I wuv fweezikss" ... haha

 

I never really understood those "gifted" programs. How exactly do they determine that a child is "gifted"?? The term really pisses me off too, as if they are implying that other children are stupid or something.

 

LOL you're child may feel differently

 

Not sure how it generally works, in my brother and cousin's case they took a few tests

[medguy5367]

I never really understood those "gifted" programs. How exactly do they determine that a child is "gifted"?? The term really pisses me off too, as if they are implying that other children are stupid or something. And to think, the greatest minds in our history weren't exactly child prodigies so the program hints of arrogance, in my opinion.

 

 

I was in a "gifted" program. You took an IQ test, and if you got >135, you were in.

 

 

And please name some "great minds in history" that weren't highly intelligent children.... I'm waiting...

[carolynH]

Gifted children used to mean kids with extra strength in one or more areas (language, math, science, arts, and sports) than kids of their own age. Some of them could even be considered special ed because of their exceptionally weak performance in other areas. Gifted programs were set up for them so that they wouldn't be bored and started bothering other kids in the class room and also to give them the stimulation they need. Gifted programs nowadays are blurred with enriched programs since some of the so called "gifted" kids are actually kids who do extremely well in their class. Some of them were "trained" to do high level math and science (mainly math) at an early age. I've seen parents actually pushed their kids so hard in order for them to be accepted into the gifted program and be so proud to brag around it. Kids from gifted programs may not necessarily be doing more successfully than kids from other programs or even regular programs. In fact, I've read an article that studied the outcome of a group of gifted kids. Most of them didn't do too well in life. Their EQ and social skills are not good enough to enable them to get along well with others and therefore do not do well in the real world.

 

Anyway, I do agree with training your kids early. You'll never know the potential of a child/baby. I've seen kids whose parents started actually talking to them (not baby talk) when they were infants. They were able to speak in full sentence when they were just 12 months old. They were also being read to since they started to have more than a minute of attention. They started reading on their own (with phonics skills) before age 3! So, yeah, start early!

[astrogirl]

What did you do your PhD on, in physics??

 

Well, technically it was astrophysics. Red supergiant pulsating stars (observational, not computer simulation stuff). Stars like Betelgeuse that are going to blow up "soon." And my master's was on using the calcium II H and K lines and some hydrogen lines in the same wavelength region to come up with new ways to measure temperatures of stars. Much less exciting than stuff blowing up.

[carolynH]

 

I never really understood those "gifted" programs. How exactly do they determine that a child is "gifted"?? The term really pisses me off too, as if they are implying that other children are stupid or something. And to think, the greatest minds in our history weren't exactly child prodigies so the program hints of arrogance, in my opinion.

 

A child is tested by a psychologist to check his/her IQ level. If he/she is in the 98th (corrected not 99th, sorry it was too long ago) percentile of kids in the same age group then he/she is considered gifted. There's is this school that "produces" so many "gifted" children after the test every year (that school board has a standardized test for all Grade 3 kids every year) and you know what? Majority of the children in that school are sent to take extra tutoring classes (study ahead kind) after school by their parents!

[xkittens]

In fact, I've read an article that studied the outcome of a group of gifted kids. Most of them didn't do too well in life. Their EQ and social skills are not good enough to enable them to get along well with others and therefore do not do well in the real world.

 

In psych we learned that moderately gifted children (IQ 130-160) had better social skills and emotional intelligence than people of normal IQ, it was only the profoundly gifted (IQ >160) that had those problems

[axialpac]

Well, technically it was astrophysics. Red supergiant pulsating stars (observational, not computer simulation stuff). Stars like Betelgeuse that are going to blow up "soon." And my master's was on using the calcium II H and K lines and some hydrogen lines in the same wavelength region to come up with new ways to measure temperatures of stars. Much less exciting than stuff blowing up.

 

That's really interesting!! haha "soon" ... I'm guessing you mean a couple of million years.

[medigeek]

A child is tested by a psychologist to check his/her IQ level. If he/she is in the 99th percentile of kids in the same age group then he/she is considered gifted. There's is this school that "produces" so many "gifted" children after the test every year (that school board has a standardized test for all Grade 3 kids every year) and you know what? Majority of the children in that school are sent to take extra tutoring classes (study ahead kind) after school!

 

I was in a gifted program from grade 4 onwards, and it's actually 98th percentile and higher.

Throughout half the test I was wondering how some of these questions could possibly judge someone's intelligence.... like a lot of the questions I could see how, but some things like basic knowledge questions... lolz.

[medguy5367]

Yes, because Einstein developed his theories of special and general relativity when he was a child

 

For me to name some greatest minds (in my opinion, physicists, I'm sure there are others -- but I'm only familiar with physicists) you need to define what is meant by a "highly intelligent child" -- many of the physicists I'm aware of, their talents were unnoticed as children, they were regarded as nothing special until they got older. For example Feynman, by age 15, was experimenting with various mathematical techniques and had a great understanding of calculus -- but as a child he was average at best.

 

Most of the greatest physicists had normal childhoods (some were late talkers!) and it wasn't until they got older that their natural aptitudes in math and physics were manifested.

 

What the hell are you blabbering about? Who said that Einstein was developing groundbreaking physics when he was a child??

 

All I said was that Einstein was a highly intelligent child, and that this is the norm - gifted children go on to be gifted adults.

 

And just because no one "notices" them doesn't mean that they aren't brilliant as children.

 

 

Please read more carefully and work on your reading comprehension skills...

[astrogirl]

That's really interesting!! haha "soon" ... I'm guessing you mean a couple of million years.

 

Yeah, pretty much. Although a couple of them are behaving very erratically, which could be a sign that they're going to go supernova in something on the order of 100-1000 years. Still probably not within my lifetime, though.

[axialpac]

What the hell are you blabbering about? Who said that Einstein was developing groundbreaking physics when he was a child??

 

All I said was that Einstein was a highly intelligent child, and that this is the norm - gifted children go on to be gifted adults.

 

And just because no one "notices" them doesn't mean that they aren't brilliant as children.

 

 

Please read more carefully and work on your reading comprehension skills...

No, they weren't "brilliant" as children. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. I've read numerous biographies on Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman and by no means were they prodigies until after they entered their pre- to teenage years and they ONLY had natural aptitudes in math and physics and didn't do too well in other subjects.

 

Read up on ACTUAL child prodigies. Children who mastered several languages and have the ability to learn a new one in little over a month. Children who learned calculus at 5 years or younger and who had IQs of 120+.

[xkittens]

What the hell are you blabbering about? Who said that Einstein was developing groundbreaking physics when he was a child??

 

All I said was that Einstein was a highly intelligent child, and that this is the norm - gifted children go on to be gifted adults.

 

And just because no one "notices" them doesn't mean that they aren't brilliant as children.

 

 

Please read more carefully and work on your reading comprehension skills...

 

Wow does everyone in gifted programs turn out like this?

good thing I dropped outta that s**t a long time ago

[medguy5367]

No, they weren't "brilliant" as children. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. I've read numerous biographies on Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman and by no means were they prodigies until after they entered their pre- to teenage years and they ONLY had natural aptitudes in math and physics and didn't do too well in other subjects.

 

Read up on ACTUAL child prodigies. Children who mastered several languages and have the ability to learn a new one in little over a month. Children who learned calculus at 5 years or younger and who had IQs of 120+.

 

No one is talking about child prodigies. Please stop listening to the voices in your head.

 

The discussion is about whether brilliant physicists, etc. show high intelligence as children.

 

 

Now that we've got that sorted out:

 

Einstein excelled in academics almost immediately. He showed high intelligence in both physics and mathematics, and was mastering Euclid's geometric principles by the age of twelve.

[medguy5367]

In other words, a brilliant child.

[xkittens]

Children who learned calculus at 5 years or younger and who had IQs of 120+.

 

I'm sorry what?! A child with an IQ of 120 at the age of 5 means that they have the same mental capabilities as an average 6 year old (6/5X100 = 120).

My IQ was much higher than 120 at age 5, and I would have never been able to learn calculus, I liked to do a lot of math and adding/diving/multiplying was as far as I got

I don't think an average 6 year old can do differential equations lol

[leap87]

Gifted children used to mean kids with extra strength in one or more areas (language, math, science, arts, and sports) than kids of their own age. Some of them could even be considered special ed because of their exceptionally weak performance in other areas. Gifted programs were set up for them so that they wouldn't be bored and started bothering other kids in the class room and also to give them the stimulation they need. Gifted programs nowadays are blurred with enriched programs since some of the so called "gifted" kids are actually kids who do extremely well in their class. Some of them were "trained" to do high level math and science (mainly math) at an early age. I've seen parents actually pushed their kids so hard in order for them to be accepted into the gifted program and be so proud to brag around it. Kids from gifted programs may not necessarily be doing more successfully than kids from other programs or even regular programs. In fact, I've read an article that studied the outcome of a group of gifted kids. Most of them didn't do too well in life. Their EQ and social skills are not good enough to enable them to get along well with others and therefore do not do well in the real world.

 

Anyway, I do agree with training your kids early. You'll never know the potential of a child/baby. I've seen kids whose parents started actually talking to them (not baby talk) when they were infants. They were able to speak in full sentence when they were just 12 months old. They were also being read to since they started to have more than a minute of attention. They started reading on their own (with phonics skills) before age 3! So, yeah, start early!

 

I'd be careful not to generalize about children in the "gifted" or "enriched" program. I was in the so called, then "gifted" program because I was really good at music - as in, I composed at an early age, knew how to play 3 instruments, had no trouble learning a new instrument really quickly, and now looking back at it, I got 100% in every single assignment/quiz/test/exam in music. So they placed me in the "gifted" program. But I do remember the kids that were in the same program as me. They were all "gifted" in different areas - drama, art, math, etc. 75% of them had great social skills and were also those popular kids in school that everyone liked.

 

I actually checked what some of these people are doing now: one is in med school, another is working for Google, another one is a manager at some company, one of them is doing movies, one of them most recently published a book.... Yes, some of them may have fallen off the bandwagon but not ALL of them.

 

I'd like to see this paper you're referring to.

 

Edit: Too bad the OP is banned. I'd say to him: if uni is soooooo easy, why are you ONLY getting As and an A-?! Why not all A+s?!

[drkwhy]

Edit: Too bad the OP is banned. I'd say to him: if uni is soooooo easy, why are you ONLY getting As and an A-?! Why not all A+s?!

 

I think he went by the UofT system where there are no "A+"s

[leap87]

I think he went by the UofT system where there are no "A+"s

 

lol... (10 char)

[carolynH]

I'd be careful not to generalize about children in the "gifted" or "enriched" program. I was in the so called, then "gifted" program because I was really good at music - as in, I composed at an early age, knew how to play 3 instruments, had no trouble learning a new instrument really quickly, and now looking back at it, I got 100% in every single assignment/quiz/test/exam in music. So they placed me in the "gifted" program. But I do remember the kids that were in the same program as me. They were all "gifted" in different areas - drama, art, math, etc. 75% of them had great social skills and were also those popular kids in school that everyone liked.

 

I actually checked what some of these people are doing now: one is in med school, another is working for Google, another one is a manager at some company, one of them is doing movies, one of them most recently published a book.... Yes, some of them may have fallen off the bandwagon but not ALL of them.

 

I'd like to see this paper you're referring to.

 

 

Sorry I couldn't find the actual articles I read, but here are some similar ones:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8028543/Gifted-children-no-more-likely-to-succeed.html

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1315414/Gifted-children-just-likely-fail-life.html

 

Please don't get me wrong. I do not generalize the kids in gifted programs or enriched programs. There are obviously smart, hard working, non-arrogant, and kind individuals with high EQ and social skills in these programs and will do well and successfully in real life. If you are one of them, then I'm happy for you. I'm just basing what I said on the different findings I read and the large number of people (both in gifted programs and enriched programs) I saw in real life. By no means they represent the whole pool.

 

Happy New Year to all!

[ArchEnemy]

I think he went by the UofT system where there are no "A+"s

 

There are A+s at UofT.

[zainy1993]

I think I might know this person David from UT. Are you that asian kid who always sits in the front and asking questions 24/7 and sometimes you like to summarize and explain the prof or the TLS guy what he just said like a second ago. Im not joking, literally the whole of life science knows him and we all hate him. He sounds like the obnoxious kid though from class, but I never knew he would have been so vocal about these things. I always got the feeling that he's a bit shy around other students.