Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihnet.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!ihnp4!ihnet!tjr From: tjr@ihnet.UUCP Newsgroups: net.kids Subject: Re: Classes for gifted children Message-ID: <117@ihnet.UUCP> Date: Mon, 30-Jan-84 12:19:59 EST Article-I.D.: ihnet.117 Posted: Mon Jan 30 12:19:59 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 1-Feb-84 01:38:07 EST Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 58 I wish to enter this discussion of school programs for "gifted" children from another viewpoint - personal experience. In 1955, at Christmas, I was moved from kindergarten to first grade, one year ahead of normal; since then, I attended one grade ahead of the other kids my age. THIS WAS GREAT! Even without it, I was usually bored stiff in school, until I reached post-graduate studies at the University of Illinois. The boredom of intelligent children in the public-school system cannot be overestimated. Teachers have to run the classes for the "average"; they run remedial sessions for the "slower", and usually let the "brighter" children fend for themselves. The only teachers I remember are those that made some effort to challenge me, by special assignments or suggestions for outside reading or projects. Many teachers interpreted my boredom as indifference or antagonism, which complicated the situation. I believe that any effort to encourage school children to expand their horizons or to really get out there and "think" MUST be encouraged. Remember, the "best and brightest" will be the leaders of tomorrow, we should try to help them, not constantly put impediments in their path. To the parent that expressed concern that their child's program was not effective, or was downright wrong: sure, every program must be evaluated upon its own merits; but remember, YOU are NOT an eight-year-old (I doubt that you enjoy finger-painting, why should you enjoy intellectual exercises aimed at children?) - the program should be evaluated BY THE CHILDREN. Yes, young children can be amazingly adult at times; they can also be exasperatingly childish, God Bless 'Em. The example given was that "pig:pork" was claimed to be 'the same relationship' as "egg:chicken"; clearly they are not THE SAME (in some sense), but there clearly are some aspects that are THE SAME (i.e. one becomes the other). Taking such an example out of context can be very misleading - what the teacher says and does with such an example is all important. This could be a deliberate attempt to get the children to examing what "the same" means, and not merely an exercise in relationships; I don't know, I wasn't there. I think that this example could be brilliant, with GREAT pedagogical potential - there are several other aspects of "sameness" and "relationships" and "becoming" (etc.) that could be explored. It all depends upon the teacher; if the children were encouraged to use this as a springboard into other ideas, it seems to me to be EXACTLY what a program for gifted children should be all about. [Don't say that I am ascribing too much intelligence to children - I distinctly remember an I.Q. test I took in 3rd-6th grade, containing just such relationship questions. I had never seen such questions before, and after a few minutes of figuring out just what was being asked, I was amazed (and excited) at the breadth and generality such relationships among relationships expressed. Taking that TEST was a major LEARNING EXPERIENCE for me.] In short, talk to your children about their schooling, and such programs - they are people, too, and their evaluation is really the important one. Tom Roberts {ihnp4!}ihnet!tjr