FWIW - I haven't read the book myself - I read a discussion of it elsewhere (on the FB mkp group, but AFAIR you aren't an mkper?) in which the chapter involving IQ tests and GT programs was being criticised for having many factual inaccuracies, including concerning some of what it said about tests. So you might want either to check that figure about how bogus IQ testing preschoolers is, or at least maintain a mental question mark over it.
Interesting. One of my general problems with the book is that I really don't think the authors cars much about being accurate. They describe research, which is a step above most parenting books, but they are still more interested in telling a story rather than describing what is known about a particular topic. I suppose that sells articles better, but it's not as satisfying for me as a reader.
I know I've heard before that IQ tests scores aren't very stable in early childhood, though I don't remember seeing any details about what that means.
They aren't all that stable at any age, and yes, less so in early childhood. It was just the specific number I was wondering about. It could be right, though, and I certainly agree that IQ testing preschoolers is weird. It doesn't seem as though it should be beyond the wit of humankind to educate each person appropriately
( ... )
Speaking as a late bloomer myself, I think it is a good idea to keep Helen from noticing. My parents did that, when I bloomed slowly. They only told me they'd been worried about my early intellectual development (or lack thereof) on the day I got my PhD. :> Like Erik may be, my younger brother was crackerjack smart from Day One.
I don't know if Erik (or Helen) are going to be particularly smart or not. But my feeling is that it will take longer to tell with Helen than it will with Erik.
I wouldn't call my kid a late bloomer, but he was not exactly a superstar at early childhood, if that makes sense. I think those things are different. We have long known that he's very bright, very engaging, yada yada yada, but that did not translate in preK and kindergarten. In part I blame the teachers, in part I blame an environment that (by necessity) has to corral behavior and gets kids being normalized very early on and I *really* blame this environment for overvaluing social alpha behavior in early childhood (those are the kids that are gonna be easiest to deal with in a group, after all.) In kindergarten his teacher got in my face and told me she thought he had "social and learning issues. SERIOUS ONES!" (I blew her off because I just didn't buy it...) Fast forward to now (3rd grade.) He is a superstar in school. He's the kid the teachers love, he's the kid who Gets It, he's the strong academician. So much for SERIOUS PROBLEMS. *eyeroll* Those kids who were all over it in preK? Eh...very average
( ... )
Well, you could be on another end of the spectrum and think that your kid is exceptionally gifted for zir age group and that you're not doing enough as a parent to fulfill that talent and are wasting it.
Comments 7
Reply
I know I've heard before that IQ tests scores aren't very stable in early childhood, though I don't remember seeing any details about what that means.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment