DS's 4th grade math teacher was a lot like those CFK has encountered, and about passed out from shock when I suggested possibly skipping 5th grade math. The idea was incomprehensible to her. The stubborn part of me really wants to update her on DS's upcoming placement (algebra 2) in the school year where he WOULD have had 6th grade math on her path.

DS had a great teacher in 2nd grade, which was his first year of NCLB testing. Our state tests in the fall and spring. DS's math score went from 4th grade level in the fall to 8th in the spring of his 2nd grade year. His teacher was so sweet, but a little embarrassed. She pulled me aside and said, "You know I'd like to take credit for his improvement, but I don't deserve it. I *know* I didn't teach him this stuff; did you?" I told her I hadn't taught it to him either and we both had a good giggle.

But I do think she *did* teach him more than she took credit for. She did sneak a few hard problems when she could and she was very good at explaining notation etc. I think DS was ready to take off and run with any tid-bits he could get.

Yes, I think "tidbits" (good word choice!) often get absorbed so fast that we don't even realize they were there.

That's not to say that some kids don't figure things out completely on their own, sans tidbits. But I find it hard to define a kid as not PG for not knowing something that he has never seen before. That was really my main point. Am I making more sense?

If a K-er has never seen 6th grade math, he might master it on his own and would certainly fit CFK's definition of PG. (And mine!) But then again, I think it's absolutely possible for a child to be PG and not to have mastered math that he's never seen, even if math is his strong suit. I just don't think it's wise to base the definition on those extremely stringent terms.

Would someone call my school district and explain that to them? That was the total basis of their refusal to test DS6. They gave him a 2nd grade math sheet, he looked at them like they were crazy and voila- he's not gifted.

Ugh! Sorry M&M!

I think the debate comes from the "public" opinion of what PG is and not the bands of grey as you get to EG. And some of us would defint those grey bands as EG not PG, as defined by DYS.

Someone mentioned that calculus would be hard to do without some teaching. I disagree. If I don't have enough money to buy a house and the guy selling the house sells me the option to buy it in six months at a set price, I have a derivative, that's calculus.

I imagined everyone here followed the example, hence an uber bright PG child could do derivative concepts in his head just like he knows how to do a puzzle.

And yes, kids are not black and white, but there seems to be so many darker shades of grey before you get to that little man Tate phenomenom of PG.

There are moments of head turning when my child says something, and she did sit down at her Barbie piano and do a scale at 2, but I don't expect her to play like Mozart any time soon. To me it is EG, not PG. Maybe not by Davidson definition, but my view of PG.

Ren

I agree there are bands of gray....I guess I'm just not sure why it matters. I don't care what people call my son, so long as he continues to get the acceleration he's scheduled for (I had a dream last night where they took it away, !)

My take on the "self taught" calculus was based on the notation. With a book and his own time....sure, the sky is wide open, but give the kid a WJ and show him the integral sign, and chances are he won't know what that means, nor how to solve it.

I'm with Dottie. Who cares as long as my child is taken care of? Of course, when a school or teacher overlooks him, a label is helpful, but in the end, I don't want my child left behind - or ahead, as the case may be.

I think my point, way back when, black and white etc...

is that if we could have a stronger definition it would make advocacy, or taking care of my child, easier with the powers that be. Defining the educational needs, whether homeschooled or not.

Ren

Hi Ren,

I think the term you are looking for/describing is a child prodigy.