|
the trump tutelage posted:You're talking to stone cold. The only two kinds of people who exist are whites and their victims. Also true.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:You're talking to stone cold. The only two kinds of people who exist are whites and their victims. Next you'll tell us that the history of all hitherto existing society isn't the history of class struggles
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
i was in a gifted program, and i think my posts are qualitative examples of how gifted programs are worthless and poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
this is the perfect thread for this forum full of complete loving idiots, especially myself
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
I attended a Gifted program as a kid. I can relate to the lack of challenges, the emotional and social issues, etc. I turned out pretty drat ok: got a great gig as a scientist at a startup that may actually be a unicorn, I'm married with a three year old kid and another in utero, I have deep friendships and generally respect from my peers. I do have issues, as we all do, but as I get older my strong emotions are chilling out and I'm getting rid of self-destructive habits slowly but surely. So that's my story. I think frequently how I'll handle my daughter if she takes after me, as she has shown a number of traits I had at her age, and truthfully I'll just roll with the punches as they come along.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
I was in a gifted program, and it probably saved me a few concussions in my little rural town who inexplicably had a gifted teacher who was a goddamn treasure of a teacher, the kind that doesn't exist anymore because we don't oppress women into one of a half dozen career tracks like what happened when she was young and could've been a superstar at whatever she did. I was segregated from the other kids who I didn't get along with and put into a small classroom with other students who were a bit more odd, and weren't all gung-ho on the south rising again, death to all Yankees, slavery was good for black people, and all that jazz you'll find in Tiny Shithole, Louisiana that an argumentative boy would get into fights over these ideas. Maybe I'm not terribly much smarter than the average person, but I liked the gifted and talented classes. Certainly I wouldn't have received an education of any kind without those classes for the 6-10th grade of my school life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:I was in a gifted program, and it probably saved me a few concussions in my little rural town who inexplicably had a gifted teacher who was a goddamn treasure of a teacher, the kind that doesn't exist anymore because we don't oppress women into one of a half dozen career tracks like what happened when she was young and could've been a superstar at whatever she did. I was segregated from the other kids who I didn't get along with and put into a small classroom with other students who were a bit more odd, and weren't all gung-ho on the south rising again, death to all Yankees, slavery was good for black people, and all that jazz you'll find in Tiny Shithole, Louisiana that an argumentative boy would get into fights over these ideas. Greetings fellow bright kid from Bumfuck nowhere.I, too, had to deal with shitbirds like whom you describe, though I got the added blessing of daring to be an atheist pretending to be Catholic in a region full of hateful, hypocritical Protestant sects. Glad I got out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:Greetings fellow bright kid from Bumfuck nowhere.I, too, had to deal with shitbirds like whom you describe, though I got the added blessing of daring to be an atheist pretending to be Catholic in a region full of hateful, hypocritical Protestant sects. Glad I got out. If you were so smart why didn't you just pretend to be a Protestant around those people?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
I was in a gifted program, and now I'm going to demonstrate it by posting 500 words that neither address anything previously discussed in this thread nor offer any insight into the value of such programs except insofar as can be presumed from my obvious narcissism and rambling aimless prose
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I was in a gifted program, and now I'm going to demonstrate it by posting 500 words that neither address anything previously discussed in this thread nor offer any insight into the value of such programs except insofar as can be presumed from my obvious narcissism and rambling aimless prose *checks forum* yep, still in d&d
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:If you were so smart why didn't you just pretend to be a Protestant around those people? It was a town of 4000 people, it's not like I could hide an affiliation. Are you the kind of person who asks black people why they just don't act whiter around white people?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:It was a town of 4000 people, it's not like I could hide an affiliation. Are you the kind of person who asks black people why they just don't act whiter around white people? No, I'm the kind of person that can recognize an obvious joke, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:No, I'm the kind of person that can recognize an obvious joke, though. TBH it's not a v. good "joke," seeing how I've been asked that before with no joke intended. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I was in a gifted program, and now I'm going to demonstrate it by posting 500 words that neither address anything previously discussed in this thread nor offer any insight into the value of such programs except insofar as can be presumed from my obvious narcissism and rambling aimless prose
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What I'm gathering from this thread is that "gifted and talented" children turn out to be neither. Learning quickly can also be a strong disadvantage. There is an excellent book that's come out recently called "Unbroken Brain" that argues that addiction is related to learning differences. While primarily dealing with addiction it explains a great many of the concepts needed to understand why G&T people don't really do any better than any one else. An example, is the compulsive interests, we don't really choose what we get interested in and we get super interested in whatever it is to the exclusion of other things. One has to learn how to point ones compulsive interest at things and that's a really hard thing to do. On top of that it's easy to look at "sucess" as defined by society go: well gently caress that bull poo poo and choose something else. There is the issue of a qualitative difference in experience of the world too. Losses, set backs, anger, negative emotions and behaviors, we learn those things faster and feel them more intensely. Unlearning or modifying the habituated isn't easy. Think of brains like a sponge sucking up concepts from whatever its in. People don't get to choose what they learn from society and family; G&T get hosed up more from bad environments. Owlofcreamcheese posted:I imagine most people in G&T end up above average. But people just hear "above average" and think a lot more than that really means. Like the average income of a person in the US is about 34,000. I bet most G&T students end up above that. But like 50% to 150% higher than that, not 10,000% higher than that. It's 20% more income and no real difference in distribution of what we do. I can think of Oscar winners, waitstaff, bank managers, early dead from drugs, etc from the people I went to school with. Chance and time happen to them all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:i was in a gifted program, and i think my posts are qualitative examples of how gifted programs are worthless and poo poo  i also dropped out of high school and then college multiple times fortunately depression helped me avoid hyperfocus by making it impossible to focus on anything i enjoyed for very long
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:It's 20% more income and no real difference in distribution of what we do. 20% above average is still above average. Like I think that is a big thing, people hear "above average" and think millionaires and movie stars then get let down when above average just means above average.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:A good post describing a dual diagnosis situation This was similar to my younger sister she tested right at the line but was also moderately dyslexic. What you're describing mirrors what she went through. Adding to OP
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
I was in G&T classes, and my wife was not. She's more successful than I am by every concievable metric except for dead gay comedy forum post count. G&T is a worthless, garbage label.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:It's 20% more income and no real difference in distribution of what we do. I can think of Oscar winners, waitstaff, bank managers, early dead from drugs, etc from the people I went to school with. Chance and time happen to them all. BrandorKP posted:Then go with multiple standard deviations from the mean on whatever standardized tests are most appropriate and reflective of the current research. Easy peasy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I was in G&T classes, and my wife was not. She's more successful than I am by every concievable metric except for dead gay comedy forum post count. G&T is a worthless, garbage label. That's a pretty sweet N=1, anecdotal point of datum you got there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
i can say "i poo poo my pants" in seventeen languages
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:That's a pretty sweet N=1, anecdotal point of datum you got there. Sharing personal experiences has been the majority of this thread, my dude. S'bout as valid as your whinging about how hard it was to be an atheist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
twodot posted:
I've mentioned a bunch of time that schools mostly use the OLSAT for placement in gifted and talented. It's a test that is half IQ style thinking questions and half grade appropriate academic stuff like math problems and vocabulary tests.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:23
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:20% above average is still above average. Like I think that is a big thing, people hear "above average" and think millionaires and movie stars then get let down when above average just means above average. Hell, even the Terman Study of the Gifted didn't find scores upon scores of ultra high achievers, and he actively interfered in the study by writing letters of recommendation for numerous participants.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Sharing personal experiences has been the majority of this thread, my dude. S'bout as valid as your whinging about how hard it was to be an atheist. Actually wasn't an atheist until college, but I was getting the poo poo kicked out of me for being Catholic in the time period I was speaking about. The difference between the two: I shared a semi-detailed anecdote about my experience as a kid with the G tag, you shared a sentence and drew a conclusion that the whole shebang is worthless because it didn't apply to your case, in your view. Here's a question: what if your wife should've been labeled gifted? Or, what if you "diagnosis" was right on, and your education or socialization stunted your abilities? There's just a lot of ways to take it, is what I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
What I'm not seeing is how 'gifted and talented' as a label corresponds to a categorical distinction. You keep trying to draw these lines, "more obsessed", "more intense" etc, and I'm not sure that they correspond to anything but your gut feeling. Phenomenologically, no one has any point of reference for the personal experience of others, other than their own - how is it then possible to come to a vague a conclusion as 'higher emotional intensity'? Isnt using that as a shorthand for behavioral problems, which can stem from almost anything including external factors such as family situation, a bit of special pleading?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I've mentioned a bunch of time that schools mostly use the OLSAT for placement in gifted and talented. It's a test that is half IQ style thinking questions and half grade appropriate academic stuff like math problems and vocabulary tests.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
i demand that all of my discussion threads consist only of the results of rigorous double-blind studies
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Don't we have, like, an entirely separate forum for people who want to post about their personal experiences without regard to whether anyone else in the world should ever give a poo poo about them?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Its one thing to talk about how some kids perform better than others academically, programs designed to help said kids, or talk about that and the confluence of behavioral problems - but the positioning the existence of 'gifted and talented' as a psychological phenomena itself, is quite another. I think some level of skepticism is justified.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
twodot posted:How is the person who earlier totally deferred to explain what they meant by gifted now coming up with what appears to be hard data regarding the outcomes of gifted children? Maybe I was mistaken... I gave the definition I like in the OP: "Giftedness is asynchronous development in which advanced cognitive abilities and heightened intensity combine to create inner experiences and awareness that are qualitatively different from the norm." I followed with a general discussion of how the specific criteria widely vary between states and districts. It's squishy because there isn't really a federal standard. Well the PSAT is a disguised gifted screening for giving out national merit scholarships and no child left had some guidelines. By "totally deferred" do you mean in the OP? I would have picked up the 20% thing from either Hoagies or Davidson, they are generally where I go looking for information. I've seen articles on how different segments do (profound/exceptional, moderate,etc) in different countries, in accelerated vs not etc. I think the one I picked it up from was talking about all categories, can't seem to find it again. I know there are some articles on the exceptional/profound getting more doctorates etc. Go hog wild: http://www.davidsongifted.org/Search-Database http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/ twodot posted:Hmm, nope. Can you just post the objective measure you are using to come to the conclusions you are posting? This cannot be an objective conversation for me. Some of my conclusion are personal observations of attending a congregated school of about 2000 gifted students. Some are self observation. Some are my observations of my wife and son. Some will refer to articles, books and data I've read. I cannot be objective about my conclusions. I am in, and the people I most deeply and immediately care about are in, the category being examined. No goddamn way I can be objective. I'm going to have deeply rooted biases.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:I cannot be objective about my conclusions. BrandorKP posted:I would have picked up the 20% thing from either Hoagies or Davidson, they are generally where I go looking for information. I've seen articles on how different segments do (profound/exceptional, moderate,etc) in different countries, in accelerated vs not etc. I think the one I picked it up from was talking about all categories, can't seem to find it again. I know there are some articles on the exceptional/profound getting more doctorates etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
twodot posted:Cool is that the measure that is behind the data that BrandorKP was presenting? Are you and they the same poster? If that's the measure that BrandorKP thinks is appropriate, why didn't they just offer that instead of saying "just choose whatever test you want and whatever metrics you want based on that test"? Because knowing the name of the test is weird obscure trivia no one would know? That I just know because it's a computerized test.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
twodot posted:Cool is that the measure that is behind the data that BrandorKP was presenting? Are you and they the same poster? If that's the measure that BrandorKP thinks is appropriate, why didn't they just offer that instead of saying "just choose whatever test you want and whatever metrics you want based on that test"? You know, it seems like there are always a bunch of D&D goons that are super butthurt about the idea of discussing the education system. I think you're the same as the people posting their personal anecdotes about how terrible their school experience was. Instead of recounting your own personal trauma, you just express your general anger about discussion of the school system. Can you show us on the doll where they touched you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Because knowing the name of the test is weird obscure trivia no one would know? That I just know because it's a computerized test. litany of gulps posted:You know, it seems like there are always a bunch of D&D goons that are super butthurt about the idea of discussing the education system. I think you're the same as the people posting their personal anecdotes about how terrible their school experience was. Instead of recounting your own personal trauma, you just express your general anger about discussion of the school system. Can you show us on the doll where they touched you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Its one thing to talk about how some kids perform better than others academically, programs designed to help said kids, or talk about that and the confluence of behavioral problems - but the positioning the existence of 'gifted and talented' as a psychological phenomena itself, is quite another. I think some level of skepticism is justified. At the end of 18th months the milestone for a child is to say 8 - 10 words. At the age my son had spoken vocabulary of over 100 words and was using sentence structure. Can you in good faith tell me that degree of difference from the norm isn't going to cause behavioral and psychological repercussions?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
twodot posted:Let me be clear, I am very specifically butt hurt about people trying to present objective data as somehow authoritative while totally failing to provide any sort of evidence their data is remotely correct. I'm happy to be butt hurt about this across a variety of topics. Right, you're just asking questions. You definitely seem to have something to offer to the conversation while complaining about other people's contributions. You'll dismiss a dozen anecdotes with your smug superiority alone! Do YOU have anything to offer, or are you just whining?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:At the end of 18th months the milestone for a child is to say 8 - 10 words. At the age my son had spoken vocabulary of over 100 words and was using sentence structure. edit: litany of gulps posted:Right, you're just asking questions. You definitely seem to have something to offer to the conversation while complaining about other people's contributions. You'll dismiss a dozen anecdotes with your smug superiority alone! Do YOU have anything to offer, or are you just whining? twodot fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
twodot posted:"Excuse me, sir. Are you a literal oracle that predict the future of this individual child, 5, 10, or even 50 years into the future? Oh? You aren't literally omniscient possessing all possible knowledge of both the present and future? What's the point then? Also I'm allowed to make declarations about other children's future without any sort of evidence that I'm right, and if you ask me for evidence, I'll just say I forgot, and you should find it." Right, just managing to balance being both smug and whining at the same time. Impressive. Edit: twodot posted:I'm literally whining
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 05:44
|
|