Not to freak anyone out or anything...

lmkelker1 · June 2011

But does anyone know of an research showing a correlation between meeting milestones and academic achievement? I did a rough google search and didn't find much and wonder if I am not searching for the right thing... I can't be the first one to think of this.

I was just wondering what research has found with kids who reach milestones "early" or "late" and how it translates to school later on... are they "smarter" or quicker learners, or does it all come out in the wash.

I am not saying anyone's baby is not smart! Just want to make that clear!

saturdaynightdoubletree · June 2011

I don't know of any real research, but as a teacher I think it's a wash.... and how are we determining "smarter"? I'm not sure a baby that rolls over early is going to be book smart because his muscles developed faster than a baby that rolls over late.

NorahtheExplorer · June 2011

I don't think initially it is a sign of being more intelligent...but I think it can lead to being more intelligent.

I found this in an old NY Times article......

Although babies who learn to talk early are not necessarily any smarter than those whose language development is slower, early skills in using language can give children a head start in both cognitive development and social skills. Children who can express themselves well may be more effective at making their needs and wants known, more likely to assume leadership roles among their peers and more likely to interact with older children and adults. Those with advanced language comprehension are better able to extract verbal information from their environment. And those with more advanced oral language are also likely to be more advanced in written language.

SapphireKat18 · June 2011

I'd be surprised if there was any real correlation. Though I did have someone tell me that 25+ years ago her baby didn't sleep and the Pedi back then told her that babies who don't sleep well tend to be very smart. So I've been holding onto that little tidbit of way outdated info...lol.

saturdaynightdoubletree · June 2011

BensMommy1117:
I don't think initially it is a sign of being more intelligent...but I think it can lead to being more intelligent.

I found this in an old NY Times article......

Although babies who learn to talk early are not necessarily any smarter than those whose language development is slower, early skills in using language can give children a head start in both cognitive development and social skills. Children who can express themselves well may be more effective at making their needs and wants known, more likely to assume leadership roles among their peers and more likely to interact with older children and adults. Those with advanced language comprehension are better able to extract verbal information from their environment. And those with more advanced oral language are also likely to be more advanced in written language.

this I do agree with. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of physical milestones when I first read this. Kids develop most of their language between 0 and 5, so those who talk, socialize, and read more have a head start when they start Kindergarten (around age 5)

NorahtheExplorer · June 2011

BensMommy1117:

I don't think initially it is a sign of being more intelligent...but I think it can lead to being more intelligent.

I found this in an old NY Times article......

Although babies who learn to talk early are not necessarily any smarter than those whose language development is slower, early skills in using language can give children a head start in both cognitive development and social skills. Children who can express themselves well may be more effective at making their needs and wants known, more likely to assume leadership roles among their peers and more likely to interact with older children and adults. Those with advanced language comprehension are better able to extract verbal information from their environment. And those with more advanced oral language are also likely to be more advanced in written language.

...and this would all depend on the environment they are in. An early talker who isnt nurtured may never get to take advantage of those early language skills while a late talker who is constantly being nurtured would come out on top above the early talker.

Water_Wedding · June 2011

I wouldn't think of it as milestones- rolling over, sitting up, crawling, walking. I think that communication does have some sort of effect. It's not just about speaking early though. The child could be signing and accomplishing some of those same things.

monimonimoni · June 2011

All I know is that my kid's a genius Idea

lmkelker1 · June 2011

saturdaynightdoubletree:
BensMommy1117:
I don't think initially it is a sign of being more intelligent...but I think it can lead to being more intelligent.

I found this in an old NY Times article......

this I do agree with. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of physical milestones when I first read this. Kids develop most of their language between 0 and 5, so those who talk, socialize, and read more have a head start when they start Kindergarten (around age 5)

I am a kinder teacher so thats why I started to think about this. I never really thought of the students before age 4 until I had my own kid. I know I used milestone benchmarks in making determinations for SpEd, or really extreme cases (one kid was potty trained 6 months before starting kinder (can we say red flag?), but I definitely agree that the more a kid can talk then more likely they are to be "ahead" in areas.

I wondered how they would be able determine the variables in research, such as you all mentioned, what's "smarter." But I thought someone might be able to attempt it.

I have two older brothers. My oldest brother and I were walking at 8 months, knew all our abc's before we could talk (by pointing obviously) and my middle brother didn't walk until he was 18 mos and did everything a lot later than my oldest brother and I. The oldest bro has a Ph.d. and I did very well in school and am getting my masters in eduation. My middle brother had a hard time with school and was forced to do some higher education in the automotive field to appease my parents. I just wondered if there was a correlation. It's probably just the coincidence.

saturdaynightdoubletree · June 2011

monimonimoni:
All I know is that my kid's a genius

Yes

Kate621 · June 2011

I shouldn't have opened this post.

BeachM · June 2011

I didn't walk until 15 months and have a master's degree. I'm not freaked out that Finn is towards the late end of normal for gross motor skills.

monimonimoni · June 2011

BostonKisses2:
Kate621:
I shouldn't have opened this post.
I'm thinking that myself...

But you guys know that your kids are geniuses so whatev.

Ananke · June 2011

I don't think there is any real correlation. All my books have said the contrary. While measurable intelligence first starts showing itself around 9 months, it isn't determined by milestones. Einstein didn't speak until he was about 4, and many other very smart people were "behind" developmentally. I have no research to back this up, but I think it's because their minds are so focused on other things (more interesting to them), they don't follow the 'normal' development patterns. In fact, there is something called the "Einstein Syndrome" which is used for children who don't speak until they are older.

Also, I've actually heard very recently, maybe from a Dr. Sears book?, about the bad sleep=high intelligence link. I can't remember if it was just a working theory or if there were any studies that went with it. I'll have to look for the reference. If it's true, I have the next Einstein on my hands.

lmkelker1 · June 2011

Ananke:
I don't think there is any real correlation. All my books have said the contrary. While measurable intelligence first starts showing itself around 9 months, it isn't determined by milestones. Einstein didn't speak until he was about 4, and many other very smart people were "behind" developmentally. I have no research to back this up, but I think it's because their minds are so focused on other things (more interesting to them), they don't follow the 'normal' development patterns. In fact, there is something called the "Einstein Syndrome" which is used for children who don't speak until they are older.
Also, I've actually heard very recently, maybe from a Dr. Sears book?, about the bad sleep=high intelligence link. I can't remember if it was just a working theory or if there were any studies that went with it. I'll have to look for the reference. If it's true, I have the next Einstein on my hands.

DH is a HORRIBLE sleeper... always has been. And he is a genius. So there is some hope for poor sleeping babies!

nicole0719 · June 2011

I rarely post here but my oldest who will be four at the end of August was very delayed in expressive speech (but average to above average in other areas). We had him evaluated by EI and he was put in speech therapy around 20 months (he had 1 word and no attempts at anything else). Now, his articulation and expressive speech is far above those of his peers in his class. His use of the english language is amazing considering where we were just a short while ago and he communicates very effectively in Spanish as well (my in laws don't speak english). So while I can see a possible correlation between what was mentioned I definately don't think milestones dictate intelligence. DS2 is hitting all his milestones early and may be below average in intelligence later on - who knows

Ananke · June 2011

lmkelker1:
saturdaynightdoubletree:
BensMommy1117:
I don't think initially it is a sign of being more intelligent...but I think it can lead to being more intelligent.

I found this in an old NY Times article......

this I do agree with. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of physical milestones when I first read this. Kids develop most of their language between 0 and 5, so those who talk, socialize, and read more have a head start when they start Kindergarten (around age 5)
I am a kinder teacher so thats why I started to think about this. I never really thought of the students before age 4 until I had my own kid. I know I used milestone benchmarks in making determinations for SpEd, or really extreme cases (one kid was potty trained 6 months before starting kinder (can we say red flag?), but I definitely agree that the more a kid can talk then more likely they are to be "ahead" in areas.
I wondered how they would be able determine the variables in research, such as you all mentioned, what's "smarter." But I thought someone might be able to attempt it.
I have two older brothers. My oldest brother and I were walking at 8 months, knew all our abc's before we could talk (by pointing obviously) and my middle brother didn't walk until he was 18 mos and did everything a lot later than my oldest brother and I. The oldest bro has a Ph.d. and I did very well in school and am getting my masters in eduation. My middle brother had a hard time with school and was forced to do some higher education in the automotive field to appease my parents. I just wondered if there was a correlation. It's probably just the coincidence.

I understand what you're saying here, but I really don't think that at the kindergarten age children should automatically be labeled as Special Ed because they are slow talkers or haven't reached various other milestones. 5 years old is awfully young to be labeling someone for quite possibly the rest of their educational career. Like I said in my previous post, Einstein didn't talk until he was about 4 and by 9 still didn't talk very good, but he is the idol we look to when we think about intelligence. Plenty of other very intelligent people would have been mislabeled. Thomas Edison had to be home schooled because the teacher thought he couldn't learn since he was so unruley. Turns out he was brilliant and quite possibly ADD, as many highly intelligent people are.

Also keep in mind that there are many different types of intelligence. A late talking baby may not be gifted in linguistics, but may go on to create a cure for cancer, or become an Olympian.

Oh, and I'm not trying to flame, but the whole "red flag" thing for the 5 year old may not be any sort of indicator of intelligence. There are many other reasons a 5 year old may not be potty trained. I think that by automatically saying "oh, he's not potty trained, so he must be of lower intelligence and will need special classes" is a major disservice to him.

JBrianne · June 2011

BostonKisses2:
monimonimoni:
BostonKisses2:
Kate621:
I shouldn't have opened this post.
I'm thinking that myself...
But you guys know that your kids are geniuses so whatev.
Well that's very true!

A very good friend of ours was born at 27 weeks. He has a master's degree in microbiology.

monimonimoni · June 2011

JBrianne:
BostonKisses2:
monimonimoni:
BostonKisses2:
Kate621:
I shouldn't have opened this post.
I'm thinking that myself...
But you guys know that your kids are geniuses so whatev.
Well that's very true!
A very good friend of ours was born at 27 weeks. He has a master's degree in microbiology.

Yes Yes Yes

AimeeL85 · June 2011

I hope not, as I wait for my 6 month old to roll over

jamieaustin · June 2011

I treat plenty of kids who met milestones on time and are having fine motor, visual motor difficulties now. I haven't seen a difference in my job. I also have several kids who have lots of delays in fine motor, visual motor, self help, coordination areas who are VERY smart. I have seen articles that imply that if they meet milestones early then the child may be gifted. But I have also seen articles that say that left handedness leads to giftedness or cognitive delays.

Just remember that many milestones are a little later now then they were 10-20 years ago. For instance, if a child wasn't walking by the time they were a year in the '80s then pedi would be concerned. But now many pedis aren't concerned to 13-15 months-some even 18 months!

lmkelker1 · June 2011

Ananke:
lmkelker1:
saturdaynightdoubletree:
BensMommy1117:
I don't think initially it is a sign of being more intelligent...but I think it can lead to being more intelligent.

I found this in an old NY Times article......

this I do agree with. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of physical milestones when I first read this. Kids develop most of their language between 0 and 5, so those who talk, socialize, and read more have a head start when they start Kindergarten (around age 5)
I am a kinder teacher so thats why I started to think about this. I never really thought of the students before age 4 until I had my own kid. I know I used milestone benchmarks in making determinations for SpEd, or really extreme cases (one kid was potty trained 6 months before starting kinder (can we say red flag?), but I definitely agree that the more a kid can talk then more likely they are to be "ahead" in areas.
I wondered how they would be able determine the variables in research, such as you all mentioned, what's "smarter." But I thought someone might be able to attempt it.
I have two older brothers. My oldest brother and I were walking at 8 months, knew all our abc's before we could talk (by pointing obviously) and my middle brother didn't walk until he was 18 mos and did everything a lot later than my oldest brother and I. The oldest bro has a Ph.d. and I did very well in school and am getting my masters in eduation. My middle brother had a hard time with school and was forced to do some higher education in the automotive field to appease my parents. I just wondered if there was a correlation. It's probably just the coincidence.
I understand what you're saying here, but I really don't think that at the kindergarten age children should automatically be labeled as Special Ed because they are slow talkers or haven't reached various other milestones. 5 years old is awfully young to be labeling someone for quite possibly the rest of their educational career. Like I said in my previous post, Einstein didn't talk until he was about 4 and by 9 still didn't talk very good, but he is the idol we look to when we think about intelligence. Plenty of other very intelligent people would have been mislabeled. Thomas Edison had to be home schooled because the teacher thought he couldn't learn since he was so unruley. Turns out he was brilliant and quite possibly ADD, as many highly intelligent people are.
Also keep in mind that there are many different types of intelligence. A late talking baby may not be gifted in linguistics, but may go on to create a cure for cancer, or become an Olympian.
Oh, and I'm not trying to flame, but the whole "red flag" thing for the 5 year old may not be any sort of indicator of intelligence. There are many other reasons a 5 year old may not be potty trained. I think that by automatically saying "oh, he's not potty trained, so he must be of lower intelligence and will need special classes" is a major disservice to him.

Just to be clear on that particular kid... he was highly autistic and not diagnosed because mom didn't believe in doctors.He did not speak, was not potty trained until 4.5 years of age, along with LOADS of other developmental issues... and it is most definitely used for educational purposes to HELP kids success in school. The general education class was not the best placement for him. He is now in 3rd grade with the right placement and making great gains. Teachers don't make assumptions and just place kids in SpEd based one thing. It takes all year to get them placed because of federal regulations. Kindergarten is the first time students are seen in an academic light and many times, issues that students deal with all their lives, or just a few years are found and screened in kindergarten.

grr_aargh · June 2011

I *think* you need to research the difference between precociousness and intelligence. While some kids are precocious (capable of acquiring a skill early and quickly), it does NOT correlate with intelligence.

In other words, draw a circle and another circle overlapping it. One's precociousness. The other's intelligence. There's some overlap, yes, but one's not necessarily a sign of the other.

I personally believe that the theory that bad sleepers = highly intelligent exists only to keep us from eating our young in hopes that they'll one day become gadzillionaires who can support us when we're old.

Scigrlnyc · June 2011

Meh, smart in my opinion is WAAAY over-rated.

The truth is smart gets you nowhere without a strong work ethic. Some of the "smartest" people I know are also the laziest.

I am not a genius (my IQ says so), however I have an advanced degree in a very technical field.

In fact, there have been behavioral scientific studies that show kids perform worse on tests and take fewer risks when they are told they are smart versus when they are told they worked really hard. The reason being the "smart" child does not want to risk being "not smart" so they will not as easily try things outside their comfort zone.

BeachM · June 2011

grr_aargh:
I *think* you need to research the difference between precociousness and intelligence. While some kids are precocious (capable of acquiring a skill early and quickly), it does NOT correlate with intelligence.

In other words, draw a circle and another circle overlapping it. One's precociousness. The other's intelligence. There's some overlap, yes, but one's not necessarily a sign of the other.
I personally believe that the theory that bad sleepers = highly intelligent exists only to keep us from eating our young in hopes that they'll one day become gadzillionaires who can support us when we're old.

I thought this too. The sleep experts (Ferber and Weissbluth) would highly disagree that bad sleeping = smarter so I'll trust them over Dr. Sears.

MrsLnt · June 2011

My family keeps saying that smart babies don't sleep. I allegedly slept like 2 hours in my first 4 years of life and did very well in school. Based on how DS sleeps, he'd better be going for a Nobel prize.

I'd like to think it makes a difference since my kids have been on the early side of things, as were DH and I, and we both were considered "gifted" as kids, but I really don't think it does. A good friend of mine didn't talk until she was 2 and has a PhD in English Literature and is a college professor. Smart or not, a person gets nowhere without a good work ethic.

grr_aargh · July 2011

flip_flops:
grr_aargh:
I *think* you need to research the difference between precociousness and intelligence. While some kids are precocious (capable of acquiring a skill early and quickly), it does NOT correlate with intelligence.

In other words, draw a circle and another circle overlapping it. One's precociousness. The other's intelligence. There's some overlap, yes, but one's not necessarily a sign of the other.
I personally believe that the theory that bad sleepers = highly intelligent exists only to keep us from eating our young in hopes that they'll one day become gadzillionaires who can support us when we're old.
I thought this too. The sleep experts (Ferber and Weissbluth) would highly disagree that bad sleeping = smarter so I'll trust them over Dr. Sears.

To be clear, I trust Dr. Sears's science. It doesn't actually contradict the science in Ferber and Weissbluth. Weissbluth would have us all believe our kids would be drooling morons if they're crappy sleepers. I disagree with that as well.

(My kids, for the record, are bad sleepers AND highly intelligent. . . but my point is simply that I'm not sure it's so simple as to say bad sleepers = geniuses and good sleepers = dumb. I know plenty of well-slept geniuses and plenty of restless dummies.)

Want a personalized experience?

Not to freak anyone out or anything...

Re: Not to freak anyone out or anything...

Choose Another Board

Search Boards