Differences between giftedness and Asperger

Post Reply New Topic

I imagine that a non-AS "gifted" children could have problems relating with peers, if he is interested in different things that other children prefer.

If the children has an "active but odd" behavior, this could be a sign of difficulty in understanding social interaction; but I am not so sure in the case of a "loner" behavior.

Maybe it manifests in more than one way? The bottom line is, the child is having trouble relating. In my elementary school, there was a girl who had the reputation as a straight A student, and was expected to make straight As routinely. She excelled at school, but did she have Asperger's? I don't think so, because she related well to her peers. She wasn't the most popular girl, but she didn't get picked on. She didn't fight with them. The teachers didn't view her as a smart kid who couldn't make and keep friends. The girl is either gifted, or a hardworking student, not sure which. I am fairly certain she doesn't have AS.
A child who is making good grades in school, is well thought of by their teachers and peers doesn't warrant a diagnosis. Why not just let a child like that blend in without any labels? You can be smart and NT, too.

Gifted children DO very often have trouble forming relationships with peers. They are often very cerebral and don't get on with people whose main interest is pop music or celebrities or who is going out with who. They also tend to think outside the box and look at social norms from a logical perspective and find them wanting, another thing that makes it hard for them to relate to their peers. Kids often place great value on being like everyone else, and gifted children tend to find a lot of social norms silly and illogical.

I'd beg to differ. The "gifted" child will probably have problems forming relationships with peers because his/her peers aren't stimulating enough and/or aren't interested in anything remotely similar. Being AS and gifted is then like a double whammy.

Getting straight A's isn't equivalent to being gifted. It merely means one has enough innate ability in all areas to master the class curriculum and is highly motivated to study and get good grades.

The gifted child who has trouble making friends could be gifted with a lack of social reciprocity, and could be considered for an AS diagnosis. The lack of social reciprocity being the key factor in diagnosing AS. I have known plenty of honor role students who are either popular or somewhere in the middle, not lonely, thoroughly despised, or exceptionally well liked. I went to a high school with over two thousand students enrolled and noticed certain things. I was observant about who was popular and aware of who was making straight As and considered over achievers by teachers and I cannot recall one friendless overachiever. They all had at a least one good buddy.

Even in grade school, the smartest girl in the class did not lack social reciprocity.

Many people do consider the straight A student to be gifted, you have to have some kind of innate ability to do it, along with hard work. Some kids can achieve it without studying, because of a photographic memory or the ability to remember everything which is said.

Not me. That is, a straight A student can be "gifted", but can be "not-gifted" also. And I think that, usually, "gifted" is used, no to mean a student with intellectual potential to be an "A student" in the context of the children of his/her age, but a student with intellectual potential to learn and be interested in things beyond the things that are supposed the children of his/her age learn.

These popular and brigth girls that you meet were only good students or they had also an extensive and/or intensive knowledge of subjects outside school curriculum? I only will called them "gifted" in the 2nd case.

However, I admit that my definition can be problematic, specially because can make the theory that "in many cases, gifted kids have social problems social problems" largely tautological (after all, if "gifted" kids are defined by being interested in things more "advanced" that the things that "normal" kids of their age are supposed to learn, almost by definition "gifted" kids will have trouble in interacting with "normal" kids).

You can get As in the American school system through high school with a purely rote learning style. You really don't need to understand anything you've been taught deeply (especially in the mathematics department) to get straight As and even to do well on SAT/ACTs. It's ridiculous, but that's the way it is.

I was diagnosed as a "gifted Aspie" or 2e child in 2nd grade. The norms of the general social culture of my schools left me bored and unsatisfied, so I mainly pursued studies outside of school and eventually began to develop a hatred for school. It wasn't until junior year of high school that I regained my motivation and worked my way to a 4.0 average for the year and a 2300 SAT score. Did I work hard for those numbers? Sure. Did I have to work hard for those numbers? No, and I know other kids who didn't work for them at all. School is really what you make of it, and schools in general will have the facilities to support your interest and level of interest. However, your level of interest and expertise isn't measured in high school, and such additional work and studying you do on subjects goes unrecorded.

So who's the "gifted" one? The motivated student who can memorize his way to straight As? Or the student who has his troubles but can (for the most part) understand everything he's taught, even though he may or may not succeed in the school system? And what about kids who fall somewhat in to the middle of these two parameters? How do we even define the term "gifted", such that we don't get lost in subjectivity? In my experience, almost everyone I've met had something peculiar about them; something they could do particularly better than most other people. If everyone is gifted though, they aren't really gifted in the sense that they are special.