A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

cover article in Time magazine on gifted education



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 19th 07, 12:56 AM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Beliavsky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 453
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

My wife and I thought this was an interesting article. Here are some
excerpts. Other research supporting academic acceleration of gifted
student is at http://www.nationdeceived.org/ .

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...653653,00.html

Are We Failing Our Geniuses?
by John Cloud
Time Magazine, August 27, 2007

[T]he lack of awareness about the benefits of grade skipping is
emblematic of a larger problem: our education system has little idea
how to cultivate its most promising students. Since well before the
Bush Administration began using the impossibly sunny term "no child
left behind," those who write education policy in the U.S. have
worried most about kids at the bottom, stragglers of impoverished
means or IQs. But surprisingly, gifted students drop out at the same
rates as nongifted kids--about 5% of both populations leave school
early. Later in life, according to the scholarly Handbook of Gifted
Education, up to one-fifth of dropouts test in the gifted range.
Earlier this year, Patrick Gonzales of the U.S. Department of
Education presented a paper showing that the highest-achieving
students in six other countries, including Japan, Hungary and
Singapore, scored significantly higher in math than their bright U.S.
counterparts, who scored about the same as the Estonians. Which all
suggests we may be squandering a national resource: our best young
minds.

....

[S]ince at least the mid-1980s, schools have often forced gifted
students to stay in age-assigned grades--even though a 160-IQ kid
trying to learn at the pace of average, 100-IQ kids is akin to an
average girl trying to learn at the pace of a retarded girl with an IQ
of 40. Advocates for gifted kids consider one of the most pernicious
results to be "cooperative learning" arrangements in which high-
ability students are paired with struggling kids on projects.
Education professor Miraca Gross of the University of New South Wales
in Sydney has called the current system a "lockstep curriculum ... in
what is euphemistically termed the 'inclusion' classroom." The gifted
students, she notes, don't feel included.

....

Actually, research shows that gifted kids given appropriately
challenging environments--even when that means being placed in classes
of much older students--usually turn out fine. At the University of
New South Wales, Gross conducted a longitudinal study of 60
Australians who scored at least 160 on IQ tests beginning in the late
'80s. Today most of the 33 students who were not allowed to skip
grades have jaded views of education, and at least three are dropouts.
"These young people find it very difficult to sustain friendships
because, having been to a large extent socially isolated at school,
they have had much less practice ... in developing and maintaining
social relationships," Gross has written. "A number have had
counseling. Two have been treated for severe depression." By contrast,
the 17 kids who were able to skip at least three grades have mostly
received Ph.D.s, and all have good friends.

  #2  
Old August 19th 07, 01:09 AM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Donna Metler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 309
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education


"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...
Beliavsky wrote:

Actually, research shows that gifted kids given appropriately
challenging environments--even when that means being placed in classes
of much older students--usually turn out fine. At the University of
New South Wales, Gross conducted a longitudinal study of 60
Australians who scored at least 160 on IQ tests beginning in the late
'80s.


Keep in mind, however, that what is true of kids
with 160+ IQs is not necessarily true of all gifted kids.
I think it's very important to meet the needs of gifted
kids; however, there are many possible ways to do that
and what is best for a student depends on many factors.
Even with the results cited above, radical acceleration
may only look good in comparison with mainstreaming.
I'm not knocking acceleration. It works for
some kids. However, I am very leery of this notion in
that it gives what looks like an easy and cheap way out
of meeting the needs of gifted kids. Need more than you
can get in your mainstream class? No problem--we'll just
shove you in with kids one, two, or more years older than
you. Well, maybe it beats the alternative, but I suspect
there are better alternatives available. I wouldn't trade
the program my kids are in for radical acceleration, no way,
no how, and I'd be mad as could be if they tried to tell me
that tossing them up a grade or two was an adequate solution.
For the profoundly gifted, the numbers are so small
that sometimes radical acceleration is the only option.
They're as far ahead of most other gifted kids as most
gifted kids are ahead of kids with average abilities.
At any given time, a school system may have so few of them
that they'd have a hard time creating a class of kids
with similar needs. I would never want to take acceleration
off the table as an option. My point is simply that I
don't think acceleration is the cure-all that some people
think it is...and sometimes the cynic in me sees it as
a bill of goods being sold to parents of gifted kids.

And what concerns me a bit is that it's not going to always work for all
children at all times. The statement that placing a child who can read in
kindergarten is emotional torture kind of bugs me, because while a 5 yr old
might be reading on a 4th grade level, that doesn't mean that they're not 5
yrs old and going to school in the big building for the first time. My 2 1/2
yr old is on a kindergarten to 1st grade level in most academic areas, but
emotionally, physically, and socially she's still an almost 3 yr old who
goes back and forth between being excited about getting to go to the "big
class" (preschool, as opposed to the infant/toddler MDO classes) and wanting
to cling to what she knows and mommy. There's no way she'd be able to handle
kindergarten right now, even though I'm regularly looking at 1st grade
materials in order to provide her what she needs at home.

I suspect that when she's 5, kindergarten will be about her speed in
everything BUT academics-and that accelerating her to the point that she's
challenged academically would not be a good choice in any other area.

In many ways, I wish there was an equivalent of her preschool once she gets
to kindergarten. Her 12 hours a week at preschool are serving an emotional
and social need even though academically she's not learning anything new
there, and I can easily, with that schedule, teach and supplement at home. I
suspect if she were able to go to school part-time and homeschool part-time,
it would be a better fit for her, at least in early elementary before GT
programs pick up (which isn't until 3rd grade), than either homeschooling or
traditional schooling.



  #3  
Old August 19th 07, 01:17 AM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,293
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

Beliavsky wrote:

Actually, research shows that gifted kids given appropriately
challenging environments--even when that means being placed in classes
of much older students--usually turn out fine. At the University of
New South Wales, Gross conducted a longitudinal study of 60
Australians who scored at least 160 on IQ tests beginning in the late
'80s.


Keep in mind, however, that what is true of kids
with 160+ IQs is not necessarily true of all gifted kids.
I think it's very important to meet the needs of gifted
kids; however, there are many possible ways to do that
and what is best for a student depends on many factors.
Even with the results cited above, radical acceleration
may only look good in comparison with mainstreaming.
I'm not knocking acceleration. It works for
some kids. However, I am very leery of this notion in
that it gives what looks like an easy and cheap way out
of meeting the needs of gifted kids. Need more than you
can get in your mainstream class? No problem--we'll just
shove you in with kids one, two, or more years older than
you. Well, maybe it beats the alternative, but I suspect
there are better alternatives available. I wouldn't trade
the program my kids are in for radical acceleration, no way,
no how, and I'd be mad as could be if they tried to tell me
that tossing them up a grade or two was an adequate solution.
For the profoundly gifted, the numbers are so small
that sometimes radical acceleration is the only option.
They're as far ahead of most other gifted kids as most
gifted kids are ahead of kids with average abilities.
At any given time, a school system may have so few of them
that they'd have a hard time creating a class of kids
with similar needs. I would never want to take acceleration
off the table as an option. My point is simply that I
don't think acceleration is the cure-all that some people
think it is...and sometimes the cynic in me sees it as
a bill of goods being sold to parents of gifted kids.

Best wishes,
Ericka
  #4  
Old August 19th 07, 11:37 AM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Donna Metler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 309
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education


"Sue" wrote in message
news:j6mdnWvH74KK1FXbnZ2dnUVZ_t2inZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
"Donna Metler" wrote in message
In many ways, I wish there was an equivalent of her preschool once she
gets to kindergarten. Her 12 hours a week at preschool are serving an
emotional and social need even though academically she's not learning
anything new there, and I can easily, with that schedule, teach and
supplement at home. I suspect if she were able to go to school part-time
and homeschool part-time, it would be a better fit for her, at least in
early elementary before GT programs pick up (which isn't until 3rd
grade), than either homeschooling or traditional schooling.


And that's not to say that she is gifted. I suspect that the kids who are
truly gifted, is going to be a much smaller number than many parents would
like to believe. It really kind of bugs me that parents are stating their
kids are gifted, when they really are not. Most preschoolers are sponges
and will pick up lots of things, especially if the parents are pushing
them, which many are. Most kids all catch up with each other in 3rd grade
and the ones that the parents thought they were profoundly gifted at 3 yrs
old, turns out to be pretty average.


My daughter was picking out words on signs before age 2, and is reading
through the easy reader section of the library at 2 1/2. She read 47 books
this summer for the summer reading club, independently, most of them not to
me but to the librarians and volunteers at the library.

I somehow doubt that she's just average.



  #5  
Old August 19th 07, 12:52 PM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,293
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

Donna Metler wrote:
"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...
Beliavsky wrote:

Actually, research shows that gifted kids given appropriately
challenging environments--even when that means being placed in classes
of much older students--usually turn out fine. At the University of
New South Wales, Gross conducted a longitudinal study of 60
Australians who scored at least 160 on IQ tests beginning in the late
'80s.

Keep in mind, however, that what is true of kids
with 160+ IQs is not necessarily true of all gifted kids.
I think it's very important to meet the needs of gifted
kids; however, there are many possible ways to do that
and what is best for a student depends on many factors.
Even with the results cited above, radical acceleration
may only look good in comparison with mainstreaming.
I'm not knocking acceleration. It works for
some kids. However, I am very leery of this notion in
that it gives what looks like an easy and cheap way out
of meeting the needs of gifted kids. Need more than you
can get in your mainstream class? No problem--we'll just
shove you in with kids one, two, or more years older than
you. Well, maybe it beats the alternative, but I suspect
there are better alternatives available. I wouldn't trade
the program my kids are in for radical acceleration, no way,
no how, and I'd be mad as could be if they tried to tell me
that tossing them up a grade or two was an adequate solution.
For the profoundly gifted, the numbers are so small
that sometimes radical acceleration is the only option.
They're as far ahead of most other gifted kids as most
gifted kids are ahead of kids with average abilities.
At any given time, a school system may have so few of them
that they'd have a hard time creating a class of kids
with similar needs. I would never want to take acceleration
off the table as an option. My point is simply that I
don't think acceleration is the cure-all that some people
think it is...and sometimes the cynic in me sees it as
a bill of goods being sold to parents of gifted kids.

And what concerns me a bit is that it's not going to always work for all
children at all times. The statement that placing a child who can read in
kindergarten is emotional torture kind of bugs me, because while a 5 yr old
might be reading on a 4th grade level, that doesn't mean that they're not 5
yrs old and going to school in the big building for the first time.


It also doesn't mean they're ready for the content of
some books appropriate to 4th graders ;-)

My 2 1/2
yr old is on a kindergarten to 1st grade level in most academic areas, but
emotionally, physically, and socially she's still an almost 3 yr old who
goes back and forth between being excited about getting to go to the "big
class" (preschool, as opposed to the infant/toddler MDO classes) and wanting
to cling to what she knows and mommy. There's no way she'd be able to handle
kindergarten right now, even though I'm regularly looking at 1st grade
materials in order to provide her what she needs at home.


Well, and there's also no guarantee that kids a couple
years older will be more kind to someone who's even more
obviously different or that the teacher will be more qualified
to deal with a gifted child.

I suspect that when she's 5, kindergarten will be about her speed in
everything BUT academics-and that accelerating her to the point that she's
challenged academically would not be a good choice in any other area.

In many ways, I wish there was an equivalent of her preschool once she gets
to kindergarten. Her 12 hours a week at preschool are serving an emotional
and social need even though academically she's not learning anything new
there, and I can easily, with that schedule, teach and supplement at home. I
suspect if she were able to go to school part-time and homeschool part-time,
it would be a better fit for her, at least in early elementary before GT
programs pick up (which isn't until 3rd grade), than either homeschooling or
traditional schooling.


I think a lot depends on what kind of support the
school can offer, and what her personality and interests are
like at that time. If the school can offer enough enrichment
that she's not bored and she's enjoying the social and other
aspects of school, then she may be fine with what enrichment
you can provide in after-school hours, especially if this
is just a stop-gap until 3rd grade. It all gets back to the
question of whether it's essential that they push their
limits academically at every possible opportunity. In my
opinion, if it's child-led, sure; but otherwise, I doubt it
matters much at all in the long run if the child coasts
through kindy or first grade as long as the child is
having fun and enjoying learning. Because our schools also
don't start their center-based GT program until 3rd grade,
most schools have quite a bit of support available for
gifted kids in K-2 to make sure they're not totally bored--
some of which can involve moving the child to a higher
grade group for math and/or reading, while still leaving
them with the social and emotional support of a same-age
classroom for learning the ropes.

Best wishes,
Ericka
(who is thrilled to hear that our school system is finally
creating a program for gifted kids with learning difficulties)
  #6  
Old August 19th 07, 02:27 PM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Citcom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education


"Donna Metler" wrote in message
...
And what concerns me a bit is that it's not going to always work for all
children at all times. The statement that placing a child who can read in
kindergarten is emotional torture kind of bugs me, because while a 5 yr
old might be reading on a 4th grade level, that doesn't mean that they're
not 5 yrs old and going to school in the big building for the first time.
My 2 1/2 yr old is on a kindergarten to 1st grade level in most academic
areas, but emotionally, physically, and socially she's still an almost 3
yr old who goes back and forth between being excited about getting to go
to the "big class" (preschool, as opposed to the infant/toddler MDO
classes) and wanting to cling to what she knows and mommy. There's no way
she'd be able to handle kindergarten right now, even though I'm regularly
looking at 1st grade materials in order to provide her what she needs at
home.

I suspect that when she's 5, kindergarten will be about her speed in
everything BUT academics-and that accelerating her to the point that she's
challenged academically would not be a good choice in any other area.

In many ways, I wish there was an equivalent of her preschool once she
gets to kindergarten. Her 12 hours a week at preschool are serving an
emotional and social need even though academically she's not learning
anything new there, and I can easily, with that schedule, teach and
supplement at home. I suspect if she were able to go to school part-time
and homeschool part-time, it would be a better fit for her, at least in
early elementary before GT programs pick up (which isn't until 3rd grade),
than either homeschooling or traditional schooling.

You might want to look into homeschooling. It sounds like what your DD
needs. I homeschool my gifted son. You can do the teaching like you were
talking about and join your local support group for the socialization. Our
support group includes classes, field trips, clubs, and play days every
month. We also do county sports, we did gymnastics before he was old enough
for the county sports, and were part of a weekly playgroup.

Good Luck. BTW, it can be difficult finding reading material that is
appropriate for an accelerated reader.

L. Miller

  #7  
Old August 19th 07, 02:34 PM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Chookie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,085
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

In article ,
"Donna Metler" wrote:

And what concerns me a bit is that it's not going to always work for all
children at all times. The statement that placing a child who can read in
kindergarten is emotional torture kind of bugs me, because while a 5 yr old
might be reading on a 4th grade level, that doesn't mean that they're not 5
yrs old and going to school in the big building for the first time.


As a general rule, however, social development tracks cognitive development,
not age. As an extreme example: I know of a boy who was speaking in
sentences by 18 months. At the church creche, he would go up to other
toddlers and ask "Do you talk?" If he didn't get a sensible answer, he'd move
on to the next child. Fortunately, the church had a largish creche -- but if
it hadn't, he might have spent quite a while looking for someone to talk to.
Concepts of friendships and humour change with cognitive advancement too, so
if your little girl is looking for a best friend to share secrets with in
kindy, she will most likely be disappointed. Most kinders think a friend is
the person you are playing with. If you have a child who is several years in
advance of her classmates in most cognitive domains, grade-skipping might be
the kindest choice for her in social as well as intellectual terms, but not
*all* gifted children are like that.

I suspect that when she's 5, kindergarten will be about her speed in
everything BUT academics-and that accelerating her to the point that she's
challenged academically would not be a good choice in any other area.


Miraca Gross has tended to cover the opposite problem -- kids who are held
back academically (ie, not accelerated despite an obvious need) in the hope of
"improving their social skills". This is where the children have already been
rejected by their age-peers, so the social situation doesn't improve, and they
become bored as well. Remember that Miraca works largely in the Australian
culture, where intellectual prominence is frowned on.

In many ways, I wish there was an equivalent of her preschool once she gets
to kindergarten. Her 12 hours a week at preschool are serving an emotional
and social need even though academically she's not learning anything new
there, and I can easily, with that schedule, teach and supplement at home.


I was tentatively offered a one-year grade-skip for DS1 last year, and I
refused. He was already *two* years ahead in both English and Maths, so the
grade-skip seemed tokenistic to me. Instead, he's been accelerated in other
ways. There are about 16 different forms of acceleration, and which ones you
use depend on your own child's personality, stage of education, and the
resources available. I do notice that DS1 spends a lot of lunch-time with
fourth-graders, playing handball. First-graders aren't generally into
rule-based games; they like imaginative play and running. DS1 has fulfilled
his own need in this area. I wouldn't have been able to do it; I wouldn't
have had the ball skills to play handball at six. He can lose with reasonable
grace.

Seems to me that what children need is:
* a chance to befriend people who are similar to themselves (eg intellectual
peers, fellow-hobbyists)
* a chance to befriend people who are different from themselves
* a chance to succeed
* a chance to fail (eg academic challenge)

Put those together and you get resilience. Miss one, and you cripple the
child emotionally.

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Parenthood is like the modern stone washing process for denim jeans. You may
start out crisp, neat and tough, but you end up pale, limp and wrinkled."
Kerry Cue
  #8  
Old August 19th 07, 02:41 PM posted to misc.kids
Donna Metler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 309
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education


"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...
Sue wrote:
"Donna Metler" wrote in message
My daughter was picking out words on signs before age 2, and is reading
through the easy reader section of the library at 2 1/2. She read 47
books this summer for the summer reading club, independently, most of
them not to me but to the librarians and volunteers at the library.

I somehow doubt that she's just average.


Maybe, but did she comprehend what she read? Just because a child can
read words, doesn't mean they are understanding them and comprehension is
more important than just reading words. Some kids are better at different
things than others and it still doesn't mean they are gifted. Everyone
reaches things differently. I would still say that most averages out by
3rd grade and if the child is truly gifted, then yes different
accommodations should be made. It seems that my girls were little sponges
when they were little and seemed really smart, but they are just average
because once they reached a grade where things became harder, they were
in line with pretty much everyone else.

She asks and answers questions about what she reads. I'm an educator by
trade. I know what reading looks and sounds like. I also know what counting
objects with 1-1 correspondence vs just counting by rote looks like, and
many other things that she's doing. And when I say that she's pretty much
mastered the kindergarten curriculum as taught in schools here short of
writing, without formal instruction that's as someone who has experience
with that curriculum and knows what the kids at the end of the year look
like.

But I also know that physically, emotionally, and socially, she's not at a 5
yr old level. She gets frustrated with children her age, because they're not
doing what she wants to do, and older children tend to not want to play with
a child who can't keep up with them physically, even if she's playing in the
same way. And when she gets frustrated, she's all toddler, all the time. If
she's tired and cranky, she's a tired and cranky toddler. And if she's
occupied and engaged, she's not going to always make it to the toilet on
time, either. She's not some little 5 yr old in a not yet 3 yr old body.
She's a 33 1/2 month old who just happens to pick up on academics apparently
via osmosis.

Believe me, I would happily have her even out and become more "normal". I
didn't make her the way she is, I haven't taught her to read early or made
any real effort at coaching besides things like signing her up for the
summer reading club when she showed an interest and driving her there weekly
to read with the volunteers.

And I RESENT the assumption that I don't know my child or know what's
"normal" for a child her age and am just feeding my ego.



This is a bit of a fallacy. While it is true that
not all gifted kids are early readers, the overwhelming majority
of kids reading *that* early are gifted (and probably highly
gifted or more), particularly if it's not one of those situations
where they've been coached to within an inch of their lives.
It's true that a lot of differences in reading in
the early years are developmental and even out by around
3rd grade, but reading this early and with this degree of
fluency is very unusual for normal kids (stories from
some parents notwithstanding). It's also unusual to see
the normal kids show this sort of precociousness in multiple
areas.

Best wishes,
Ericka



  #9  
Old August 19th 07, 02:42 PM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Sue
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

"Donna Metler" wrote in message
In many ways, I wish there was an equivalent of her preschool once she
gets to kindergarten. Her 12 hours a week at preschool are serving an
emotional and social need even though academically she's not learning
anything new there, and I can easily, with that schedule, teach and
supplement at home. I suspect if she were able to go to school part-time
and homeschool part-time, it would be a better fit for her, at least in
early elementary before GT programs pick up (which isn't until 3rd grade),
than either homeschooling or traditional schooling.


And that's not to say that she is gifted. I suspect that the kids who are
truly gifted, is going to be a much smaller number than many parents would
like to believe. It really kind of bugs me that parents are stating their
kids are gifted, when they really are not. Most preschoolers are sponges and
will pick up lots of things, especially if the parents are pushing them,
which many are. Most kids all catch up with each other in 3rd grade and the
ones that the parents thought they were profoundly gifted at 3 yrs old,
turns out to be pretty average.
--
Sue


  #10  
Old August 19th 07, 03:29 PM posted to misc.kids,misc.education
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,293
Default cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

Chookie wrote:
In article ,
"Donna Metler" wrote:

And what concerns me a bit is that it's not going to always work for all
children at all times. The statement that placing a child who can read in
kindergarten is emotional torture kind of bugs me, because while a 5 yr old
might be reading on a 4th grade level, that doesn't mean that they're not 5
yrs old and going to school in the big building for the first time.


As a general rule, however, social development tracks cognitive development,
not age.


Eh, I'm not sure how much I buy that. I know an awful
lot of immature gifted kids. At the same time, that doesn't
necessarily mean that they are at the same place as their age-peers
either. Often gifted kids live with not fitting in all that
well socially *anywhere* (and therefore they sometimes feel
most comfortable with sensitive adults who can adjust as needed).

Seems to me that what children need is:
* a chance to befriend people who are similar to themselves (eg intellectual
peers, fellow-hobbyists)
* a chance to befriend people who are different from themselves
* a chance to succeed
* a chance to fail (eg academic challenge)

Put those together and you get resilience. Miss one, and you cripple the
child emotionally.


This, I would agree with--always keeping in mind that
there are many hours in which to meet these needs, not just the
school hours.

Best wishes,
Ericka
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Breast-feeding pic on cover sparks backlash against Baby Talk magazine johnson Pregnancy 74 August 1st 06 08:15 PM
Breast-feeding pic on cover sparks backlash against Baby Talk magazine [email protected] Breastfeeding 1 August 1st 06 07:06 PM
Breast-feeding pic on cover sparks backlash against Baby Talk magazine Mum of Two Solutions 0 July 30th 06 08:37 AM
Breast-feeding pic on cover sparks backlash against Baby Talk magazine FragileWarrior Pregnancy 4 July 30th 06 01:43 AM
Breast-feeding pic on cover sparks backlash against Baby Talk magazine Neosapienis Solutions 0 July 29th 06 11:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.