Jennifer Crane, "'Gifted Children' in Britain and the World: Elitism and Equality Since 1945" (Oxford UP, 2025)
37:33 Share

Close your eyes, exhale, feel your body relax, and let go of whatever you're carrying today. Well, I'm letting go of the worry that I wouldn't get my new contacts in time for this class. I got them delivered free from 1-800-CONTACTS. Oh my gosh, they're so fast. And breathe. Oh, sorry. I almost couldn't breathe when I saw the discount they gave me on my first order. Oh, sorry. Namaste. Visit 1-800-CONTACTS.com today to save on your first order. 1-800-CONTACTS.

As a contractor, I don't pay for materials I don't use. So why would I pay for stuff I don't need in my mobile plan? That's why the new MyBizPlan from Verizon Business is so perfect. Now I can choose exactly what I want and I only pay for what I need. Right now with MyBizPlan, get our best price as low as $25 a line. Visit verizon.com slash business to get started today. New lines only. Price per month with 5 plus lines. Includes auto pay and paper free billing and promotional discounts.

Taxes, fees, economic adjustment charge, applicable add-ons, prices, and terms apply. Guarantee applies to base monthly rate and stated discounts only. Add-on prices additional. Offers end June 30th, 2025.

Welcome to the New Books Network.

Welcome to New Books and Critical Theory. It's a podcast that's part of the New Books Network. On this episode, I'm talking to Jenny Crane about gifted children in Britain and the world, elitism and equality since 1945. So welcome to the podcast. Thank you so much for having me. This is a fantastic book and it struck me as one of those

books were in retrospect it's kind of you know of course somebody should have written the history of gifted children but you know the kind of the idea of doing this must have sort of like been quite a

a process really to kind of come to the idea of, you know, this is a subject, it's a topic, I could write about it doing the research and we'll kind of talk about all of those things as we go along. And I guess that the starting point is that question of where the kind of inspiration came from. Why did you

um think about a history of gifted children and and why do we need this history kind of right more yeah great question thank you um it's so random isn't it in the world where you kind of can research or write about anything it's kind of like why why does anyone pick any topic

I think when I, it was maybe 2018, I'd just done a project about the cultural history of the NHS at the University of Warwick that I loved. And that was about why people feel attached to the NHS and public attachment. And before that, I'd run my PhD, which was about child protection and especially perspectives from voluntary groups and children and parents.

So I kind of had all these interests going on about welfare states, about children's voices, about writing from below. I was kind of looking for a new project. I was precariously employed on a postdoc. So I also was looking for a project I could, you know, realistically bid for funding with.

And I was lucky. I was looking for a newspaper archive online, which is always a lovely thing to do, isn't it, for a full page from the 1950s. I should do. And saw these really interesting adverts for Horlicks, the malted drink, which said, take pride in your gifted child and is your child sensitive? And they were looking to, then they looked on other newspaper databases online.

So I was looking on the Times and the Telegraph, the Manchester Guardian, and I saw that it was quite a popular advert for a bit in the 50s. And they were selling this drink on the basis that it might help children who are particularly sensitive or had a particular type of nervous energy. And that something about that, like gifted children, which they were calling them in particular, would need calming and nurturing in that special way. Just got me interested, you know, thinking about kids, you know,

that I know and people that I know and the idea that somebody who was intellectually gifted would have like a distinctive personality or distinctive physical movements as well I just thought was kind of interesting and weird which is often a good place to start with looking more into something

And then it was only actually when I started to look more into this. So other people have written about intelligence testing in amazing ways, or kind of IQ and also obviously school systems. When I was looking into it more and more, I was like, this is actually not only interesting from a child centered perspective of being like, what was it like to be a gifted child? Are they especially nervous? How did they feel about the label? But it's also really interesting and more

like prescient and important from a perspective of what that does from society um from like why are we even looking for intelligence why are we looking for giftedness and if we fixate on intelligence and giftedness who is that including who is that excluding um biased metrics what is that doing what's it like to live with that label the kind of unfairness angle as well

Which, as you say, today has actually become more and more prescient as the project's gone on when we're in a world of obsession with IQ in America, at least as well. Or the idea that AI has IQ. Contentious debates about whether breastfeeding raises IQ. It's kind of everywhere, isn't it? And it's all based on these same systems of intelligence testing. Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, slight spoiler alerts, but as we go through into some of the later chapters in the book, we'll see that a lot of the kind of rhetoric of giftedness is

tracks kind of social elites pretty closely, which, you know, is with us now and almost is kind of depressing me what, what you'd expect. But, but before we even kind of touch on that, it was striking, you know, you have sort of encountering this advertising where you get this intuitive sense of, I know what this category is. And at the same time, you know, the book does a lot to kind of unpack and kind of destabilize the category. And it, it,

It's a tricky question to kind of say, well, what is a gifted child? What are we actually talking about? Particularly given, you know, you've written a full book about this, but can you give a sense of, I suppose, what the category is, you know, what,

what actually is this idea of a gifted child? Yeah, totally. It's so flexible, isn't it? But I guess that's the case with kind of most medical and social categories. And obviously, I think that's why it makes it interesting because it's the flexibility of it that's meant that so many different people are interested, which you see in the book. So like parents who are desperate for help are interested. Kids who are feeling lonely at school are interested. Psychologists, like teachers, policymakers, voluntary groups, they're all interested because they're all imposing things.

like different categories, but fundamental from the 40s, maybe to today and across those groups is the idea, I guess, that they'll be, you know, in some way more highly intelligent and like of a high level, more highly intelligent than other children and potentially also later than other adults.

And then the way that this is measured is hugely variable. So I talked already a bit about intelligence tests and it can be measured by, you know, the physical object of intelligence tests and getting children to rearrange jigsaw puzzles in the shape of a face or to tell a story from an image and then giving a very numerical number. This child has an IQ of 160.

They're profoundly gifted or they're not. But then there's also groups who try and measure it in a more qualitative way. So in health visitor manuals or midwives, they'll say this baby or toddler appears like particularly alert or has this particular energy. So you can just tell intuitively because you're an experienced professional that

Or they'll say this child asks a lot of questions or they have new ideas. Sometimes the idea that they'll be especially disruptive. So maybe at school, the gifted child will just kind of turn a book on its head and still have read it all. But then they'll be reading upside down. They'll be especially creative and their mind will be ahead of their body. So that kind of development will be a bit disordered. Yeah, really different.

And then something funny that I found actually is that obviously for some parents, it's sometimes they're saying as gifted and they're self-identifying their child as gifted when it's something that in manuals might be seen as quite developmentally normal.

So other times it's not the case and they're getting IQ tested. But other times some parents will say my child is gifted because they're like walking at the age of two or they're recognising shapes at the age of three. And according to other educational manuals, that'll be quite typical for development. So it's definitely prone to, you know, being projected and gifted, not gifted. But fundamentally, it's something about such a level of high intelligence that that child might need special treatment or special provision in order to flourish and to live well.

It's a kind of diversity of their mind. Yeah, I mean, that, I suppose, movement from, you know, what might be a kind of quite reasonable sort of sense of parental pride into this kind of social category is one of the things that the book tries to track.

over time and as with with a lot of these kind of social categories that seem sort of normal and reasonable to us now there's quite a kind of a long almost kind of pre-history um to it and one of the things that kind of might be a good route in to understanding that is is entitled these two categories i guess of kind of um elitism and inequality and i wonder if you could sort of

of um sketch out what what those terms mean really and why they're kind of important um to the story particularly i suppose as the kind of story gets going as you say in that sort of

post-1945 really kind of pre-1960s period. Yeah definitely like why those terms and there's obviously been other amazing writing about meritocracy or democracy and these different kind of ideas about um yeah elitism or equality different framings the reasons that I took

B's, as you say, is grounded in that post-war moment, 1945, the new welfare state, and people debate how much actually changed, like with healthcare, no new hospitals are built, we just kind of make them publicly accessible, or with education, how much actually changed in the 44 and 45 Acts.

But what I think did change is often a sense of public excitement and sometimes retrospectively built into the 70s, 80s or 90s. People felt that that was a turning point or a moment and people felt that it was a big moment for pushing some kind of vision of equality. And what that meant could be really fuzzy, like, of course, but I think fundamentally a lot of sources speak about this as a moment, a quest for equality, kind of a new, like,

Britain a turning point from elitism and that is something that gifted child campaigners really latched on to and I'm sure a lot of other campaigners as well because if you have huge claims in policy or in education policy about education having to cater for all ages and aptitudes and all abilities then

then that's something, if you feel there's a gap for your child or for a category of child, that's something you can hop into and say, if we're in an equal post-war state, it's a problem. And if this group isn't provided for. And that's something that even from the early 40s, kind of concerned teachers or directors of education started kind of writing about to local newspapers. So they were saying, if in the new welfare state, we had kind of junior classes that cater for all different children, the gifted one will be neglected.

And sometimes they were then saying that our futures will be gravely jeopardised because that's a problem for productivity in the future. But other times they were saying that's a problem for Britain as an equal post-war welfare state, because if we're not providing for gifted children, we're not providing for everyone. And so I guess that rhetoric of equality is,

I obviously totally recognise as fuzzy and porous. But again, I think it's powerful in terms of setting up an expectation around how gifted children would be treated and in terms of giving campaigners something to hook onto. And especially by the 60s and the 70s, when the National Association for Gifted Children is set up, which I talk about a lot, they are super explicit about saying that they're seeking mere equality and making these equality claims.

Unless people claim to be looking for elitism, but you do see it sometimes in tabloids in the 70s and 80s saying actually elitism is leadership and elitism is strength of economy or strength and position in the world. So I kind of chose those terms because they come up a lot in the sources and because I think they were powerful ways to talk about why gifted children matter for the actors at the time.

Yeah, it is remarkable how much, I guess, is placed on these kids' shoulders, really, particularly when you encounter these discourses, you know,

in the House of Lords, in government policy, as you say, in the popular press of like, you know, you guys are going to be in charge. So on the one hand, we need to support you, but also, you know, you've got a big job to do. And I mean, we'll come back to that, I think. But before that, you mentioned one of probably the kind of key players in the book, which is the National Association for Gifted Children. And they...

I suppose, have a kind of ambivalent role in the book. You know, there's a sort of an understanding of what they were doing, how they campaigned, how their campaigns, you know, to an extent kind of changed, but didn't change over time. But at the same time, a lot of their actions in the book, you know, it's pretty clear that many of the, I suppose, kind of potentially socially negative aspects

impacts of the gifted children concepts uh abound up in how they campaigned so who were they and i suppose kind of like why do they matter to the story yeah i would say for them and they were definitely they were providing spaces that parents felt like they were very needed and that children reviewed very positively and so they're founded in 1966 and by someone called margaret branch um

who a Guardian article said developed her interest because she was working in Guy's Hospital, London. And she met an epileptic boy who also had an IQ of 150. She became curious. She had training in children's therapy. She'd worked for the UN. She joined the Women's Auxiliary Air Force. She had a lot of different professional experiences. So she became interested in giftedness and she found this group in 1966.

in London and in even in the initial draft constitution and it's true of this group throughout his lifespan they're kind of looking to collect and disseminate information about gifted children but they also really want to provide an opportunity for gifted children and parents to kind of meet each other and to just have a space where they feel safe to like be themselves and what this means in practice is often running of after-school clubs and summer clubs where they do kind

kind of a lot of random activities. They might do like bird watching. They might talk about Karl Marx. They might do stargazing. It's this idea that gifted children to be intellectually satisfied need to follow this really broad range of interests.

And they run these clubs often through volunteers. They kind of grow and grow. So by 1966, they've got 200 members and they're still running into the 80s. And I think have around like 50 kind of regional branches. So what they're providing varies. But what stays the same is that they are kind of providing these, as I say, holiday clubs.

for kids and for parents and in the children's magazines about them you can definitely see that a lot of children are benefiting or writing about benefiting so much from these because they might be feeling isolated or lonely at school or like they're a bit weird or a bit different and then actually just being able to do all these different activities and being able to question things or like to play outdoors meet other people who understand them is actually quite huge for them

as well so it's a they can be quite a quite a powerful space for their members especially the 70s and 80s that's when they're kind of flourishing and getting a lot of government grants as well

I'm not switching my team to some fancy work platform that somehow knows exactly how we work. And its AI features are literally saving us hours every day. We're big fans. And just like that, teams all around the world are falling for Monday.com. With intuitive design, seamless AI capabilities, and custom workflows, it's the work platform your team will instantly click with. Head to Monday.com, the first work platform you'll love to use.

I think you're on mute. Workday starting to sound the same? I think you're on mute. Find something that sounds better for your career on LinkedIn. With LinkedIn Job Collections, you can browse curated collections by relevant industries and benefits, like FlexPTO or hybrid workplaces, so you can find the right job for you. Get started at LinkedIn.com slash jobs. Finding where you fit. LinkedIn knows how.

You can Venmo this or you can Venmo that. You can Venmo this or you can Venmo that.

The Venmo MasterCard is issued by the Bancorp Bank and a pursuant to license by MasterCard International Incorporated. Card may be used everywhere MasterCard is accepted. Venmo purchase restrictions apply. I keep coming back to this word, kind of ambivalence, because that was...

That's what I read into that story where, yeah, you know, you can kind of see, as you've just mentioned, small government grants, you know, these kind of moments where the National Association intersects with the state in a sort of formal way. But at the same time, you know, some of the quite kind of positive things

stories that the young people have. And the young people are really kind of central to the book in a way that right towards the end, you talk about the kind of methodological challenges of doing this. But at the same time, I thought it was really kind of wonderful because it wasn't just a story of here is a social category and here is what that social category has done. You give a sense of, I guess, both how gifted children were treated

as we've already talked about, you know, sort of burdened with this label, but also how they, you know, some of them kind of enjoyed that and particularly thinking about, you know, things like bits of poetry that start some of the chapters and the kind of sense of gifted children being allowed to flourish as gifted children. And it'd be good to hear, I guess, a bit about who the gifted children were and how,

they kind of lived the label of being a gifted child. Yeah, absolutely. That is my favourite kind of part of this project is that I was really lucky to have these rich sources of like poetry and drawings and letters and children's magazines.

Which again, like the quantity of those shows in a way that that label obviously wouldn't have been important for everyone, but that a reasonable number of children were wanted to engage with that. And they wanted to write to other children who were also labelled as gifted and continue this kind of pen pal correspondence as well.

And for some of them, and maybe even a majority of them who are kind of reported in these sources, actually, it's a really like empowering label. And like some kids talk about previously feeling like at school, like none of their peers understood them because they're all the same age, but they just have really different interests.

And then they found that really distressing until they were told that they were gifted and they're going to these extracurricular spaces. And then actually, because they kind of now feel that about themselves, they're able to thrive in school more and just to think, you know what, like, I don't need to have constant social contact here. I'm different. And that makes me feel powerful. It's like a superpower.

Or other children, they say like that's the kind of first kind of positive social interaction that they have is at these summer clubs because they can talk about some kind of special interests that they have, like the monetary system or trade flows or something a bit random and they can find people who are interested with them.

At the same time, there's obviously some examples from it, definitely less. And it could be part of a kind of disruptive gifted child self thing as well, because there's some examples from children's writing where they do really question the label. And so one of the examples from the book that's one of my favorite ones is this group of gifted children in America where the category is kind of even huger and really used across the country and in schools. And they write to the gifted child group in Britain as a kind of like pen pal thing as a collective thing.

And they say that the test that labelled them as gifted was a silly test just describing pictures, which really is something that we could read into IQ testing. It is a test describing pictures often or part of it.

And they say that they wish they could tell grownups, you know, they're human. They're not like a gifted child. They're just humans. They just want to be treated more holistically in the round as children. They say, I wish you could stop pulling the child psychology bit. So they're really calling it out. And there's a few sources like that where the children are kind of rejuvenated.

rejecting the label they're saying it's silly they're saying that happiness is what matters rather than giftedness or intelligence and that the ways they've been diagnosed are silly as well which as I say in a way is them kind of like playing with the label and that they're doing this writing to giftedness magazines is maybe them just kind of enjoying testing the label and showing they're gifted but it does also show I guess a level of

of cynicism and especially the critique by children of should we care about giftedness or should we care about happiness I think is quite powerful and something that you don't see come through in policy until like the 90s or the 2000s like does giftedness even matter why should we care um it's quite a radical kind of line of argument it's nice when you see it in drawings as well so drawings that are criticizing measurements or poetry but saying all measurement is silly it's quite fun child perspective

It's good. It always disrupts adult categories in quite a different way. I mean, what about policy? What happens when, as you say, by the time you get kind of into the 90s and beyond, the state essentially kind of formalises the idea of a gifted child in the education system? Why did this happen? And I guess kind of what are the sort of consequences of that?

Yeah, definitely. So I think what I think overall is that there's loads of like local initiatives from schools trying to help kids or teacher training colleges trying to help kids in the 60s, 70s, 80s. Like Essex, Devon, Oxford have these local pilots. And it's not until the late 90s, as you say, in the 2000s, that we see more like cohesive national efforts to talk about gifted children.

And it means a couple of things. So I think overall, it means that the term is kind of broadened and diffused a bit, but also kind of standardized and kind of tied to social mobility agendas more explicitly for the first time, which is interesting and important as well.

So I'd say it kind of starts with John Major's administrations, though not explicitly. And they talk a bit in the book about national records of achievement that I don't know if people will remember, which are these like maroon folders, which you were told to carry about with you for the rest of your life because it'd be incredibly important and all employers would want to look at it. You're meant to put all certificates in it. So that was like kind of saying all children and young people should catalogue their gifts and their talents and their achievements and carry them. And then under New Labour,

There is much more explicit rhetoric around gifted children. And so their manifesto in 2001 is the first main party manifesto to talk about giftedness since 1945. And it says that they want to extend provision for gifted children as we nurture children's special talents.

And then on the social mobility thing, the Excellence in City reports, which was launched in 1999, says that they want to combat urban disadvantage and that that will be tied in parts for asking local authorities to identify some children as gifted.

There's also the establishment of the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth, which is like the formalisation in a way of these earlier kind of like local patchy clubs because they get children together. I think they have like 150,000 kind of members by 2007 from 77% of schools and they get them together for summer workshops, I think, to talk about

And like radio, film production, crime scene investigation, social marketing, like all kinds of things. And it's seen as a way of, you know, stretching gifted children, preparing them for university in the world, providing them with more information and skills.

Yeah, all of which is to say, I guess, 90s, 2000s, definitely more government interest. And we see these initiatives like the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth. And the way it's a story that carries on, because again, we see children having a really positive response to this, mostly liking being labelled, enjoying the extra activities. But I think what's slightly new is the formalisation and then the formalisation of trying to really think carefully about testing and about how the children are identified and to broaden out the metrics.

So saying that children will kind of write a letter themselves and they'll get a recommendation from a teacher. They'll do a marked piece of work. And then this tie to like, can this help us with broader social mobility is quite new and important as well.

So I guess it's the idea of equality in a new way that's just very distinct to that kind of turn of the 20th century, turn of the 21st century moment. I mean, all of that sounds eminently reasonable, doesn't it? You know, gifted, talented children being supported and helped by the state.

And one of the things the book does kind of throughout the book is say, hang on, you know, there's pretty close matches between what look like kind of the kids of social elites and the kind of label of gifted children. And, you know, this in the UK, but, you know,

we might think about this in other societies, maps on to things like gender, racial, class, inequality. And I suppose...

One way of kind of manifesting that as a question is like, what's the kind of the downside of the kind of gifted children story? Why is it that, you know, young white posh boys seem to be the kind of gifted children, particularly, you know, in public discourse, but actually kind of more generally in some of the policy stuff too? Yeah, I really disproportionately identified that.

Yeah, it's a bit of a... It's a kind of tension in the book that on the one hand, when you read the sources...

This is really giftedness child spaces in the late 20th century or something that really kind of helped the children who are identified. And also the groups who are looking to recruit are typically kind of trying hard to to broaden their membership. And they want to identify children from across society. And they'll be like partnering with local schools or changing their metrics of assessment or trying to like work in specific areas where they think they'll recruit diverse children.

but at the same time um there is like a tie um historically with intelligence testing um and this kind of elitism and it's been documented you know um by people writing about how on the other end of the spectrum like the same intelligence tests that can identify giftedness can also identify um children as like subnormal or as ineducable so i think it's not until the 1970s that um

all children have this right to education and children aren't written as ineducable because of low IQ testing and therefore just not even kind of taught in schools and the parents have to find homeschooling or some other option. And then there's also really great and important writing about black kids disproportionately labelled as subnormal and then sent to a whole different school system. And that is a label that they could carry with them for the rest of their lives with huge lived emotional impact.

So really it's kind of raising the question of whether any testing system like this for intelligence

Even if you're looking on the high end and you're looking, you're accepting that people on the high end can have all these emotional issues, but you're still creating a scale and talking about people on a lower end of that scale and the ramifications for them will be, you know, even worse. So I think really kind of following the call from kids and then from later educational sociologists, just to really say why, yeah, why value education?

You know, like obviously I agree we should look for children's emotional needs and we should try and support every child holistically. But I guess this history for me and for educational sociologists and people in the sources even as well is just raising that question of why not just start with what every child needs

um what problems do they have what emotional problems what social problems what makes them thrive what helps them and then try and help each child individually rather than starting with intelligence testing or looking for intelligence because then we're always creating winners and losers and this book shows even people at the top end of the scale could could not enjoy that and not feel like winners but obviously people who are measuring badly on iq testing um

and it is disproportionately often favouring white middle-class boys, people on the bottom end of the scale are facing even more profound challenges with accessing education and with self-esteem and with just carrying on with the rest of their lives, being labelled as low IQ. How did Britain compare to the rest of the world? You know, there are other organisations, other gifted children kind of movements going on outside of Britain. Was Britain kind of...

you know, sort of unique? Was it sort of weird in that British way of being obsessed with particularly class hierarchies or were there kind of similar tensions in movements from other places? Yeah, it's so fascinating.

the comparison. So America, there's so much interesting writing on America, which is just a whole different system with formalized funding, specifically around giftedness from a much earlier period. These international groups are trying to gather. There's just a million, even within Britain, there's a million different education systems and across the world, obviously even more. But there are these international groups

groups um which try to kind of launch some kind of comparison and they try to map on like is it like a democratic system or an autocratic system is more or less likely and have a giftedness program there's not that many clear kind of um examples very varied um what is consistent um is that even in world-centered groups so i look at the newsletters of one world group

And even in kind of these, we still see this critique by children and young people sometimes. So some newsletters that I looked at from this world centered group had a children's corner where children write in.

I'm really echoing the statement from these American kids to the British kids that I talked about from the 70s. And this child here says, we're only human. We can be overrated, overworked. People are overconfident in our abilities in a poem, which is published by this group. So kind of the children's critique thing is quite consistent. And they're quite critical consumers of the label. And then the high hopes is quite consistent. So obviously, there's some countries where it's not consistent.

not as prominent as a rhetoric um but at many moments the idea that some gifted young people could revive an economy um or could kind of solve like tensions after um a conflict like in many countries and many examples that I write a bit about in the book but which could be a whole other research kind of angle but in many countries that is appealing at some time because it's just fundamentally a hope for the future that people want to have and I guess they want to

have that sense of renewal. They want to start again. So that's consistent. But what I try to argue is a bit distinct to Britain is, as you say, this kind of class thing or how distinctively this obsession with equality and elitism is constantly framing the British debates. I try and say it's a bit distinct, but definitely that conflict is really prevalent. It's prevalent in European groups. It's prevalent in groups that try to mobilise

and bring together people interested in this from across the world. Yeah, it's definitely out there. I mean, there's a lot in the book in terms of sort of future agendas and, you know, that kind of international comparison is one obvious next direction. I think also there's, you know, I guess like the last kind of 10 years or so, we've already touched on

maybe the kind of revenge of, of the more undesirable elements of gifted children, this course that we're living through now. Um,

But at the same time, often academics kind of, you know, once you finish a book, you're kind of a bit, I'm really finished. And, you know, new research projects that maybe relate, but are kind of distinctive and different come up too. So what are you doing in terms of kind of your work now, your work that's coming next? Yeah, well, what I was, yeah, that temptation after a project, as you say, to just leave it for five years is,

or try something different. But actually what I've realized that I'm interested in at the moment, it's actually the material culture of IQ tests and children's IQ tests.

I actually just bought from eBay a 1970s one, which was carried about, I think, by educational psychologists going from school to schools to measure children. It's in a beautiful green briefcase and you open it up and it has all the things from or similar things to actually the cover of my book, which is like kind of jigsaws that kids were meant to rearrange and that was watched or images

images of like people walking in the rain or stuff like that and children were meant to describe them so I thought what I'm going to do at the moment which is a bit of a side tangent obviously super linked is just kind of follow them as an object like where were they produced where did they go how were they used how were they carried about what was that case doing just kind of see how that object-led focus takes me and also understand more about like a deep dive into those intelligent tests like what

when were they made how long did they last for how do they relate to tests that we still use today because there's still object-led testing and today also for things like neurodiversity can be tested for with object-led things like what's the link between these objects and I've read quite a lot about how children reacted to them and I've read accounts of children who like thought the jigsaws were silly or who threw them on the floor or who did or didn't want to play with them but I've read less about the object.

itself and like what it was doing when we started using different ones how it was carried about that's what I'm getting into at the moment via ebay

The Jeep brand has always stood for American freedom. And now we're standing with you with Employee Pricing Plus. Hurry into your Jeep brand dealer for details today and join the family. Jeep, there's only one. Offer valid on select 2024 and 2025 Jeep brand vehicles for non-FCA employees and retirees. $200 admin fee applies. Not all buyers will qualify. Restrictions apply. Does not apply to leases. Ends June 2nd, 2025. Jeep is a registered trademark of FCA US LLC.