Jump to content

Menu

Article on kids with "rage to master"


Recommended Posts

I think it's a good article-and I like that they touched on the opportunities that happen when such a kid is recognized and given a chance to excel. Sometimes with DD it seems like a chicken or the egg thing. Yes, she was a driven kid when it came to her chosen areas, but if she hadn't been noticed and given access to the higher level experiences and materials, would she have remained so?  I do wonder, each time I read one of these articles or studies, how much the higher number of prodigies in Math, Chess, and Music has to do with the fact that achievement in these fields is so much more easily quantified, and that therefore it's easier for kids to be noticed and moved ahead.

 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“From the starting point of innate, natural ability,†Feldman says, “specific talents tend to require specific environments very well suited to their development.â€

 
For instance, the SMPY subjects were a fortunate bunch of kids from the start. Without encouragement from parents or teachers, they likely wouldn’t have taken the SAT early. Their advantages continued to compound after they were identified as “exceptionally gifted.†Unlike many — perhaps most — gifted children, they gained access to unusually rich learning experiences. These included special attention from schools and teachers and invitations to hyper-intensive summer programs, such as the ones that Zuckerberg, Gates, Jobs, and Germanotta attended, where they could gorge themselves on a year’s worth of math or science or literature in a few weeks.
 
Two recent papers published in the Journal of Educational Psychology found that among young people with high ability, those who were allowed to skip a grade, enroll in special classes, or take college courses in high school were significantly more likely to earn PhDs, publish academic papers, develop patents, and pursue high-level careers than their equally smart peers who didn’t have these opportunities.
 
Everyone’s heard the bright-kid-overcomes-all anecdotes. But the bigger picture, based on decades of data, shows that these children are the rare exceptions. For every such story, there are countless nonstories of other gifted children who were unnoticed, submerged, and forgotten in homes and schools ill-equipped to nurture extraordinary potential. In those environments, David Hahn–type outcomes are far more prevalent.
 

My quibble is with the implication that the above is luck.  Appropriate academic education is "lucky" only due to the pathetic availability of truly suitable programs for gifted kids in the majority of public schools.

 

I also agree with the comment to the article that a number in the 120s is probably a gross underestimate of the ability of Feyman (with whom I'm not familiar) and presumably demonstrates the limitations of FSIQ calculation.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think there's some luck, though. Obviously, the school system should be more equitable and provide more options. But in my DD's case, there are three major US organizations in Herpetology (Society for the Study of Reptiles and Amphibians (mostly land animals), American Society of Ichthyology and Herpetology (mostly aquatic and semi-aquatic species) and Herpetologist's League (very small compared to the other two, and seems to be largely older adults at this point). All three have a pretty comfortable working relationship, down to doing many of their conferences and events together. However, if you're not at least a college student, only one will talk to you-SSAR. And that comes down to a kid who is now in college having met a former SSAR president when she was on a girl scout field trip, talking to him, and him realizing that this kid needed mentoring and support. Because of that connection, quite a few other high school students have gotten the opportunity to be involved with SSAR, and because that wedge was in the door, my DD was able to become part of the SSAR pre-baccalaureate program at age 9.

 

It wasn't until about 6 months later that I realized just how serendipitous it was. In our home state, if you only belong to one organization, it's ASIH, because salamanders and turtles tend to fall under ASIH rather than SSAR-and pretty much all the species of interest in TN are either salamanders or turtles. However, DD's mentor is a specialist in lizard behavior, which is an SSAR area. Therefore, SHE knew the organization had this program, and was in a place to push for a 9 yr old to be included. Most of the other people DD has encountered locally simply wouldn't have been in the position to do so, even if they'd known the program existed-and the difference between one mentor and having an international organization with all that knowledge behind you is great. Maybe, as a parent, I could have eventually found the right door to knock on to open it, but ultimately, it came down to being in the right place at the right time with the right people.

 

 I'm sure there are kids who manage to do it all with library books and sheer grit and determination. But I do think it's easier to jump the line from passionate kid to prodigious results if you manage to get that mentoring and support from someone really, really good at what they do. And that's something that public school GT programs usually aren't going to be able to provide.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do wonder, each time I read one of these articles or studies, how much the higher number of prodigies in Math, Chess, and Music has to do with the fact that achievement in these fields is so much more easily quantified, and that therefore it's easier for kids to be noticed and moved ahead.

:iagree:

My DS9 loves penguins. I asked the DYS consultant if she knows any organization who don't mind a 9 year old volunteer. Math, Chess and Music are a lot easier to find mentors.

 

ETA:

In my area, it would be relatively easier to find fine arts mentors than my home country.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

My quibble is with the implication that the above is luck.  Appropriate academic education is "lucky" only due to the pathetic availability of truly suitable programs for gifted kids in the majority of public schools.

 

I also agree with the comment to the article that a number in the 120s is probably a gross underestimate of the ability of Feyman (with whom I'm not familiar) and presumably demonstrates the limitations of FSIQ calculation.

 

 

I do think there is some "luck" to it all.  I mean, life is luck though, right?  Being in the right place at the right time, literally and figuratively, can sometimes matter.  I do agree with the incredible suckiness of gifted ed right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I'm sure there are kids who manage to do it all with library books and sheer grit and determination. But I do think it's easier to jump the line from passionate kid to prodigious results if you manage to get that mentoring and support from someone really, really good at what they do. And that's something that public school GT programs usually aren't going to be able to provide.

 

Yes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea that luck (being at the right place at the right time) +talent+ drive+practice+family support = success; seems common sensical, no?

 

I mean, most of us have heard of gifted children fall through the cracks because of lack of encouragement, poor learning environment, lack of engagement in school, no mentors, poverty...

There are exceptions, children who succeed despite all odds, but the price these children pay for achieving their goals is probably heartwrenchingly high.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take exception to the stance that a gifted person who does not pursue a career in a distinguished field has fallen through the cracks or is not a high achiever.

 

 

I don't see where in the article or within this thread has it been implied that "gifted person who does not pursue a career in a distinguished field has fallen through the cracks or is not a high achiever."?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was not explicitly said. Sorry I can't cut and paste right now, but I remember the article talking a lot about gifted children, and then prodigies in fields such as art, music, and physics. It seemed to me that the unspoken question was why the other gifted children could not go further, faster...and that further, faster progress in a difficult field is the pinnacle of human achievement.

 

Perhaps I'm reading my personal history into it too much. All this stuff is certainly worth investigating and interesting to consider, I just don't like the idea that someone has not reached their full potential if they suddenly decide to quit the astrophysics program and dedicate their life to raising children. Or, you know, anything else someone chooses to do. As if their intelligence and capabilities will be wasted in "lesser" endeavors, or that they might not have had the necessary traits, such as intelligence, to go "further, faster."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was not explicitly said. Sorry I can't cut and paste right now, but I remember the article talking a lot about gifted children, and then prodigies in fields such as art, music, and physics. It seemed to me that the unspoken question was why the other gifted children could not go further, faster...and that further, faster progress in a difficult field is the pinnacle of human achievement.

Falling through the cracks from my life experience would be more about kids failing out of school when they could have made it. "Smart" kids might just be so bored they blank out and did not complete high school. There are of course other reasons kids fall through the cracks besides boredom.

 

ETA:

A mom I was talking to while our kids were at camp said she felt a lost of some self worth for not working. She ask me if I was going to return to work for my sense of well being. I am happy spending my hubby's money :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 It seemed to me that the unspoken question was why the other gifted children could not go further, faster...and that further, faster progress in a difficult field is the pinnacle of human achievement.

 

Perhaps I'm reading my personal history into it too much. All this stuff is certainly worth investigating and interesting to consider, I just don't like the idea that someone has not reached their full potential if they suddenly decide to quit the astrophysics program and dedicate their life to raising children. Or, you know, anything else someone chooses to do. As if their intelligence and capabilities will be wasted in "lesser" endeavors, or that they might not have had the necessary traits, such as intelligence, to go "further, faster."

 

I understand where you're coming from. One of my favorite quotes is by Charles Schulz- "There is no greater burden than great potential." I try and remember this quote when I parent. Anyways, tying self-worth to achievement is probably not a good idea for any child, gifted or not.

 

Falling through the cracks from my life experience would be more about kids failing out of school when they could have made it. "Smart" kids might just be so bored they blank out and did not complete high school. There are of course other reasons kids fall through the cracks besides boredom.

 

 

^^ What she said.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand where you're coming from. One of my favorite quotes is by Charles Schulz- "There is no greater burden than great potential." I try and remember this quote when I parent. Anyways, tying self-worth to achievement is probably not a good idea for any child, gifted or not.

 

 

 

Love this. I need to print it out and hang it on my fridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I just don't like the idea that someone has not reached their full potential if they suddenly decide to quit the astrophysics program and dedicate their life to raising children."

What difference does it make what you do if you messed up raising your children? There are a lot of opportunities to be a very high achiever as a parent. They might not be as socially lauded as other achievements, but I will be impressed with you.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...