How much do you think is "nurture", and how much "nature"?

[Jill- OK]

Okay, I've thought about this before, but receiving standardized test scores today has brought it back to the forefront of my mind, lol. :001_smile:

 

Both of my older children scored well. I could have predicted how they'd do, though; oldest daughter is a bright kid, and a hard worker, across the board. Her test scores reflect that. Oldest son is a sharp cookie all around, but he's weak in spelling and math computation. Not in grasping the general ideas, but in figuring, so to speak.

 

How do you winnow out what's reflecting your strengths, as a teacher, what your children's natural bents are, and what could be bolstered by a little more attention?

 

Honestly...I don't know that my teaching has anything to do with this, other than finding weak spots and trying to address them. (For example, math computation). I think my kids would lean the ways they're bent, whether they were with me or at school, but there is a part of me that always wonders if I'm shaping them towards my preferences, unknowingly. (Unwitting focus on literary discussions and a subconscious math avoidance, for example).

 

Thoughts? Or am I rambling, lol? :D

[KidsHappen]

Mentally, physically, personality traits, every natural attribute is well nature. Now what they do with what they have got, to a certain extent, that is nuture. Their manners and training that is what you give them. I raised all of my kids the same and they all have different strengths and weakness.

 

I have an intellectual, one artist, one athlete, one goofball, one who is a natural mother and then I have my son. By the way, he has the highest IQ, he just can't seem to figure out how to utilize it.

 

It is the same with their health. Their were all raised the same and some have practically never been ill and others get every little bug that goes around.

 

My kids all have various physical and mental challanges (don't we all) but the fact that they make the most of what they have, that I like to take credit for. :)

[Crissy]

Well, Jill, I don't know if this will make you feel better, worse, or just leave you with more questions. Here, though, is an article I read this morning, and your post brought it to mind.

[Mommyof4ks]

I don't think you can really 'make' your kids lean towards what you like or what you like to teach unless they themselves like those things. I have an artist, a mechanical engineer in the making and a smarty pants. None of these things are my favorite things, but they all like science which is something that I did not like or like to teach until they decided that they wanted more of it.

 

As someone else mentioned this goes across all parts of the kids. I have a child who rarely gets sick and one that has cancer as well as one in the middle of those two. One is neat and the other two are messy. One must have a schedule and the other two are more flexible. Two must know the days plans while one will go with the flow. It is interesting really.

[Jill- OK]

...but it does comfort me a little in my decision to just accept that my son is a little challenged in the area of math computation. :001_smile:

 

Drill may or may not help it, but it's worth a try. ("A pedagogy designed to identify strong and weak areas of achievement is not a bad idea.")

 

I've read something else, recently, that leaned towards the idea that environment had less to do with outcome than most might like to think, and I know people who would seem to prove that. (My dad was one of the most intelligent people I ever met, and he certainly didn't have an "enriching childhood" in the modern sense.)

 

It's not very thrilling to think that you (or your children) are only given a certain amount of raw material, but I think it also underscores the value of teaching a good work ethic, alongside the flashcards, Little Einstein videos, etc.

 

Hard work can make up for a lot of lack.

[Renee in NC]

By the way, he has the highest IQ, he just can't seem to figure out how to utilize it.

 

You have my condolences. I have one like that too and man, is it hard!

[Sharon H in IL]

Crissy, that article is amazing! I'm so glad you posted the link. I'm printing it out and re-reading it carefully.

[LoriM]

The more I work and practice, the luckier I seem to get.

 

— Gary Player

 

I do think we all have a natural limit or natural potential, but I watch special people overcome all "known" limits quite regularly, so I also believe that nurture had a great deal to do with it. :)

 

I'm probably an 80-80 gal. I think for those people who rise above adverse home situations and become amazing people--it was 80% nature.

 

And for those people who overcome physical limitations and owe their success to the support of friends and family...it was 80% nurture.

 

:)

Edited June 26, 2009 by LoriM
misspelling :)

[Jill- OK]

I'm probably an 80-80 gal. I think for those people who rise above adverse home situations and become amazing people--it was 80% nature.

 

And for those people who overcome physical limitations and owe their success to the support of friends and family...it was 80% nurture.

 

:)

 

Sounds good to me! :001_smile:

[LoriM]

Sounds good to me! :001_smile:

 

I'm a statistician, you know. :D

[OrganicAnn]

The problem is that if it is largely genetics, then one (just theoretically) could ask does it really matter what a teacher/parent does. As parents we generally want to think that the decisions we make matter.

 

Seems there is lots of evidence that genetics does play a big roll (twin studies). But like the gifted kids that do better if their success in school isn't attributed to their intelligence but rather their effort, as parents don't we have to kinda trick ourselves into thinking it isn't just genetics. I mean otherwise we might just throw up our hands and say what can we do and its out of our control.

 

I believe that all kids are born (genetics) with a range (might be a very narrow range for some and a wide range for others) of potential. That the environment will determine if they are at the top of the range, middle or bottom. My goal is to try to create an environment (enrichment, rules, routines, choices, experiences) that will help my DD be at the top of her range. Just my rambling thoughts.

[KidsHappen]

Well, Jill, I don't know if this will make you feel better, worse, or just leave you with more questions. Here, though, is an article I read this morning, and your post brought it to mind.

 

Good article. My favorite line though was: After all, it's not called the theory of multiple stupidities. :)

[OrganicAnn]

The line that popped out at me was "Too many people have chosen to believe in what they wish to be true rather than in what is true."

[Tap]

Not necessarily education based learning, but since dd2 is my great-niece I have a unique look into her. I am not close to the babies mother...at all, but did know her as a young child. The things that are amazing to me, are the little glimpses of her mother, that I see in her! The personality, the attitude, the nature of her movements...all a spitting image of her bio-mom. She has only had visitations with her mom, so she hasn't had enough time with her to have any real impact on her demeanor.

 

It is amazing to have a child, and to see another parents influence so heavily imparted into your child's personality.

[KJB]

My husband and I were recently discussing this topic.

 

DH's take is that you can't get out what isn't inherently there already, but you can sure mess up what exists.

 

In other words, a child with less raw ability can't be made to have more raw ability just because they are in an excellent environment. However, a child with excellent ability can be led astray by a poor environment. Not that some people won't achieve anyway in spite of circumstances, but a bad environment can hinder and impede a bright person from achieving his potential.

 

I believe that a person is born with a defined amount of potential and environment either helps to achieve that potential or gets in its way. I also have come to believe that *motivation* and *persistence* are the true keys to success rather than just intelligence. If you have all three, you are destined for greatness.

[Catherine]

"nurture" as a big influence. And how anyone who has had a second child would even consider it.

 

Nevertheless, I agree with OrganicAnn that our job is to help them to come out at the top of their range, not the bottom. I would also add that for any child with a particular learning challenge, there is potential for spectacular failure if they are not helped in an effective way.

[kalanamak]

"nurture" as a big influence. And how anyone who has had a second child would even consider it.

 

 

 

When you see abused children. When you look at culture attitudes towards school achievement (ie a USian child who excels in something is considered to have "a gift", whereas a Chinese child is considered to have worked hard at it).

(I do, however, accept nature as a very dominant force.)

[Renee in NC]

"nurture" as a big influence. And how anyone who has had a second child would even consider it.

 

Nevertheless, I agree with OrganicAnn that our job is to help them to come out at the top of their range, not the bottom. I would also add that for any child with a particular learning challenge, there is potential for spectacular failure if they are not helped in an effective way.

 

On the flip side, you could drive yourself nuts thinking that if you would just get them the right therapy, tutoring, supplements, etc. then they will be "normal." This also leads to terrible guilt that if you had just tried harder then the child would have overcome their learning issues.

[TravelingChris]

I think Intelligence is almost all nature to start out with but you can certainly lower it with neglect, abuse, etc. :iagree: with the article and had wondered in the past why my family was different than that which is described by multiple intelligence fans. We are good at learning. One of my kids is particularly talented in drawing and painting, another is very musical (and it is not solely interest based. or rather her brain was wired for this interest). SOme people love music but that doesn't make them have any talent. I also agree with those who say while it is nature, you do better by assuming it isn't.

 

Note too that a few conditions are often found with giftedness and can mask it. ADHD, dyslexia, anxiety, etc.

 

IN terms of math drill, that has very little correlation with intelligence. My 12 yo maxes out math concepts part of the test but doesn't have all her facts down. Although I have had math oriented undergraduate degree and very heavy statistics based graduate, I still have to reflect on a few math facts. So does my PhD husband. So what- it takes us only a second or two to figure it out although we may not remember 8*7 at a given moment. I do calculate quickly though and often people in groups like to use me for cash handler at events since I do that.

[Nestof3]

Looking at Nathan and Ben leads me to believe that most of who they are is really nature. They both have their strengths, though Ben's are harder to find. He is not passionate about a lot of pursuits other than playing Legos and wanting to play on the computer. Nathan is one of those Thomas Jefferson types -- the ones that go after so many things with a passion. He is almost always devoting his time to learning, and he learns amazingly fast.

 

They have been given the same nurture.

 

Now, I do think that Nathan would be a very different person if he were brought up in a different household. I have decorated our home with intellectually stimulating things. I have provided tools and resources. If he had parents who never took him to the library, who didn't buy books, who allowed him to watch television all day (oh -- that would be parents like mine), I don't think he would be the same. I feel like I'm spending so much time catching up to the person I would have been had I been nurtured with the nature I have within me.

[Jill- OK]

Good article. My favorite line though was: After all, it's not called the theory of multiple stupidities. :)

 

:)

 

(Although I might be persuaded that those exist, too, lol.)

[Jill- OK]

It is amazing to have a child, and to see another parents influence so heavily imparted into your child's personality.

 

...not a parent, but I've been shocked at how much of my (deceased) father I see in my oldest son.

 

Not just looks-wise (my son looks as if he's going to be quite tall, not something he got from my husband, lol), but in sense of humor and mannerisms.

 

The other day, we were at the park, and something happened that I know, without a doubt, would have caused my dad to laugh. My son started to chuckle, in that same low-key but extremely tickled way my dad used to.

 

It was bizarre...almost like looking at my dad.

 

My son did have a close relationship with my dad, but we lived in another state for three years, before he died, and he's been gone almost that long. I can't imagine my son actively picking up habits/mannerisms from him, at the young age he was when they spent the most time together.

 

Some things really are genetic, without a doubt.