s/o of getting to the Ivy League--How do you produce a kid with that kind of drive?

[melissel]

I think "love of learning" and "drive to be the best" are two very very different things that may be confused here.

 

After reading all of the posts so far, I'm left with a question -- How much of "motivation" is actually "good habits?"

 

Both excellent points--I'll have to think more about those. Cat, I started thinking the same thing, actually, after I responded to Amy's second to last post.

 

I'm still :bigear: and ruminating.

 

Thank you all!

[Catwoman]

Cat, I started thinking the same thing, actually, after I responded to Amy's second to last post.

 

Clearly, great minds think alike. You know, when we're motivated and all. ;)

[Embassy]

What I mean is, are the motivated kids that way because they were born that way, or is it because ever since they were 3 or 4 or 5, they had a strict schedule and an enforced study routine? They seem like wonderful, motivated students, but is it because they love to learn, or is it simply because they've never known any other option?

 

I don't know about all kids, but in my experience I think it is mostly innate. My oldest has a high level of internal motivation. He didn't start any schooling until he was 5.5 and then it was only for half a year. He was born driven and I HAD to start schooling and resume schooling because of his drive. He was NOT content to learn through play or explore things informally full-time anymore. He has had full days of school since 1st grade and hasn't had a problem with it. My little girl has a similar personality. I haven't really started her on anything formal yet. She is growing in hunger for learning so I'm not sure how much longer I'll be able to wait.

 

I believe it is innate because I have another child raised the same way who is so totally opposite. He is so relaxed and laid back. I find it a bit refreshing :) I have to give him nudges often and I'm working on building good habits and teaching him to delay gratification. He prefers to go for the instant reward rather than waiting for a much larger reward down the line. The last instance involved him wanting his haircut over quickly and getting it buzzed instead of being 10 minutes more patient while he had it cut the way he liked. He had a buzz and instantly regretted it. Lessons like this, I hope, will go a long way toward helping him make wiser choices for long-term goals.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Wehomeschool

[Crimson Wife]

I believe I read an article somewhere that the majority of students in Ivy League graduate programs came from strong state programs, or programs from lesser-known colleges that simply had a great "X" program.

 

Out of curiosity one time, I went through the class roster provided to my DH by his Ivy League grad school that had all the undergraduate schools listed. Here was the breakdown:

 

-1/3 of the students had attended elite universities undergrad (Ivies or similar caliber like Stanford, MIT, Oxford, Cambridge, IIT in India, etc.)

-1/3 attended "public Ivies" like UC Berkeley, UT-Austin, UVA, U of M-Ann Arbor, etc. or the service academies like West Point & Annapolis

-the remaining third was split pretty much evenly between the 2nd tier privates (Georgetown, Amherst, Northwestern, etc.) and all the other colleges.

 

That said, we didn't notice any correlation between the prestige of the undergraduate school and the intelligence of his classmates. In fact, one of the most brilliant classmates he had was a graduate of some no-name college in West Virginia.

[GoVanGogh]

How do we help our kids develop an intrinsic desire for knowledge and the self-motivation to learn? Has anyone actually figured it out?! If you've had success in this area (or even just a plan for the future!), I'd love to hear about it. And if you think it's a nature vs. nurture thing, please share your thoughts on that too.

Well, I just have one child and he is still fairly young (10), so take my input with a grain of salt. ;)

I think it is partly nature and partly nurture.

 

Nature (and this is just going off my very limited experience):

DS seemed to have been born wired differently. He was premature and very ill at birth. But by the time he was three weeks old, all of his medical staff was saying that we would have a hard time keeping up with him. DS had 'something' even at that very early age - he was extremely alert and active, despite (or maybe because of?) his difficult birth. It has been a while since I researched preemie babies, but I remember reading of several studies that reported that difficult births can affect a child's brain in a positive manner.

 

Nurture:

We foster a love of learning - it is just part of our lifestyle - so DS sees reading and learning and exploring as something one does for enjoyment.

 

A few specifics:

 

1.) DS is an only child. We do play with him, but he also knows that mom and dad are not his built-in playmates. Even though we are involved in quite a bit, he still has a lot of alone time at home which we think is important for children. We limit the 'junk' toys and keep him stocked with books, educational toys, broken appliances to take apart and study, etc. He has always been active and not interested in sitting at a computer or television, so we don't limit electronics. That said, we don't encourage them, either. I do think "alone time" is important for children.

I am not sure how that looks/works in larger families. I do know my nephew (one of five children in a small house) locks himself in the bathroom and uses the empty bathtub as his "alone place."

 

2.) I attended an unschooling conference years ago and one of the most important things I got out of it was: Pay attention to your child and feed their interests! This speaker did not like the unschooling term "strewing," where one puts educational things in the child's path, as she thought it was better to be direct: I bought you xyz because I noticed you had an interest in it. This speaker said children appreciated having their interests (even passing fancies) noticed and addressed.

 

3.) Don't limit a child, even when they are interested in something far-fetched or something you think is too "old" for them. Children that are driven tend to have passions or interests that are way beyond their age. (DS just read a book on Arduino boards. I took him to Radio Shack as a 'treat' and it is what he picked out.)

 

4.) I don't know the latest research on "brain food," but the driven children I know have better eating habits than most children and have mature food preferences. Cause-and -effect? Parental influence? I don't know. But another good reason to ditch the processed foods.

 

5.) Have children take an active role in their education. I have told my child since he was five that this is his education. I am the facilitator, but he is responsible for his education. I keep the schedule and overall plans, but I want his input. Education isn't "something that just happens to him" but something he is a part of. I take him to the teacher supply store and homeschool book fairs and ask his opinion and let him pick books he is interested in.

 

6.) We think it is important to expose a child (what is the CM quote?) to a feast of ideas. We take 20-30 field trips a year (not fire station type field trips), plus we travel for educational opportunities. We stock our home with a variety of books and magazines. We actively try to open up our child's world.

[Crimson Wife]

I went to an Ivy caliber university primarily because in the environment in which I grew up, anything less was considered tantamount to "failure" :rolleyes: Most of the adults I encountered growing up were graduates of selective colleges- my parents and their siblings, my parents' friends, my friends' parents, even many of the teachers at my public high school. 95% of the graduates of my high school went on to attend college, and about half of those went to selective 4 year schools. Most of the classrooms were decorated with banners from the colleges to which the teacher had written a successful letter of recommendation for a student (there was a friendly rivalry among the staff).

 

Don't get me wrong- I loved college and being in an environment where intellectualism was valued. I met so many amazing people, including my DH :001_wub: I just don't think I ever really had much of a choice about it, because it was what the expectation of pretty much everyone around me. If a student got accepted and had the resources or financial aid to go to an elite school, that's what he/she did.

[theguptas]

I want my kids to attend the college that has the right environment for them. Maybe it will be Ivy League, maybe it won't.

 

Last summer, a friend contemplating homeschooling asked me about "competition." She wanted to know how my children would be able to compete against their peers if they were educated at home. I told her my goal wasn't "competition" as much as it is "ambition." I want them to have interests, passions, etc. and to pursue them vs. always being motivated to just do better than everyone around them (ahem, like I was). I think being motivated by your interests and passions will serve an individual throughout their lives more so than just always looking around to make sure you got the better grade than your neighbor.

 

When you get out into the working world, being a team player and excited about what you do is going to make your quality of life better overall than just competing for the next promotion, raise, accolade. I worked in a company that had such a cut-throat environment because they hired all of the brightest coming out of the country's top MBA programs. There was no team atmosphere and that was how the CEO wanted but, wow, was it an unhealthy place to work.

 

I want my kids to have a well-balanced life as adults. I want them to do something besides just work. So I'm not sure Ivy League is the right goal for my kids - unless they decide it is something they want.

 

Very timely article from the NY Times.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/education/edlife/one-percent-education.html?_r=1&ref=edlife

 

Some notable excerpts:

The emphasis on personal achievement has done more than turn the admissions process into a race to rack up résumé points; more important, to the extent that elite colleges set the pace, it is turning the educational culture into one that stresses individual perfection instead of one that stresses social improvement. Because graduate schools and the best jobs often require extraordinary credentials, students must pour their energies into their own ambitions and accomplishments. And schools encourage it.

 

Some may see this obsession with perfection as the culmination of a long trend; tiger moms have been pushing their children to be intellectual decathletes for generations. But it may actually be a reversal of an even longer trend. At the turn of the last century, the influential philosopher John Dewey saw education as a democratizing force not just in its social consequences but in its very process. Dewey believed that education and life were inextricably bound, that they informed each other. Education wasn’t just something you did in a classroom to earn grades. It was something you lived.

 

There is a big difference between a culture that encourages engagement with the world and one that encourages developing one’s own superiority. The former promotes a sense of commitment; the latter has the danger of rewarding students for collecting as many experiences as they can without stopping to explore — like tourists who pride themselves on how many stickers they can slap on their luggage.

Whatever this does to education, it also undermines the underpinnings of the social contract.

 

The danger isn’t just that people who are born on third base wind up thinking they hit a triple; the danger is that everyone else thinks those folks hit triples. One percent education perpetuates a psychology of social imbalance that is the very antitheses of John Dewey’s dream.

[justamouse]

This is such a great thread.

 

After reading all of the posts so far, I'm left with a question -- How much of "motivation" is actually "good habits?"

 

What I mean is, are the motivated kids that way because they were born that way, or is it because ever since they were 3 or 4 or 5, they had a strict schedule and an enforced study routine? They seem like wonderful, motivated students, but is it because they love to learn, or is it simply because they've never known any other option?

 

I know that some people can honestly say that their kids get up in the morning, eat breakfast and hit the ground running with their schoolwork without a complaint, but many of us have kids who would be nothing less than thrilled if their dads told them that they didn't deserve the "privilege" of their mom's teaching that day... because it would mean a day off from school. (No need to ask which kid is mine in the above example. :glare:)

 

Do you think a lack of motivation sometimes stems from the fact that a really smart kid is able to get high grades without studying, so there's no real need to put forth a lot of effort?

 

Just wondering about all of this stuff! :001_smile:

 

I think it has a LOT to do with habits. I think it's 99 % habits, but from what I've learned, the earlier the habits are formed, the more ingrained they are to the personality.

 

Success is still success whether you climb the mountain slowly or quickly. What matters is that you're climbing the mountain. So that part is personality-HOW you climb. I think the other one percent is relationship.

 

And yes, I think the smarty pants are not challenged enough. I see it myself. It's everything I can do to stump one of my kids. I mean, he has the right answer ALL The time, and I used to just be happy with that, but then I realized that unless I start challenging him and making him work for some of his success, we're in for a world of hurt.

 

Very timely article from the NY Times.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/education/edlife/one-percent-education.html?_r=1&ref=edlife

 

Some notable excerpts:

The emphasis on personal achievement has done more than turn the admissions process into a race to rack up résumé points; more important, to the extent that elite colleges set the pace, it is turning the educational culture into one that stresses individual perfection instead of one that stresses social improvement. Because graduate schools and the best jobs often require extraordinary credentials, students must pour their energies into their own ambitions and accomplishments. And schools encourage it.

 

Some may see this obsession with perfection as the culmination of a long trend; tiger moms have been pushing their children to be intellectual decathletes for generations. But it may actually be a reversal of an even longer trend. At the turn of the last century, the influential philosopher John Dewey saw education as a democratizing force not just in its social consequences but in its very process. Dewey believed that education and life were inextricably bound, that they informed each other. Education wasn’t just something you did in a classroom to earn grades. It was something you lived.

 

There is a big difference between a culture that encourages engagement with the world and one that encourages developing one’s own superiority. The former promotes a sense of commitment; the latter has the danger of rewarding students for collecting as many experiences as they can without stopping to explore — like tourists who pride themselves on how many stickers they can slap on their luggage.

Whatever this does to education, it also undermines the underpinnings of the social contract.

 

The danger isn’t just that people who are born on third base wind up thinking they hit a triple; the danger is that everyone else thinks those folks hit triples. One percent education perpetuates a psychology of social imbalance that is the very antitheses of John Dewey’s dream.

 

Thanks for the link!

[Crimson Wife]

The emphasis on personal achievement has done more than turn the admissions process into a race to rack up résumé points; more important, to the extent that elite colleges set the pace, it is turning the educational culture into one that stresses individual perfection instead of one that stresses social improvement. Because graduate schools and the best jobs often require extraordinary credentials, students must pour their energies into their own ambitions and accomplishments. And schools encourage it.

 

Some may see this obsession with perfection as the culmination of a long trend; tiger moms have been pushing their children to be intellectual decathletes for generations. But it may actually be a reversal of an even longer trend. At the turn of the last century, the influential philosopher John Dewey saw education as a democratizing force not just in its social consequences but in its very process. Dewey believed that education and life were inextricably bound, that they informed each other. Education wasn’t just something you did in a classroom to earn grades. It was something you lived.

 

There is a big difference between a culture that encourages engagement with the world and one that encourages developing one’s own superiority. The former promotes a sense of commitment; the latter has the danger of rewarding students for collecting as many experiences as they can without stopping to explore — like tourists who pride themselves on how many stickers they can slap on their luggage.

Whatever this does to education, it also undermines the underpinnings of the social contract.

 

The danger isn’t just that people who are born on third base wind up thinking they hit a triple; the danger is that everyone else thinks those folks hit triples. One percent education perpetuates a psychology of social imbalance that is the very antitheses of John Dewey’s dream.

 

Since when does "democracy" mean anything more than one citizen, one vote? I seriously don't understand the use of the term as a euphemism for social engineering to try to reduce inequality.

 

I think a major problem with our country is that it is not meritocratic enough. Family connections and wealth still too often count more that talent when it comes to college admissions, landing a job, etc.

[zaichiki]

This is such a great thread.

 

After reading all of the posts so far, I'm left with a question -- How much of "motivation" is actually "good habits?"

 

What I mean is, are the motivated kids that way because they were born that way, or is it because ever since they were 3 or 4 or 5, they had a strict schedule and an enforced study routine? They seem like wonderful, motivated students, but is it because they love to learn, or is it simply because they've never known any other option?

 

I think the question is -- what do you mean by motivation?

Kids can be motivated by external sources.

 

1. Get all As and you get a trip to Hawaii.

2. I'll pay you for every A.

3. Pass this class and I'll take you out to eat.

4. Get anything less than an A and I'll wh*p your ***.

But there are kids who are interested, motivated, obsessed, and passionate about a particular topic, class, or skill. This cannot be created. This is innate. Those kids usually excel in that area b/c they crave all the time and energy they put there.

 

In the end, a kid can get an A b/c they loved the topic and put in all kinds of time OR they can get an A b/c they were motivated by someone else to put in all kinds of time (OR they can get an A b/c it's something they already knew, but let's not go there).

 

Now... remove the external motivation (bribe, threat, whatever) and see what happens. I think the only kids who go beyond what is required (and learn more) are the ones with the innate motivation in that area. Habits or no habits, if you don't *want* to spend the extra time, you won't.

[justamouse]

Since when does "democracy" mean anything more than one citizen, one vote? I seriously don't understand the use of the term as a euphemism for social engineering to try to reduce inequality.

 

I think a major problem with our country is that it is not meritocratic enough. Family connections and wealth still too often count more that talent when it comes to college admissions, landing a job, etc.

 

I totally understand what you're saying, and I agree, it is connections/family/money more than talent, but I do think a European university system would work wonders, especially as the uni bubble is astronomical and rising, and you need a degree to pump gas. ;)

[zaichiki]

The Price of Privilege by Madeline Levine does a good job discussing the issue of extrinisic vs. intrinsic motivation. Disregard the title; the advice can be applied to kids from all walks of life.

 

MBM,

Can you tell me more about this book?

[Bluegoat]

Since when does "democracy" mean anything more than one citizen, one vote? I seriously don't understand the use of the term as a euphemism for social engineering to try to reduce inequality.

 

I think a major problem with our country is that it is not meritocratic enough. Family connections and wealth still too often count more that talent when it comes to college admissions, landing a job, etc.

 

Is it democracy if the votes of the citizens are meaningless? Political power is related to the ability to understand government and issues, and to economic realities.

 

In a nation where it is difficult or impossible for some people to have what is required to actually participate in and make use of the vote they are given, it is really no different than the Roman Colosseum - a distraction to keep the masses happy while those in power (with money) do their thing.

[Bluegoat]

I totally understand what you're saying, and I agree, it is connections/family/money more than talent, but I do think a European university system would work wonders, especially as the uni bubble is astronomical and rising, and you need a degree to pump gas. ;)

 

I would not be suprised to see this change before my kids are finished school. Even now, I know many people who have concluded that a university education is not the ticket to prosperity they had hoped and pursued other avenues.

[beaners]

I know a few moms who push their kids incredibly hard, but I honestly think that, in their cases, it's so they can brag that little Jimmy can read ancient Greek and he's only 7. :glare:

 

Ok, who is this maligned Greek-speaking 7 year old you keep referencing? I'm starting to get curious. :tongue_smilie:

 

For the original question, I think it would have done me a world of good to hear that I was capable of achieving those lofty goals. I was doing well enough, and that was fine with my parents. I don't remember a single conversation about how beautiful calculus can be or how exciting it was to follow the spread of ideas from Greece and Rome to the modern world. I did still manage to find elegant proofs and read about how those ideas led to the rise and fall of nations, so it wasn't a complete bust.

[justamouse]

I would not be suprised to see this change before my kids are finished school. Even now, I know many people who have concluded that a university education is not the ticket to prosperity they had hoped and pursued other avenues.

 

I'm just seeing people give up because they've been priced out, and it's really, really sad. The others are in debt far more than they can afford.

[Catwoman]

Ok, who is this maligned Greek-speaking 7 year old you keep referencing? I'm starting to get curious. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

:D

 

I remember years ago, on a different forum, one of the moms was constantly bragging about her super-genius kid, and one of her biggest boasts was that the kid was fluent in ancient Greek. So someone asked how old he was, and she said he was 7. :eek:

 

I'm pretty sure no one believed her, because she also said her son was a math genius and was a violin prodigy, but I remember hoping against hope that she was lying, because can you imagine how stressed the kid would have been if she'd been telling the truth about even part of it?

 

But the story stuck with me, mainly because her posts seemed to stir up a lot of competition in many of the other moms, and I thought it was just the silliest thing. It was like an auction -- my kid read at 2 years... that's nothing, mine read at 18 months... that's practically ancient -- my little darling read War and Peace at 6 months while I nursed her in the recliner...:tongue_smilie:

 

I could never get into Competition Mode.

[zaichiki]

:D

 

I remember years ago, on a different forum, one of the moms was constantly bragging about her super-genius kid, and one of her biggest boasts was that the kid was fluent in ancient Greek. So someone asked how old he was, and she said he was 7. :eek:

 

I'm pretty sure no one believed her, because she also said her son was a math genius and was a violin prodigy, but I remember hoping against hope that she was lying, because can you imagine how stressed the kid would have been if she'd been telling the truth about even part of it?

 

 

 

You know... there actually exist kids/people like this who are not stressed, but energized by these kinds of things.

 

My mother has a cousin who is profoundly gifted... truly fluent in 14 languages... became a man of the cloth in two very different religions (one at a time)... and can't really speak comfortably with very many people b/c no one can follow him. From the way the family talks about their experiences with him growing up, I can totally imagine that he could have been a 7 year old like the one you're talking about. Apparently he needed hardly ANY repetition to learn something new and LOVED extremely challenging and off-the-beaten-path kinda stuff... so I don't think being fluent in Greek, a genius in math, and a violin "prodigy" would have been stressful for him.

 

It's a shame that people either a) don't believe the mother or b) feel competitive with her.

[GoVanGogh]

You know... there actually exist kids/people like this who are not stressed, but energized by these kinds of things.

 

My mother has a cousin who is profoundly gifted... truly fluent in 14 languages... became a man of the cloth in two very different religions (one at a time)... and can't really speak comfortably with very many people b/c no one can follow him. From the way the family talks about their experiences with him growing up, I can totally imagine that he could have been a 7 year old like the one you're talking about. Apparently he needed hardly ANY repetition to learn something new and LOVED extremely challenging and off-the-beaten-path kinda stuff... so I don't think being fluent in Greek, a genius in math, and a violin "prodigy" would have been stressful for him.

:iagree:

My DH works with a lady that speaks a dozen languages. Her son is 7 and is already fluent in three languages. He doesn't seem stressed at all. "Energized" is a great word for it. Some people get so much enjoyment out of learning that they are truly energized.

[Alessandra]

:lurk5:

 

great thread -- habits/motivation, intrinsic/extrinsic, intellectual curiosity/desire to succeed....

 

I have really enjoyed all the comments. I have a ds who is bright, motivated, but often falls apart at the idea of actually working (!).

[MBM]

MBM,

Can you tell me more about this book?

 

Levine discusses a number of issues, but I'll try to briefly sum up her views about internal and external motivation.

 

She states that internal and external motivation are not mutually exclusive. Young children naturally will explore and do things to satisfy their own curiosity (internal motivation), yet they also do things to please their parents for which they receive approval, praise, a reward, etc. (external motivation).

 

External motivation will change into internal motivation as the child takes in the messages he is receiving from his parents and if he is allowed to choose those which suit him and then apply them to his development, interest, capability, etc. This does not mean the child pursues those interests exclusively; rather, he is allowed to pursue what interests him, learning at a pace that suits him.

 

The goal is to help the child internalize for himself a desire to be capable and interested in learning. The process matters more than the end result, and well-meaning parents often do not realize how they thwart this development.

 

She goes into more detail discussing this and other important issues and does a much better job explaining than I do. I'd highly recommend it to any parent.

 

ETA: She discusses children who aren't motivated and when a parent should be concerned about that. Sometimes it isn't a problem.

[Donna]

I think the question is -- what do you mean by motivation?

Kids can be motivated by external sources.

1. Get all As and you get a trip to Hawaii.
   
2. I'll pay you for every A.
   
3. Pass this class and I'll take you out to eat.
   
4. Get anything less than an A and I'll wh*p your ***.
   

But there are kids who are interested, motivated, obsessed, and passionate about a particular topic, class, or skill. This cannot be created. This is innate. Those kids usually excel in that area b/c they crave all the time and energy they put there.

 

In the end, a kid can get an A b/c they loved the topic and put in all kinds of time OR they can get an A b/c they were motivated by someone else to put in all kinds of time (OR they can get an A b/c it's something they already knew, but let's not go there).

 

Now... remove the external motivation (bribe, threat, whatever) and see what happens. I think the only kids who go beyond what is required (and learn more) are the ones with the innate motivation in that area. Habits or no habits, if you don't *want* to spend the extra time, you won't.

 

:iagree:

[Muttichen]

My oldest three have been accepted at Ivy Leagues (Harvard, Yale, Princeton) and NONE of them was consistently motivated throughout high school. They finally got motivated in their senior year when they visited colleges and these schools stood out for what they are -- amazing. They were able to get in because my husband and I were motivated. We gave them an education that wouldn't close any doors and expected them to do well and they rose to it.

[Onceuponatime]

I think it is part personality, part teaching/guiding , part modeling. For each person those parts may have to be larger or smaller. I do think conscientious parental modeling can play a big role. This is why the odds are that none of my kids will end up at Ivy League schools. It just isn't that important to us. Dh and I are both comfortable with a middle income life and have modelled how to live that kind of life successfully to our kids. If they want to shoot higher, they are welcome and will be supported to the best of our ability. But there will be a point where we can no longer give informed guidance and the child will have to step out on his own initiative. This has already happened with one of our kids. He is doing very well. :-)

[flyingiguana]

The kids I've known who have gotten into Ivy League schools have not seemed particularly driven. They were only about average, in the driven department. I've known much more driven kids, but they didn't see the point of going to an Ivy League school (or didn't get in). They're much happier somewhere else where their drive has somewhere to go. (And those kids I know who went to Ivy Leagues -- eh -- still not all that driven, still haven't found much passion for anything.)

 

But if you're only asking what makes a teen driven and whether these signs are apparent early on -- I wouldn't worry about a lazy 9 year old. I've known lots of do nothing kids at 9 who found a passion at 17 or even later who are now doing very well for themselves in terms of satisfaction with their work and impressing other people.

 

As others have mentioned, the best thing you can do is provide a solid education. It doesn't even need to be all that impressive. Just get the basics down: reading, writing, and math. Then, if the child decides to pursue something, they won't be held back by a fundamental lack in their education.

 

My own kids were fairly lackluster at 9, in comparison to stories I've read of other kids. But as late teens, they've become pretty impressive in the fields they've chosen to pursue (which are not the fields I would have thought to choose for them, back when they were 9).

[flyingiguana]

:D

 

I remember years ago, on a different forum, one of the moms was constantly bragging about her super-genius kid, and one of her biggest boasts was that the kid was fluent in ancient Greek. So someone asked how old he was, and she said he was 7. :eek:

 

I'm pretty sure no one believed her, because she also said her son was a math genius and was a violin prodigy, but I remember hoping against hope that she was lying, because can you imagine how stressed the kid would have been if she'd been telling the truth about even part of it?

.

 

Interesting thing is, I've only ever heard of these sorts of geniuses on the internet. Well, that's not strictly true. I have heard of them IRL, but when I meet the kid, it turns out they're really not all that special. The parents have just been talking them up.

 

This includes kids I've known who "went to college at 10". Well, sure, they did, but they didn't do all that well. But the parents went on talking up these kids as if they had been the most brilliant students in the class. They didn't seem to notice what grade the kid actually got.

 

Some parents are living in an odd fantasy world, where reality never intrudes.

 

I'm still waiting to meet a real genius.

[BarbecueMom]

I have one friend who is a Harvard grad. Brightest, most driven person I've ever met, but you wouldn't know it just from talking to him for a few minutes. He has a personality that just can't help but take whatever opportunity he's been given and exceed everyone's expectations, and then some. There's a big difference between people like him, whose ambition is very natural (and he said his dorm mates were mostly like this), and people who visibly try as hard as they can, even if their motivations are internal.

 

That being said, he had plenty of people in his life to open doors and let him achieve. That's really my only goal with educating my boys, finding the doors of opportunity and supporting their paths. Beyond the genes they have, I can't do any more for them in the "nature" department.

[Crimson Wife]

Interesting thing is, I've only ever heard of these sorts of geniuses on the internet. Well, that's not strictly true. I have heard of them IRL, but when I meet the kid, it turns out they're really not all that special. The parents have just been talking them up.

 

I know a number of individuals who are profoundly gifted (way, way, WAY smarter than my own children or I could ever realistically hope to be). Very few of them stand out as being obvious geniuses upon first acquaintance.

 

There is one guy who graduated from my high school and college a few years ahead of me whom I seriously think could win a Nobel Prize some day. In high school, he was on the national Physics and Math Olympiad teams and he went on to receive a PhD. in Neuroscience from Stanford. But he is also one of the most down-to-Earth guys I know, and it isn't until you get him started talking about the research he's doing that it becomes clear he's brilliant.

[justamouse]

My oldest three have been accepted at Ivy Leagues (Harvard, Yale, Princeton) and NONE of them was consistently motivated throughout high school. They finally got motivated in their senior year when they visited colleges and these schools stood out for what they are -- amazing. They were able to get in because my husband and I were motivated. We gave them an education that wouldn't close any doors and expected them to do well and they rose to it.

 

I think you need to post a little bit more. :D

[Cassy]

I know a number of individuals who are profoundly gifted (way, way, WAY smarter than my own children or I could ever realistically hope to be). Very few of them stand out as being obvious geniuses upon first acquaintance.

 

There is one guy who graduated from my high school and college a few years ahead of me whom I seriously think could win a Nobel Prize some day. In high school, he was on the national Physics and Math Olympiad teams and he went on to receive a PhD. in Neuroscience from Stanford. But he is also one of the most down-to-Earth guys I know, and it isn't until you get him started talking about the research he's doing that it becomes clear he's brilliant.

 

Yes, one of DH's friends is very like this.

 

Cassy

[Beth in SW WA]

Ds caught the Ivy bug when he toured MIT & Harvard last April on our 2-week east coast trip. We spent a day with friends who work as campus pastors on BU's campus. He saw the east coast college environment and heard first-hand accounts of campus life from friends who lived in that world for the last 10 years. Ds came away inspired. He would love to attend an Ivy but unfortunately he doesn't appear to have the SAT scores to get in (although he will try). He didn't get passionate about his college future until his junior year -- which is a bit late in the game. He is applying to Stanford's high school summer quarter. He is touring colleges this year and is very forward thinking. This had to come from within him. It is nothing we have done other than exposing him to people & experiences. He has to want it.

 

Looking back, he wishes he took academics more seriously his first 2 years. He got nearly straight As and has a stellar, well-rounded resume' of leadership, sports, music, ministry/community service, grades, etc. But he didn't read enough as a younger student to nail the verbal section of the SAT. A lifelong love of reading is the key to success on that subsection. He is just not an avid reader. He is math & music. Last night he asked me for a classical piano book. I found my clarinet in his bedroom yesterday. He wants to learn violin also. He has 7 instruments in his room. Music is his passion. He won't read Steinbeck or Dickens for pleasure.

 

BU sent him an email yesterday. We'll see where it goes.

 

Despite our encouragement, Andrew didn't have the drive & determination until he owned it for himself -- which for Ivy schools may have been a bit too late. We are trusting God to lead him -- which may be 11 minutes away from here at UP. :)

 

Pardon my ramblings. Just waking up here in the dark & rain.

[Muttichen]

I think you need to post a little bit more. :D

 

I'm too busy teaching my kids (and/or shuttling them all over creation LOL!)

[Laura Corin]

'Calvin' is working towards the first stage of UK high school exams. To have a good chance of being noticed by the most prestigious universities, he needs to get top marks in almost all of them. He just did his 'mock' (practice) exams. He didn't do that much work, but as he doesn't find academic work hard he got top marks in most tests. He didn't get top marks in everything however and he wasn't happy with himself. He got an A, but not an A* in a couple of subjects. The reason he wasn't happy was that he didn't feel that he deserved the As.

 

So partly his motivation is wanting to attend a good university, partly wanting to work towards a goal and see the results.

 

Back to the original question: we've always said that he should do his best, but he has chosen his own goals. I suspect that he was born conscientious.

 

Laura

Edited January 24, 2012 by Laura Corin

[jennynd]

I was accepted into Cornell but I had to turned it down since I was offered full scholarship from another high profile school. So I supposed I can talk a bit

 

No, my parents didn't do much. They emphasized that study is important. But most are just by myself. I knew when I was in middle school that if I want a better life. I need to study hard and work hard. So, indeed, I will say it is more of a personality.