Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 167 guests, and 10 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    parentologyco, Smartlady60, petercgeelan, eterpstra, Valib90
    11,410 Registered Users
    March
    S M T W T F S
    1 2
    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    10 11 12 13 14 15 16
    17 18 19 20 21 22 23
    24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
    Joined: Dec 2010
    Posts: 1,040
    A
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Dec 2010
    Posts: 1,040
    In our district, everyone who scores at or above 95th percentile on standardized grade-level testing gets invited to do the Duke TIP's 7th grade talent search, and most who qualify do - almost all of those kids end up taking either the SAT or the ACT very close to their 13th birthdays (either before or just after), and it is not based on having particularly wealthy or involved parents. I'm sure lots of schools in the JHU catchment area do the same. I wouldn't say that practice alone would get you to the point where you could qualify for the SET.

    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 221
    G
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    G
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 221
    Hoagies have recently been linking to this study, which also touches on why talent matters. I've only had a chance to skim it so far - the reference to talent is toward the end.

    http://www.psychologicalscience.org...ing-giftedness-and-gifted-education.html


    "If children have interest, then education will follow" - Arthur C Clarke
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 288
    L
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    L
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 288
    I guess I just don't see the "talent doesn't matter" as a legitimate position to take, so that may affect my reaction to this piece. IMO, people who say that talent doesn't matter are actually saying other things ("I don't want to admit you are smarter/better at something than me", "I don't know how to teach this kid", "I resent the fact that you can do something better than me with significantly less practice"). Of course talent matters, everyone knows this deep down. Most of the major developments in our society have been produced by people who were able to perceive the world differently than everyone else, not people who practiced alot. But those who won't admit this are just not going to be convinced by a piece like this and I worry that it would just make them more resentful or disinterested. That's all. But, honestly, perhaps it is also my own residual tendencies to hide my own talents, (not admitting to being the student who screwed up the curve on an exam, "dumbing down" my vocabulary, etc.). I just don't feel like an article like this being read by my teachers/peers/colleagues would have been helpful in any way.

    But, as a social scientist, I also challenge the variables they provide here as measures of real world success.

    "those who were in the 99.9 percentile � the profoundly gifted � were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, secure a patent, publish an article in a scientific journal or publish a literary work. A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage."

    I do not see that as a logical leap. It sounds to me like the profoundly gifted are much more likely to max out the educational possibilities available, (perhaps in an attempt to avoid the "real world"?).

    I think a more interesting outcome variable might be innovation in their fields. PGs should be more highly represented in this category by virtue of their abilities to think differently than others, rather than their ability to complete more school. This may overlap to the variables they list, but not necessarily. Much of what is published in academia is significantly devoid of creative thought and still tends to reward following rather than choosing your own path for a significant portion of your career.

    (Please note, any unintended bitterness in this post is not directed at the article or any other posters here, but to the way this article hit a nerve with my own personal history. lol}

    Joined: Jun 2008
    Posts: 1,840
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jun 2008
    Posts: 1,840
    Originally Posted by LNEsMom
    "those who were in the 99.9 percentile � the profoundly gifted � were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, secure a patent, publish an article in a scientific journal or publish a literary work. A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage."

    I do not see that as a logical leap. It sounds to me like the profoundly gifted are much more likely to max out the educational possibilities available, (perhaps in an attempt to avoid the "real world"?).

    I think a more interesting outcome variable might be innovation in their fields. PGs should be more highly represented in this category by virtue of their abilities to think differently than others, rather than their ability to complete more school. This may overlap to the variables they list, but not necessarily. Much of what is published in academia is significantly devoid of creative thought and still tends to reward following rather than choosing your own path for a significant portion of your career.

    The quoted section in here is the key idea of the piece. And LNEsmom's commentary is the right color on it.

    AS to the real world aspect. I work with about 500 software developers and there are only three people in the whole firm who can solve just about every problem put in front of them. I add in a few more people as they just do not get rattled and can calm people down so they can think as a team.

    Everyone is very smart, but only a very tiny group provides the ideas that in a time crunch get everyone unstuck. And their ideas are very high quality. They also look ahead and try to design things that are easy to do and which have few unintended consequences and which satisfy many requirements, not just one.

    AS one of these three, I know I see the world VERY differently. The hardest part is explaining the WHYs to people. Very often they just have to see it in action as they cannot visualize it. Another hard part of this is going through why something should NOT be done. People would rather eat that donut in front of them as you cannot convince them of the donut shop in the next room.

    Longer term, the solution is to hire more PG/MG/HG people rather than "professionals."






    Joined: Jan 2008
    Posts: 1,689
    W
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    W
    Joined: Jan 2008
    Posts: 1,689
    As I mentioned before, the longitudinal study done about Hunter, by a Hunter grad, showed that yes, they did have academic success but not innovative success.

    Innovation probably requires real world obstacles not chess strategies, because you have to include the human factors.

    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 2,007
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 2,007
    Let's take "securing a patent" out of that list.

    Securing a patent is pretty darn easy.

    Joined: Jun 2008
    Posts: 1,840
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jun 2008
    Posts: 1,840
    Originally Posted by Wren
    As I mentioned before, the longitudinal study done about Hunter, by a Hunter grad, showed that yes, they did have academic success but not innovative success.

    Innovation probably requires real world obstacles not chess strategies, because you have to include the human factors.

    They also have to place themselves on a different road. The road less traveled by.

    http://www.bartleby.com/119/1.html

    Innovation requires something else.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

    Quote
    Kuhn�s insistence that a paradigm shift was a m�lange of sociology, enthusiasm and scientific promise, but not a logically determinate procedure, caused an uproar in reaction to his work. Kuhn addressed concerns in the 1969 postscript to the second edition. For some commentators it introduced a realistic humanism into the core of science while for others the nobility of science was tarnished by Kuhn's introduction of an irrational element into the heart of its greatest achievements.


    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 288
    L
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    L
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 288
    Originally Posted by Giftodd
    Hoagies have recently been linking to this study, which also touches on why talent matters. I've only had a chance to skim it so far - the reference to talent is toward the end.

    http://www.psychologicalscience.org...ing-giftedness-and-gifted-education.html


    I would love to see a NYT opinion piece arguing something along these lines: that the gifted deserve the opportunity to "strive" too, and that this support has benefits not just for them but for everyone through the possible innovations they could provide if properly supported.

    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 176
    D
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    D
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 176
    Originally Posted by LNEsMom
    I would love to see a NYT opinion piece arguing something along these lines: that the gifted deserve the opportunity to "strive" too, and that this support has benefits not just for them but for everyone through the possible innovations they could provide if properly supported.

    If only there were a "like" button in these forums . . .

    Joined: Feb 2010
    Posts: 2,639
    B
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    B
    Joined: Feb 2010
    Posts: 2,639
    The next day, the Times goes back to praising strivers with little academic talent but the "right" racial and socioeconomic backgrounds who are trying to get into top colleges:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/education/lets-get-ready-offers-help-for-college-admissions.html
    Learning to Play the Game to Get Into College
    By MICHAEL WINERIP
    November 20, 2011

    ...

    In case Nathaly is asked to describe herself in three words, she has picked them out: trustworthy, friendly and workaholic.

    Those are the right words, said Ms. Lichtman, the math teacher, who will be writing a recommendation for Nathaly.

    Her first two semesters in math, Nathaly got an 89 and an 86, but then fell apart on trigonometry, exponents and logarithms. �Fractions, the pi thing, oh my God,� Nathaly said.

    For weeks she stayed after school for help.

    Few students hoping to go to an elite college would ask for a recommendation from a teacher who gave them a C. Few teachers would give a C student a strong recommendation. �You know, I didn�t care about the final grade,� Ms. Lichtman said. �Nathaly showed me a work ethic that will make her successful in college and life, that�s what matters.�

    <end of excerpt>

    She does not sound like 4-year college material to me. I agree with comments 1, 5, 11, and 60 at the NYT site.

    Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Testing with accommodations
    by aeh - 03/27/24 01:58 PM
    Quotations that resonate with gifted people
    by indigo - 03/27/24 12:38 PM
    For those interested in astronomy, eclipses...
    by indigo - 03/23/24 06:11 PM
    California Tries to Close the Gap in Math
    by thx1138 - 03/22/24 03:43 AM
    Gifted kids in Illinois. Recommendations?
    by indigo - 03/20/24 05:41 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5