Exactly-- it's as though in the effort to pursue a growth mindset for our children, we've neglected the fact that while attainment is a destination, the means-- and PACE-- of getting there is probably not terribly mutable for an individual when you get right down to it.
I can't will my child onto a different developmental trajectory by feeding her more or promoting special exercises or anything. It is what it is. That's not to say that I think that her current physical development is static, or that it isn't important to provide her with good nutrition and physical activity that promotes good health.
It's just that no amount of wishing and cajoling/preparation will actually MAKE her develop faster if that isn't her genetic destiny.
I don't know why we persist in believing that all children are cognitively lumps of clay in this fashion. They simply are NOT.
Where we live (and, it sounds like, where Cricket is, as well, and also eastcoast) people are shocked when they come face to face with the reality of a child like DD. They've very plainly heard it all before.... from parents. But they've also very plainly not SEEN too many kids who are really like her.
She's a cheetah being educated alongside well-conditioned border collies, and she knows it. Sure, most dogs aren't bright enough to do what Border Collies do (B.C.'s are amazingly clever-- for dogs) but no Border Collie can match a cheetah. Nor is it easy for a cheetah to muster the enthusiasm, willingness to please, or stamina that border collies are famous for. Unfortunately, gifted programs and AP coursework have become more and more geared toward stamina and work ethic, not genuine rigor/depth academically. It's the same old M.O.S. 'differentiation' strategy. This is NOT good news for cheetahs, and we're systematically crippling them as a society by expecting them to be just some form of super-Border Collie. Border Collies are a lot easier to train. A lot easier to live with-- a lot more adaptable, easier to feed, more... domesticated.
DD's own favorite recent analogy is that she's a llama among sheep and-- at least in the upper-grouping track that she is generally on-- goats. The trouble is that llamas still have to hide their long necks to fit in with the goats. Anyone that knows camelids knows better than to treat a llama like a sheep or even a goat. That's not going to end well; llamas are intelligent, sensitive and autonomous in ways that neither of the other two creatures are... and the fact that they have superficially similar housing and care needs doesn't change it. KWIM?
