I like the term "child led,'" though I may interpret it differently than the OP's link intended or by others here. IMO, the term means in the child's best interests, not because the kid wants to.
I've been thinking a lot about this idea, especially in context of the Genius Denied mantra (parents don't push gifted kids; gifted kids pull their parents). That mantra bothers me. Not all gifted kids are that self-motivated. I suspect that in most people (even very intelligent ones), assiduousness has to be developed, meaning that there are times when an authority figure has to say, "You have no choice. Do it."
IMO, putting too much faith in the gifted-kids-pull idea implies that a kid isn't gifted unless s/he's always or mostly pulling. In my experience, that's just not true, and it leads to distortions about what it is to be very intelligent. Sure, my kids can be self-motivated, but it's not the rule (yet; I hope it will be in the future). I see my job as helping them become that way. So I put them into situations where they're outside their comfort zones --- places where they wouldn't go by themselves, or would leave quickly if left to their own devices. My goal is to help them learn that there are some very difficult tasks that they can do if they try hard enough, and that the trying part isn't always enjoyable.
