Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion A question of priorities regarding strengths

If a student has a particular strength in math for instance, and his/her parents are homeschooling, then should they focus on math? Should they spend extra time on math, and fully develop that strength? Should they instead try to focus on the weakest areas? What if the strength is in something for which career opportunities are less certain, like painting, or dance, or music? Should every subject be given equal time, regardless of the student's strengths, allowing their abilities to dictate their progress? Should the core subjects be covered, and after that the student decides how to spend extra time, thus making learning more enjoyable?

I'm not sure how to balance specialization, well-roundedness, and learning enjoyment.

I'm not a homeschooler but I would suggest meeting a well-rounded set of requirement and spend extra time on special passions/interests. I like the idea of following their lead a bit and then provide a book (or whatever opportunity) and leave it around for them to pick it up or see where it takes them.

You may want to look at some Montessori ideas for some insights in self driven learning.

I like the well-rounded idea, but I read something that really made me think in the book The Other 90%. The author basically talks about how we all are made to feel that we need to focus on our weaknesses so we can be well-rounded.

He says that you should actually figure out what your strengths are and stop wasting so much time trying to fix or develop your weaknesses. He thinks your ticket to success is capitalizing on the unique strengths we each have in life. Build up your strengths, instead of shoring up your weaknesses. That really resonated with me.

I feel obligated to make sure my kid(s) try out a lot of different things and learn how to function in various situations but...
Ex:
If my child is introverted with so so social skills and loves to read, I'm not going to go out of my way to stress social interaction to make her some ideal of "well-rounded." We will go hit the library, instead.

I believe I read the same about not worrying so much about being "well-rounded". That's why I haven't pushed our son in the physical accomplishment department. He's 4.6 and has no interest in learning how to ride a bike. But he wants to be right there when you're taking apart the washing machine to see how it works.

It's important to be able to answer the questions on a test to pass on to the next "grade" (I hate that whole "grade" thing, btw.) I plan to encourage my son to focus on his weaknesses just enough to gather the GPA he needs to do what he wants in life. If that means a "C" in Phys.Ed., so be it.

I know of a case, of a father and a son, in which �specialization� worked out well. The father has early on found the son was interested in a science subject. He helped him to develop into a passion. The son skipped many grades. Because of the specialization, he was accepted to a research lab at a very young age and then again because of the specialization was awarded several prestigious fellowships.

On one hand, a kid �all rounded� but without a subject truly outstanding may be difficult to win awards or be recognized to fully develop that talent (some point in time, the child�s educational need will exceed what the parents have to offer). On the other hand, a kid who has great strength in one specialization may be deficient in other areas, academically or socially. A difficult choice for parents.

We are homeschooling a child who has significant strengths and significant weaknesses. We have focused on getting his weak areas up to the level where they won't unduly impact his ability to function in daily life, to the extent we can without unduly cutting into his time to pursue his passions. We have found that we can leverage his strengths to help him find ways around and through his weaknesses.

If your child doesn't have areas of weakness that rise to the level of disability, I wouldn't worry about forcing them to try to be "well-rounded". I would focus on making sure that they have regular exposure to a wide range of unfamiliar topics and experiences, because you can't develop passion or skill something you've never tried, and ensure that they are allowed to pursue things that they find they enjoy but don't easily excel at if they choose.

Summarized,
I �recently enjoyed reading a book about the strengths movement. �The author mentioned over a few chapters that people spend so much time and effort remediating children's weaknesses when in fact your true passion will likely be found in one of your strength areas, not from your area of weakness. �The author suggested that you should learn about your own strengths and your children's strengths and teach them how to look for their own strengths. �Your strengths are whatever makes you feel strong and invigorated from doing it, not necessarily the same as the things you are good at. �It's not that you don't work on weaknesses, you approach them through the lens of your strength areas.

Personal thoughts,
The strengths movement recognizes the Howard Garners multiple intelligences and multiple learning styles. �I peersonally �think it's great to accept that there's many ways to learn or present the same thing. �I don't know how I feel about using learning styles for accommodations. �I would incorporate it into the strengths movement by leading an excersize in metacognition by intentionally using various learning styles and eventually explaining why, if it was me. �I almost think the point of the strengths movement is metacognition, thinking about how you think, and using that to recognize how it feels when you're in the zone and take that with you wherever you go. �

YOu know what, now that I think about it, I read somewhere that you should develope your strenghts too. I stand corrected.

I would say it would depend on input from the child and also, who's to say about the career opportunities anymore?

We are homeschoolers and do focus on the strengths and interests. Somehow it just works out more peacefully that way. Focusing on interests led to a happier, more motivated child in our home. But every year that we homeschool, I make little adjustments, esp if it's health-related. I do regret not focusing more on physical stamina when he was younger. It has become a disadvantage for him now during playdates and field trips. This year, we changed things a bit. While we still focus on strengths, we've also introduced more physical activities.

If I drew a pie chart, I'd say it'll be 40% main interest/ strength (math), 30% other core subjects (mostly covered through interesting book or video selections), 20% life skills and physical activities (increased from about 5% previously) and 10% miscellaneous eg. current events. As he grows older, I suspect I'll be reducing the focus on other cores (because I feel the basics will be covered sufficiently) and increase the focus on physical health.

I also find that age matters for us. Younger ages: it seemed more important to me to provide more balance (except for physical activities which just weren't his interest no matter what we tried). Now in our 5th year homeschooling, we're specializing more.

One reason parents homeschool is that they can teach their children at their level. If your son is gifted in math, he may learn two or more years of "school math" each year even if he studies math for only an hour a day. Extra time on math may not be necessary if the time is spent well. If your son wants more math after the allotted time is over, he can work on math on his own, perhaps reading "recreational math" books such as those by Martin Gardner or "contest math" books with Math Olympiad problems.