What could we have done differently?
HG/EG son attended rigorous private prep school, took 10 AP exams, scored 5 on 9 of them, and then went to an "academically rigorous" private college. He entered with 40+ credits and will graduate in 2.5 years. Currrently 20, he recently revealed that he felt very different in middle school and high school because there were only 2 or 3 students on campus he really related to intellectually. And today he has revealed that college is "markedly less rigorous" than high school was, and the only stimulating people are the professors. He is hungry to be with people truly interested in learning as opposed to good workers and grade grubbers. There just are not many such people. Where on earth should he have gone to college??

He already has a job for after graduation, but at such time as he wants to go to grad school, I don't want a repeat experience of disappointment and frustration.

What kind of college is this?

Your last sentence says it all.

When choosing a college (and we're finding this to be true right now, as a matter of fact), it may be BETTER to be in a less selective environment.

Why?

Well, because as your DS so astutely noted, his real peers are not the students around him, but the faculty. That is likely to be the case of about 90% of the students even at the most prestigious institutions on earth.

The only difference is that as you go up in prestige, the students themselves have been groomed/conditioned to "pass" as HG/HG+.

They still aren't-- at least most of them aren't, I mean. But statistically, what can one realistically expect here anyway??

The "hard working" students are now able to achieve at the same stratospheric levels as truly EG/PG students now... because the entire k-12 system now conditions kids for volume, not authentic rigor, and makes an A accessible to ALL, provided that they just "do enough" or "work hard."

So this is how you get to a point where a school produces 40 valedictorians. ONE of those kids is actually EG or PG, most likely. About half might be HG. The rest are likely MG or borderline MG, and TigerParented.

Why do I mention this? Because all of those valedictorians are now your son's classmates in college.

Faculty look out at a sea of cookie-cutter "perfect" students... and how should they tell them apart? How can they know which three of them in a class of 100 are really worth the extra time? How can a STUDENT figure out which two classmates are genuine peers? They can't.

In a less elite setting, however, one of those PG kids IS that different from the rest. They will get noticed and nurtured because they are rare and special. Now, no-- they aren't going to have any more peers than in the elite setting.

But you said it yourself; when you're a statistical rarity, you may very seldom meet others like yourself. While BigName University may be enriched in those outliers... fundamentally, the environment also makes them harder to identify from the background noise.


^ JMO.

Grad school is different. Truly. There, the less-able vanish after the first year. Those who remain are generally at least HG, and many of them are EG. (Depends on the field, of course-- in STEM, this is certainly true, though.) As you go up in educational setting, the enrichment becomes more noticeable.

This is why your son's professors have more in common with him than his average classmates. They are more like his LOG.

DD already discovered this during a high school internship at a uni research lab. Pleasantly, she also discovered that faculty are downright rapacious about mentoring the real thing, and it's not at all hard to identify them in a non-selective setting.

DH went to Harvard and felt the opposite of your son. He felt like he finally went to school with his peers. First time he met someone smarter than himself.

So I am curious also, what is this school and how selective are they?

Great insight. This post rings true to experiences I am familiar with, and could be the subject of several articles, a research study, even a book. I'd call this required reading for parents, high school guidance counselors, and college admissions officers.

One important note: Those who leave college while pursuing advanced degrees may include those without sufficient funding, despite profound intellectual gifts. The one thing I'd most appreciate the world to understand about giftedness is that it occurs in every demographic and can present unique burdens to those with limited finances.

This was true for me. I found a wonderful mentor who took me under his wing. He was a renowned scholar in his field but he stayed at the mediocre state flagship university because his wife didn't want to move. His (very smart) graduate students were my social network.

When I did a fellowship at a very selective LAC, students were accomplished in everything that they did including music and sport and they were efficient and focused but only a couple of them seemed passionate about ideas and learning. However, I must say, most of them were just about the nicest, sweetest, and loveliest teenagers/young adults I've ever met. As a parent, I could live with that tradeoff.

This doesn't really jibe with my college experience. I have trouble believing that things have changed this much in the intervening years.

I spent a year at UC Berkeley, and felt like I did more or less fade into the noise most of the time. I was able to connect with one professor, though, and I worked in his lab in the spring and summer. I never really connected with any peers. I can't even remember the name of my roommate.

Then I transferred to MIT, and I felt like everyone "got" me. I connected with a number of professors, and worked for a couple of them. I made great connections with other students, many of whom I am still in contact with. Overall, a very positive experience.

In grad school (at MIT again), it started out OK, and devolved into a dreadful slog.

In law school (at Harvard, while I was working in a law firm), I never felt connected to anyone in my class, and I have trouble even remembering anyone who was there. My professors definitely knew who I was, but I doubt they remember me now, ten years out.

I'm not sure where UCB ranks in your hierarchy of selectivity, but I presume that MIT and Harvard are near the top of it. At the former, I was noticed and nurtured in undergrad; less so in grad school. At the latter, I was noticed but not nurtured, and I doubt that I am remembered.

Many thanks to all of you. Lots of interesting things to think about here. I have been reflecting and reading over the last few days. Son could have gone to one of the early entrance college/high school programs, but would have left home 2 years sooner and still finished college at the same young age. We have tried to foster his full development, not just his intellectual dev. His participation at church and sitting and talking at our dinner table for those teen years was very important to us, and he acknowledges the value himself.
I have talked to him now about not doing so much belly-button gazing. As a well-educated adult, he will have most of his interactions with people whose IQs are 110-135 or so. He needs to understand himself but also to understand others and make adjustments.
Good for him he identified the professors as "his kind of people". Right now he just wants to be finished with school and assignments and do "real stuff" - working. But you have given some interesting info for future possible grad school.

Other: I think it is best not to name the college. Son did NOT want a big university. This is a school of about 2,500 students, and his department is quite small. He was determined to attend here, applied early decision.

I think some of this is institutional culture. Take two small, competitive liberal arts colleges with similar stats on the surface, and one could have students whose main interests are Greek culture, preprofessionalism, skiing, etc and the other could have kids who are into--well, smoking pot, but also philosophy, film, neurology, arts performance, etc., and doing a lot of independent study.

I'm not saying I know anything about the school your son is at, but I do think even the small competitive schools vary a lot in terms of the kind of peers you get and I'm not at all sure it's as simple as IQ scores. I do think it's true that at a really large university, you may have a better chance of finding "your people," simply by virtue of size. It might take a long time, though.

UM brings up the point that my DH has used to argue in favor of larger institutions. I have to admit that I had my doubts about this strategy for an introvert, but hearing it again here is reassuring.

Isn't angst-fueled navel-gazing a fundamental component of adolescence and the transition into adulthood? I think that at some point in during that time, many people realize that they feel a lack of connection to their surroundings and peers.

HK, I went to a small school known for being very quirky and intellectual and found my people almost immediately. My sibings went to huge universities (selective ones, but...) and found their people eventually, but it took them both till well into their sophomore years.

Of course, it makes a big difference not just where you study but WHAT you study. Ensure the subject matter is challenging, not just the level.

I didn't think it ever went away.

I've been disconnected for 20 years.

I have a tough time believing that he can't find "his people" at a rigorous LAC. I'm thinking along the lines of schools such as Williams, Middlebury, etc.

DD18 knows some PG kids. One went to a rigorous school (not an LAC) and he is thriving there. Finally challenged in classes and has come out of his shell socially.

Now maybe if it isn't an elite school, but more like a school DD18 attends, he could find school not so challenging. It is a good school for her major (typically listed in top ten for the major), but overall not so rigorous. She now aces courses that she didn't ace in HS. I have mixed feelings about that.

ITA. And fwiw... I am not sure that I buy that a person who is PG can only identify with people who are also PG - surely there are going to be people that your ds can find who he identifies with in other ways - through shared interests.

Which doesn't mean that all college campuses are going to be a good fit for all students. We had a *lot* of students transfer out of our relatively small university after freshman year - because the social part of life wasn't working out. I'm not so sure it was the actual mix of students or the campus itself as much as it happened because so many of the freshmen were away from home (in a far-away sense) for the first time and they missed what was familiar, missed old friends, etc. The people I knew who left after their first year all went on to other colleges and were all happy - sometimes in very similar circumstances to what they'd left at the first college. I remember wanting to leave more than a few times too during that first year too, but I lived close to home and was able to "get away" on the weekends.

Freshman classes (at our school) were typically a lot of requirements across majors, and not the most exciting classes. Once you'd gotten past that first year and were taking courses in your major, that's when the rigor started and when you started finding yourself taught by interesting profs rather than not-quite-so-interesting grad students. So that's the other thing to think through - is he really going to be unhappy forever at his current uni, or does he just need to stick it out and try sophomore year and higher level courses in his major.

Best wishes,

polarbear

This is such an important observation. Your student is so lucky to have your assistance and input. Look for a university level honors program. Find majors that require an unbelievable amount of reading, writing, science classes, writing or some combination. The honors students work through the night when everyone else is either partying or sleeping. Yes, you may find a small percentage of those people. I think that may be why someone said it is lonely at the top. But, the gifted person needs a high-level of intellectual stimulation. Also, there are some towns in the United States that are known to have a larger number of intellectuals. Your student will likely be drawn to those places and will want to work in those places anyway. It feels like a tough topic to discuss with just anyone; it is very hard to explain our needs when other people just do not feel that way. Good luck and please do not mind if we do not give too many specifics. This is not an easy discussion to have because people seem to take offense if you suggest that some students are working much harder during their college years than others. It is not about comparison. It is just about meeting different needs.

Interesting post. My D, a college freshman, had finding PG people in a challenging environment at the top of her criteria list. Her final three choices were U of Chicago, Swarthmore, and Harvey Mudd. She is happily working her tail off and hanging out with bright people and bright professors at Mudd. Other schools that seem like they could have met her criteria: Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Caltech, and MIT. Certainly other schools have significant numbers of gifted students and challenging courses, but none except those seemed really immersed in the culture and challenges she wanted.

I've been dying to know how she's liking HMC, intparent-- that's great to hear!!

North Dormer/Linde Dormer here... Glad she's liking Mudd. Can't imagine anyone not finding challenge there.

I went to a huge state flagship university (over 60,000) and was part of the honors program. I had a fabulous experience. Mentors in your area of interest and the opportunities for research were built into the honors program. For my family finances were an issue and I found this to be a great compromise (and an overall wonderful experience). Also, the classes were considerably smaller this way:)).

That is what we eventually decided upon, too, CFK. DD gravitated to the grad students, professor, and post-docs in the lab during her summer research internship... at 14.



I'm hopeful that placing her in an honors college setting will, as another poster indicated, provide her with a small-college-within-a-larger-full-service-research-university, and be the best of both worlds.

Short of MIT and the associated admissions frenzy, unbelievable annual costs, family upheaval, etc. with a 14yo in the eye of that storm, it seemed the best we could do.

It provided me with an alcoholic felon as a roommate.

And boy were there a number of rather interesting people populating the dorm.

It could have been that it was the 90's, though.

Things were quite different last century.

Have I also mentioned how I feel about kids <17 living in dorms? Yeah-- just... not. Happily, many colleges feel this way, as well.

There was also a Rhodes Scholar in the dorm.

HowlerKarma, she loves, loves, loves HMC. I have never seen her so happy. She is maxed out academically (which a lot of parents know can make a PG kid really happy!). She has friends, thinks her classes are mostly fascinating, her professors are brilliant and really want to teach undergrads, and she likes the weather (no polar vortex there!). I can barely pry her off campus to come home for breaks. She applied for summer research on campus but didn't get it for this summer, but I am sure it will work out next summer -- not many freshman get to do it. She has discovered computer science (who knew??) and thinks she may major in it. So honestly, it could not be better (except for the pocketbook part -- but we are making it work). Whew -- found a hole for my square peg.

That was about my experience with Mudd. It's 4 years in my life where everything from my social to academic life made sense. So glad she's happy.

geofizz, I think you nailed it with the "made sense" part. She told me last week (spring break, I made her go on vacation with us ) that she feels like she can really relax and be herself at Mudd, which is one of the best parts. I think it is going to be pretty sad when she has to leave at the end of her 4 years. One thing I noticed when we visited before she applied was that the kids didn't seem to be itching to get off campus like a lot of kids are at small schools by junior year. The juniors and seniors were really into their clinical projects and classes, and still seemed excited to be there.

Agree, except for DonutMan and Sanomlong (sp!), we stuck to campus. So much so that when I was at Pomona a few weeks ago, I wasn't entirely sure where I was. Finding Mudd was easy, though, walk towards the mountains.

Learning my own social needs and learning social skills there have paid off long term, and has made things easier for me since leaving than I suspect it would have been otherwise.

We had a separate honors only dorm, not that it stopped the drinking;)

These days, I suspect that a lot of grad students are passionate about further credentialing and potential salary increases.

However, I could be quite mistaken, since I don't hang around grad students (anymore), and I'm thinking about chemical engineering, which people went into *for* the money (which was the same with law, only worse, since you were talking six figures), I could be mistaken.

Good for her. According to this article Harvey Mudd graduates also earn well.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...hich-major-will-make-you-richest/359628/
Which College—and Which Major—Will Make You Richest?
A new study finds that nine of the ten most lucrative degrees in America are in computer science programs at elite colleges—and Harvey Mudd runs away with the lead
by DEREK THOMPSON
The Atlantic
MAR 26 2014, 10:39 AM ET

My daughter is a freshman this year at a selective LAC in Mass. that starts with a W. Thankfully she has found her tribe and is very happy. The majority of her classmates are gifted and they know it.