On another forum Suki Wessling had this to say to a similar question about underachievement, and it stuck with me:
[quote]...I think there's a tendency for parents to confuse aptitude with ability and interest. IQ is supposed to test aptitude - basically a test to see how the brain functions on certain tasks. But that has nothing to do with what a child is interested in, what excites him, what drives him. Highly creative people in general are going to be less concerned about academic achievement and more interested in actually *doing* things.
There are some core things things wrong with that formulation, IMO.
Academic pursuits ARE a form of doing. It's a false dichotomy to say that there's science, math, literature, and then the real stuff. Making knowledge IS doing.
I also don't think interests are immutable, at all. My DS was terrified of the woods at age 3. He is now an accomplished hiker. We worked against his fears by not giving into them, and we have taken lots of opportunities to expose him to things he was not at first interested in.
It turns out that "I'm bored" is often code for "I don't know about that yet." Interest can be cultivated.
But I do agree, there is nothing that says a gifted person has to be interested in academics. There are gifted people who use their gifts building really beautiful furniture. There is a NOVA episode where the magician Teller (of Penn and Teller) actually speaks-- and he is obviously an extremely intelligent person. Making the world better comes in all ways.
DeeDee
