Well, to be fair, it's possible that some percentage of her success is what I'd call hothousing.
My DD is particularly strong in STEM due to life in an immersion environment, too. I don't think that's active hothousing, though-- it's just that kids are interested in what their parents do, and how they think, and if those parents spend professional time with them and answer questions, the brightest of them will soak it up like sponges. My DD's literature and social science acumen is entirely her own, though.
It's probably no accident that her expertise is in the same general area as her parents' computer-science professions.
The mistake is in assuming that it can be reduced to some formulaic method which produces seeming prodigy. It can't. Obviously. With the same inputs available, the vast majority of homeschooled students do NOT have this kind of success this young. I have fallen into this trap myself, though-- I find myself thinking "wow-- it's just not that hard!" when a homeschooling parent talks about all that s/he is doing to teach a child very basic literacy. My DD didn't need all of that, and she certainly didn't need continued support for months on end. I have to stop and realize that no... a single set of controlled readers and a couple of weeks really isn't enough for most kids. Not even for most bright ones.
Thank you, HK. I'm gratified to hear a gifted child's natural environment plays a role but not so much as to create their intellectual ability. It's what I've come to believe from reading about kids like DS.
Your example of the set of controlled readers is exactly true.
