Isn't it equating two non related points, or three actually. �2nd, so many things interfere between input and output, socials skills, opportunity, circumstance, puberty! And I forget my 3rd point LOL
DeHe
Yeah probably. �And now it looks like we're thinking of two different studies anyway. �I was replying to this because the other experimental school I had read about from the sixties seemed to think by serving the top IQ kids their students would be the future leaders and inventors, but like in Wren's referenced study they only made comfortable lives for themselves, no real mark on the world. �There's nothing wrong with that if you ask me, it's just not what they expected that time. �
��I don't know about DYS, but when I read about The Academy initially a year ago the emphasis was on fellowship and peers and a place to relax and fit in. �The sixty's school just wanted to influence the future and beat Russia. The DYS seems to be more interested in supporting the kids lives here and now. �Maybe that's just how I read it.
It would be really interesting to see the long term outcomes of DYS grads. �Just like the study that followed Hunter grads, finding the ones that started in grade school (as identified top gifted students) didn't do anything exceptional. �Had nice, contented lives, but didn't find their "passion" to make their mark. �While kids who entered in 7th grade had much more success, both monetarily and noteworthy. �Is it because of changes in IQ or what is it.
About the question, "what is intelligence?". Why do they say pigs are smarter than dogs, and rats are more intelligent than guinea pigs and what's the connection with the things they test for human IQ? �And what about artificial intelligence? �Isn't intelligence just problem-solving then? �
I think giftedness is different than intelligence because it just means natural born talent. �Find out if giftedness includes determination and perspiration or if only talent does.
