Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion 'Outliers', anyone reading it??

I'll admit that I was disappointed in The Tipping Point, and didn't really see what all the fuss was about. This book sounds interesting though, at least for the amount of discussion that it is generating! I think I will request a copy from my library system.

Good one Kcab!

If you are referring to the Implicit Association Test he referenced, I think it's a very important tool to demonstrate that sometimes people have subtly racist leanings whether they realize it or not.

I'd guess that could also translate into words or action with questionable undertones of bias. I'm quite sure anyone could fall into that trap, we are after all, quite complex.

If anyone is interested in taking the test, here's a link:

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

This is just a great discussion, I am enjoying the latest comments!
Just to respond to a few that I didn't get a chance to over the last couple of days...

From Austin:
"Gladwell looks at many ethnic groups - not just Rice Paddy farming - for examples - and it not ethnicity - but the culture that occupation brings."

True, but also Gladwell got very very specific about how very fussy rice farming is - the work ethic is one part of the equation but he was also talking about the very difficult task of getting the slope of the bed just right, maintaining the water level, spacing the plants, fertilizing, etc. It almost sounds like a bit of engineering, agriculture, chemistry, and biology rolled into one - maybe other areas of farming require these levels of precise manipulation, but he makes it sound pretty unusual. I have never been a farmer, so I wouldn't know for sure.

Jool -
There is a rags-to-riches theme in the book, to be sure, but there are also stories of folks like Robert Oppenheimer and Bill Gates - mid to upper class kids and the opportunities they've found/had the presence of mind to seize.

Just in general, to dispel maybe a bit of the idea that he's just assuming asians are better at math:
He goes to some length to discuss the testing which has repeatedly shown the student populations of various asian countries as well-ahead of western countries in areas of science and math - it is not simply a stereotype or assumption that they are better, it appears to be a testable trend. He talks about some hypotheses to explain this trend, but also asserts that it makes no sense that given the right circumstances western students could do just as well!

'Neato and kcab - yes! actually even in this book, in the epilogue which Austin mentioned, he has a discussion about race and racism whether folks are in the minority or the majority it doesn't guarantee a non-racist outlook. He discusses his own mother's racism.
(I read that as just the last chapter of the book, but now I see it is noted as an epilogue.)

got to run...

Well, looks like someone spoke too soon! <.< Thanks for the clarification, Chris.

Off-topic: I took the IA test that Neato linked to, and apparently I slightly favor white people over blacks, but I'm neutral with Barack and McCain. For the first block I didn't read the directions and said McCain was "good" while I was actually supposed to select Barack, so that may have skewed the results. :\

I'll admit I usually leap ahead of arguments.

My sister's kids are clearly bi-racial and they are quite sensitive to it.

Yup, I would agree with that - he is definitely talking quantity of learning in a period, not kids in one group exceeding the level of other groups and then falling back below that level. Is that what you mean? The gains are within the same group, but the idea of having more material from which to pull over the summer for an upper class kids makes sense to me....

(don't hate me for suggesting the book!!) whether you agree with the author or not, it's a good one to have under your belt, right??

Chris, I'm glad you recommended the book. I'd been meaning to read it and your post gave me the kick in the pants I needed.

Thanks for "bumping" Kipp. I had never heard of that school and was quite intriqued by the description of it.......

Whether or not I was a fan of this book; I LOVE these kinds of discussions.

Chris, I'm glad that you recommended it too. I have enjoyed this discussion immensely, and I like seeing different sides of the same issue. It think it is my scientific background that keeps me from accepting the strong influence of chance and luck. I still believe that people make their own luck by watching the flow of events around them, reading the subtle changes in their surroundings, and being willing to act to create new experiences. I think that some people will watch the world around them closely enough to position themselves in a place where they can take advantage of an opportunity as it presents itself. Humans just ascribe this process to luck.

Perhaps I am biased in the fact that I believe people with a high IQ are "better" at this than someone on the opposing side of the bell curve. (oh boy, that will probably cause a firestorm!) But I think you need to be inquisitive and constantly seeking new experiences in order to create "luck". And I see a correlation between that inquisitive nature, one that is unwilling to accept the standard answer and constantly asks 'why', as one of the hallmarks of high IQ. However, I do see that if a person with a high IQ is never challenged, is never pushing the boundaries to learn more, and falls in the trap of underachievement, then they will probably stop asking those questions that lead them to see the subtle shifts in the world around them. And that is the biggest gripe that I have with the way our school teach our kids. Rote memorization and test score are seen as more important than inquisitive critical thinking.

I think that all kids should be taught to analyze their world critically. All kids should be taught to question 'why' and to seek out clues to how the world around them works. Do high IQ kids do this more naturally than normal kids? Or do the parents of high IQ kids reward and encourage this behavior from the start? This question might lead to a chicken verses the egg argument.

But I am speaking without reading the book. So I will thank you Chris for making me curious enough to move Outliers out of the 'to be returned' pile and put it next to my comfy chair on the top of the stack. I may write back in a few days to say that my above argument was completely off base. But then, that is what I love about reading a good book. It can have to power to alter, shape, or at least cause us to question our beliefs.

added to the end of the post....
I think, after I went back and reread your post, Chris, that we are really saying the same thing. We are just using different words and coming at it from a different angle.
We are both saying that creativity/inquisitive thinking is the best indication of success.

What's the old saying: luck is really when preparation meets opportunity? That makes perfect sense to me, though I'd add "talent" to the mix, too...

I'm with you, ebeth. I'm not a big believer in luck either. No, we don't have control over the whole world, but I think we have control of quite a lot, and we have the ability to see patterns and circumstances developing and respond accordingly even more so. Do circumstances affect us? Of course. But I think we have even more effect on our circumstances if we choose to. And I agree that smarter people (and there are many kinds of smart!) tend to choose to affect their circumstances more regularly.

I worked my way through college waiting tables. The restaurants I worked at were not places full of GT people, not in any sense. Life was very narrow for the people there. I found it deeply depressing how little control they took over their lives. Things "just happened" to them. They said things like "Who coulda seen that coming" a lot. And I pretty much always thought, "Well, *I* could have! Cause and effect, guys!" They saw luck, I saw pattern. They threw up their hands and felt helpless, I saw them making bad choices.

Are there smart people with blind spots? Oh yes! Some bigger than others. But I never saw such abdication of personal control by such a large group of people as I saw at those restaurants. It was depressing...and eye-opening.

Circumstance matters. But I think there's a lot more to GTness than when your birthday is, and I think there's more to success than how much time you put in on an endeavor.

Then again...I value hard work, but some people are just born better at things than others. I was a better writer in college than my classmates, and I'll guarantee you that I spent less time doing it than they did. I never kept a journal, I wrote my papers at the last minute and didn't revise them, etc. I know I didn't spend 10,000 hours writing before I wrote my novel. Nowhere close!

OTOH, I guarantee you that I could spend 100,000 hours--a million hours!--perfecting my jump shot, and I still wouldn't make it in the WNBA. I don't have the talent and I never will. Work matters. Choices matter. But talent matters, too. There's no vacuum here. I'd put birthdays pretty low on the list of things that matter...

My reading list grows every time I read this thread. Love it!

This reminded me of a concept I came across today called "Zone of Proximal Development" by Vygotsky. It was described in a book called Alternative Assessments with Gifted and Talented Students by Joyce L Tassel-Baska.
It helped me better define some of my frustration. DD6 spends so little of the school day working in the zone of proximal learning. She also spends very little time even working at the level of what she can do independently. Instead so much of her time is spent working below both the zone of proximal development and her level of independent work. Most of her new learning seems to come from what I can squeeze in afterschooling.

At least the MAP testing is more open ended than the state standards testing. It gives me a starting point to understand what DD6 can do independently...when the Powers That Be don't substitute the correct scores with erroneous data showing there's very little difference between the students