There is a hidden assumption, however, that somehow a gifted child is failing if they do not get some post-grad education. Lots of gifted people become autodidacts. I would be more interested in gifted people who gave up on learning than I would be gifted people who didn't complete some formal education system.
The title is correct. The value system underlying the study is debatable.
Many gifted children fail at the commonly accepted academic standards.
The value of the commonly accepted academic standards is debatable.
Given my IQ, I could be considered a failure because I stopped with a Masters instead of finishing a PhD. I might be considered a huge failure because I've devoted myself to raising my son (and learning lots of interesting things along the way) rather than to a technical career. But I'm not a failure, I'm simply succeeding on a different path from the expected one.
I might be considered a huge failure because I've devoted myself to raising my son (and learning lots of interesting things along the way) rather than to a technical career.
Not by me. I've been following much the same path. Learning more about my children's interests has helped prepare me for a more challenging career now that my children are growing up.
>I might be considered a huge failure because I've devoted myself to raising my son (and learning lots of interesting things along the way) rather than to a technical career.
The system in place would consider you a failure because you haven't lived up to the expectations of what the system wanted you to do. No one can claim that as an absolute, no matter how hard they try. (;
Yeah I was just thinking that maybe gifted people are more likely to perceive how the social contract of higher education is breaking down even as tuition shoots through the roof with no slowdown in sight.
I mean sure, some careers require a certain level of formal education, and Ivy League still gets you into the good ol' boys club, but in many many cases the cost/benefit of even an undergrad degree is questionable; especially if you are above average.
I hate to say it, but after spending some time at an average college that I got a scholarship to, it became rather apparent that a lot of the regular people who go to college do so because they don't know any better. That's why things like "Undergraduate Studies" and "General Business" degrees exist. The college is ultimately a business, and that business can only sustain itself if is has a sizable source of revenue; telling unmotivated slobs that they should be questioning the value of taking 15 hours a semester of "general education" credits isn't high up on the list of priorities.
Most schools are geared toward normal people. Gifted people don't learn at a normal pace. Attending a normal school is forcing yourself to learn more slowly, or feel like school is pointless because you already know what you're being taught.
I don't think I qualify as 'gifted' by any stretch of the imagination, but I did teach myself electronics, how to program and a bunch of other skills, it is more a matter of persistence than talent in my case.
I do find that it helps though once you've reached a basic understanding of a subject to search out other people to help broaden your perspective, it also helps tremendously when you get stuck.
Learning by doing stuff at your own pace is quite satisfying, but it is not good to be doing this 'on your own' forever. You run the risk of getting stuck on a dead end road.
I think plenty of the crank scientists out there are 'autodidacts' that never learned to communicate with others. That's a fairly easy trap to fall in to, if you are your own teacher then there is nobody to tell you that you are dead wrong before you've dug yourself in too far to back out.
There is a hidden assumption, however, that somehow a gifted child is failing if they do not get some post-grad education. Lots of gifted people become autodidacts. I would be more interested in gifted people who gave up on learning than I would be gifted people who didn't complete some formal education system.
The title is correct. The value system underlying the study is debatable.