From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: Smart kids (Was Re: Magnet schools)
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:03:14 GMT

In article <8411@lib.tmc.edu> laurie@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu (Laurie Gelb) writes:
>In article <C0Mvsy.ox@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K.
>Yoder) questions why a kid with a high IQ needs athletics just for "balance:"

>>>If the kid likes something other than academics, let him at it. 

>>I agree with that, but the point here is that schools need to encourage
>>academic development, which is something that compared to the encouragement
>>offered for athletic prowess is practically nothing.

>Agreed, if a kid would rather read science books than play basketball, s/he
>should be encouraged to pursue those interests.  But a kid
>who makes good grades, understands things others don't, etc. is often labeled
>a "nerd" or "geek" not because s/he lacks a personality, but because the others
>are jealous.  Helping a kid to understand that attitude is crucial for survival
>in, yes, the real world.  That's the world where enlightenment is often feared,
>where facts are often subordinate to emotions.  If a kid with a high IQ is
>going eventually to contribute to the improvement of that world (assuming you
>care about human survival somewhat and would prefer to see intellect used
>rather than hoarded like a toy), s/he has to understand it enough to find a
>place in it. That implies the motivation to understand it.  Parents either
>provide that motivation or destroy it ("you're better than the rest of those
>kids; don't worry about them").  

On the contrary, that kid is being destroyed by the current system.  One
does not develop one's mind by playing basketball.  As an adult, one has
considerable choice of one's associates, and the anti-intellectuals can
have their dumbness.

Those who go along with the crowd are very unlikely to contribute to the
improvement of anything.  What is needed is to encourage the idea that
inquisitiveness, ingenuity, continual questioning, striving to understand
instead of just learning to get A+, is needed.  Not all can do that, but
very few public schools even allow the children to do that.  The word 
allow is not an overstatement; the schools teach pap.

>Minds need to be nurtured, not isolated.  Knowledge is useless in a vaccuum.

>This is why my gifted child is no longer in private school.  Some lessons
>extend beyond what can be taught in a classroom.

Very definitely so.  With 99.99% of the classrooms teaching little, it is
necessary to learn outside.  But to acquire understanding of structure and
concepts, not facts.  To acquire the desire to excel, even if others will
dislike you for it.  

It is the nerds and geeks who will make the contributions to knowledge, and
advance mankind.  The schools teach little beyond what computers will do in
the future; that the great bulk of the people want to live like that is no
reason to waste a mind.

>Note that I do not advocate lowering one's intellectual standards in order
>to accommodate the rest of the world, nor would I ever advocate my son's
>doing so.  That's why we *must* teach a gifted child how to have different
>expectations for him/herself and for others.  

In order to have different expectations, it is necessary to accomplish
what others cannot.  You have lowered your child's intellectual level
greatly.  You may even have destroyed the ability to understand.


>Uncle Sam wants YOU...
>to pay your taxes, obey his laws, and keep your mouth shut.

And anyone who does this is nothing more than a machine.  We do not need
a nation of machines.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Xref: sparky sci.edu:1274 misc.education:5709 misc.misc:4280