To ask what makes a dc academic

Books, books, books.
Being read to, spoken to, fostering their interests.
Intellectual confidence can increase if you feel your intellect is respected and seen.

i prefer oxford and Cambridge advice and psychology today preferably then edit my articles from that information, to hopefully help the op.

I would say interest.i wasn't what one would call particularly academic in school, got ds in half my subjects ( undiagnosed dyslexia may have played a part here) but I did go on to do my masters and PhD in Neuropharmacology at Russel group universities.

It was only towards the end of my undergraduate that I decided this was the route I wanted to take and needed to get my ass in gear to achieve it. I now lecture in a Russel group uni and I would say determination, interest and engagement are some of the largest predictors of success

I agree. A child will drive their own learning through their curiosity and this is the best way to learn. You don’t need to encourage them at all. They will want to learn.

It could be natural innate intelligence as some children have but IMO academic is not the same; it is a genuine desire to study and enjoyment of it without guidance from the parents usually. More like a combination of intelligence and desire to use that to learn on their own free will. For example, one child is naturally very intelligent and an early reader but does not enjoy studying or learning particularly — I would not describe as academic. Another who is also intelligent loves to study and learn and spends much of their time doing so by choice and therefore does well — I would describe as an academic child / student.

I taught both my DCs to read before starting school. We sat down for a max of 10 mins a day but they both were happy to do this. It seemed to give them a huge head start at school.

Read beyond the set texts and required readings--expand your intellectual and cultural range. Invest desire, energy, passion in what you are learning and discovering.

ChatGPT?

My 3 kids are all very different even though they were all read to/encouraged to read/talked to etc. They all did fine - got good degrees/jobs but only one was top of her class through university/high school etc. I think the difference is a natural bent toward academia (ds probably has this too in fact but has adhd so it slows him a bit), an ability to organise her work really well, an ability to be dogged in the face of challenges, and strong curiosity.

My advice to you is to read as much as you can and read widely - fiction and non-fiction. To be curious - ask questions, talk to your teachers etc. and to focus on learning how to learn. This is the thing my academic child really grasped. How to take effective notes. How to learn something so it sticks. How to plan an essay. There are techniques to all of this.

You're 15 and now in the UK? How did you even find MN to post on?

@ThisMintTraybake
From Google and Oxbridge sites:

1. Curiosity and Intellectual Engagement: High-achievers possess a genuine curiosity and actively seek knowledge beyond the curriculum.
2. Self-discipline and Time Management: Effective time management and self-discipline are crucial for academic success.
3. Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills: Top-performing students excel in critical thinking and problem-solving, breaking down complex issues systematically.
4. Effective Study Strategies: High achievers use various study techniques tailored to their preferences and material.
5. Resilience and Perseverance: Academic success requires resilience and perseverance in the face of setbacks.
6. Effective Communication Skills: Strong communication skills are vital for articulating ideas clearly, both in writing and speech.
7. Lifelong Learning Mentality: Academic high-flyers embrace continuous learning beyond formal education.

Foster any innate curiosity that you have. Find out more about everything. Most things become more interesting when you know more about them.

Being a good reader from a young age and being read to a lot. Reading is so important because not only do you learn so much from reading but it is also vital for accessing the rest of the curriculum once you reach a certain age ie work sheets, text books etc.

Being given as many opportunities to learn about things as possible - owning lots of books, toys that help learning (lego, puzzles etc), visits to museums, art galleries, nature walks, other countries/cultures, musical instrument lessons, sports lessons all those sorts of things. The more you're exposed to the more you are likely to find out what you are good at and what really interests and inspires you.

By having parents that take a big interest in your school work. Making sure all homework is done, going to parents evening, reading your school book with you every day, testing you on spellings, wanting to hear about your day at school. Helping and supporting you in anything you're struggling with, buying helpful text books, getting a tutor if needed, paying for private school where you will have small classes.

Having a good memory and IQ are also going to make a big difference.

There are lots of things that parents on a lower income can do - but having money really is a huge advantage in encouraging a child to do well in academic terms IMO. There are so many experiences and opportunities not to mention revision books and tutors that have to be paid for if you want them - and that is so much harder to do if you are poor.

Well 'academic' and 'intelligent' are two different things. You are conflating them. A mistake prevalent in our society.

The former has two meanings:

• Relating to education and scholarship
• Of theoretical, but not practical interest.

Every single one of those academics you spoke about, no matter how nerdy/well-dressed/whatever they are. All have something in common.

The ability to pass exams, and have excellent written + oral communication skills, in their field of interest. In 2024 undergraduate degrees (in the UK at least) have 'diverse' modes of assessment, some may be more 'practical'. But all Master's degrees whatever the country require a dissertation, or written output with the appropriate formal language and formatting. Similarly, a PhD requires a thesis. These are all requirements of education and scholarship.

The definition of intelligence however is broader:

• The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.

This covers a broad range of abilities as you stated. The nursery worker who knows what a baby wants when they start to cry? Intelligent. My illiterate grandmother whose food was perfect, and who could cook anything once she'd watched someone else do it? Intelligent!

Many people understand something instinctively but cannot communicate in a formalised way. They will never be 'academic'. I know many people who for example can fix anything, but they can't pass written exams on the theory of 'fixing things'. Similarly a good cook like my grandmother will eb able to articulate why they do certain things but they may not be able, or even want to write essays on the subject of cooking.

Maybe with the use of AI more of these people will be able to access academia. But there are so many qualifications, covering a wide variety of skills, I don't know when 'academia' became the gold standard for a judgement of intelligence.

It's a tricky one. Personally, I think we ought to broaden our definition of intelligence to include things like humour, empathy and love of beauty. We've all met people who excel at logic and mathematics yet fail to get a joke or pick up on someone's feelings. And we've all known people who are clever, with a string of qualifications, yet feel nothing when they walk around an art gallery or watch the snow fall.

Even within academia there are types of intelligence. I studied art history at university, and it was funny to walk through the economics department then the literature and art department. The economics professors were often nerdy little men with bow ties. One, I remember, looked like something out of a bad Hollywood comedy, with trousers that were too short for him and a funny little walk. Then you'd get to the art department and the lecturers would be dressed like characters out of Oscar Wilde or Withnail and I! OK, those are crude stereotypes, but you get my point.

My brother is a good example of how difficult it can be to pin intelligence down. He was hopeless at maths and science (I don't think he even turned up to his maths GCSE), yet he excelled at literature and was reading Aldous Huxley and George Orwell as a teenager. Today, his house overflows with books on Shakespeare and Chaucer and so on. Ask him to use a laptop, however, and he's helpless.

The key is to identify their passion. The child has to love a subject, or forget it. I have known very, very intelligent people with zero academic leaning. They are clever, but there is no particular subject that captivates them. If you want to raise an 'academic' child, inspire them with a love for something. Take them to art galleries, museums, bookshops, plays, etc, and wait. Something might just light the fuse. Brian Cox, for example, said it was watching Carl Sagan's Cosmos on TV. I know someone who is doing a PhD in Latin who swears he would not be where he is had he not watched I Claudius as a child. And I once read an interview with a philosopher who traced his career back to reading A Hitchhiker's Guide as a boy.

This would be my definition as well.

I think you can be academic inclined but struggle at school as the school system tends to be one size fits all.

Reading. And more reading. And even more reading. Generally a love of books.

I teach on a secondary school and was really surprised at how many kids didn't get read to as a child! Particularly those in my lower sets!

I read to mine for 30 minutes every night then they also read in bed.

I think being an “academic” is as much of a trait as something that can be learned. But it can also be a value. It can be learned if it doesn’t come naturally - but it’s like teaching someone who isn’t a natural born musician m, music - doable but takes more effort.

Im from a “working class” background - mainly because parents migrated here. Studying has always been a “value” in our household. Always do your best, do your homework etc etc. I’d say me, my siblings and even my daughter (teen) are all academic but it’s a mixture of upbringing and having a genuine interest in studying. We were all in top or second set at school and we all did well at uni and post grad. I love reading, so does my DD, love debates and deep conversations, we watch documentaries and find them interesting. I read research papers for work and genuinely enjoy doing it. Whenever we have a questions no matter how stupid we research it and practice critical thinking as a family (it could be as basic as why is grass green). I also leave channels like LBC on when they have appropriate debates and my DD listens and we talk about it.

When parents ask me “how do you get your DD to study” (her closest friends are not academic according to their parents - except one who is in top set with her - I have never paid for a tutor and neither has the other but that’s because I can’t afford it). I tell them it’s a mix of her personality, she is curious and we do lots together and bring maths, English etc in our daily lives - cooking, calculating change, questioning everything really.

Those that arnt academic are usually skilled in other ways - maybe it’s creative, maybe it’s manual labour; could be music, business and entrepreneurship. I think it’s a shame that the education system just pushes the academic type. Not everyone cares - when you tap into whatever an individual cares about, you can get so much more out of them.

That happened to me. I found school really easy, just coasted along without putting effort in and then found out that A Levels aren't so easy!

Develop a good work/life balance. You need to study, ideally engage in reading/doing beyond the curriculum (for some subjects such as engineering and comp sci there's a lot you can do) . For some subjects, at an appropriate point you need to practice by doing the past papers. But your body needs to be healthy too - eat proper food, do some sort of enjoyable physical activity and get enough sleep.

You may or may not be naturally 'academic' - aim to fulfill your own potential not try to force yourself into a mould that may not fit.

As i said, some things are both an academic and practical but i still feel the academic bit is the theory of how/ why rather than just the practicing the thing over and over so you get better at it.

Ask the teacher if you don't understand and then keep asking if you still don't understand. Actually academic achievement is less and less linked to being rich. Find something you are interested in and follow that. Practical jobs can earn more in rich countries nowadays and can be more stable. Many academic jobs are under threat of being overtaken by computers (AI)

So are scientists not academic? Practicalities and experimentation are key, science would get nowhere is everyone just learned and hypothesised in theory and no one actually did anything. The vast majority of science academics are slogging away in labs every day, not sitting in a library.

academic kids to me are ones who learn easily, and can achieve average to decent results without much effort. Of course if they don’t put any effort in chances are the kid who’s not as academic but puts a lot of work in will do better. So it’s not just about results.

i got distinctly average results at school. I found it easy so didn’t bother learning anything, and that way of learning didn’t suit me. Got to uni and flew, with several PhD offers and post docs around the world after that. I didn’t enjoy it though so got a “normal” job.

Study

What is the feedback that you are receiving on your school work to improve it?