What's the secret of very high achieving children?

[Starbrightmoonlight]

Is it private school? Cultural capital? Lots of travel? High expectations? Kids expected to work hard at school, parents setting extra work at home? Is money & extracurriculars a factor?
The most high achieving families I know have children attending private school, travel loads, bring the dc to galleries, exhibitions, theatre etc, kids excel in extracurriculars & parents very invested in "expanding" the curriculum themselves... Any thoughts?

It's never just one thing.

And the definition of high achieving will influence the answers.

Intelligence - that's genetics and innate.

Academic - that will be genetics and high intelligence, self determination and good organisation skills which is usually genetic and/or pushy parents who make you revise hard. Access to good quality education will play a huge part but I know many students who've succeeded despite this.

High achieving - as in achieving the best you can for your own IQ and other cognitive abilities or may disabilities will be dependent on much more outside influence. This could be schooling, adults around you, peer pressure, self determination and access to support facilities required.

I think a mixture of genetics/natural ability, the ability to work hard and be focussed and some mixture of competitiveness/ambition.
My ds is very high achieving, he sets his mind to something and then works incredibly hard to get there. He is ambitious for himself and whilst not overtly competitive with others he sets his bar very high and enjoys the 'chase'. When he achieves something he is already looking to the next thing (e.g. Oxbridge admission, once there, being in the top 10 of his year group, looking at competitive internships etc).
I would say he has confidence in his ability, but what really stands out is the drive to work hard to get where he wants to be.
For full info: state school, did football and music as extra curriculars, (nothing outside the usual, but he did excel musically), no tutoring, 2 supportive parents who encouraged, but a fairly ordinary household.

Natural ability and not having environmental factors that create obstacles.

Easy enough to achieve academically. Let's look at the people who are high achievers and who have good mental health, a stable life and a circle of loving family and friends.

Genetics isn’t straightforward- still the luck of the draw. Out of our 4, one is clearly high achieving- the rest are currently fairly average.

FWIW, I was objectively high achieving, but that came from me - parents very disengaged/ actually harmful. My self esteem was poor, and although I got my Degree - it wasn’t great. I should have got a better level of Degree because I am smart enough - but my experience parenting ruined my self esteem.

Now I’m a housewife- so the high achieving didn’t objectively last - but I still love learning and have many interests.

The original question is too limited to answer fully. Yes if you work your children hard they will achieve at school - but it will only last if they truly have that ability within them. And if they can only define themselves through academic achievement, they will be unhappy

My siblings and I retrospectively have achieved well (My brother had a shaky start academically but is now a well respected barrister with a dodgy CV!).

We were a squeezed middle lower class family with very working class roots. My DM left school at 16 and while her family didn't value education she did. My DF was a graduate and his parents really valued education both for their children and us, the next generation with both money and time.

Money was tight in our household. Very, very, very tight during the 1991 financial disaster. We went on infrequent holidays abroad paid for by grandparents. We always went to historically interesting places e.g somme, normandy beaches. Grandparents also at various points gifted national trust/ english heritage type memberships as presents.

We mostly went to state school. I did 2 years at private school (grandparents again) after a house/ school move made me really miserable and I wasn't being stretched academically.

But... there were a lot of books in our house, we went to the library regularly and were encouraged to borrow and read widely. My DM would organise us for to do loads of stuff in school holidays - museums/ castles/ stately homes often with my paternal aunt who was a teacher.

If we were doing a school project my DM would arrange relevant trips/ get books from the library etc, Other family members would chip in with their areas of expertise e.g language practice. There was always a lot of current affairs chat at meal times and most of the time there were newspapers in the house and we were encouraged to read them. When things were really tight for money we would get the papers second day from my grandparents who got several each day. At various points New Scientist/ National Geographic type subscriptions were given for christmas. We had a computer, printer & scanner to do so school work with when this wasn't that common. I submitted a typed project at the end of primary school - this was extremely unusual at the time.

Sport/ Music etc. was encouraged but constrained by £££. Guiding lent lots of opportunities for me. My DBro got a lot out of air cadets.

Money and cultural capital will mean mediocre children can become high achievers. Poorer children usually have to be exceptional (talent and work ethic) to become high achievers

Sadiewt.it won't and life issue's will always trump everything..

If we are talking about doing well at school then any calm vaguely supported home will always trump home problems.
No matter how rich that home is

I was using cultural capital to imply a stable home where parents have the means and desire to pay for the museums, travel, galleries, hobbies etc

That’s so sad. Poor children. There’s way more to life than academic achievement

High achieving doesn’t have to be a negative, it can just mean doing well at school and having some ambition or self motivation. It doesn’t necessarily mean an exceptional genius or hothoused child. I’d rather a naturally high achieving child than one who never bothers at anything and has no curiosity of the world (which carries on in to adulthood),

I believe its being surrounded by like minded individuals and expectations. If everyone around you wants to work then you by default work even if you don't particularly want to. There is no one willing to mess about with you and as humans we don't want to be the odd one out. Be around people who don't want to work then even if you do want to work it will be difficult with all the distractions of others and again you would be the odd one out and would want to fit in. You see it in adults too. If someone want to make a change in themselves they usually move areas to reinvent themselves and start to have friends with a different outlook to one they had.

My PIL had 3 children. He was a mechanic then joined the police, but didn’t progress up the ranks. She left school at 16 and worked at the sewage works. One child got an assisted place to a good private school and went on to Oxford. They’ve had a high profile career. The other 2 didn’t have stellar academic records at school, but both have now got masters degrees and doing very well in their respective careers.

what’s the magic ingredient? Lots of family interest. A focus on education and a desire for improvement. They usually had a v basic camping holiday in France once a year. Never ate out. V modest life.

Having a curiosity about the world is nothing to do with being a high achiever.

this thread his shown we really need a clearer definition. Doing well at school/work is, in my opinion, a weird measure of people- though appreciate that’s how the world is set up.

dollyblack I'm not clear why you equate high achieving with being miserable? I assume that's why you say you'd hate to have a high achieving child because you assume they'd have an unhappy or less rich like that if they'd achieved less highly. Obviously being high achieving doesn't equal happiness, but the opposite isn't true either. High achievement can create choices in life whereas low achievement can shut it down, and since choice is probably more likely to aid a happy life than not, I'd rather that my DC were on the higher achieving end of things, at least at the time of their life when they were making the choices which would be most likely to shape their adult life.

Those who do well have intrinsic motivation to succeed and understand the concept of balance. Nothing to do with money.

*less rich life than

Clearly I’m not a high achiever because I do not understand how understanding the concept of balance is a defining characteristic. If you could just explain please or is it too hard for the likes of me?

Knowing that one outcome is not the be all and end all. That life is for enjoying as much as it is for working

I'm not that poster btw I just understood the post

@Answerthedoor clearly my comment offends you on some level although I'm unclear why.....

High achievers in my experience are those who are self motivated to succeed and can sustain attainment over time, which requires an understanding of the concept of balance. Those who do not grasp the concept of balance may well ''achieve'' however they will peak at a certain point and then burn out. They may or may not achieve their potential. Those who grasp the concept of balance appreciate that ''high achievement'' is not a binary state - rather it's an evolving state which is also not limited to (or purely measured by) academic outcomes. That is to say, one might achieve a clean sheet of A at GCSE followed by 4 A levels at A then go onto university, be relieved of external pressures (or support like tutoring) and then flounder, or perhaps achieve a 1st in university then fail in the world of work because one lacks the ability to adapt and evolve to develop different skills. In summary, high achievement is a holistic state.

Some high achievers come from money, others don't. Some go on to make eye watering amounts of money, others don't. Nothing to do with money.

Trust that clarifies?

My eldest DD is aged 11 and extremely bright, top of the class at her primary school, ambassador there, and very motivated. She doesn't ever seem to have any problems getting excellent grades, she just excels naturally through high intelligence. I was always taking her out, chatting to her about anything and everything when younger. She wanted to make the best grades and was vest motivated to be a high achieving child naturally, and I know she hates failing.

She's now at a top girls' private school and got in on an academic scholarship. It doesn't surprise me at all, she's thriving there (in spite of her worries about making friends etc).
My dad has her earmarked for Oxbridge as he didn't quite make it there 😳🤣 So, no pressure from grandparents at all..!

I'm incredibly proud of her and think she isn't even that aware of how bright she is. She's quite modest and I'm sure she probably has some autistic traits (as I think me at DH probably do too), which is most likely behind her intelligence.

I'm biased, I know, but I hope she goes far. I was really proud of her earlier this summer at the end of her last term of primary school when she was one of the children interviewed on the local BBC news for her views on climate change... it showed just how confident she was, giving such articulate and interesting views.

I'm hoping my other two younger DC will go on to great things too, but equally I will be proud of them whatever they achieve.

If someone is consumed by their subject and are renowned for their expertise but balance is meaningless to them they can’t be considered high achievers?

One of my DC worked alongside a brilliant academic at Oxford who was consumed by their work and had no work/ life balance which was in any way discernible to my DC. The academic was middle aged, not in a relationship, and did nothing in terms of social life but was and is making extraordinary leaps forward in terms of scientific thinking. I think it's probably a bit mean to say that that academic is not a high achiever, despite an utter lack of balance in their life.

It wasn't at all clear that balance is meaningless to this person. I don't think the academic appeared to be happy by the one sidedness of their life. But I don't see that is actually relevant to the level of achievement.