For those of you with 'bright' children, do you take the credit for it ....

[sandyballs]

..... or believe it's pot luck. I'm sick of hearing about a friend's 'genius' child and how it is all down to her parenting.

I know we can help by encouraging reading, blah blah, not constant screens etc, but it is pot luck isn't it really. If it's not how do you explain very different siblings, some who struggle, some who thrive academically yet have been brought up in the same way. This kid is an only btw.

I know it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things but she winds me up and I'm curious as to what MN think.

Not a jot, sadly.

DS1 is a techno-wizz and DS2 plays a mean guitar - I am beyond shit at both music and ICT. I do claim responsibility for their permenant lack of matching socks and Futurama fixation, though.

Your friend sounds like a pain in the posterior.

My dd's father and I both take sole credit for dd's brilliance and both blame the other for her shortcomings. I'm saying that slightly tongue-in-cheek, but in fact it's true.

I do think I'm entitled to some of the credit for her vocabulary, because of the the way I talk to her.

That said, I find it slightly irritating when my mother takes credit for what I've done academically, so I do have to concede that dd is in fact her own person rather than my creation.

I've read that genes 'learn', in other words they listen to the environment that they are in, and change, passing themselves on to the next generation in a more useful form.

In remote agricultural communities, with little experience of academic study, IQs (or measurable intelligence) can be low. But people from these backgrounds who go on to be educated then produce children with higher intelligence.

So, yes, intelligence may be inherited, and yes, nurture plays a role, but there may be a 3rd factor in that all the experiences that you have in life (academic rigour, street smarts, or a laid-back lifestyle) have an impact on your genetic legacy too.

We do have such a narrow definition of intelligence in terms of academic attainment. How about footballing genius, a chat show host's gift of the gab, a leftfield comic, an expressive musician, an inspiring teacher, an instinctive nurse, a multi-tasking SAHM, or someone like my dyslexic dad who is a truly amazing Mr Fix-it?

A bit of both, I suppose. Nature, nurture, Genes, DNA...it is largely preplanned.

I think some people are born with their brain "wired" more optimally than others, however, I think that if they are not sufficiently stimulated then they will not develop as they could.

I take some credit for my son's great imagination: because I don't allow television and video games to be his main source of entertainment
I take some credit for my son's good progress in school: because we've always read to him, we discuss things with him and allow him to formulate thoughts and plan tasks. I encourage a good work ethic.
I take some credit for my son's good musical ability: Because it is me who encourages him to practice everyday.

However, none of the above would be possible if he didn't have it in him naturally.

I eldest sister was without a doubt the brightest of us all, super high IQ, great at studying. However, I think it is my middle system who is the most successful, she was a bright, but he has done better in the working world. It's all subjective really.

Sorry, that should read. My eldest sister.....

oh my goodness!!! I really should preview the message first. Sorry for all the typos.

All my kids have had the same upbringing but they vary from Son 1 who had his IQ once measured as "off the scale" to Son Anonymous who makes Jordan look like Jeremy Paxman.

In nature v nurture, nature always wins but nurture may well play a part.

Parents always think their kids are speshul. But as one of my kids says, how can everyone be special? If everyone was special then special isn't special.

There's 'intelligence', but also another aspect of doing well academically is determination, grit, not giving up, whatever you want to call it. That's very important as to how children will progress through school. I have one DS who somehow will not give up and try until he gets it right, and the other one isn't really that bothered. Guess which one is doing well at school. DS1, who is the not so determined child, is however very creative in his writing and drawing, and in the way he plays. I think they are both super clever obviously!

Much as I'd like to take the credit, I have to settle for the reflected glory! DS1 has always been a mini-genius - he's one of the few kids to get into his massively over-subscribed London grammar school with no tutoring (other than me making him take an exam paper every day under strict examination conditions prior to the entrance exam).

DS2 is bright but DS1 is academically gifted. Nowt to do with me and definitely nowt to do with his dad

I think 'intelligence' is often inherited, and some aspects of personality, but an encouraging environment can help them to make the most of what they've got, and make them aware of the opportunities available to them.

Wasn't there a big research project completed recently which concluded fairly robustly that most of intelligence is nature? I seem to remember hearing it on the news.

I do not take credit for the wiring of my children's brains.

I do take credit for creating a home environment where:

there is exposure to a rich and varied language

learning and exchanging ideas is seen as an interesting and valuable thing to do at any age

everybody feels secure enough to express themselves and test out new ideas

According to Hans Eysenck (if my recollection from my psychology degree is correct), intelligence is approximately 70% inherited. Genetic inheritance sets the range within which a trait can settle, environment then moves it around within those limits. With IQ that means that you have a genetically set midpoint which your environment (upbringing, education, social interactions, etc.) will move upto 15 points up or down.

I think it's a mixture of both.

DH's parents both left school at 15 with no qualifications at all. DH was moved up a year at school because he was ahead of his peers, and has a degree and professional qualification. That I would say is 95% nature.

I think your capacity for learning is something you're born with. The rest is down to the input you get from your parents, teachers and your environment.

Yes, genetic and environmentally determined as Rosieres has pointed out. Neither are too shabby in my dc's case

Lots of studies have shown that genetics/nature plays a dominant role in determining people's intelligence/character.

Our two children are so very different yet they've been raised the same way. You can provide them with opportunities but it is up to them how well they do and hopefully everyone finds a niche in life that works for them!

Some of it is genes. But also studies have shown that children's "ability" isn't innate - you can improve performance at school for a lot of children by simply improving their memory and retention.

What about children who do very well academically but without any real input from parents and whose parents haven't done well academically, don't read much etc? Dormant genes passed on or cracking teachers at schools?

I joke that DS2 intelligence is nothing to do with me! He has inherited it from DH, I was always 56 per cent in the hard subjects! He is upset with 98 per cent, why didn't he get 100! It's definitely nature. He was in the top ten in his year in Grammar School. Other DS, more average, so he has my brain!

(Ironically, he is miles ahead of a class mate who was tutored from dot).

To be honest I think its a combination of both. Whilst this is my first pregnancy, I have 3 siblings, and we are all intelligent in our own way. My parents encouraged us to do whatever it was we wanted to do and to do our best at it, they were there to help with everything that they could, and when they couldn't they advised us on what to do.

Being the eldest I can see that we are all intelligent in different ways, and whilst intelligence in some respect comes from the genes, how it is used and understood comes from nurture just as much as nature.

The same goes for my partner's family, they are intelligent in different ways and as such where they are in life now is down to the fact that their parents let them do what they wanted to do and encouraged it.

The long and the short of it is each and every child is different and for me its about how we encourage them to use what they have and develop it that's important.

Environment, unless of course you think our ancient ancestors were as bright as us. We are an adaptive species, its social in the final analysis even if genetics plays a part.

Surely evolution has played a part in the advancement of our species though, those of our ancient ancestors with the greatest intelligence used it in order to survive and pass on their genes to the next generation, while those of lesser intelligence couldn't sustain themselves and died out.

Only genetically. DH and I both mathematically inclined. DS1 mathematically inclined. My sister had no interest in maths, but both her kids are flying high in the subject.

Conversely, my brother has dyscalculia.

One child likes school, one thinks it's boring. Is it the the chicken or the egg, when this is reflected in their results?