To think that nearly any child could become a genius with early training?

[crunchymint]

I have been reading about psychologist László Polgár who thought that any child could become a genius in a chosen field with early training. As an experiment, he trained his daughters in chess from age 4. All three went on to become chess prodigies, and the youngest, Judit, is considered the best female player in history.

Hmm I am not sure. My sister has a beautiful voice and a trained one. She is a lot older than me so when I was very young (2/3 and she was 15/16) I began to pester my parents for lessons because I wanted to be like her. So I had 7-8 years of lessons after which the teacher took my parents aside and said, look I can keep taking your cash or I can be honest and say that she really really can’t sing. 🤣🤣🤣
He was right.
On the other hand my son began playing the violin after pestering me aged 3 and I don’t think he’s a genius but he’s now 6 and can make a fairly beautiful sound when he wants to.
I think there is some innate ability involved. Then there’s interest and willingness to learn and push through and improve.

Does anyone even pay attention to IQ any more? It seems a fairly pointless measurement in the overall scheme of things. 'Success' comes down to so many other factors. IQ isn't a perfect measure f intelligence but there are certain fields in which intelligence is a prerequisite for success. (There are many others where high level of social skills, or practical abilities etc. are vital).

Singing is the same. Lessons could improve my vocal ability but I'm never going to become an opera soprano. You either have a great voice or you don't.

"Simply that it is possible for perfectly ordinary children from disadvantaged homes."

Why are you implying that children from disadvantaged homes shouldn't know how to read?

but there are certain fields in which intelligence is a prerequisite for success.

Well I'm not arguing with that. What I'm questioning is whether its worth anyone's while measuring 'intelligence' in this format as by itself it's not much of an indicator of anything.

Become expert perhaps. But it is restricted. I swim every single day with my very young son and older children. They are unlikely to become Olympic swimmers. My son is more confident than many in the water, but not faster nor better at technique.
My daughter learned to read before school. But now all her peers can read. I guess the child needs to carry on which requires their interest.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-484259/Abuse-case-chess-girl-Jessie-Gilbert-DID-kill-says-mother.html

Pressuring children to become experts at chess always reminds me of this story.

There is something really intense about that obsession to ensure your child stands out.
Not that it's always associates with abuse but it does sort of indicate to me that someone might be a bit one sided in their parenting style in some way

No I think she’s saying that the school pushed these kids to read earlier than usual. And it is unlikely that these kids would have had the same background in terms of access to resources as the more wealthy kids.

I think you can level the ground somewhat but as we know parental influence and education etc has an enormous bearing on how children do in the long term.

There was a long term french study of very premature babies (of interest to me as a mum of a v v premature baby) that suggested that post discharge (so assuming that till that point all the babies had similar medical care) the thing that determined long term development was a) birth weight b) parental socio-economic status.
And that makes sense to me. I can see that my premature baby with a bleed on the brain has been helped by what we can do for him- private physio, gym class, music classes, swimming etc. I don’t know how much that will correct his birth ‘deficit’ but I am assuming that it will help.

SuperLoudPoppingAction I feel like it benefits the parent more than the child. They can brag to other people "my child is better than yours" and the child will later have confidence issues and feel they are never good enough.

With the way i was raised I was made to feel like a performing monkey. I learnt to read very early and remember having to read out big words to show people.
I could have used a bit more mellow attention and acceptance tbh.

No its not possible. Child prodigies have a mixture of natural aptitude and shed loads of practice.

OP - are you the same person that did a post a while back about musical prodigies? It was pretty much the same storyline. Snore! Off to ponder my navel. 😴

My children do all like chess. I am fairly obsessive by nature tbh and I did buy a lot of thinkfun strategy games when kid2 seemed to like them.
But i tried to play with him when he asked rather than forcing it on him.

Kid1 can now play chess but would not have enjoyed it being forced on her. I think children only go along with that if they think it's the only way to get positive attention

No I have never posted on this subject before and did not read that thread.

My only thought on this is “Why the fuck would you want your child to be a genius?”

If I taught my children chess from the age of four they'd be just as useless at it as I am 😂

I disagree.

For a start you would need to know if the child was gifted with a brain or a body. So for instance a child that could possibly go on to be a world class athlete, wouldn’t necessarily be receptive to learning a skill like chess, which involves using their brain.

My mum always said my brother would be a manual labourer of some sort. School labelled him as a trouble maker because he struggled with academic subjects (1970s and probably dyslexic) but he could strip a radio or hairdryer, find out what made it work and then reassemble it from about age 8.
He went on to become a rather talented carpenter, but no amount of “training” would have made him a lawyer or world chess champion.

kosha Yes the school pushed all these kids to be able to read at 4. I only mentioned the disadvantaged backgrounds as in the main, these were not kids who would have been taught to read at 4, or supported to do so, by parents. Some of the parents were illiterate. It was very much the school that pushed this and made it happen.

And I am not arguing for pushing young children to learn lots of skills at a very young age. I personally think social development is crucial at this age.

YABU

I think you're effectively saying that people don't have innately different levels of intelligence which doesn't ring true at all. I think people can become knowledgeable and skilled at things through practice and repitition, but genius goes beyond this and is impossible to replicate. I have known someone who I would consider to be a genius and the way their brain was wired and how they thought just seemed fundamentally different. They picked up new concepts and ideas with such ease that I think any non genius attempting to compete with them through sheer effort and hardwork would fail. I think this is generally true with all levels of intelligence as intelligence affects how quickly someone can understand concepts and pick up new thinks. Hardwork can allow someone to become skilled or knowledgeable but it will likely be a much harder and slower process

I think the whole subject is very interesting, but the nature/nurture thing cannot definitively be proven one way or the other.

However I do think folk (generally) are very scathing about the amount that babies understand (in general).

I was always very talkative with my daughter, starting off by 'converstaions' where I'd chit chat to her babble, and leave pauses for 'replies'. She picked up words easily and tried to sound them till she could say them. I paid for a course in baby sign language (which was considered the 'new thing' about 18 years ago) however she was already speaking quite a few words by 9 months so rather than learn the sign she spoke the word! Shealso could speak in short sentences of her own (not repeated ones someone else said) by her 1st birthday eg 'airplane up there' when Concorde went over.
So of course I tried the same thing with my friend's 10 month old non-talker son, she said to offer him a biscuit so before going in the kitchen to get the jar I said to him (with no biscuits in sight) 'would you like a plain biscuit or would you prefer a chocolate one' Of course he tried his hardest to say 'cokolat' because he knew exactly what he wanted, friend was amazed that a) he understood, when there were no biscuits in sight and b) that he could actually say this (and we had to repeat a few times with more biscuits to prove it wasn't a one off, he also knew a plain biscuit he was given was 'not cokolat' and refused it).
When my daughter was tiny I always did 'right sock first and the left one is the one left till last', same with shoes, gloves, arms in sleeves etc. really just as something to say as we're dressing. Obviously by 2-3 she was dressing herself mostly so I dropped it, but was interested to note that at infant school they did a play at Christmas that involved marching soldiers who had to turn on the stage and the teacher said she was one of the only ones to relaiably know her left from right! Now did all that sock business teach her left and right? I think so, she rides and can memorise 2 or 3 dressage tests in a day (with circles and changes of pace as well as lefts and rights), and has no problem with directions when driving. Many of her friends still struggle.

I do so very much wish I had recited her 7 or 8 times table to a silly tune every time I did a nappy change, then she might be a maths genius! Anyone with a newborn up for trying this?

Incidentally I support a local charity www.abctoread.org.uk/ who help encourage non or poor readers from an early age, by going in to primary schools and giving additional reading support to those that need it. It has made a huge difference to many children locally.

I also saw that TIL this morning! It's really a very interesting anecdote.

I don't agree that any child can be expert level at anything (because genetics, birth injury, etc) but it's blindingly obvious that any child can be better at anything given enough input. Otherwise we wouldn't ever bother teaching them anything at all.

Bumpity I actually agree if you are talking about the extremely rare true geniuses. Like that Indian guy who had a very basic primary school level education and independently came up with many maths theorems before working at Cambridge University. Those individuals are incredibly rare.

Ariela I too think most underestimate babies and toddlers. They often do understand far more than adults give them credit for.

I don't believe in hot housing very young children, but I think the vast majority are capable of learning an enormous amount if they are hot housed.

No, I don't believe anyone could become a genius. I think anyone could become good at something given enough nurture, time and education, but true genius is on a level of intelligence that we just don't understand.

My two DCs are naturally bright; university educated middle-class parents mean they're already at an advantage when compared to some friends. One of them has a bit of a penchant for painting and has had some work displayed and sold in a couple of galleries. He's 7. He has one parent who studied fine art, paints and draws with him and around him, has been exposed to arts and had opportunity to explore those since he was 6 months old and has parents who celebrate and encourage his love of art. If he'd been born into another family where they weren't artistic, who knows if he'd have ever learned to love painting or if he'd never have chance to find his talent. His love of art could become a career, could become a passing hobby or could become something he gives up. But doing something at 7 because he's been exposed to it all of his life doesn't make him a genius. He's not Monet. He's not Renoir. He's just a child who had a door opened for him by a parent who loves something he's interested in. To be a true genius I think he'd have had to shine despite having no external input.

hathaway Another TIL fan

I believe they could, and I also believe you'd end up with this: