Being moved up a school-year, as many are, tends to do them little harm. But on average having a high IQ as a child is associated with better physical and mental health as an adult. Of the top 0.01% of children, 50% went on to earn a PhD, medical or law degree.įindings from studies led by Ian Deary of the University of Edinburgh, meanwhile, undermine the idea that gifted children go on to become disproportionately troubled. This runs contrary to the idea, proposed by some psychologists, that there is a ceiling to IQ, after which its influence wanes. There is variation even among the top scorers (see chart). These children were also much more likely to have high incomes and to file patents. Of the SMPY participants who scored among the top 0.5% for their age-group in maths and verbal tests, 30% went on to earn a doctorate, versus 1% of Americans as a whole. Research into how these children did in adulthood has emerged over the past two decades. Julian Stanley, then a psychologist at Johns Hopkins University, over 25 years recruited 5,000 precocious children, each of whom had intelligence-test scores in early adolescence high enough to gain entry to university.
Just how important is suggested by the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY), founded in 1971. But as Stuart Ritchie of the University of Edinburgh points out in “Intelligence”, researchers in cognitive science agree that general intelligence-not book-learning but the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly and so on-is an identifiable and important attribute which can be measured by IQ tests. Speaking for the sceptics, Christopher Hitchens, a journalist, argued that: “There is.an unusually high and consistent correlation between the stupidity of a given person and propensity to be impressed by the measurement of IQ.” Like any assessment, IQ tests are not perfect. IQ tests have attracted furious criticism. Two decades later she started work at the Speyer School in New York City, one of the first schools with a challenging curriculum for these pupils. In 1916 Leta Hollingworth-a psychologist whose doctorate refuted the idea that women struggled at science because of destabilising menstrual cycles-began some of the earliest research on children with high IQs. The study of gifted children goes back at least a century. But it is far from the only characteristic that matters for future eminence. Intelligence is highly heritable and perhaps the best predictor of success. The research also suggests that the nature-or-nurture debate is a false dichotomy. It shows that countries which do not get the most from their best and brightest face big economic costs. The second is an increasing focus on fostering the attitudes and personality traits found in successful people in an array of disciplines-including those who did not ace intelligence tests. The first is that educationists are using a broader range of methods to identify highly intelligent children, especially those from poor households.
Yet in many countries it is being overhauled in two main ways. Singapore’s approach is emblematic of the traditional form of “gifted” education, one that uses intelligence tests with strict thresholds to identify children with seemingly innate ability.
If their parents accept the offer, the children are taught using a special curriculum. To receive the overture, pupils must ace tests in maths, English and “general ability”. Inside is an invitation to the city-state’s Gifted Education Programme. EVERY year in Singapore 1% of pupils in the third year of primary school bring home an envelope headed “On government service”.
0 kommentar(er)
