Jim Clark wrote: > […[ I would be very surprised if genes did not play some part >in the radical sorting process that led some few to stardom and >the rest to whatever miserable fate awaits them once their >dreams of glory are shattered by reality.
Joan Warmbold replied: >Daniel Coyle makes a convincing case for otherwise. He noted >over and over again the so-called hot beds had two crucial >elements: a) a person who provided inspiration, or in his words, >"ignition,"; and then, b) opportunity for lots of deep practice. >[…] But what Coyle does make a very convincing case for is >that children's environmental experiences are the most important >part of the formula. He does go further to make the case that >genetic predisposition is not part of the equation at all, or if >so, a very small part… I want to approach this from two different directions. Here's the first, starting with the post from Miguel Roig-Rearden on 2 January: >Speaking of people with amazing abilities, check out this kid: >Bluejay: the mind of a child prodigy: >http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7186319n. As with other very young child prodigies featured on TV programmes over the years that I have viewed, this young boy's extraordinary talent didn't require all the factors cited by Coyle, other than that he spent very many hours practising or developing his talents. But then no one who ever thought about the subject has ever believed that hard work (though often not so regarded by the prodigies) was not an essential factor in such achievements. Note that such exceptionally gifted individuals are not savants – in all other ways they are normal kids. It seems to me evident that genetic factors play a necessary, but of course not sufficient, role in their accomplishments. (Check out the clip cited by Miguel.) It is likely that such amazingly gifted children lie at the extreme end of a spectrum, with very talented children not so far along. This implies that, whatever other factors are required for the very talented children to reach exceptionally high standards, genetic propensity is an essential element. From a UK Channel 4 programme I saw about six years ago on very young child prodigies: "At three years old, Mikhail can add in the thousands. At six, Adam is able to solve quadratic equations and is studying A-level chemistry. By five, Michael (now aged 11) was reading Shakespeare and learning Hebrew." http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius/episode-guide/series-1/episode-1 The topic of child prodigies is discussed here by Professor Joan Freeman: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius/articles/professor-joan-freeman-feature Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org ---------------------------------------------- From: Joan Warmbold <jwarm...@oakton.edu> Subject: Re: Book Recommendations Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:56:17 -0600 Daniel Coyle makes a convincing case for otherwise. He noted over and over again the so-called hot beds had two crucial elements: a) a person who provided inspiration, or in his words, "ignition,"; and then, b) opportunity for lots of deep practice. What was fairly unique to Brazil was that from the age of 5 to 10 or so the boys play an alternate version of soccer called futsal. It's indoors with a field have the size and so provides the players 6 times the opportunity to practice--i.e., far more intense and engaging. He also cites a study of 157 randomly chosen children who were planning on taking musical lessons and followed them from a few weeks before they started their lessons through high school. The factor that best predicted who would end up at the top were the answers they gave to the question, "How long do you plan to play this instrument?" The researcher then organized the answers into three groups: low/medium/high level of and it was the children who had the high level commitment that consistently came out on top. He also notes a number of times that teachers predictions of who will come out on top relative to their apparent gift or talent does not correlate well at all with who does end up at the top. His contention is that kids who are ignited by a role model (Anna Kournikova in Russia; Andruw Jones-correct spelling-from small island of Caracao who each ignited a passion for tennis and baseball, respectively. Jim, your point certainly sounds logical as, with all the competition, how could genetic potential not be part of the equation. But what Coyle does make a very convincing case for is that children's environmental experiences are the most important part of the formula. He does go further to make the case that genetic predisposition is not part of the equation at all, or if so, a very small part. Have you read the entire book? I was impressed with the role of the growth of the myelin tissue that occurs when a child practices intensely for that required 10,000 hours. Joan jwarm...@oakton.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7700 or send a blank email to leave-7700-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
