| I wonder how many early-to-college kids spend a lot of time studying versus how many spend far less time than average. For our son, he spent far less time than average. He didn't take notes in classes, sometimes never read the textbooks (especially in CS classes; he's learned over 70 computer languages and started picking them up at age 5 via self-study, so he knew a lot of CS material before taking classes on the topics), and didn't believe in studying for exams (he considered it bad feedback for what one truly "knows" as studying can mean the exam will be testing more what is in short-term memory rather than long-term memory), and he was able to take fairly heavy loads (the highest load he registered for was 25 credits, not the 35 or 60 some Cornell students took in one semester, though) and still do well. He is intelligent enough that he can coast through rather easily, which is a blessing and a curse as he hasn't learned to "work hard" day after day like many who aren't from middle-class families do, but rather just goes in bursts as he feels inspired and then chills and does fun stuff that isn't work related at other times. My guess is many smart people don't have to study (or put as much time into writing papers or computer programs or whatever) nearly as hard or as much as general students to still get results that are considered more "awesome" than plenty who work hard, but the people who will go the farthest are those who both work hard *and* have a certain something naturally, so the most fortunate are those who both love to work hard daily (or at least M-F or such) and have talent. |