Child Prodigy in the UK

<p>If I may comment on the “midget” question. I once had a student with fairly serious physical limitations due to cerebral palsy in an upper level biochemistry lab I was teaching. Of course we made accommodations for him, most significantly assigning him one of my three teaching assistants. I had no problem with that, as the young man was academically capable. I think assigning a TA to oversee a young child in a class is a completely different matter, however, and would be an unwarranted expense and disservice to the other students in the class.</p>

<p>cpofthehouse, I am not suggesting that Ainan not be given an opportunity to explore his interests or satisfy his curiosity. I question the need, and appropriateness, of enrolling him in college as a regular student, which is what his parents want to do, if I remember the initial post correctly.</p>

<p>I also question the idea that mastering chemistry as a stand alone subject is evidence of extreme genius. Chemistry is not like physics and mathematics in that regard, in my opinion. I think the kid needs to learn a lot more about a lot more subjects.</p>

<p>Midmo, I agree. I once knew a very precocious, very mature three year old. He could read and do math at an advanced level, and knew chemical formulas and molecule configurations better than most kids who are taking courses at that level. His vocabulary was outstanding. One day he really shook up his family when he took a sip out of the gasoline container that his dad left out in the yard while he was fooling with the lawn mower. This kid who tell you the chemical formula for the gasoline, drank some of it. Fortunately, no harm done, but that is the reason why you have to be careful. You just cannot hold a young child responsible for certain dangerous actions, and an adult who does so will be dunned. If there is a chemical accident involving college aged kids,though it is a problem, is not big news. The same thing involving an unsupervised 7 year old would have a lot of backlash. It’s just irresponsible to take that risk. But to learn the theory, or if the parent can get a tutor or guid, , is certainly not a big deal if the child is ready. Would any of you parents pull the reins if you had a 7 year old who got this far in chem and other subjects, and who is curious and a’raring to go on to the next step, or would try to find that opportunity?</p>

<p>From what I read, the child has fulfilled the academic level to go on to university level work from his exam results. I don’t know if he would be accepted at such a university on those results if his age were not disclosed and I do not have Marita’s knowledge of how those exams work. Some young kids I knew (not age 7, however) were accepted to schools like Johns Hopkins, CMU, Stanford, MIT when their test scores showed they could hand that level work. These kids were not accompanied by parents, and some were even housed on campus. I would not go for that, but if a child were capable of university level work that I could not provide for him at home, I would like to take him to class so he could be taught the materials at the appropriate level. THe test of whether he could function in class–tests, papers, discussions, etc would certainly occur, and no breaks should be given to him when it come to the subject standards. Perhaps he would not be able to cut it. Perhaps he would. Can’t tell till he tries it. I don’t see the big deal here. Let the child in, if he meets the academic standards and age is the only hold back. If it doesn’t work, he can certainly back pedal. He has plenty of time.</p>

<p>Yes yes and again yes. to the pull the reins. There is a lifetime ahead for this kid, as for other less outstanding kids, and I would never squander the once in a lifetime opportunity for college on a seven year old who would never take a lit, philosophy, history, etc etc class. The brightest kid I know was a maths wizz at 8 (IB level). His parents transferred him to a German-speaking school, and then, at 12, sent him to boarding school to England. At 15 he was trilingual, had read the classics in 3 spoken languages as well as greek and latin. He also discovered that his passion was philosophy and linguistics, although he still enjoys maths as a hobby. he told me himself recently how lucky he was to be educated in a country (France) which, unlike England, does not allow students to specialize too early. He is honest enough to say that he probably would not have been unhappy had he been sent to Oxford at 15 to study mathematics, because he wouldn’t have known what he was missing.</p>

<p>I am not saying to stop everything else. Hopefully the kid is also kicking a ball, playing with his siblings, and doing all sorts of other things. I agree that he should not be focused in a narrow area at this stage. Just saying if he is interested in a subject and is at certain level, give him the opportunity to move along. He may well drop it. Perhaps he cannot juggle other things as well. Even normal kids may be this way. My kids are forced to do a certain amount in all subjects, and have certain mandatory activities (church, family get togethers, etc) But once they have done those, they can certainly be spending time on advanced chemistry. Heck, I wish I could replace tv and video games with chem.</p>

<p>No agression intended towards you, cpt. I understand and agrre with your frustration. just think that your house is somewhat safer with the explosions on videogames than if you had a chem lab in the basement! (smile)</p>

<p>Heh, heh. Had chem, physics labs in the basement with some hair raising stories. Washing mentos down with diet coke is not an advisable activity either.
What my kids lacked in understanding the theory,they made up in their hands on labs. </p>

<p>But as I said before, I took Chem and Bio without the labs. Chem was required for me but not the lab. I wanted the Bio, but not the lab. I did not miss them. Know a bunch of kids who took Ochem and other advanced sciences without the labs and picked up the labs at different times. And we are talking about a rigorous uni setting here. </p>

<p>My two younger ones were pretty decent athletes. The natural next step were more competitive swim teams, and private skating lessons. Well, it did not work. More time and more work than they wanted to do. And that ended it. But there are kids who move right on up to national standings–I know them. THey would not have without the opportunity. THey are not typical kids. If my any of my kids could whip through SAT1 and 2 exams at a very high level, and wanted more challenging curriculums, I would look for them. Right now my youngest loves to draw, is considered talented; we’ll try an art program… Who knows where it will go? Along with the abandoned instruments and athletic equipment in the garage, or never again touched textbooks? Or will it become a passion? I’d give it a whirl. Not to say, the kid is going to be permitted to spend ALL of his time on that activity. There are chores and other commitments as well, and academics too. </p>

<p>One of the reasons my one son is at a particular private school is because the public one would not permit him to take the level courses that would be challenging for him. I saw no reason for him to retake math, and have paid for that decision in the tuition. There are kids at our school that are tutored in math (by the school) because they ran out of math courses that are offered as classes. </p>

<p>I do not believe that all of the early advanceness is necessarily going to result in a super human at adulthood. Maybe, maybe not. Most likely high functioning but not necessarily true genius. I believe I referred to a very precocious young lady I knew well who is my oldest child’s age. He has now pretty much caught up with her though she started much earlier. Same undergrad degree, same instrument, but he is playing professionally now; she is not. He is looking at more selective law schools than she attended. He is making more money than she is at his job. He is certainly more wordly in the seamy part of life than she is. But I think she enjoyed those years she spent in college,conservatory and law school more than she would have going through the traditional route. She certainly plunged herself into her work then very enthusiastically. </p>

<p>But I certainly would do my best to accomodate the level of accomplishment and interest my kids have achieved. I would not want to put them into a school that could not meet those levels, nor would I want to put them into a school or environment where they could not meet their standards.</p>

<p>This is an extremely interesting thread, and I have been reading through the large number of posts. Ainan seems to be an extremely bright boy 7 years old, who got a grade “C” in a single subject, Chemistry.</p>

<p>I totally agree with many of the posters here on this board that while the boy may be ready for enrichment or mentorship for Chemistry, a single “O” level, especially with a grade of C, in insufficient to gain him admission into any good universities in any continent (either Europe, Asia or Australia). </p>

<p>So, why not have patient, and build up his academic credentials first, before trying to get him into a University?</p>

<p>According to [Bangkok’s</a> Independent Newspaper](<a href=“http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/11/09/regional/regional_30055527.php]Bangkok’s”>http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/11/09/regional/regional_30055527.php) the father seems extremely anxious to get his child into a university. He called a press conference outside the National Library in Singapore, and “distributes copies of Ainan’s curriculum vitae to interested bystanders”</p>

<p>"I cannot believe that a kid this many years before puberty will be safe around 400 degree substances, no matter his intelligence. "</p>

<p>I agree, but generally gen. chem and organic chem labs are pretty tame by design. No one wants unnecessary liability issues. His dad has said he’s going to accompany him. The couple of times they use something like sulfuric acid then maybe the dad could just get it and pour it into the solution.</p>

<p>I would also say that physical dexterity issues are not really as pronounced as they would be in a real lab. Everything is set out for the lab by the TA’s. They don’t have to lug around big 2 L jugs like in a real lab or do large-scale rxns. that involve heavy glassware.</p>

<p>

I think the rough equivalent, in American terms, would be if the kid had taken the SAT II in Chemistry and scored around 700. That would be a very impressive achievement for a 7 year old, but it would not by itself be indicative of college readiness. </p>

<p>An O level is an intermediate exam – students who complete O levels go on to a more advanced phase of secondary school and study for a more advanced set of exams, called A levels. In Singapore, a high school student would take at least 6 O levels - this is done at around age 16. The rigorous universities – such as Oxford – would expect to see passing scores on at least 2 or 3 A levels. (For Harry Potter fans, the “OWL” exam is simply the fictional equivalent of an O-level). </p>

<p>The letter “O” stands for “Ordinary”. “A” stands for “Advanced”. So basically this kid got a “C” on the “Ordinary” exam given to students in Singapore after the equivalent of 10th grade. A “C” means the same as it does here – it is a solid passing grade, not a strong grade. If you were the parent of a 16 year old who struggled with chemistry and got a C on his O-level, you’d breath a sigh of relief; if you were the parent of a very bright 16 year old who got that score, you’d be a little disappointed. </p>

<p>See [Education</a> in Singapore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Singapore]Education”>Education in Singapore - Wikipedia) for details.</p>

<p>In Singapore, there is no high school equivalent of 11th or 12th grade - instead students who wish to continue their education after the O levels go on to the equivalent of a junior college; that may be some part of the source of confusion here. Perhaps that is what Valentine has in mind when he refers to a “university” (though I’m being charitable in that assumption – I have a feeling that people in Singapore must be aware of the difference). </p>

<p>I think this is a very bright kid who deserves the opportunity for an education that provides challenge. I don’t think from what I have read that the kid is anywhere near ready for college level studies – If I were a parent, I would take the the “C” on the O level as an indication that my kid was not quite up to par in that area, and take a step back. Maybe for a 16 year old a “pass” is good enough, but when it comes to the issues of acceleration, I wouldn’t be in such a rush. I wouldn’t want to push a bright, eager, highly motivate 7 year old into a situation that would lead to frustration and struggling-- why crush the kid’s confidence? </p>

<p>But the bottom line is that a C on an O level is not a university-qualifier. I think unfortunately this is a case of a parent of an exceptionally bright youngster who is a little bit too caught up in marveling at his child’s accomplishments to take an objective view.</p>

<p>The article linked by Jason in post #149 is interesting.

</p>

<p>Frankly, those assertions I find hard to buy. Wouldn’t a 2 week old have drunk only breastmilk or formula? And how often did he look at a WATCH at age 2 months?</p>

<p>Also the following passage worries me:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>^^I’m assuming it’s a translation issue and they meant “clock” when they said “watch.”</p>

<p>I know a lot of families with a strong interest in science and willingness to advance research on child development, but I know very few–none, personally–families who are willing to have a professional journalist videotape them at all hours of the day and night to check the details of how the child in the family develops.</p>

<p>I hate to speculate, but now that I’ve learned that Ainan’s father Valentine considered himself a ‘child prodigy’ until he was treated hostilely by Cambridge makes me wonder whether he’s just projecting feelings of rejection and inadequacy, and all of his dreams of genius onto a little son who is no doubt a bright boy, but who probably is not anywhere near ready for a full college experience at 7 years of age.</p>

<p>Just a note, Valentine, but humility is a gift, and you’re not going to get any pats on the back by telling journalists that you considered yourself a ‘child prodigy’. And as for your son, I honestly think his gifts, as they are, speak for themselves, and that you do not need to release every milestone in his life to the world at large. It is not necessary for you to expose the minutae of his young life for him to get a properly rigorous, challenging, exciting, and well-rounded education like he deserves. I echo what tokenadult and other posters have said.</p>

<p>I’m going to call BS on the word “water” spoken two weeks after birth, and even the clock watching at two months. Babies’ eyes are not even well even focused and developed to see that nuance at that age.</p>

<p>Now, I might believe six or eight months, which would still be incredibly precocious, but there is something odd to me about this need to make these children sound superhuman. </p>

<p>This child is likely quite prodigious, but parental opinions are very biased. I always watch for young music prodigies, and it never ceased to amaze me the children that parents “think” are prodigies, and sooooooo clearly aren’t.</p>

<p>Out of curiosity, I did a google on Valentine, and found some really interesting things. I want to clarify that I am not trying to be confrontational or disrespectful and do not want to detract from the fact the Ainan is a truely smart kid. However, here is what I found out.</p>

<p>Here are the facts. Please verify what I said by clicking on the links provided and checking it for yourself.</p>

<ol>
<li>There are about 639 articles that has been picked up by various news syndicates when you search “Valentine Cawley”. However, most of these media stories are from several SELF-WRITTEN and SELF-PAID PRESS RELEASES that were circulated by the “Valentine Crawley Company News Section” at [Valentine</a> Cawley company news](<a href=“http://www.1888pressrelease.com/valentine-cawley-2440-company-pr.html]Valentine”>http://www.1888pressrelease.com/valentine-cawley-2440-company-pr.html) and are about the achievements of Ainan.</li>
<li>The person who wrote these articles are Valentine Crawley, ID 668887. He also paid US $45/- to submit each of these self-written press releases to [Press</a> Release Distribution from 24-7PressRelease.com](<a href=“http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/login.php]Press”>Press Distribution Login: Login And Submit Your Press Release) . Various other news syndicate worldwide (e.g UKPRWire, Newsflash, UK Ireland News, Malaysian News, etc) will pick up the self-written, self-paid News Release and distribute them worldwide, translating them into numerous languages.</li>
<li>Many of these press releases by Valentine are written in third person witing style, for example, he would write "Commenting on this unusually early child development, Valentine Cawley, their father, said: “I believe it is a sign of perfect health of body and mind, that all should work so well, so young.”</li>
<li>Here are a few really extraordinary claims that Valentine has made in his press releases :</li>
</ol>

<p>[Press</a> Release - The Earliest Walkers On Earth…First Steps Of Child Prodigies](<a href=“http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/view_press_release.php?rID=17169]Press”>The Earliest Walkers On Earth...First Steps Of Child Prodigies)
This self-written press release describe his 3 sons under the title “The Earliest Walkers On Earth…First Steps Of Child Prodigies”</p>

<p>[Is</a> Six Year Old Child Prodigy, Ainan Celeste Cawley, The World’s Youngest Scienc by Valentine Cawley](<a href=“http://www.1888pressrelease.com/is-six-year-old-child-prodigy-ainan-celeste-cawley-the-wor-pr-j69r5nv97.html]Is”>http://www.1888pressrelease.com/is-six-year-old-child-prodigy-ainan-celeste-cawley-the-wor-pr-j69r5nv97.html)
This self-written press release informs the “World Youngest Science Teacher”, his son Ainan, who at the age of 6 has given a 1-hour talk to a small group of children.</p>

<p>[How</a> Is A Child Prodigy Made? Valentine Cawley’s Blog Reveals The Secrets Of The by Valentine Cawley](<a href=“http://www.1888pressrelease.com/how-is-a-child-prodigy-made-valentine-cawley-s-blog-reveals-pr-61sos26u8.html]How”>http://www.1888pressrelease.com/how-is-a-child-prodigy-made-valentine-cawley-s-blog-reveals-pr-61sos26u8.html)
This self-written press release informst the world about his 3 genius son, descibe as "Ainan Celeste Cawley, six, a former baby genius, is a scientific child prodigy, with a general gift and education in science: in physics, chemistry, cell biology and astronomy. He also has a gift for music and art. Fintan Nadym Cawley, three, is a natural actor, with a leadership gift – and an ear for music. Tiarnan Hasyl Cawley, eight months, and a baby genius, has all the precociousness of another nascent child prodigy - and a gift for music. "</p>

<p>I want to keep a TOTALLY open mind, and want to leave it totally up to the readers to analyze these self-written, self-paid claims, and see if the are accurate.</p>

<p>Again, I do not want to sound rude or skeptical. I just want to leave it up to the many parents of smart kids on this board to make their own decision about the veracity of these articles.</p>

<p>I just went to the website that Jason posted. Honestly, I now find this entire story ridiculous, contemptible, and for Ainan, truly sad. I do not know how this child will be affected later in life by this obsessive behavior of his father’s in the past 6 years… that Valentine quoted himself multiple times and wrote of himself in the third person is headscratchingly self-serving, and that’s only the beginning…</p>

<p>Why is it so inordinately important that this man’s children are first in the world at essentially every existing developmental and academic milestone, and even at a few that don’t exist? For instance… world’s youngest teacher… are you kidding me? My friend’s four year old sister showed a playmate of hers how to put a dress on a Barbie doll, SHE’s the world’s youngest teacher… enough!</p>

<p>cptofthe house - in your post #143 you provided an example of a precocious 3-year-old who could recite chemical formulas, but then drank gasoline. </p>

<p>This is a very important issue – something that people who have studied child development are well aware of, but parents of apparent prodigies may not realize. There is often a very big gap between the factual or procedural knowledge exhibited by a child, and the conceptual understanding. I know that I found such gaps with my own kids – for example, my son seemed to be years ahead in his understanding of mathematics, so when he was age 4 I decided to repeat some of Piaget’s conservation experiments with him, quite confident that my son would be the genius who would prove Piaget wrong. Unfortunately, it turns out that Piaget was right – my son was very good at manipulating numbers and shapes, but his 4-year-old brain still had a lot of growing to do. My d. was also very precocious, and also seemed to be blessed in early childhood with a photographic memory, but I was more savvy with her, and far more ready to ask myself the harder questions about what she could and couldn’t do. </p>

<p>I think that it is important to allow a gifted child room for exploration and certainly to avoid a school placement that will bore the child to distraction – but that does not mean a linear approach to acceleration. A 7 year old child is still a child, even if he is an exceptionally brilliant child. Part of the task of parenting is to be able to see and nurture the needs of the child. </p>

<p>What I don’t see in this case is any supporting evaluation or recommendation from a child psychologist – some objective third party with experience working with gifted children who would also know to ask the right questions. </p>

<p>Here is what a journalist saw, however: </p>

<p>

Source: [Bangkok’s</a> Independent Newspaper](<a href=“http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/11/09/regional/regional_30055527.php]Bangkok’s”>http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/11/09/regional/regional_30055527.php)</p>

<p>Somehow I think that a kid who enjoys playing with window shutters or taking apart beverage packaging can have his academic needs met with something short of a university chemistry lab.</p>

<p>By the way, I found this picture of Ainan at a chalkboard:</p>

<p><a href=“http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2006/09/27/444037/P1060008.JPG[/url]”>http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2006/09/27/444037/P1060008.JPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Now, I’m honestly awful at guessing ages, but I’d assume this is a fairly recent picture. Look closely at that board. Ainan has written the EXACT SAME double-replacement chemical reaction four times, substituting in Zinc, Magnesium (which he spelled incorrectly), Radium, and Uranium. His scribbled drawings of stick figures, both labeled ‘Adult’, accompanied by more scribbles which I can only assume to be Ainan’s idea of what those redox reactions would look like in a lab, remind me of my own art at age 7. From this picture, I see the most absolutely basic of chemistry problems, spelling mistakes, and the scribbled drawings of a child, which are absolutely normal for a kid Ainan’s age. Of course most 7 year olds cannot even balance basic double-replacement reactions (what we learn in the 1st week of 9th grade Honors Chemistry), like Ainan can, but do you think a student ready for university would show off that level of work and a couple of cutesy stick figures? I’m not attacking Ainan, but I’m rather dismayed at his exhibitionist father for exaggerating the prodigy of his sons.</p>