Genetics
Taught them to read long before they went to school.
Lots of books around. We love to read.
They knew we valued education.
Got to give Alex Trebeck some credit. 
We watched Jeopardy! together for as long as he can remember - and before that. He graduated college this year and we still watch together when he’s home.
- good luck in the genetic lottery.
Mine are adopted, too, and I agree nurture is what molds some vague potential into more. I think I agree with 3boystogo. “interacting with the kids, asking questions, and seizing (and making) teachable moments.” And listening, offering honest praise. One was an avid reader (we couldn’t keep up with her demand for books,) while the other enjoyed hs reading assignments but didn’t take a deep personal interest in it til late college. Now she’s got the bug.
Jeopardy is a thought- we used to watch who Wants to be a Millionaire and I think not knowing the answers instilled some curiosity.
Mozart effect (learning music instrument.)
Follow child’s interest and support/nurture his passion of learning, no matter what the interest is - the quality of the learning is more important than the type of the learning/interest.
I do agree with the genetic factor and reading. Having good peer is important too. I am not sure the Mazart effect is valid anymore, but D1did started piano when she was 5 and she did very well on it. We did not do much otherwise for her and we did not even realize she was a top student until almost the end of junior year. She does have good self-discipline and always finished school works ahead of schedule.
Agree that a healthy diet is important for brain and overall growth, unfortunately the research on omega 3 supplements and brain/cardiovascular function is not panning. http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/30/fish-oil-claims-not-supported-by-research/?_r=0
Yes, the roll of the genetic dice can be very important, especially at the tails of the bell curve or if there are spikes in the profile. At least, that is what I have concluded as the parent of severely disabled and gifted/LD children. But, it is not always easy to tell which way the genetic dice have actually rolled at a single glance.
I think the interesting groups to look at would be outliers - students who succeed in spite of daunting odds, in spite of a lack of early “promise”, or after serious set-backs. In these cases, I think it is helpful to have a “helicopter parent” not afraid to ask questions or challenge professionals, or another mentor.
I would add - it can be helpful to have an adult who is not a parent realize that a student is very smart and offer encouragement and support, especially if they are struggling with boredom, frustration with rote learning, a learning disability,or poor time management.
I have a 5th percentile child and and 30th percentile child. Both were read to every night for years and our house is full of books. The 30th child appears to be intellectual because she is well spoken and can write well and I attribute that to all our early reading. In reality, she is much more concerned about her social standing than her academic standing.
I would say it is encouraging curiosity. I’ll illustrate with a story!
I volunteer at the local library, and one morning somebody had locked the cash box, which you weren’t supposed to do because the lock is broken and once it locks, it never unlocks. So the manager and I were trying to figure out how to get into the box.
There was a mom and her young son (I’d say around 4 or 5) looking at books in the same room as we were, and the kid was SO interested in our dilemma of the locked box. The mom was like, oh, Ethan, leave them alone, and I said, hey Ethan, how would you get into the box?
We spent the next ten minutes with Ethan helping us try different ways to get into the box, what tools we could use, and eventually figured out how to bend some of the prongs where the lid met the bottom, which allowed the box to pop open. We all cheered when we got it open, and Ethan was totally jazzed at getting into the box. The mom was kind of mystified that we’d let Ethan help us and make “such a big production” of it, but I saw a curious kid who wanted answers :).
This is pretty much how we raise our kids-a lot of investigating, asking, and figuring stuff out. I think there is definitely an inborn level of curiosity, but it can also be developed or squashed depending on the parents’ personality.
@jym626 There are several studies that give evidence contrary to the NIH study. IMO, it makes sense that good fats are helpful to the development of the brain, which is made up of about 70% fat.
I don’t do a knee-jerk reaction to every study coming out of the health profession…even the NIH. When I was a kid, margarine was supposed to be a healthy alternative to butter. Today, we know a lot more about trans fats and , as it turns out, Parkay wasn’t so good for me after all.
When I was pregnant with my s a coworker who has 6 children told me each child is unique and the trick is to understand who they are as individuals. Now with 18 years of parenting under my belt, I believe everyone is born with some gift or talent, without regard to traditional definitions of academic ability. The trick is to discern who the child is and parent to those talents/gifts, not force them into some preconceived idea of how or who the child should be. Sometimes that does means giving a child strong guidance; sometimes it means getting the heck out of their way.
I also happen to be in the expose them to books, music, the arts and the great outdoors camp of parenting.
@NJFabFour I love your story. Twins and multiples always provide fascinating insights into the nature/nurture discussion.
3boys,
Don’t think anyone is doing knee-jerk responses. I try to stay on top of the research in this area as it is related to my work. There is nothing wrong with taking supplements, but when the data doesn’t support the claims, sometimes the snake oil sales can hopefully be curtailed a bit. There are lots of supplements that are taken that have no proven efficacy. For the mostpart, they couldn’t hurt.
The Mozart effect didn’t work for us. Both kids start music lesson at roughly the same age. The musical one who has a near for music felt asleep playing musical instrument. The non musical always likes playing this instrument because she is good in math. That seems to be a good correlation.
@goldensrock, that’s pretty much my approach (see post #21 above).
Afaic, “It takes a village.” So music was good for mine. When they were young, it was another exposure to kind adults who gave them simple goals and allowed slow, age-appropriate mastery, a great lesson for later tasks and challenges. My girls enjoyed it. (But, omg, little kids practicing violin drove me nuts.)
I agree there is a lot in their lives, their growth and uniqueness that we can’t control- sometimes, we can’t even explain. But we have a lot of influence. even when it’s about a talent we don’t have, we still guide them in attitude, persistence, resilience, etc. We’re role models.
Genetics plays a huge role. So does the desire of the child and the knowledge of the parent.
I taught my children to read prior to their entering kindergarten, using the Dick & Jane collections that were sold at Wal-Mart, along with some actual Dick & Jane books. My son enjoyed “playing math,” which involved my asking a math question and letting him calculate the answer. When my son was in kindergarten he informed me that since we had three days left on our cruise we had 72 hours, which he calculated by multiplying 320 + 34. So after that I started asking him to multiply larger numbers. At the time he still didn’t know his multiplication table past 5, so I slowly worked my way up to include problems that included higher numbers.
I used to shout out a math problem when he would come in from school. In second grade I asked him to cube a number as he walked in the door and he angrily informed me that the kids on the bus made fun of him because he knew all his squares and cubes, and that he wasn’t supposed to learn that until SIXTH grade. That was the end of playing math.
My daughter, for what it’s worth, never took to “playing math.” She was unable and/or unwilling to do simple multiplication even after reaching second grade. It’s not considered “politically correct” to note that boys are generally better and more interested in math, but that certainly was the case in our family. Both kids are good readers, and I do think my early encouragement and instruction paid off.
Just as an added note, I think my son could have been a good athlete. But I’m not athletically inclined and have lazy eye, which means I have lousy depth perception, so I didn’t spend any time throwing a football or baseball with him. With another parent he likely would have been a better athlete but less of a scholar.
My kids are interesting, smart, empathetic, and funny - but not the sort of uber-academic smart that is often touted on CC. For us, the important factors were eating dinner together every night (with conversation), travel (heavy on museums), and family game night. Lots and lots of books.
For my son in particular, academic progress came in sudden spurts. I cried when his kindergarten teacher said he was reading well below what was expected (despite me reading to him every night). By the beginning of 1st grade he was reading many grade levels above, and is an incredibly voracious reader now. Math was similarly stressful - until the lightbulb went off late in 10th grade and he finally “got it”.
We couldn’t get D1 to read much growing up. Even now as an adult for her work she would read minimum news to do her work. Whereas D2 would read the bath tub. When she was young, her punishment would be no leisure reading for a week, instead of no TV or internet. But they both work very hard in their respective fields.
Earl, you may have just explained “nurture.”