I’m surprised that, on this thread, nature is overwhelmingly winning out in the nature vs nurture debate. (Yes, of course, it’s not one-dimensional, but rather a spectrum, and the nature-leaning folks also recommend reading, good peers, encouragement, etc. Nevertheless, the emphasis here seems to be on “good genes.”) I don’t disagree at all. I’m just surprised. There has been such controversy about this subject, especially since The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life by Herrnstein and Murray.
I agree that reading is essential. I’ve enjoyed passing my favorite books to my kid to see if they’d elicit the same excitement that they did with me. (This also gave us something to talk about – i.e., helpful for interaction with reticent teens.) … I think that it’s also important to facilitate. If my kid showed interest in something, I’d look up ways to get the ball rolling and develop that interest. Some kids apparently have the instinct to do this research themselves, but mine didn’t… I also think that parental expectations are important. Some kids rise to the imposed challenge and surprise themselves, which leads to confidence and a will to push themselves to reach even greater heights.
I read an interesting article years ago ( forgot the source) saying the “smart” genes are linked with the X chromosome… so if you want a smart son, the mom has to be smart. The son got his X from his mom. It is easier for girls as they got one X from dad and one X from mom. The chances of having a smart girl is higher as only one smart parent is enough. For the son, you need a smart mom. I have no idea if this is true!!!
The parents here mostly provide their kids with environments and lifestyles that could adequately nurture whatever intellectual gifts they have. But some of our kids excel academically and others don’t. And this seems to be a matter of the individual children’s nature.
In the larger society, though, where environments that allow a child to excel cannot be taken for granted, I think nurture plays a far more important role.
I posted earlier in the thread about my top 5% kid and my 30% kid. What I forgot to mention is that the 5% kid taught herself to read by age 3 1/2. She was compelled to read EVERYTHING. Labels in the grocery store, mail, newspapers, street signs, as well as books. She came with me for a Dr visit and when the nurse opened the meds closet DD stood in front of the boxes and read aloud the names of all the drugs. The look on the nurse’s face was priceless. Completely nature and that child was born to be academically driven.
The 30% child is more socially motivated and as a child enjoyed visits to the library, book store, nightly reading, etc. which were social and educational. As she became a teen she found other social pursuits more interesting and books took a back seat. But, as I mentioned in my earlier post, she clearly benefited from her early and frequent exposure to books and reading because she got a great foundation in vocabulary and writing. So nurture clearly helped in her case.
“I read an interesting article years ago ( forgot the source) saying the “smart” genes are linked with the X chromosome… so if you want a smart son, the mom has to be smart. The son got his X from his mom. It is easier for girls as they got one X from dad and one X from mom. The chances of having a smart girl is higher as only one smart parent is enough. For the son, you need a smart mom. I have no idea if this is true!!!”
Phew, I’m SO glad we have two girls, lol. Seriously, though, I’ve seen people who are brilliant, and their moms are, um, not so much. I don’t think intelligence as an inherited trait is that simple.
There is no secrets whatsoever. Those who do homework will be straight A, as ALL it is required in such a low level of academic environment as American k - 12 is to do your homework every day, do it on-time (or ahead as most busy kids have to balance their time between academics and tons of ECs) and do it very well. That was how it was done in our family, I do not know any other way.
Here is data for references.
D. graduated #1 from the #2 private HS in our state. Graduated #1 pre-med in her UG class, received monetary award for it, had good choices of Med. Schools to attend. Matched to her number one choice of residency in very selective medical specialty and was the only one who received a faculty award in this specialty at graduation. She never was an avid reader, I had hard time teaching her how to read at age 6. Reading scores on every test were her lowest. Nonetheless a superior writer, skill that pull the grade in every class. Stopped reading for pleasure altogether at about 14, just way too busy to read.
Granddaughter is all As, junior at one of the hardest to get into test-in’s in NYC (30,000 applicants to 900 spots), acceptance by test scores only.
GrandSon just got accepted to another very hard to get in HS in NYC that his older sister (my granddaughter) was not accepted at all. This one required an audition. When I complimented him sometime ago, his comments were: “Just doing my homework”
This is the smartest advice that I know, “Just do your homework!”, there are no mystery, no tricks, no games. Those who play all kind of games, end up losers any way.
All 3 have been crazy busy with tons of un-related and very time consuming ECs from about age of 5, including sports, music, art. D. continued with many and added more in college and even participated in some at Med. School…
Repeating the same inaccurate information about simply doing HW to get As.which has been refuted time and time again by many posters, does not make it so.
@anaesabc - my husband must have read the same articles you have - he has mentioned the fact that we have both a genius son and genius daughter means they have to have a genius mom. So I replied with “Where did I put my car keys?” Then he added - at least, their mom must have been a genius in picking out a sperm donor.
Like everyone else, I believe promoting a love of reading is a key. But as important as anything is the simple task of talking to your child. Involving them with how you make decisions will help them understand the world.
I fall much more in the nurture camp than the nature camp. BIL and SIL adopted my niece and nephew - twins born in prison from a crack mom - they were first foster parenting them, but decided to adopt when the bio dad also died in prison. These kids are now almost 8, but have been reading since pre-K, and were delighted when D sent them her set of Harry Potter books.
@MiamiDAP, many of us put forward our kids as examples, many of us over-generalize on the basis of our very restricted sample size, and all of us are subject to various biases (detection bias, exclusion bias, etc.). You go it one step further by issuing proclamations that your children are proof of this or that (mostly this).
I get the homework angle; it’s a bit like that old saw: “90% of success is just showing up.” Pithy saying, but IRL there’s probably more to it.
My kid #1 was like this. My kid #2 was not. Kid #2 showed no interest in reading, cried if someone tried to read to her because she disliked it so much, and didn’t learn to read until it was taught in school.
2 (the nonreader) did much better academically than #1 (the early natural reader).
Really interesting thread. I don’t believe that you’ll hear many of these opinions spoken openly in the public. Imagine the firestorm if an education expert appeared on 60 Minutes and said something like this, directed at young single men: “if you want to optimize the intelligence of your progeny, find a woman with an extremely high IQ, and marry her. Then provide nurture to your children to cultivate their academic potential.”
I do not hesitate to take credit for my kids successes (nurture)…
Lots of books in the house…my kids were avid readers even when they were babies in the crib (which was great because it bought us a little more sleep on a Saturday morning!)
Very limited television for most of their young childhood (and when we did it was videos such as Sesame Street or Disney movies)
Lots of creative free time.
Lots of family time.
But I was also lucky to have naturally gifted kids, so I also always say I had good material to work with (nature).
Not giving them everything they wanted = instilling drive to succeed.
Exposing them young to real experiences rather than artificial ones. We went on learning vacations to national parks throughout their childhoods. Went to theme parks exactly twice (eventhough they are very close). For example, on a trip to Florida, we skipped Orlando entirely and went to the Everglades.
91 Indeed these days it seems everything is supposed to fit a political narrative else it gets shouted down. Free speech is so important and the anonymous forum helps. I'm definitely enjoying the posts. Thanks all.
Personally, I think it’s far too simplistic to look for measurables when the measurement systems are inherently flawed. Or at least, skewed. Or limited. In fact, I think it’s not too smart, at all, to say, well Johnny got more correct answers on these tests, so he is brighter. In fact, in cases, Johnny may just be neurotically pursuing that low level goal, cranking it out for the wrong reasons and without intellectual growth.
The notion that just doing one’s homework is all it takes: that doesn’t make anyone highly intelligent- not the doer and not the sayer. Just getting A’s or being a val, any val, is not what makes one highly intelligent. Period. It’s incredibly limited thinking. Flawed from the get-go.
So, rethink, folks. Look around you. The people we consider brilliant are for their style of thinking, the way(s) they use the knowledge and expertise they accrued, the challenges they take on, their resilience in preparing themselves for higher order tasks (you don’t get to be an astrophysicist by waddling through basic math.) Not simply for being graded higher.
As for reading, yes, some kids take to it seemingly on their own. But for most kids, it’s a reflection of what they see around them, the ways adults interact with them, etc. In almost every case here where parents say “reading,” they may forget what it means for an adult to read to a child, the process itself and the “more” that goes on.
I would add that neither child had much interest in reading for pleasure or otherwise. I know that studies show that homes with books (and we have hundreds) are correlated with kids who do well in school, but that may be correlation rather than causation. Reading can be an escape or just laziness, rather than real learning.
But both my kids were good students, my D a great one. Valedictorian of her top tier high school and university.