<p>I’m arriving a little late to this thread, so my comments will be a bit scattered.</p>
<p>To respond to the OP’s question first: No, I don’t think so. Students who are interested in math/science (and who have been given free rein to follow their own interests early on) are often ready for university courses by high school. I can think of several reasons for the differences in frequency of acceleration in math/science vs. the humanities:</p>
<p>a) Understanding literature or history requires a sophisticated understanding of human motivation and an extensive background of reference points. It takes students time to mature emotionally and to acquire a good framework into which new information can be incorporated. Mathematics, as it is usually taught in the schools, does not require this.</p>
<p>b) In literature, the texts in high school courses may be read <em>voluntarily</em> by adults. Good literature contains depths that can be plumbed, often to the limit of the student’s understanding. In contrast, there is only so much that can be said about solving quadratic equations, in high school–solutions of polynomial equations do become very interesting again in the context of group theory, but almost no one can leap from high school algebra to Galois theory without some help and background–which is acquired from university courses.</p>
<p>In terms of marite’s comment about a friend who will not accept graduate students from the PRC, I would like to say first that graduate work in science/math does require original thinking (!!!), just as in the social sciences. Very broadly speaking, grad students from the PRC come into my particular university department better prepared than our domestic students, in terms of science/math background. (As with all generalities, this one has some striking exceptions.) Countervailing to that, the American students–generality again!–do seem to be somewhat more willing to try the approach I’d call “flying by the seat of the pants, let’s see if we can invent some way to solve this problem.”</p>
<p>But I will happily accept both into my research group! Both benefit from their interactions, and I think that both can learn/be taught/acquire somehow an approach to problem selection and problem solving that is both creative and firmly knowledge-based. </p>
<p>@vicariousparent: Since apparently “viciousparent” isn’t taken, I thought briefly about using that name as an alias, in case I wanted to post some harsh comments in the future. However, I’ve thought better of it! So if anyone does begin to post under that username, it’s truly someone else!</p>