Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Wanna feel inadequate? or What have you done with your life?

Originally posted by wdlove
I know that iBookin is taking college classes while in High School!
Click to expand...

http://www.calstatela.edu/academic/eep

This is the program I'm in. It allows students as young as 11 to leave high school, middle school, etc. to enter college. I myself entered when I was 13 (almost 14), skipping 5 grades.

I didn't like junior high. Most of the teachers were not very good, and I wasn't very into the whole social scene. The high school I went to wasn't a bad one per se, but there were a lot of things that bugged me about it. I won't bore you with them, but suffice it to say that the year I spent there (7th grade) was not too enjoyable.

My opinion is that acceleration is not for everyone. To go to college at a young age, you need a certain level of maturity and an ability to interact with people who may be twice or even three times your age along with academic skill. I think that if you have all that you should go for it if you feel it is the best thing for you.

Part of our admission process is that prospective students spend one quarter (CSLA is on the quarter system) at the program to try it out. They take two classes, and must recieve at least a B in each one to gain entrance, as well as be selected by an admissions committee, with input for regular EEP students. This process is meant to determine which students have the qualities necessary to go to college very young.

I really enjoy the program and think it to be much better (at least for me) than junior high.

By the way, I have a friend who used to post on these boards as Mercury who is also in the program. Maybe he'd like to offer his opinion as well?
 
Originally posted by themadchemist
His peers are med-school-aged students. I am sure that he would feel bored interacting with his far-less-mature fellow 12-year-olds, even embarrassed to be associated with them.
Click to expand...

Well, when I was a 12-year old I couldn't stand the immaturity of my peers and I am not exactly high up on the maturity scale either. In fact, it was a problem through most of my school years that I could stand virtually no one due to rampant immaturity and general stupidity. Needless to say I ended up being a very anti-social loner.
 
Originally posted by wdlove
It will be important for him to take some classes with his peers. He should have time to just be a kid. Planned activities with his peers!
Click to expand...

Planned? Gee, that sounds like some spontainious fun just waiting to happen!

As so many have expressed concerns about how these children will miss-out on obtaining social skills, I just want to offer some insight here about social adaptation, as the parent of Autistic children.
I am disgusted with the imposition of socially-oriented garbage upon my children in the classroom.
Some children don't fit the cookie-cutter, and no amount of someone's feeling like they need to, in order to be 'normal kids' will make them.
I don't feel that a lack of desire or concern with social functions is at all abnormal either. To NOT be "in" socially doesn't hinder one's ability to communicate, to behave in a socially acceptable manner, to function in the work place, etc.

Peers are rarely people our exact age. Think about this: where else but in public school are you ever situated in a large group of other people exactly your same age? (prisons closely resemble)
As adults, our peers come from all walks of life, represent many generations and ideals.
Socially, behaviorally, we have to manage a few basic skills. We must stay within the law, and in the workplace we must peaceably co-exist with a full spectrum of co-workers of varying gender, race, beliefs - you name it. As long as we are able to do so, we are able to function on a basic level.
That is really, basically all we need to learn in order to function in society. (whether or not this is learned in school is another arguement entirely)
Outside of our profession, WE choose who we form closer friendships with (peers), usually by having similar interests with those individuals. None of this is anything at all similar to the institutionalzed setting of schools.
Children are often forced to socialize with people we as adults would choose not to. For example, I choose not socialize with drug dealers. They exist. I exist. We don't frequent the same social events, and I have few occassions to become acquainted with one. At work, I may sit right next to a person I may not wish to know any better. As long as he does his job functions, and I do mine, neither of us has a problem working with the other. Outside of the workplace tho, I have a choice about who I socialize with and to what extent. Children often do not. If they are seated next to a 'butthead' in class, that may not cause problems during classtime (work), but outside of the classroom, they don't call it a day and go thier seperate ways like co-workers, they also must socially interact with this individual. Something adults have the freedom NOT to do.
It seems normal to me then, that there would be a lot of children who are not 'happily adjusting' to this setting for whatever reason. Add the issue of above average intelligence to the mix, and it just complicates matters, as these children have NO challenging, or stimulating conversation amongst thier "peers". They are already without a doubt out of place in this setting! So why then try to force them into it? What is to be gained socially? Do they need to know who's with whom, or who has the new ride, or what's hip? No. Does the lack of all the social hype and gossip hinder thier development? I don't think so. Detrimental to thier health in any way, shape, or form? NO. How then does this socialization in which they would otherwise miss out prove valuable?


How the institutionalization we mandate is perceived as normal or conducive to learning and individual development bewilders me...

Some kids don't fit the mold, they may not be average, but rather than abnormal, I'll continue to consider them exceptional.
 
When I was in college, we had a 16th birthday party for one of the guys in the marching band. I think he was a sophomore by this point. He was really intelligent and quite mature, but he was still 16. And it really showed from time to time. But we did not expect him to act like a 21 year old all the time. And I think therein is the problem. Don't expect a 12 year old to act like his 30 year old "peers" all the time. Sure there are times where he needs to demonstrate high degrees of maturity, just don't expect it all the time...
 
Originally posted by judith
Some kids don't fit the mold, they may not be average, but rather than abnormal, I'll continue to consider them exceptional.
Click to expand...

There will always be exceptions to the rule - in all aspects of development, social, mental, physical, etc. Its not black and white, but what I think is at issue here is possibly losing your childhood if you develop too fast.

Sure, exceptional kids have different perspectives on things, but if they're developing more rapidly/differently, what's to say that that's not right for them.

I think it comes down to what they're comfortable with and can handle.

I wouldn't want to have given up my innocence as a kid, no worries, no responsibilities ;) But eventually you have to become an adult, in this case, he's had to deal with it much sooner than most and had less time to develop as a *normal* child might. Parents and other adults can add too much pressure/expectations on a child, it happens to regular kids as well. Is that good or bad for him, it remains to be seen.

D
 
I agree with many others the this needs to be handled on a case by case basis. That is in the best interest of the child is paramount. The child should initiate his/her interest. Parents that push a child can be damaging to the child psychologically!
 
Originally posted by AppleMatt
It's interesting, quite an achievement, but I agree with arn, I think there are serious social issues to consider.

Those aside, I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the physical side over the mental. At 12 he is far from fully developed, he has yet to even hit puberty. The brain undergoes a bigger change (both physically regarding sizes and densities of certain areas and neurochemicals) during puberty than any other time in life. It's also a lot of mental pressure, not just succeeding but also facing the realities of modern medicine. Has he any clinical experience or did they just "throw him in"?

I've never skipped years (they don't really do that in the UK), but I am doing an extra degree alongside medicine, it adds a year to my course but it adds three more letters after my name :cool:.

AppleMatt
Click to expand...

You bring up an excellent point. The idea of facing a patient's mortality is a grave one, and one that is central to medical training. Is this kid ready for it?

I suspect that he will spend most of his professional career doing research, as most people who go for MD/PhD do. (I want to do this, but I still want to focus on practice, go figure)

But there's no way to get around the medical curriculum and the high-level of maturity (not just intellectual, but social) that goes along with this.
 
This is just rote based learning, right? Why bother? It is sad if you ask me. This child is bound is to have severe problems in the future. I met a bloke in his 40's who had an reported IQ of 220 once. He was socially and professionally dysfunctional, unhappy and very very isolated.

EDIT-
Yeah it those post linked at the bottom of posts. I checked my browsing history. It's the cookies' fault.
 
Last edited:
quasinormal said:
This is just rote based learning, right? Why bother? It is sad if you ask me. This child is bound is to have severe problems in the future. I met a bloke in his 40's who had an reported IQ of 220 once. He was socially and professionally dysfunctional, unhappy and very very isolated.
Click to expand...

Quasi, what were you looking for that dug this up?
 
arn said:
that's nice and all... and it's an amazing accomplishment, sure....

but seriously, this kid is going to be screwed up socially.

He can't have any friends... his "peers" are 22-30 years old.

I'm anti-grade-skipping. :) In this case, obviously there probably wasn't much choice since he's so advanced... but still - I think school is more about learning social skills and interactions as it is learning book-stuff.

arn
Click to expand...

AppleMatt said:
It's interesting, quite an achievement, but I agree with arn, I think there are serious social issues to consider.

Those aside, I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the physical side over the mental. At 12 he is far from fully developed, he has yet to even hit puberty. The brain undergoes a bigger change (both physically regarding sizes and densities of certain areas and neurochemicals) during puberty than any other time in life. It's also a lot of mental pressure, not just succeeding but also facing the realities of modern medicine. Has he any clinical experience or did they just "throw him in"?

I've never skipped years (they don't really do that in the UK), but I am doing an extra degree alongside medicine, it adds a year to my course but it adds three more letters after my name :cool:.

AppleMatt
Click to expand...

I actually disagree. I mean I understand the concerns, but I have also taught at public high schools and Ivy league universities. The social maturity you discuss is really just a twisted sort of "dumbing down". The point being that people need to be people and act stupid and laugh and make human connections. But a genius like this comes along once in a long time and it would be foolish to not at least attempt to "allow" him to reach his fullest potential. If we forced him to be a little retarded at times and act like a "kid", it would be just as bad as forcing him to hit the books 24/7. He is doing this on his own volition and should be given the freedom to maximize his potential.
 
It's not the purported intelligence of the person but what they do with it. Being book-smart only takes you so far; you need to be able to problem solve and work with the unexpected, not recant facts. Time will tell whether he can cross the threshold between theoretical situations and what-if's into actual applications of said science. Far too many bright people get hung up in the theoretical and forget the practical (in medicine and life sciences). Obviously if he were leaning towards a more theory driven field (ala math) he could shirk most of the hands-on.
 
arn said:
that's nice and all... and it's an amazing accomplishment, sure....

but seriously, this kid is going to be screwed up socially.

He can't have any friends... his "peers" are 22-30 years old.
Click to expand...

Hopefully he won't end up another William James Sidis, poor chap.

Since he's studying medicine, here's hoping the kid discovers a cure for cancer... one that doesn't involve MJ, since da Gob'ment will never legalize it's use.
 
That's quite an impressive kid! I hope he doesn't burn out. There was a kid at my school who had some mental health issues, he left secondary school two years early and went straight to college in Cambridge. He left all his friends and doesn't speak to anyone he used to know, I believe he's now a lecturer at Cambridge at 25 years old. I'm sort of underselling the problems he had just incase he's behind me but I wouldn't want to be in his shoes.

I'm happy with my achievements. I'm now running a successful business, getting award nominations and having my work published by 25.

There are those who have done better and even more who are much smarter, but I don't like to think I've done too bad with my head full of minimal brains.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back