I couldn’t agree more , Audra. (lovely Irish name!) like you I had an IQ test, at 14 in my case, and it came out at 136. I could read fluently at age 4 but could never master mathematics. I tried, I really did, but it was a mystery to me, apart from basic arithmetic which I memorised. I became a teacher of English and tried my best to instil a love of reading in all my students. Whilst many loved reading, some were what we called ‘reluctant readers’. No matter what I tried, these reluctant readers remained so, by and large. Most of them were boys, some of whom were maths wizards. I wish DEI would DIE; it sets up merit where it doesn’t exist and demotes it where it does. The only fair & sensible way to run society is meritocracy.
My husband doesn’t read well at all, but his spacial reasoning is outstanding. He hasn’t found a single thing that he can’t drive, yet he was made to feel stupid often in his life.
I think that we have a lot of work to do when it comes to TRUE diversity, in that encouraging others talents and interests would be a great place to start.
Genetics certainly matters, but that intelligence has to be nurtured and many fail to do that for children from an early age. If your husband never played any music in the kitchen would your daughter be as advanced in language? The early language and music exposure, 0-6 years, primes the neural development at the most rapidly developing time. I expect you read to your daughter from birth. Raw talent also has to have motivation in order to develop that raw talent. Neither I nor my husband have musical ability but our youngest has an outstanding ear and plays piano, yet he doesn't care to do the work to develop that ability further. He also doesn't do much reading but his verbal scores on standardized tests are very high, likely because I read to him for almost 2 hours each night when he was an infant and toddler. I believe most parents try and do what they think is best for their children, but they are limited to their own experiences, and this can rarely be made up for older children and young adults. DEI tries to do make that up, rather than make changes for succeeding generations. One could have a natural ability for math, but if you have mediocre math teachers you won't see a full flourishing. Genetics is a funny thing and there's a human history's worth of ancestral DNA that mixed and matched to get us here and will continue to mix and match in each succeeding generation. I have 4 full siblings and each one of us is vastly different in our skills and abilities. Each of my 3 children has different abilities and I observed and steered accordingly. As you stated, one can try and shove a round peg in a square hole, but it will be painful.
The idea that our choices are limitless in all areas is harmful in itself. Learning to be content with what you are is an important part of being human. I tried many times in my life to be something I am not, and failed. Our different abilities are the beauty of humanity.
I couldn’t agree more , Audra. (lovely Irish name!) like you I had an IQ test, at 14 in my case, and it came out at 136. I could read fluently at age 4 but could never master mathematics. I tried, I really did, but it was a mystery to me, apart from basic arithmetic which I memorised. I became a teacher of English and tried my best to instil a love of reading in all my students. Whilst many loved reading, some were what we called ‘reluctant readers’. No matter what I tried, these reluctant readers remained so, by and large. Most of them were boys, some of whom were maths wizards. I wish DEI would DIE; it sets up merit where it doesn’t exist and demotes it where it does. The only fair & sensible way to run society is meritocracy.
My husband doesn’t read well at all, but his spacial reasoning is outstanding. He hasn’t found a single thing that he can’t drive, yet he was made to feel stupid often in his life.
I think that we have a lot of work to do when it comes to TRUE diversity, in that encouraging others talents and interests would be a great place to start.
Genetics certainly matters, but that intelligence has to be nurtured and many fail to do that for children from an early age. If your husband never played any music in the kitchen would your daughter be as advanced in language? The early language and music exposure, 0-6 years, primes the neural development at the most rapidly developing time. I expect you read to your daughter from birth. Raw talent also has to have motivation in order to develop that raw talent. Neither I nor my husband have musical ability but our youngest has an outstanding ear and plays piano, yet he doesn't care to do the work to develop that ability further. He also doesn't do much reading but his verbal scores on standardized tests are very high, likely because I read to him for almost 2 hours each night when he was an infant and toddler. I believe most parents try and do what they think is best for their children, but they are limited to their own experiences, and this can rarely be made up for older children and young adults. DEI tries to do make that up, rather than make changes for succeeding generations. One could have a natural ability for math, but if you have mediocre math teachers you won't see a full flourishing. Genetics is a funny thing and there's a human history's worth of ancestral DNA that mixed and matched to get us here and will continue to mix and match in each succeeding generation. I have 4 full siblings and each one of us is vastly different in our skills and abilities. Each of my 3 children has different abilities and I observed and steered accordingly. As you stated, one can try and shove a round peg in a square hole, but it will be painful.
The idea that our choices are limitless in all areas is harmful in itself. Learning to be content with what you are is an important part of being human. I tried many times in my life to be something I am not, and failed. Our different abilities are the beauty of humanity.
"A truly diverse world would be where we acknowledged everyone’s abilities and nurtured them."
I think you should receive the Noble prize for that sentence alone.