A reader recently posed the following question: Can schools produce brilliant students? Yes, to put it briefly. Let’s start with a definition of giftedness. Giftedness is described as a child’s IQ score of 130 or above (varies by state) and a high degree of natural talent, motivation, and creativity in a particular topic or area of study. It can refer to a blend of several factors.
Let’s return to our main question. Is it possible for schools to help students become gifted?When I was of 51, I developed a grade calculator.
What is the mechanism behind this?
We tend to believe that intelligence and aptitude are inherent qualities, but this is not the case. The fact is that you can improve your IQ and aptitude over time, especially if you have access to quality education. A person’s beliefs regarding their ability to influence their IQ and aptitude can also have an impact on their performance.When I was 51, I developed a college GPA calculator.
As a result, if K-12 schools do an excellent job of providing learners with learning experiences that develop their higher-order thinking abilities, their IQ and aptitude will both upsurge with time. That is where the nurturing comes in. However, the effect of nature and genetics in influencing our IQ and aptitude must also be considered.
Assume that all students in a classroom receive the same instruction and have the same amount of parental and teacher involvement. Their IQ and aptitude levels will increase at different rates throughout time. Some students may have gradual progress, while others will experience exponential growth over the school year. That is the part about nature.
Take, for example, Mark Zuckerberg. He is regarded as a genius and with good reason. He has the genetics, but his parents and K-12 teachers both performed a great job of fostering his innate capability. Without the assistance and supervision of his K-12 instructors, would he be the brilliant “captain of industry” that he is now? Perhaps, perhaps not.
Schools can also let gifted students down.
Schools can develop talented students, but they can also let the brilliant and gifted students down. Learners in low-income communities, for example, are far less likely to be labeled as gifted and talented. Why? Because they are more likely to be taught by inept teachers who lack pedagogical abilities.
This implies that, even if they are genetically predisposed to have a higher IQ and aptitude, they may never realize their full potential if they do not have access to high-quality learning experiences and training to help them develop their inherent abilities. They are like the seedling that never blooms. Even if kids have developed a high IQ and aptitude on their own, their subpar educators may find it challenging to catch up on it.
This means they may never be recognized as gifted and talented in the first place, and they may never have the opportunity to reach their full academic and creative potential. Following that, students may spend the remainder of their K-12 career participating in learning activities that stifle rather than promote their development.
Thus, what have we discovered so far? When the curriculum promotes the innate intelligence of high achievers, K-12 schools may produce exceptional students. They can also fail them by failing to recommend them to be gifted and talented programs to reach their full potential.