In the end, it often boils down to the old “nature versus nurture” debate, and no clear conclusions emerge. Also, being chosen as “special” for the sake of a study, relies on researchers’ prejudices, and the designation itself probably predisposed a child to excel beyond his or her peers anyway. For one thing, it is difficult to quantify all the various things that influence a child’s development - parenting, home environment, genetics, nutrition, education, and so on. However, this study, like many others on giftedness, is regarded as flawed. Stanford University, in fact, began a study in 1921 that follows “gifted” children throughout their lives. Psychologists have studied this phenomenon for a while. (By the strictest definition, a prodigy is a child, not an adolescent or young adult, who has achieved adult-level skill in a given field.) But what makes them different? Are their brains somehow superior to those of ordinary children? Maybe, but one thing remains true - these kids are amazing and have somehow developed skills far beyond the ordinary child. Some criticize the trend as a silly obsession born of a youth-centered, ageist culture. On the popular show “Little Big Shots,” Steve Harvey utilizes this discomfort to comedic effect as his precocious child guests repeatedly prove the comedian, in his 60s, a fool by comparison. These kids are at once oh-so-cute … and decidedly intimidating. As we watch them, adults seem to feel an odd combination of emotions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |