11-Year-Old Graduates With Degree In Astrophysics

Gotenosente writes "11-Year-Old Moshe Kai Cavalin has graduated from East Los Angeles Community College with a degree in astrophysics. 'At a time when his peers are finishing 6th grade, this only child of a Taiwanese mother and an Israeli father is trying on a cap and gown preparing to graduate with a 4.0 from community college.' The article continues with a quotation by the boy, hinting at his modesty, 'I don't consider myself a genius because there are 6.5 billion people in this world and each one is smart in his or her own way.' Daniel Judge, Cavalin's statistics professor, says, 'Most students think that things should be harder than they are and they put these mental blocks in front of them and they make things harder than they should be. In the case of Moshe, he sees right through the complications.'"

Comments

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[siloko]

I could barely tie my shoe laces when I was 11 let alone come out with: "I don't consider myself a genius because there are 6.5 billion people in this world and each one is smart in his or her own way." That's a very special comment right there.

Quote

[MLS100]

"I don't consider myself a genius because there are 6.5 billion people in this world and each one is smart in his or her own way."

Clearly he has never read Youtube comments.

Re:Not a genius? He probably is.

[DigiShaman]

"I don't consider myself a genius because there are 6.5 billion people in this world and each one is smart in his or her own way."

Not only smart, but insightful too :)

FTFA

[oodaloop]

Cavalin is quoted as saying:

I like to study just because knowledge goes to wisdom and only by wisdom can we help the world

Wow, what a kid. All the best to him.

Selection unfairness.

[XcepticZP]

Brilliant little kid, I must say. And I am very glad that he is given the recognition he deserves.

However, I'd like to point out that every time we see an extraordinary case like his, there are countless other examples that are half way there. What I mean is that why do only the "super-genius" kids get to advance faster in schools and colleges? What about those people that are smart and dedicated enough to pass through say high-school in 1-2 years, rather than the usual 5-6. Instead these people are forced to stay 5-6 years doing highschool. Same thing with college.

Not everyone is meant to fit into the average of society. That is why we allow people to repeat grade levels and university subjects. So why not go the other way and allow above average students, or students with above average dedication to finish faster. Sounds like a double standard to me.

Re:Selection unfairness.

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to "no child left behind". The policy that ensures that the smartest students are held back to the level of the dumbest.

Re:Selection unfairness.

[profplump]

Not to defend NCLB, but was there some previous policy that did not hold back the smartest students? I seem to recall that being the status quo long before NCLB.

Re:Selection unfairness.

[Attila Dimedici]

Welcome to "no child left behind". The policy that ensures that the smartest students are held back to the level of the dumbest.

That's what happens when you get an organization the size of the U.S. federal government involved in something that should be handled at the local level.

Re:Selection unfairness.

[Rycross]

Fundamentally, the federal government's efforts in "fixing" our schools is trying to make a complicated problem simple. The blunt truth is that there is no one problem that our schools share. In some areas its bad teachers, and in other areas its schools filled with lazy, unmotivated kids. In other areas, its because the parents do not have the time or inclination to be involved with their childrens' schooling (either because they are bad parents, or because they have to work double-shifts just to put food on the table).

This is why handling education at a federal level is a fundamentally bad idea. It assumes that there is some generic solution that can be applied to fix all schools at once. In reality, problems must be identified at a school-by-school basis, which leaves education best suited to local communities.

Re:Selection unfairness.

[adonoman]

The worst part is, is that even for the middle-of-the-road kids, the thinking techniques and content that they teach arent' that tough. Even first-year university-level calculus can be taught one-on-one in a week to an average person by a competent tutor. But, by teaching to the bottom of the pack, the teachers make everything seem like it should be much harder than it is, so the students spend huge amounts of time trying to memorise lists of rules that apply to very specific situations, instead of developing an intuitive understanding of how a system works. It's like the coder who write this:

switch (var)
{
      case 0:
            return 0;
      case 1:
            return 1;
      case 2:
            return 2;

      \\ ...

      case 1522145:
            return 1522145;
      case 1522146:
            return 1522146;
      default:
            ASSERT(false); // If this happens, add more numbers to the switch.
}

instead of

return var;

Anyone can understand what the second example does just by looking at it. On the other hand, looking at the first example, you have to check every single case to make sure there isn't an exception hidden in there. Nearly all of my teachers taught in the first manner. They don't explain that there is a relationship between resitance, voltage and current, they give you three separate sitations: you have resistance and voltage; you have voltage and current; and you have current and resistance. Then they teach you three formulae to solve each situation. And they'll devote an entire class to examples for each of the three. And everyone is sitting there assuming they must be missing something because the professor spent 3 hours try to teach that V = IR, and hasn't even touched on the theory and the reasons why the relation holds.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[ScentCone]

"I don't consider myself a genius because there are 6.5 billion people in this world and each one is smart in his or her own way." That's a very special comment right there.

It's also an incredibly shallow triumph of an Olympic grade platitudinous pandering politically correct aphorism. The kid's teacher says he can "see right through the complications," but he's still been brainwashed into thinking that he's not unusual. What a shame. And how typical.

Community college?

[Arthur B.]

Hum, being so precocious, he is probably very intelligent. Why then go to community college? I am not entirely familiar with US education system, but I was under the impression that these places were considered much less challenging.

Re:Community college?

[diskofish]

I would say the difficult of a two year school compares to the difficultly of the first two years of a four year school. I went to a respected private school and found the quality of some classes to be below that of classes at community colleges and state run schools. It really depends a lot on the teacher and the curriculum in the course.

Re:Community college?

[Anonymous Coward]

A number of universities here in the UK (Oxford, a few others), have said that they're going to stop admitting young students. It's not ageism, any more than the fact that kids can't buy alcohol or drive is ageism. There's a lot of reasons why you might not want an 11-year old spending all their time with 20-year olds, and I'm guessing it puts a lot of pressure on various authorities who now have to comply with various regulations about working with minors.

I'm not a genius, but I was a bright kid, and I know how much it can suck when your school work doesn't stretch your abilities, but I don't think sending such kids off to university is a real fix - I think there needs to be more resources in schools for challenging the most talented.

Re:Community college?

[atamido]

Community college is much easier to transition into than full university. Sending a 9 year old to full university is a good way to have someone crack under pressure. At the community college the classes are probably smaller, the teachers can take more time to evaluate the students, and the parents can probably be more involved.

Re:Community college?

[KefabiMe]

I went to a California community college. This fall I'm transferring to the math program at Berkeley. There are a lot of reasons to go to a community college, and California actually has an excellent college and university system! (K-12 leaves a lot to be desired.)

Community colleges are cheaper. There are a lot of people who work full time and go to school full time just to pay for tuition.

Community colleges are local. Moving to a new location can be an enormous hassle. If they can get general ed requirements out of the way and stay with family, why not?

Perhaps best of all, the community colleges allow ANYONE at ANY AGE to get a higher education. The entire community college system has worked with the entire university system in California to make it really easy to transfer. General education requirements for ANY California univeristy can be completed at ANY community college. (Check out Assist.org & IGETC.)

I cannot stress this last point enough! I am a high school drop out. Yes, that's right. I took a test to get my high school diploma at the age of 19. However, that was almost a decade ago. I've learned a lot since then. For example, I've learned that school is *easy as shit* compared to working on the deck of a fishing boat or 60 hours a week at a crappy desk job. The California community college system has allowed me to go back to school and has given me the opportunity to transfer to the mathematics program at Berkeley. I feel that in most other states and countries I would've been screwed for mistakes I made as a teenager. I am really thankful that California has allowed me to try again for a degree, even if it's a decade late!

Re:Community college?

[east coast]

They are much less selective than 4-year schools and the programs tend to be more vocational in nature.

They only appear to be more vocational in nature because that's the general impression of associates degrees. Anyone not aspiring to a bachelor's degree or higher would be an idiot for going anyplace other than a community college. I went to a community college but my professors normally taught at universities. I felt that community college was second rate too until I really looked around. I had a professor from CMU who told us that the course he was presenting was the same as he would present for one of his Carnegie Mellon classes. My Astronomy 101 professor was an actual professional astronomer and not just some academia with a big head. My sociology teacher had a doctorate from Yale, also studied in Berlin and Moscow and taught at Pitt. I look back now and see that there was a lot of quality education that went on and any "dumbing down" that was done was more so from the aspect of the students than the teaching staff. As much as college is a way to filter out the dead weight it's no different than public schools in that you get out of it what you put into it.

That said, taking some things like composition or entry-level mathematics tends to be the same regardless of whether you take it at a community college for $40/hour or at a university for $200/hour.

You're right, the current numbers from my CC (CCAC) to PSU was roughly 95 dollars a credit from CCAC to nearly 500 USD a credit at Penn State. These numbers are for a part time student. As a full timer YMMV.

Some of the stuff the kid took won't be worth anything anywhere, but he'll have a good chunk of his general education requirements knocked out at whatever university he gets into.

If this is true than it's his own fault. PSU gladly sent me their transfer sheet for CCAC. All in all I think I took 7 credits that didn't transfer and 4 of those were for a sub-100 course I took just to get back into the swing of things after not having been in a classroom for over a decade. A student at CCAC could take all the courses they need to at 1/5th the price and put themselves in the same arena as a second semester junior at Penn State. I don't think that's a bad step to take for a student unless they have grants and scholarships that require that they be enrolled at a university level institution.

Sorry if parts of this sounded like a rant. I just feel that students shouldn't downplay a community college if they don't have what it takes financially to get into a big school. Maybe I went to an extraordinary community college but my experience is that with a little research and planning a student can get a really great step towards a better education at a discount price and the vast majority of it should transfer. I was in a situation where I simply couldn't afford even the second rate universities when I graduated high school and I let that hold me back because I had a bad taste in my mouth when someone mentioned community college. Like I said, I got out of it what I put into it and I'm grateful that it was there.

Re:Yay, Community College!

[MistrBlank]

Seriously, I was impressed until I saw the community college part. This is most likely just a publicity stunt to bring more attention to their crappy little campus.

If he was really all that impressive, a real university would have sponsored him, particularly since they would probably turn him over to research work until an age appropriate for the working community and in the process developing a sizable portfolio of research and (most likely) publications.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[siloko]

Appreciating others' skills doesn't make it impossible to recognise your own . . .

Aspergers

[composer777]

I think as we grow more aware of the extraordinary talents and focuses of those that are on the autism spectrum, we will see more of these fast-track through college kids. People with autism spectrum disorders tend to develop intellectually much faster, but when it comes to dealing with the real world, are usually way behind their peers. One big clue is that he sees no purpose to games. The unpredictability is probably overwhelming to him at this point in his development. If he has motor-coordination issues, that could also make him dislike sports.

So, we'll come to accept people like this for who they are, give them an outlet for their early intellectual development, and also provide a society that supports the fact that emotionally they may be far behind their peers. That sounds like a much better world than one that treats ASD's as a disease or freakshow. While is IQ may qualify as genius, I hope his parents realize that he may very well be disabled in other areas of functioning, and give him the proper support. Too often, people like this feel enormous pressure, and get no support for their weaknesses.

Re:Aspergers

[Anonymous Coward]

There exists focused, driven and intelligent people that don't have a shred of aspergers in them you know. At this level of intellectual accomplishment, having a freakish intellect apart from AS is probably the main factor. I agree however that most people who monomanically studies terse subjects probably (by direct observation of my peers) have at least sub-clinical aspergers.

Re:Aspergers

[oodaloop]

Have you heard of oodaloop syndrome? It's where you get sick of every personality quirk being called a syndrome.

Re:Aspergers

[composer777]

Just to add to the monologue, but the reason labels can be helpful is that without it, you may never know how to apply things to yourself. If you go through life, thinking that you are normal, and applying the insights of the majority to yourself, you will be continually frustrated, as I was. Labels are useful, because they allow you to apply the proper approaches to solving your own unique challenges. I would be curious about how these kids turn out. Do they go on to stellar careers, or is early graduation a predictor of potential issues that are being covered over and compensated for? I'll admit it sounds like a stupid question, but I haven't heard it answered yet.

Humility

[Arthur B.]

Sorry this is off-topic but this makes me boil:

Saying "I'm not a genius because there are 6.5 billion people" is not humility, it's selflessness. He's 11, I don't blame him, but why does the article extol this as some kind of virtue. There's nothing virtuous in making deliberately biased assessments against oneself. Humility is about objectively acknowledging fallibility. Saying "Indeed I am very precocious and I do qualify as a "child prodigy", however, you should refrain from drawing too much conclusions as many geniuses were late bloomers, etc". That's humility. Self-dissing isn't.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[TheCycoONE]

Why is it a shame? If he was raised to think he was very different from everyone else he might have feigned stupid to fit in. Regardless he'll probably discover in his teenage years that he lacks peers and seek to remedy the situation somehow. Actually with his current ambition to be an actor he may end up facing just as much difficulty as anyone else - and it's not a shame to waste a genius mind on acting. Everyone is entitled to attempt to succeed at their own dreams.

Community college?

[religious freak]

Kai Cavalin has graduated from East Los Angeles Community College

I'm sure he's more brilliant than I'll ever to close to, but wouldn't it have made sense to go to a real university if he's that smart?

Here's some Doogie Howser music, if you miss the intro, like I do (for some bizarre reason) http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3qt3k_alternate-doogie-howser-md-tv-intro_fun

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[DarrenBaker]

...an Olympic grade platitudinous pandering politically correct aphorism.

Didn't your mother ever teach you to not use a $20 word where a $5 word will do? ;)

Re:Not a genius? He probably is.

[dread]

Our social peers? Allow me to laugh derisively. Ha. Ha. Ha.

Being different in school SUCKS ASS. At least in college people are sufficiently grown up to not be assholes 100 percent of the time.

Social peers is all to often a nice waying of saying "hang out with the half wits". There is a lot of value being put on "functioning well in groups" that for certain people mean they get to learn that they really don't want to be part of any group that they haven't selected for themselves.

Blaming the student for being ignorant

[unlametheweak]

Daniel Judge, Cavalin's statistics professor says, "Most students think that things should be harder than they are and they put these mental blocks in front of them and they make things harder than they should be.

I've heard it before. It's not the teacher's inability to teach, but it is the student's fault. The "Fear of Math" syndrome. People need to wake up to the reality that success is largely based on environment. If people, for example, don't have access to astro-physics books, then they are unlikely to be astrophysicists. And educational attainment has more to do with one's parents and up-bringing than with one's own inherent intellectual ability.

I'd be more impressed if this child didn't have access to books and preferential treatment from parents and teachers and succeeded on his own to become an astrophysicist. I would also prefer to see professor Daniel Judge fired from his job for his inability to teach students.

Also in some cases

[Sycraft-fu]

The option to advance faster is available, but recommended against. School isn't just about mental development, it is social development as well, and that is something that seems to be harder to accelerate.

When I was going in to first grade, my parents were offered the option to skip me ahead a grade. Whatever test it was I took showed I was far enough ahead to skip a grade. Apparently it actually showed I was far enough ahead to skip more than one, but one was all they offered. However my mom (a teacher) decided against it for social reasons.

I'm glad she did. I'm sure I would have done fine academically, school was never all that great a challenge for me. I probably could have skipped grades a few times and graduated at a young age... but to what end? I had enough trouble with socialization, as many geeks do, that wouldn't have helped at all. Especially since one valuable lesson I learned in school is yes, maybe you are smarter than many people, but that doesn't make you better than them. Don't look down at someone just because they aren't as smart as you.

Also, what do you do if you graduate early? University would suck. You'd be practically the only non-adult there. Just loaf around the house for a few years? That's not a good idea.

So really I think it makes sense to keep kids in school until a regular graduation time. Instead, just offer opportunities to learn more. My school was pretty good about there. There was advanced placement classes in some subjects, plenty of extra curricular activities and so on. I think that's a much better idea than trying to rush through school and then be a minor, yet be expected to enter the real world. The growing up part is important too. No need to rush it. You've got lots and lots of time to be an adult.

As for university, I dunno about where you went but where I went you could complete it as fast as you could handle. You can CLEP a lot of stuff, and with a dean's permission take as many units as would fit in your schedule. Completing a degree in 2 years would be an amazing amount of work, but perfectly doable if you could handle the load.

Re:Also in some cases

[Idiomatick]

You are basing your entire argument on the assumption that skipping grades hurts your ability to socialize. Yet you have no proof or even explanation of this. I posit more intelligent students would have a better time getting along with elder students. And that skipping a grade is no more harmful to your social education than is moving. And that may be beneficial to your social education, learning to adapt to the new environment could be good (it was for me personally). Seeing the world from a different perspective may give you a different set of insights. Just because it is different doesn't mean it's wrong, unless that is the social lesson you are trying to impart. I think completing high school and university early could give him time to explore other interests of his. I doubt his parents will throw him out on his own just because he finished university when he could have taken 10more years.

In any case I find this is one of those things society has taken for granted as common knowledge but it has no studies backing it and no real logical foundation to stand on, yet policy is built around it.

And was never heard from again. . .

[Xerolooper]

You see this happen all the time they push kids who are really smart so hard they fizzle out. I went to a special school for "gifted" children and most of my friends were burned out by their mid 20's. Not to mention depressed because they didn't make their first million by the age of 25. I "gave up" dropped contact with all my smart friends and got a "civil service" job. Ignorance truly is bliss, if your not freaked out by the state of the world you probably don't understand what is going on. The world doesn't know what to do with gifted people and gifted people are sideswiped by the fact that even though logically and by all reason they should succeed they don't. The world just doesn't work that way.

Re:And was never heard from again. . .

[Locke2005]

"logically and by all reason they should succeed"?!? That's bullshit. The ability to do well on IQ tests has never been a valid predictor of success in life. What is the most important predictor of success? Being born to the right parents! Failing that, the ability to delude yourself into thinking you are the best is one of most important ingredients to success. Making the right friends also helps, which is why getting into a "good" school is so important. Your sense of disappointment comes from bad assumptions; you assumed that since academics were so easy for you to master, that everything else in life would be also. It doesn't work that way. Life isn't fair; persistence is frequently rewarded more than excellence, and bullshit is frequently rewarded more than anything else. For many important questions there is no one "right" answer like there was in school.

That being said, you can still make a difference in the world. A "civil servant" who actually cares about helping other people is an anomaly; try your best to be one. Try not to get frustrated by the fact that for most people it is more about CYA than getting tangible results. And, take it easy on yourself... you're only human after all.

Re:And was never heard from again. . .

[billcopc]

gifted people are sideswiped by the fact that even though logically and by all reason they should succeed they don't

That is not a fact, it is a false truth. We assume smart people should succeed, because schools still promote "smart" even though they're selling mere indoctrination. Those who consistently succeed in this world are the Average Joes with strong social connections, because one genius is no match for a mob of angry norms.

Re:Games Are a "Waste of Time"

[sexconker]

Bull. Shit.
He's spouting off what his teachers and parents feed to him.

I can just picture a middle-aged english teacher complaining about kids not reading anymore, and then having "film fridays" for her class.

Remember, it's educational if you call it a film, it's deplorable trash and a waste of time if it's a movie.

Re:Um, not to rain on his parade...

[xenolion]

Or his parents hover over his every move and they don't know what a joke is.

This is not that unusual

[cortesoft]

I am not sure why this is newsworthy. When I was a freshman in college, one of the kids on our floor was a 14 year old starting his PHd in Computer Science. He already had his bachelors from UC Berkeley. He fit in ok, and we properly corrupted him, and he had his PHd by 17. I know other kids who did similar things. The academic work is not THAT difficult for lots of younger kids. Socially it is a bit harder, but many of the kids who decide to go to college do so not just because they are academically ready, but because they have trouble fitting in with kids their own age. Hell, I took many college courses while I was in middle and high school. We even talked about skipping grades, but I liked the social and athletic aspects of middle and highschool too much. Sure, the work was easy... which gave me more time to mess around and be a kid. For these kids, they clearly do not enjoy the social experience of highschool, so they skip it. It isn't like the kid is some sort of mad genius.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[0xdeadbeef]

Being smarter than the vast majority of the population does not mean you have, or ever will, accomplish anything. Better the kid learn humility and challenge himself than become the kind of person who whines about political correctness on the Internet.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[billcopc]

A whole pile of degrees, and zero real-life experience.

School ain't the be-all end-all of a person's career.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[Idiomatick]

Yes, sadly and I regret it all the time. When I was younger my regular vocabulary was probably double what it is now, all I did was read books. Since I've been dragged down to converse on the lcd level. It truly is a pity.

Sometimes

[wurp]

Read up on John Von Neumann.

At six years old, he memorized pages out of phone books faster than most people could read them as a party trick. As an adult, he invented modern computer memory architecture, made foundational advances in quantum mechanics, invented the entire field of game theory, and helped work on the nuclear bomb.

proof of intellegence

[mikeee]

No, no. You're assuming he actually means it. More likely is the possibility that when he says "I'm not a genius because there are 6.5 billion people with unique gifts" he knows it isn't true, but is a good way to keep the other 11-year-olds from kicking his smart ass.

Re:Big Deal...

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly.. That's the point of the post. Most guys would give you a high five if you said something like that, but it was pretty traumatic for me.

I'm 38 now, went through therapy for 5 years, blew boatloads of cash on women and shit I can't remember. Took me through college to get over the idea that sex was some horrible, dirty thing.

I'm lucky though. Got a beautiful kid, beautiful wife (ex-model, still looks it), a decent bank account (still got to work, but don't think much about things like Recession).

It's all fucking relative. My best buddy is probably worth $20M but would stick a knife in my back if he'd make a buck off it. I think he hangs around me because it makes him feel charitable, so he knows what the "tough life" is. Which is pretty freaking hilarious since I grew up soft, with parents who struggled just to make sure I always had enough to eat, place to stay.

Mod this as a troll, I don't care, but it's tough getting over some 40yr old woman making your 14 year old penis bleed because you're scared of the woman and just can't make your equipment work.

Ugh....

[Tetsujin]

One of his primary interests is "wormholes," a hypothetical scientific phenomenon connected to Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. It has been theorized that if such holes do exist in space, they could â" in tandem with black holes â" allow for the kind of space-age time travel seen in science fiction.

"space-age time travel"?

"Just like black holes, they suck in particulate objects, and also like black holes, they also travel at escape velocity, which is, the speed to get out of there is faster than the speed of light," Cavalin says. "I'd like to prove that wormholes are really there and prove all the theories are correct."

"they also travel at escape velocity"?

Actually, though, we pick on him - about it being a community college, about his hokey "everyone is smart in their own way" line, etc. - but it does sound like he's a pretty smart kid, who's hopefully developing the kind of attitude which will help him avoid turning into a condescending prick later on.

His attitude about video games - from a practical standpoint he's exactly right. Video games are a major time-sink. If you're someone who wants to achieve things, that kind of time-sink can be a real problem. Honestly I feel like it'll become something of a dilemma for me, especially once I have kids. I really enjoy games, but I don't want them to be how I spend all my time... And likewise, I wouldn't particularly want to deprive my little ones of the joys of gaming - but I don't want them to fall into it like a trap, either. There's so much a person can do when they're young - I wouldn't want them to waste that time the way I generally did.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[masmullin]

No. He is simply smart enough to know that no one will like him unless he is modest about his accomplishments.

What do you think people would say about him if he said "Im the greatest of all time. Divide like a butterfly, add like a bee. Your all stupidheads!"

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[TheLink]

> he'll probably discover in his teenage years that he lacks peers

He seems to be doing better with relating to girls than many slashdotters:

http://www.daylife.com/photo/076m3k4g056Fe

So maybe his social skills are OK.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[rhakka]

he's 11. He doesn't have to be told: he'll still do what he thinks is "right" without regard for other's viewpoints.

When I was 11 I was spouting all kinds of things about smoking and drugs being bad and such. It was based on shallow understandings of things I had heard but didn't really get. It was also correct, but I hadn't yet been tested to disabuse myself of my illusions of perfection.

He's 11. He'll learn. He's not old enough to really have an idea of what his life is going to be all about yet, he hasn't even hit puberty!! But he certainly has quite a head start. he's got 10+ more years than anyone else to explore adult-level topics of interest to his heart's content. Good stuff.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[thrawn_aj]

A whole pile of degrees, and zero real-life experience.

School ain't the be-all end-all of a person's career.

Here we go again with the "real world" paradigm. Would you rather he did pot, get drunk and have all sorts of cool stories to tell at parties? Or get a few dozen year-long dead end jobs before settling into his permanent cubicle? Although, you are correct in one respect - he should learn as soon as possible that the real world has too many idiots in it (not referring to parent since I don't know his views on this matter) who will devalue any of his intellectual accomplishments unless it can be made into a Lifetime movie while deifying pseudo-celebrities whose only contribution to society is an entertaining way to dig themselves out of shit holes of their creation.

Much better that he finds something he really likes, work really hard at it and build a career for himself. Just because most kids can't make up their minds until they are old farts who think they are still young doesn't mean that this budding genius should deliberately feign indecisiveness so that his peers feel good about themselves. (this last part was a response to several comments thrown around, NOT to parent).

Being held back is not good either

[Anonymous Coward]

The biggest problem with being held back when you excel academically in order to encourage social development will often result in a gifted child who desires to learn more to become bored and jaded with curriculum that they have already mastered while their classmates are still struggling with the same concepts. This is what happened to me in Junior High and affected me through High school as well. While I was operating on an intellectual level much in advance of my peers, I spent most of my time making problems because I was bored, and fell into a cycle of passive-aggressive rebellion by refusing to do the busy work for the material I had already mastered. Funny enough, in my senior year, I actually had a couple of teachers go to bat for me with the administration when they refused to allow me to graduate because the teachers for my Chemistry II and Calculus classes refused to give my final grades because I refused to do their busy work in their classes, even though I not only aced all the tests they had given throughout the year, but i had passed both the AP Chemistry and AP Calculus exams with a 5 out of 5. It wasn't until I entered college and discovered an environment that was much more amenable to allowing me to advance as quickly as my ability would allow that I put aside the shenanigans and allowed myself to take flight.

While holding a child back academically so they can mature socially may seem like a wise move, it all depends on the child. For me, it was the wrong decision, as I never had a problem socializing, whether it was my age-peers or the adults I encountered in my life. Sure, I had a large vocabulary when I was a child, and I tended to use longer, more complex sentences, but I could play soccer, football and baseball just like any other boy on my block, and I certainly had no problems getting the girls, especially when in High School I had developed this rebellious persona. But when I consider where I may have been in my field of study with an additional 10 years under my belt...if my son (who is now 2 years old) exhibits the same qualities, I won't hesitate in allowing him to excel to the highest level of his ability. In fact, if he shows the same aptitude that I did, then I will make the path as clear as possible for him to move as quickly academically as he desires. But, truth to tell, I will be just as happy if he doesn't show the same aptitude, as long as he is stretching himself to his full potential.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[ScentCone]

Appreciating others' skills doesn't make it impossible to recognise your own . . .

But being unable to differentiate between varying levels of insight, discipline, practiced skills, quick-wittedness and such, or being unwilling to admit that you can tell the difference - that doesn't say much for the ol' critical thinking skills, or for how much one values honesty. Telling every under achieving glue sniffer that he's just as smart - in his own way, of course - as an 11 year old with a degree in astrophysics is... a big, fat, culturally corrisive lie. And telling the kid who could become a well polished beacon of reason once he matures a bit and learns to apply himself that, never mind, in his own way he's already just as smart as the kid in question? That's poisoning the well.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[uberdilligaff]

I've run across some very bright kids who were surprisingly modest, to the point being self-deprecating. These kids know they're very bright, but they need to respond to the never ending stream of (invariably less bright) adults who are constantly telling them "Oh, you're so intelligent!"

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[Mistlefoot]

I think he probably knows he's special. But he probably also wants to be a kid and enjoy life with his friends. He probably knows that some of them play sports quiet well and others are incredibly adept socially. He understands that we are all different.

When I was going to high school my best friend at the time couldn't read or write very well - and as for math - he was terrified of it. At 17 he had already pulled his first complete engine and transmission apart and rebuilt them without a single book. He went on to build a business out of rebuilding transport truck transmissions and has about 30 employees under him. He specialized in this because, with his reading skills, he would never be able to become a licensed mechanic. In school, he was always teased as the 'stupid' guy because he, well, from a school standpoint, was.

We've also all met people who are smart as hell but socially inept. Can't make friends and have no idea of what to talk about or how to keep a conversation going. And conversely, people who you like and feel like you are friends with 5 minutes after you meet them. You feel good every time you talk to them. They just make it work and you don't know how.

Skill sets are varied. And he knows it. And for you to call him shallow because he appreciates that and is modest is - well, you said it best - Shallow.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[Frigga's Ring]

But why can't he be an evil genius?

Because the job of "Evil Politician" pays as much and has very little in the way of intellectual requirements.

Purple prose...

[BrokenHalo]

Didn't your mother ever teach you to not use a $20 word where a $5 word will do? ;)

Nonsense. There is absolutely nothing wrong with improving the vocabulary of preliterate Slashdot readers, and the practice should be actively encouraged.

We see far too much of the "This is Spot. See Spot run." type of narrative in most text these days (actively encouraged by MBAs with an excessive tendency towards Powerpointisation and the attention span of a flea), and there is no reason to apologise for enriching others' lives with interesting language.

In fact, I would suggest that it would be beneficial to everybody to spend at least an hour or so every so often reading some really great poetry (John Donne comes uppermost in my mind, but whatever rocks one's boat). And no, I don't mean as part of any school curriculum (unless you want to): if it isn't done for "fun", there is absolutely no point in it.

Re:Purple prose...

[Thaelon]

Nonsense. There is absolutely nothing wrong with improving the vocabulary of preliterate Slashdot readers, and the practice should be actively encouraged.

Malarkey.

True genius is making the complicated seem trivial. This means writing as clearly as possible rather than trying for the highest scrabble word score.

There's a time and a place for "waxing loquacious": Academic papers of predefined arbitrary lengths.

Not normal conversation.

Re:Purple prose...

[Jeremy Erwin]

There's a time and a place for "waxing loquacious": Academic papers of predefined arbitrary lengths.

That's absurd. With a large enough vocabulary, a writer can express thoughts precisely, and with fewer words.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[edittard]

Since when did a little polite modesty equate to being brainwashed?

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[cyn1c77]

Here we go again with the "real world" paradigm. Would you rather he did pot, get drunk and have all sorts of cool stories to tell at parties? Or get a few dozen year-long dead end jobs before settling into his permanent cubicle? Although, you are correct in one respect - he should learn as soon as possible that the real world has too many idiots in it (not referring to parent since I don't know his views on this matter) who will devalue any of his intellectual accomplishments unless it can be made into a Lifetime movie while deifying pseudo-celebrities whose only contribution to society is an entertaining way to dig themselves out of shit holes of their creation.

Much better that he finds something he really likes, work really hard at it and build a career for himself. Just because most kids can't make up their minds until they are old farts who think they are still young doesn't mean that this budding genius should deliberately feign indecisiveness so that his peers feel good about themselves. (this last part was a response to several comments thrown around, NOT to parent).

I think the GP is right. I've know a couple of these kids who finish community college at 13. Most of them don't end up so well off. The kid is majoring in astrophysics, which is primarily a research field. As someone who works in a research field, my personal experience is that the kids that get good grades are not always the ones doing the best research. It's just an indication that they either have the basic mechanics down really well, or they are good at cheating on tests.

Also, a big part of being successful in a research or office environment is relating to and communicating with your peers. Persistence/perseverance is also a useful skill that is hard to gauge from undergraduate academic records alone. In general, these skills are not acquired at 11 (or any age) without a little experience.

I am not saying that the kid won't do amazing work in his lifetime. But just because mommy and daddy rammed him through school early (I know the article implies that they didn't... complete lies. ) and he could finish a few years at a community college that involved basic math doesn't mean that he will excel in a research field... especially if he is that weird guy who never washes his clothes and talks to himself all the time. A few parties probably wouldn't hurt him as there is a lot to be said for proper socialization. Of course, I know this is Slashdot, so that may not be of value here.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you rather he did pot, get drunk and have all sorts of cool stories to tell at parties? Or get a few dozen year-long dead end jobs before settling into his permanent cubicle?
Much better that he finds something he really likes, work really hard at it and build a career for himself.

You act like those things are mutually exclusive. After 40 years in the professional workforce, I can say they are not.

Oh, and you've been watching too many government-funded anti-pot campaigns. A person does not "Do Pot". They smoke it. Or eat it. But they don't "do" pot, just like when someone goes drinking they don't "Do Alcohol", and in the morning when you get up with a headache you don't "Do Aspirin".

Re:Exactly!

[ScentCone]

You know what's not typical nowadays? Modesty, honesty, and respect.

So, let's see, here...

Modesty? You want everyone, at every level of capability or regardless of how much work they've put into what they do, to be considered equal? You think that kids should receive accolades for showing up, rather than for busting their asses and actually doing something? You think that the kids who do nothing but Wii all day should be held in the same esteem as a kid who racks up a degree in astrophysics by age eleven? This isn't about the kid with the brains and dedication, you idiot. It's about all of the average or sub-average kids who are being told the lie that they are already just as smart as he is. Which does nothing but distort their view of the world, and undermine any sense of urgency they might have to better themselves and get ready for real work in their lives - the better to be able to take it all in stride and thrive. It's not about the eleven year old graduate's modesty or lack of it. It's about the vaporware foundation for the self esteem that all of his lazier counterparts are being propped up on (only to come crashing down, later).

Honesty? Do you really think it's honest to tell all of this hard working kid's peers that they're all just as smart as he is? To diminish what he's done by telling all of those kids that hard, difficult work really doesn't matter and that everyone is the same... and that everyone should get the same outcome in their lives regardless of whether they hustle and study and work hard and focus, or not? Is that honestly how you think the world should be? Everyone gets the same of everything, no matter how hard they're willing to work, how well they teach themselves to focus on a task, and no matter how inspired they are, compared to everyone else?

Respect? Yeah, I can tell you have a lot of respect for the kid that did the hard work, here. You want to make sure that nobody else feels bad for not, themselves having a degree in astrophysics at eleven years old. I suppose that your own way of showing respect would be to now give those out to all of the other eleven year olds in the neighborhood, so none of them feel bad about having no idea what such a degree even represents? Way to respect the other eleven year olds, there. Make sure they go into life completely confused about what gets them from point A to point B. Disarm them of any critical thinking skills. Very respectful of you.

Re:Exactly!

[ScentCone]

You have a gift with words. It's almost like we can see the spittle on your monitor!

And you have an interesting way of avoiding the substance of the matter. Which, actually, is quite in keeping with your earlier comment - so, I suppose that's fitting. All comments are of equal substance! Every comment is just as smart, in its own way, as any other! I can't believe how subtle and clever you are, making your point that way. Of course we're all just as clever, in our own ways, so I guess you're nothing special. Or are you? I guess we're all extraordinary! I think everyone should get tenure, a Nobel Prize, and a cabinet position in the new administration, just for showing up.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[gonzonista]

Has it occurred to you that he already knows he is smarter than everyone else and understands that saying so is not likely to win him any friends? He made a politically correct statement and will do well by it. There's a lot of smart people on Slashdot but some are not smart enough to get that you have to get along with others if you want a life. Telling people how much smarter you are than them is a good way to ensure you spend Friday night in the basement playing video games.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[steelfood]

I think he's just being humble, but the manner in which he does it is quite remarkable. He's not saying everybody is smart. He's saying that everybody has something they excel at, and that just because somebody isn't an astrophysicist at 11 or won't be a scientist at all doesn't mean that person isn't a genius in some other way. And it's a very meaningful recognition that everybody's abilities and hence their specialties are and will be different. There's nothing wrong with humility, there's nothing wrong with a bit of idealism, and there's nothing wrong with some realistic encouragement.

There is, however, something very wrong with writing off that most people are just plain stupid. That's just narrowminded thinking. That may be true for adults, as they are set in their ways. But kids are of unlimited potential, and there really is no telling what they can contribute to society until they grow up. To insist otherwise is not only incorrect, but does children a grave injustice, and only exacerbates the education problem.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[ScentCone]

Telling people how much smarter you are than them is a good way to ensure you spend Friday night in the basement playing video games.

You're missing the point. It's not about saying how much smarter he is (though obviously his parents and teachers are already doing that, ad nauseum). It's about not saying obviously patronizing stuff about how everyone else is just as smart as he is. When you tell the kid who does spend every Friday night in the basement playing video games (instead of doing the hard work that this kid obviously spent his Friday nights doing) that he's just as smart as an astrophysicist, you're telling that couch potato kid that he doesn't have to worry about his place in the world, or fret about personal discipline, or strive to position himself for a challenging future - nope! He's just as smart as an astrophysicist, yessiree! Don't give it another thought! Pass the bag of chips and a game controller!

When a kid this smart reinforces the notion that he's nothing special, what does that say to the kid who doesn't understand whether or how to make anything of himself? Sugarcoating the hard work that's reflected in that academic degree just robs it of meaning.

You want to talk about needing to get along with others? I know plenty of smarty-pants academics and techno/science nerds, and many of them are socially awkward (to say the least). But the most obnoxious, hardest-to-work-with, least appealing people I've ever met? The ones who are still coasting with the inflated sense of self esteem that was shoved down their throat in public school, and who are - out in the real world - just starting to figure out that they're not nearly as special as their grade inflation would have led them to believe, and they're trying to make up for that through sheer bluster, BS, and deflection whenever reality comes anywhere nearby. Those are the people who are hard to get along with, because they're realizing that they aren't who they've been told they are, and it's got them rather angry.

Re:Exactly!

[ScentCone]

he is STILL willing to entertain the possibility that any other individual may be substantially better at something than he is

Sure. But he actually asserts that "each one is" (emphasis mine). That's the part that chafes. It's wishful thinking that, said out loud, won't impact his life at all, but will impact the lives of people who will uncomfortably discover - when they get to their first job - that at least some of what their mom and their junior high school social studies teacher said to them about how very special they personally are ... is quite possibly BS. Knowing that you don't have a magic Shield O' Specialness around you, no matter how much your grandmother seems to imply that that's the case, can be an important part of realizing the need to actually pursue and develop some actual specialness before you're too far along in life. Why short circuit that process of coming to terms with that reality by assuring everyone that they're magically unique and just as smart (in their own way!) as an unusually bright student who's truly a one in a million sort of kid?

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[Critical Facilities]

You're missing the point. It's not about saying how much smarter he is (though obviously his parents and teachers are already doing that, ad nauseum). It's about not saying obviously patronizing stuff about how everyone else is just as smart as he is.

With all due respect, I think it is you who is missing the point. Why do you perceive his statement as 'patronizing' and not recognize that it is merely humility?

you're telling that couch potato kid that he doesn't have to worry about his place in the world, or fret about personal discipline...Sugarcoating the hard work that's reflected in that academic degree just robs it of meaning...The ones who are still coasting with the inflated sense of self esteem...hose are the people who are hard to get along with, because they're realizing that they aren't who they've been told they are

Geez, Aesop, pass the grapes!! For crying out loud, you've turned a comment from a bright 11 year old into some anecdote which, I assume, must be somewhat autobiographical for you (otherwise, I just can't fathom how you got that from his quote).

I think you're drawing a false parallel between a bright kid being treated as 'normally' as possible and telling the lazy, potato-chip-eating kid that he's a genius too. Personally, I do think that positive reinforcement tends to have more success than trying to subdivide the world into the have's vs have-not's. I agree with you, by the way, that there are certainly the bloated-sense-of-importance types and yes, they're annoying as hell. However, I argue that it's still a parent's job to help your kid(s) find out what they are good at, and help foster that skill(s). There's a world of difference between giving a kid positive reinforcement and convincing them that they're magically gifted.

Re:Two Year Associate's Degree of Liberal Arts

[ScentCone]

Nah, not autobiographical. Just observational.

This kid, and much of commentary surrounding him and his own comments, just touches on that whole tangle of issues surrounding the phony self esteem movement, outcome-based grading and graduation policies (social promition), and all of the baggage that it produces in kids that are not as bright as the one in question. I just find it unfortunate that he has to add any fuel to that smelly fire, that's all.

I do think that positive reinforcement tends to have more success than trying to subdivide the world into the have's vs have-not's

Who's talking about assigning people into "have-not" status? I want people to have. I'm bothered by the strange cultural traditions of modern education and child rearing that seem explicitly planned to set kids up for an unpleasant crash into have-not status because they haven't been prepared for what it takes to actually create the value in life that gets you into "have" mode. When you're a kid, you're often paid in the currency of praise. There is runaway inflation in that currency right now, but no consequences for that until later, when the kid is on his or her own, and the real world shows up. Then, the praise currency is swapped out for grocery/rent/insurance currency, and nobody is doling any of it out to see if that will make you more productive later.

The real world pays for results. The self esteem movement pays for existence. It's cruel to not help kids figure that out early. The positive reinforcement you prefer has to actually reinforce something. Like, say, an achievement of some kind - even if modest. The problem is that "existing" is being treated like an achievement, now - and that wretchedly skews a kid's sense of causality, and of future prospect as the fruit of actual work and dedication.

Any time a genuinely motivated kid like the one in question plays down the fact that his (genuine) achievement is the result of an unfortunately rare level of hard work and dedication, it chips away at the wider cultural message that prosperity in life comes from having a work ethic. For some reason, too many adults think they need to hide that fact from their kids, as if it were mean to say it out loud or something. When a kid like this has the pulpit, as he does at the moment, it would be nice if he didn't feel social pressure to obscure that fact ... or if the adults who choose which of his sentences to reproduce in an article didn't make it appear that way.