10 year old TJ student/author

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is the real deal for smarts. She was going to UVa’s Saturday Enrichment Program, run by the School of Education & Human Development, since she was 6 so not surprising she’s doing college work there now. In Summer 2023 she earned 18 hours at UVa, including credits in math and science- so presuming earned at least that this summer, she’ll likely start college with enough credits to be considered 2nd or 3rd year. Her grandma was brilliant so it’s in the genes (her brothers are tested off the chart smart too). She likes learning, let her learn.

Obviously, she's highly gifted. All of the parental scaffolding in the world wouldn't have made her ready for high school at age 10/11 if that weren't true. But, there are a lot of highly gifted kids out there and even a decent handful at TJ. She is what happens when a highly gifted, motivated, photogenic kid also has very motivated parents who scaffolded her quite a lot and pushed her into the spotlight. As long as she's happy with all of the media events, time spent selling her products, and her educational path, then I don't see the problem.

2 summers ago this kid was taking algebra 2– if that was just parents pushing, then they should write a how to manual for all the parents who can’t get kids to even open a book, let alone take math 6 grades above them and in the summer! As someone above wrote, go Linda!

Which school let an 8 year old take and receive credit for algebra 2?

It’s all a publicity stunt, if two summers ago the kid was taking legit Algebra 2, by now she’d have completed calculus, and be done with high school math. Who knows what qualifies as summer Algebra, maybe it’s some online no credit self paced version where mom can help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The jealousy in these replies is insane. SOME KIDS ARE JUST SMART!

Why do you assume skepticism is jealousy?

Also, there is literature that suggests child prodigies based on IQ and being ahead on standard academic K-12 work rarely end up being anything more than just really smart adults.

It is objectively interesting to contemplate how much is the parent and how much is the kid's doing.

"worked with a chef to create a mealworm bar" sounds very parent-assisted. That is not jealousy on my part. I actually find it really hilarious and pompous. If it was "I ground up mealworms and put the paste into health food recipes I found on the Internet" that comes across different.

The kidpreneur in my town has an app that has "interns". But it hasn't budged above 50+ downloads in the Google Play store since spring. That's 5-0, not 000s. It actually is a good idea and deserved a prize. But it's also been way overhyped.

When the stories get too sophisticated, there's often a parent behind the curtain. These business/invention angles aren't like the Olympics where you can prove exactly what skills exist.

Yeah, this is a bit overwrought but still, she frikking 11 and she got in the same way as every other TJ student.

With that said, I don't know if her parents are doing her any favors.

[Anonymous]

There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

You only needed the first bolded word. Like it or not, geniuses exist and we can tell who they are through testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

I think almost any kid with a 140+ IQ would be academically capable of skipping 3 or 4 grades, especially in elementary school, where things move very slowly. The main difference between this girl and other 140+ IQ kids is that her parents were strong advocates for skipping grades so she wouldn't be bored, the parents have the time and money for a lot of enrichment, she's likely relatively mature and organized for her age, and the school system was willing to work with the parents.

FCPS has kids with 140+ IQs. They are at best offered 1 grade skip. They are at best allowed to skip ahead 2 years in math. Many of the parents just put their kids in AoPS or other enrichment, and accept that their kid is bored in school but socially better among similarly aged kids. Accelerated kids aren't failures in real classroom settings. They're just likely to underperform the kids who are equally smart, but also were given the time to mature a bit more. I wouldn't expect a gifted 11 year old 9th grader to outperform equally gifted 14 year old 9th graders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

I think almost any kid with a 140+ IQ would be academically capable of skipping 3 or 4 grades, especially in elementary school, where things move very slowly. The main difference between this girl and other 140+ IQ kids is that her parents were strong advocates for skipping grades so she wouldn't be bored, the parents have the time and money for a lot of enrichment, she's likely relatively mature and organized for her age, and the school system was willing to work with the parents.

FCPS has kids with 140+ IQs. They are at best offered 1 grade skip. They are at best allowed to skip ahead 2 years in math. Many of the parents just put their kids in AoPS or other enrichment, and accept that their kid is bored in school but socially better among similarly aged kids. Accelerated kids aren't failures in real classroom settings. They're just likely to underperform the kids who are equally smart, but also were given the time to mature a bit more. I wouldn't expect a gifted 11 year old 9th grader to outperform equally gifted 14 year old 9th graders.

But TJ is a very rigorous school so different outcomes. PWC schools can't compare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

I think almost any kid with a 140+ IQ would be academically capable of skipping 3 or 4 grades, especially in elementary school, where things move very slowly. The main difference between this girl and other 140+ IQ kids is that her parents were strong advocates for skipping grades so she wouldn't be bored, the parents have the time and money for a lot of enrichment, she's likely relatively mature and organized for her age, and the school system was willing to work with the parents.

FCPS has kids with 140+ IQs. They are at best offered 1 grade skip. They are at best allowed to skip ahead 2 years in math. Many of the parents just put their kids in AoPS or other enrichment, and accept that their kid is bored in school but socially better among similarly aged kids. Accelerated kids aren't failures in real classroom settings. They're just likely to underperform the kids who are equally smart, but also were given the time to mature a bit more. I wouldn't expect a gifted 11 year old 9th grader to outperform equally gifted 14 year old 9th graders.

But TJ is a very rigorous school so different outcomes. PWC schools can't compare.

Undoubtedly, the kids coming from Longfellow, Carson, or the like would have had a much more rigorous middle school experience. On top of that, TJ is going to expect high levels or organization and maturity. I'm not sure that any 11 year old, no matter how smart, would be prepared to make the jump from PWC middle schools to a school like TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

You only needed the first bolded word. Like it or not, geniuses exist and we can tell who they are through testing.

True and I'm sure there many at TJ who weren't accelerated to this extreme. Kids aren't born knowing advanced math. They learn it through exposure even geniuses. Sure, some kids learn faster than others. There are some reasonable many ways to handle this without ruining a kids childhood and it's also okay to be bored sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are kids that are either 1) genius at test taking or 2) test prepped to death by their parents and in a real classroom setting are failures.

The one 18 year old PhD student I knew at MIT was pretty immature and unable to get along with others.

I think almost any kid with a 140+ IQ would be academically capable of skipping 3 or 4 grades, especially in elementary school, where things move very slowly. The main difference between this girl and other 140+ IQ kids is that her parents were strong advocates for skipping grades so she wouldn't be bored, the parents have the time and money for a lot of enrichment, she's likely relatively mature and organized for her age, and the school system was willing to work with the parents.

FCPS has kids with 140+ IQs. They are at best offered 1 grade skip. They are at best allowed to skip ahead 2 years in math. Many of the parents just put their kids in AoPS or other enrichment, and accept that their kid is bored in school but socially better among similarly aged kids. Accelerated kids aren't failures in real classroom settings. They're just likely to underperform the kids who are equally smart, but also were given the time to mature a bit more. I wouldn't expect a gifted 11 year old 9th grader to outperform equally gifted 14 year old 9th graders.

But TJ is a very rigorous school so different outcomes. PWC schools can't compare.

Undoubtedly, the kids coming from Longfellow, Carson, or the like would have had a much more rigorous middle school experience. On top of that, TJ is going to expect high levels or organization and maturity. I'm not sure that any 11 year old, no matter how smart, would be prepared to make the jump from PWC middle schools to a school like TJ.

Perhaps, the child's parents will continue to manage this for them fine.

[Anonymous]

So well said by a PP above "parent manufactured genius child". This kid is nowhere close to what she is being projected to be - Its her Parents creating each post, book showing, science experiemtn, trip blah blah blah.. DD is in TJ and this kid seems to be failing miserably and seems to come across as pretty average / clueless when other kids speak with her. What is being projected and hyped by her parents in media is however altogether a different story.

[Anonymous]

Every single kid I know who was radically accelerated in math also started qualifying for AIME in 5th or 6th grade, perhaps also qualified for JMO in middle school, and did quite well in Mathcounts as well as other competitions. It seems odd to me when a kid is put forth as a math genius and in need of Calculus by age 12 or 13, but the kid doesn't seem to have any notable math accomplishments, aside from being so accelerated.

It's also possible that some kids are fabulous at rote learning, following algorithms, memorizing, and so on, but they're not extraordinary at deeper thought and analysis. For the most part, K-8 is a lot of memorizing and regurgitating, and not a lot of problem solving. Even in math, it's entirely possible to get straight As through pre-calculus by being good at applying standard algorithms without necessarily having a deep understanding of why the mathematics works the way it does. I bet most of the kids who are struggling at TJ would fit this profile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol my first reaction was "All that talent being wasted on mealworm cookies that nobody wants to eat." (And yes, I do know that people in other countries do eat grubs.)

Too much of a tryhard. Not surprised to hear parents are scaffolding this.

All of these "prodigies" that get in the news are majorly scaffolded by their parents who have higher IQ's than the prodigies themselves. They work the system like they're playing 3d chess. They know how to get the most out of the time and money they invest in their kids. They figure out early what their kid is kind of good at (math, music, languages, verbal skills) and then work it to the max. If the prodigies ever have kids themselves, they will never be able to work the system like their own parents did.

It's like when you're watching a beauty pageant. The real stars are the surgeons who fixed all those noses and boobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The jealousy in these replies is insane. SOME KIDS ARE JUST SMART!

Some of us also have very high IQ children, but we allow them to have a normal childhood instead of pulling all the strings we can pull to get them in the spotlight like this. I think my DD and DS could have done all this crap too if my co-parent and I had spent all our free time scaffolding precocious achievements. Maybe some people think we failed them by not trotting them out and about as public prodigies. But my gut tells me my kids are happier as they are in our low-key family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol my first reaction was "All that talent being wasted on mealworm cookies that nobody wants to eat." (And yes, I do know that people in other countries do eat grubs.)

Too much of a tryhard. Not surprised to hear parents are scaffolding this.

All of these "prodigies" that get in the news are majorly scaffolded by their parents who have higher IQ's than the prodigies themselves. They work the system like they're playing 3d chess. They know how to get the most out of the time and money they invest in their kids. They figure out early what their kid is kind of good at (math, music, languages, verbal skills) and then work it to the max. If the prodigies ever have kids themselves, they will never be able to work the system like their own parents did.

It's like when you're watching a beauty pageant. The real stars are the surgeons who fixed all those noses and boobs.

She's gifted for sure but not a genius. Watch a few of her videos. She's talking to younger students not peers or adults.

[Anonymous]

She's 12, but apparently far far higher IQ than the adults on this thread who don't understand the passage of time, or who think she spent the past 2 years travelling at near the speed of light.