Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are a LOT more kids taking AMC practice classes or participating in math contests than there are kids who are earning Honor Roll. It's not simply training. Like everything, excellence = training + talent. Kids who have just the training end up with pretty underwhelming results.
Gag me. It’s not talent. It’s a lot of hard work and usually some kind of pressure. Either internal or external— to be competitive. It’s training. These are kids under the age of 14. We aren’t able to see talent in math yet at this level when it’s all about exposure. Yes, some of them may go on to major in math. But a 25 on the freaking amc 8 is not proof or predictive of talent or some innate giftedness in math. Look, this is a world I’m very familiar with. And even if this is only my opinion I am speaking from a lot of experience. I can’t speak with authority on much, but this I can.
And I don’t want to take anything away from these kids and what they do. I just cannot stand parents thinking that their kid is particularly talented just because they’ve been spoon fed advanced math from a very early age.
Anonymous wrote:There are a LOT more kids taking AMC practice classes or participating in math contests than there are kids who are earning Honor Roll. It's not simply training. Like everything, excellence = training + talent. Kids who have just the training end up with pretty underwhelming results.
Anonymous wrote:There are a LOT more kids taking AMC practice classes or participating in math contests than there are kids who are earning Honor Roll. It's not simply training. Like everything, excellence = training + talent. Kids who have just the training end up with pretty underwhelming results.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.
There is a huge difference in the philosophies. Americans love the idea of "natural talent." A more eastern philosophy would celebrate the hard work and resulting achievement much moreso than natural talent. No one ever wants to admit this, but unless you're at the extremely elite levels in math, music, sports, art, or whatever, it's generally all about training rather than natural talent.
Yes, talent is a necessary prerequisite at the highest levels, but training is vastly more important for doing well at the highest level. The kids at or near the top train for hours a day, every day. A significant number of kids could do well on the AMCs just on natural talent with minimal training (obviously not most, but not just the rare few). On the other hand, it's virtually impossible to do really well on the higher levels of competitions without extensive training. But I agree in general that western culture wants to put more value on "natural talent" than training/hard work than they should.
Like Michael Jordan is a natural talent! I dont think he ever went to a practice![]()
There is an eastern European who trained his 3 daughters right from early ages for chess. All 3 ranked in the top 15. Two of them in the top 6 I think.
How is natural talent developed? Something triggers in their early childhood that gives them practice at that particular thing. That advantage cascades through positive reinforcement. We have a study in california in the 60s where some kids were given a test and the top 20% were tracked for decades. The top 20% performed much better than the rest of the class in a significant way. The catch is the test is a trick. The researchers selected the top 20% by random! But being told they are the top 20%, they are better than others, better coaching/advanced classes, etc cascaded into life long advantages. We have many examples like this.
In USA in kids sports, we treat everyone as if they have the potential to do well. But when it comes to math, that attitude goes out. Only some are supposed to do well.
As an Asian, I find this so painful. So many kids with so much potential goes wasted due to this attitude.
I’m the op of this particular thread. I haven’t responded since then. I am in 100% agreement with you.
These kids who have been in AoPS since first grade are not gifted in math. They have been trained very well in math. Which is great and not meant to take away from their accomplishments.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.
There is a huge difference in the philosophies. Americans love the idea of "natural talent." A more eastern philosophy would celebrate the hard work and resulting achievement much moreso than natural talent. No one ever wants to admit this, but unless you're at the extremely elite levels in math, music, sports, art, or whatever, it's generally all about training rather than natural talent.
Yes, talent is a necessary prerequisite at the highest levels, but training is vastly more important for doing well at the highest level. The kids at or near the top train for hours a day, every day. A significant number of kids could do well on the AMCs just on natural talent with minimal training (obviously not most, but not just the rare few). On the other hand, it's virtually impossible to do really well on the higher levels of competitions without extensive training. But I agree in general that western culture wants to put more value on "natural talent" than training/hard work than they should.
Like Michael Jordan is a natural talent! I dont think he ever went to a practice![]()
There is an eastern European who trained his 3 daughters right from early ages for chess. All 3 ranked in the top 15. Two of them in the top 6 I think.
How is natural talent developed? Something triggers in their early childhood that gives them practice at that particular thing. That advantage cascades through positive reinforcement. We have a study in california in the 60s where some kids were given a test and the top 20% were tracked for decades. The top 20% performed much better than the rest of the class in a significant way. The catch is the test is a trick. The researchers selected the top 20% by random! But being told they are the top 20%, they are better than others, better coaching/advanced classes, etc cascaded into life long advantages. We have many examples like this.
In USA in kids sports, we treat everyone as if they have the potential to do well. But when it comes to math, that attitude goes out. Only some are supposed to do well.
As an Asian, I find this so painful. So many kids with so much potential goes wasted due to this attitude.
I’m the op of this particular thread. I haven’t responded since then. I am in 100% agreement with you.
These kids who have been in AoPS since first grade are not gifted in math. They have been trained very well in math. Which is great and not meant to take away from their accomplishments.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.
There is a huge difference in the philosophies. Americans love the idea of "natural talent." A more eastern philosophy would celebrate the hard work and resulting achievement much moreso than natural talent. No one ever wants to admit this, but unless you're at the extremely elite levels in math, music, sports, art, or whatever, it's generally all about training rather than natural talent.
Yes, talent is a necessary prerequisite at the highest levels, but training is vastly more important for doing well at the highest level. The kids at or near the top train for hours a day, every day. A significant number of kids could do well on the AMCs just on natural talent with minimal training (obviously not most, but not just the rare few). On the other hand, it's virtually impossible to do really well on the higher levels of competitions without extensive training. But I agree in general that western culture wants to put more value on "natural talent" than training/hard work than they should.
Like Michael Jordan is a natural talent! I dont think he ever went to a practice![]()
There is an eastern European who trained his 3 daughters right from early ages for chess. All 3 ranked in the top 15. Two of them in the top 6 I think.
How is natural talent developed? Something triggers in their early childhood that gives them practice at that particular thing. That advantage cascades through positive reinforcement. We have a study in california in the 60s where some kids were given a test and the top 20% were tracked for decades. The top 20% performed much better than the rest of the class in a significant way. The catch is the test is a trick. The researchers selected the top 20% by random! But being told they are the top 20%, they are better than others, better coaching/advanced classes, etc cascaded into life long advantages. We have many examples like this.
In USA in kids sports, we treat everyone as if they have the potential to do well. But when it comes to math, that attitude goes out. Only some are supposed to do well.
As an Asian, I find this so painful. So many kids with so much potential goes wasted due to this attitude.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.
There is a huge difference in the philosophies. Americans love the idea of "natural talent." A more eastern philosophy would celebrate the hard work and resulting achievement much moreso than natural talent. No one ever wants to admit this, but unless you're at the extremely elite levels in math, music, sports, art, or whatever, it's generally all about training rather than natural talent.
Yes, talent is a necessary prerequisite at the highest levels, but training is vastly more important for doing well at the highest level. The kids at or near the top train for hours a day, every day. A significant number of kids could do well on the AMCs just on natural talent with minimal training (obviously not most, but not just the rare few). On the other hand, it's virtually impossible to do really well on the higher levels of competitions without extensive training. But I agree in general that western culture wants to put more value on "natural talent" than training/hard work than they should.
Like Michael Jordan is a natural talent! I dont think he ever went to a practice![]()
There is an eastern European who trained his 3 daughters right from early ages for chess. All 3 ranked in the top 15. Two of them in the top 6 I think.
How is natural talent developed? Something triggers in their early childhood that gives them practice at that particular thing. That advantage cascades through positive reinforcement. We have a study in california in the 60s where some kids were given a test and the top 20% were tracked for decades. The top 20% performed much better than the rest of the class in a significant way. The catch is the test is a trick. The researchers selected the top 20% by random! But being told they are the top 20%, they are better than others, better coaching/advanced classes, etc cascaded into life long advantages. We have many examples like this.
In USA in kids sports, we treat everyone as if they have the potential to do well. But when it comes to math, that attitude goes out. Only some are supposed to do well.
As an Asian, I find this so painful. So many kids with so much potential goes wasted due to this attitude.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.
There is a huge difference in the philosophies. Americans love the idea of "natural talent." A more eastern philosophy would celebrate the hard work and resulting achievement much moreso than natural talent. No one ever wants to admit this, but unless you're at the extremely elite levels in math, music, sports, art, or whatever, it's generally all about training rather than natural talent.
Yes, talent is a necessary prerequisite at the highest levels, but training is vastly more important for doing well at the highest level. The kids at or near the top train for hours a day, every day. A significant number of kids could do well on the AMCs just on natural talent with minimal training (obviously not most, but not just the rare few). On the other hand, it's virtually impossible to do really well on the higher levels of competitions without extensive training. But I agree in general that western culture wants to put more value on "natural talent" than training/hard work than they should.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:25/25
Are they available for this year??
Anonymous wrote:25/25
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.
There is a huge difference in the philosophies. Americans love the idea of "natural talent." A more eastern philosophy would celebrate the hard work and resulting achievement much moreso than natural talent. No one ever wants to admit this, but unless you're at the extremely elite levels in math, music, sports, art, or whatever, it's generally all about training rather than natural talent.
Anonymous wrote:
No one ever wants to admit this but the AMC is definitely a test you can figure out with practice. Now if a kid is figuring out the tricks on his own that’s talent. I say this as a parent of a child who is great at math, algebra I before 6th, aops student, yada yada yada. IMO it’s all training. I wonder if that’s a more eastern way of looking at high achievement though.