5 ms·

Sorry OP, for a bit of a diversion. I notice a lot of folks saying that "quick wit" or fast thinking or whatever, is just advance preparation (perhaps subconsci

by rfrey 3y ago

Sorry OP, for a bit of a diversion. I notice a lot of folks saying that "quick wit" or fast thinking or whatever, is just advance preparation (perhaps subconscious) or a memorized script, etc. It may be, but for those who think it always is, it definitely isn't. My son is/was quite bright - reading at 3, reading the Economist and understanding 20% of it at 5, teaching himself calculus at 7. He got terrible grades in school maths, and his teachers thought he was lazy because he so obviously understood the material. With some cognitive testing at age 6, he was placed "somewhere over 2nd stdev" (they just stop after a bit) for most cognitive subjects... but when taking response time tests he would drop to 2nd percentile. Second percentile! You could ask him to to find the root of a simple quadratic, and he would think about it and get the answer, then ask him to name the first five even numbers, and he would take about the same amount of time. His processing speed was (and is) just slow. In school, many marks went towards "flash tests" and speed competitions in math. He couldn't get through the first half of the tests, he'd run out of time. He's in third year honours maths at uni now, favourite topic is abstract algebra. They give him more time on tests. My point is that this is real for some people, it's not just practice or technique or rehearsing.

user_7832 3y ago
Any chance he might have dyscalculia and/or ADHD? Though I guess he’d might have already been tested.
- bigfont 3y ago
  Why bother? Given the breadth of diagnostic classes these days, there's a good chance you can find a practitioner[0] willing to make a diagnosis. That said, aside from getting funding for treatment or acceptance of accommodations, receiving a label of disordered often does not help, but does add harmful stigmatization. The OP's son seems normal, functioning, and isn't harming anyone. On the other hand, the diagnosing practitioner may need to be tested for Overpathologization Disorder[0]. [0]: http://www.psychologysalon.com/2012/01/overpathologization-disorder-modest.html http://www.psychologysalon.com/2012/01/overpathologization-d...
  - lemming 3y ago
    Our daughter was diagnosed with dyscalculia, and the diagnosis was very helpful, both for us and for her. She was really struggling with maths and felt like she must just be stupid. The diagnosis helped her to understand that it's just a very concrete thing that she has that affects one aspect of her functioning, and doesn't mean that she's dumb, or lazy, or whatever other story she had ended up telling herself. We are homeschooling her, and it also helped us to understand what was going on for her, and to adapt how we teach her appropriately. > That said, aside from getting funding for treatment or acceptance of accommodations... Both of those can also be life-changing, but you make them sound like trivial details. They are not.
    - bigfont 3y ago
      It sounds like the diagnosis marked a point of positive transformation. Before the diagnosis, your daughter attributed her math challenges to global stupidity and laziness. After the diagnosis, she attributed it to a specific difficulty with math. That reframing does sound healthy and helpful. It also sounds like the diagnosis helped you accept the situation and adapt your teaching modality. Certainly, funding for treatment and acceptance of accommodation can make a life-changing difference. That in part motivates many caring and concerned practitioners to widen diagnostic criteria, so that more people can access benefits. I can see how I came across as trivializing those benefits. Quite the contrary, though, I meant to express that yes, diagnostic labels can bring positive results, and we need to weigh those against the negative results, especially when other options exist.
      - jrflowers 3y ago
        > Quite the contrary, though, I meant to express that yes, diagnostic labels can bring positive results This makes sense. By saying: >Why bother? You were describing how helpful a diagnosis can be.
        bigfont 3y ago
        By saying why bother, I meant to discourage diagnosis, while acknowledging its benefits and costs.
ryandrake 3y ago
I have no background in pedagogy, but I've never understood the point of timed, high pressure tests, especially for children. You really just want to know the child has mastered the material such that they can solve the problems correctly--why is it necessary for them to do them in under 30 seconds, or whatever the bar is? If one kid gets the test done in 20 minutes and the other one takes 2 hours, but they both get the questions right, why does it matter?
- Arech 3y ago
  even more than that - it's quite possible the one who did it too fast have just recalled most of it from his memory, but the other is likely to have found solution for himself from scratch, which is usually much more valuable. Even the perseverance to find the solution is something worthy by itself... (obviously, "mileage may vary", but still)
  - skirmish 3y ago
    I had a friend in high school who proudly proclaimed that he never memorized trigonometry formulas, he would just derive them from scratch when he needed them. He would often run out of time on our regular 20-minutes long tests. Admirable but not practical.
- boplicity 3y ago
  > Why does it matter? Because accommodating every kid's needs is expensive, and society is not willing to pay for it.
- bloqs 3y ago
  Economics, and because of the kids that exploit lax timeframes to try to beat the system or avoid doing anything
- sudosysgen 3y ago
  There actually is a reason. It is to make sure that kids have mastery of fundamental skills that they will need in the future. If it takes you a long to subtract, for example, it will take you an impractically long to do long division, and eventually you will take so long with more complex concepts that you won't be able to learn effectively. Additionally, you also want a fair number of problems in any given test to reduce the variance in the grades, and you want the student to be able to finish a significant number exercises that can truly cover the breadth of the content to learn, hopefully with more than one approach as well. If a student takes 2h to solve a problem there is no way they will be able to complete enough of a problem set. Of course, there are outliers. But personally, especially given my shorter attention span, the ability to do math correctly and quickly was absolutely crucial, and I wouldn't have been able to pass otherwise.
zone411 3y ago
The relationship between processing speed and IQ is not so simple. E.g. https://neurosciencenews.com/iq-decision-speed-23377/ https://neurosciencenews.com/iq-decision-speed-23377/ "Researchers discovered that people with higher IQs are quicker when solving simple tasks but slower when dealing with complex problems."
agumonkey 3y ago
Quite interesting neurologically wise..
rufius 3y ago
I empathize with this. I’m similar to your son - no amount of practice ever made me faster or “more prepared”. I’ve learned to accept it and manage expectations with people. One thing I discovered about myself was for many things I have a “gut feel” that I trust unquestioningly. I might not be able to explain why something is wrong/right, but I know it is. Given a bit of time, I can explain it sufficiently and convincingly. I’ve never had the gift of quick answers with explanations. I’m okay with that.
MPlus88 3y ago
[dead]

by rfrey 3y ago

user_7832 3y ago

Any chance he might have dyscalculia and/or ADHD? Though I guess he’d might have already been tested.

bigfont 3y ago
Why bother? Given the breadth of diagnostic classes these days, there's a good chance you can find a practitioner[0] willing to make a diagnosis. That said, aside from getting funding for treatment or acceptance of accommodations, receiving a label of disordered often does not help, but does add harmful stigmatization. The OP's son seems normal, functioning, and isn't harming anyone. On the other hand, the diagnosing practitioner may need to be tested for Overpathologization Disorder[0]. [0]: http://www.psychologysalon.com/2012/01/overpathologization-disorder-modest.html http://www.psychologysalon.com/2012/01/overpathologization-d...
- lemming 3y ago
  Our daughter was diagnosed with dyscalculia, and the diagnosis was very helpful, both for us and for her. She was really struggling with maths and felt like she must just be stupid. The diagnosis helped her to understand that it's just a very concrete thing that she has that affects one aspect of her functioning, and doesn't mean that she's dumb, or lazy, or whatever other story she had ended up telling herself. We are homeschooling her, and it also helped us to understand what was going on for her, and to adapt how we teach her appropriately. > That said, aside from getting funding for treatment or acceptance of accommodations... Both of those can also be life-changing, but you make them sound like trivial details. They are not.
  - bigfont 3y ago
    It sounds like the diagnosis marked a point of positive transformation. Before the diagnosis, your daughter attributed her math challenges to global stupidity and laziness. After the diagnosis, she attributed it to a specific difficulty with math. That reframing does sound healthy and helpful. It also sounds like the diagnosis helped you accept the situation and adapt your teaching modality. Certainly, funding for treatment and acceptance of accommodation can make a life-changing difference. That in part motivates many caring and concerned practitioners to widen diagnostic criteria, so that more people can access benefits. I can see how I came across as trivializing those benefits. Quite the contrary, though, I meant to express that yes, diagnostic labels can bring positive results, and we need to weigh those against the negative results, especially when other options exist.
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      > Quite the contrary, though, I meant to express that yes, diagnostic labels can bring positive results This makes sense. By saying: >Why bother? You were describing how helpful a diagnosis can be.
      - bigfont 3y ago
        By saying why bother, I meant to discourage diagnosis, while acknowledging its benefits and costs.

ryandrake 3y ago

I have no background in pedagogy, but I've never understood the point of timed, high pressure tests, especially for children. You really just want to know the child has mastered the material such that they can solve the problems correctly--why is it necessary for them to do them in under 30 seconds, or whatever the bar is? If one kid gets the test done in 20 minutes and the other one takes 2 hours, but they both get the questions right, why does it matter?

Arech 3y ago
even more than that - it's quite possible the one who did it too fast have just recalled most of it from his memory, but the other is likely to have found solution for himself from scratch, which is usually much more valuable. Even the perseverance to find the solution is something worthy by itself... (obviously, "mileage may vary", but still)
- skirmish 3y ago
  I had a friend in high school who proudly proclaimed that he never memorized trigonometry formulas, he would just derive them from scratch when he needed them. He would often run out of time on our regular 20-minutes long tests. Admirable but not practical.
boplicity 3y ago
> Why does it matter? Because accommodating every kid's needs is expensive, and society is not willing to pay for it.
bloqs 3y ago
Economics, and because of the kids that exploit lax timeframes to try to beat the system or avoid doing anything
sudosysgen 3y ago
There actually is a reason. It is to make sure that kids have mastery of fundamental skills that they will need in the future. If it takes you a long to subtract, for example, it will take you an impractically long to do long division, and eventually you will take so long with more complex concepts that you won't be able to learn effectively. Additionally, you also want a fair number of problems in any given test to reduce the variance in the grades, and you want the student to be able to finish a significant number exercises that can truly cover the breadth of the content to learn, hopefully with more than one approach as well. If a student takes 2h to solve a problem there is no way they will be able to complete enough of a problem set. Of course, there are outliers. But personally, especially given my shorter attention span, the ability to do math correctly and quickly was absolutely crucial, and I wouldn't have been able to pass otherwise.

zone411 3y ago

The relationship between processing speed and IQ is not so simple. E.g. https://neurosciencenews.com/iq-decision-speed-23377/ https://neurosciencenews.com/iq-decision-speed-23377/ "Researchers discovered that people with higher IQs are quicker when solving simple tasks but slower when dealing with complex problems."

agumonkey 3y ago

Quite interesting neurologically wise..

rufius 3y ago

I empathize with this. I’m similar to your son - no amount of practice ever made me faster or “more prepared”. I’ve learned to accept it and manage expectations with people. One thing I discovered about myself was for many things I have a “gut feel” that I trust unquestioningly. I might not be able to explain why something is wrong/right, but I know it is. Given a bit of time, I can explain it sufficiently and convincingly. I’ve never had the gift of quick answers with explanations. I’m okay with that.

MPlus88 3y ago

[dead]