If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Nature Network)   How to send a kid to college by age 12, and make sure his or her teeth are extra bright   (mnn.com) divider line 53
    More: Interesting, Mona Lisa, teeth, colleges  
•       •       •

6825 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jun 2013 at 12:28 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-29 12:31:32 PM
mychinaconnection.com
 
2013-06-29 12:32:26 PM
Yeah...I'm gonna need the full 18 years if not a little more to financially prepare for helping them through college.
 
2013-06-29 12:35:25 PM
media.tumblr.com
 
2013-06-29 12:39:21 PM
I read a longer version of this article a couple months ago and while I'm hugely interested in knowing how they did it, I have some doubts. It seems to me that younger children learn best by doing things - being able to touch the blocks they're counting, etc. Then at some magic age they resign themselves to learning by book (because that's how we teach). How do you teach a 12 year old by book?

This is not an academic question, either. I've got a 7 year old electrical engineer.  His toy box is a bunch of legos and the parts for every computer and piece of electronics that we've allowed him to take apart (and some we didn't). But there's a huge cognitive leap between sticking a lightbulb and a battery on a piece of wire and rebuilding a remote control. How does this family do it? I really don't understand.
 
2013-06-29 12:48:45 PM
You had better believe that public school and parents themselves certainly do hold children back.
 
2013-06-29 12:51:54 PM
Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12 (home-schooled or not)?

I don't like those douchebag helicopter parents who hold their kids back so they can have a competitive advantage, but at least they have the right idea.  Accelerating can lead to some botched adults.  Not all of them can turn out like Steve Wolfram.

If your kids are too smart for their classes, then sure, let them take college courses early but mix in some time off with travel and paid or volunteer work. Then send them to college properly at 18.
 
2013-06-29 12:54:19 PM
What a hilarious headline that references THE MOST EPIC FARK THREAD EVER!!!
Homeschool guy rules and his girlfriend with the teeth is the FUNNIEST. MEME. EVAR.
I'm probably fapping right now just thinking about her.
 
2013-06-29 12:56:42 PM
I was impressed until I read one went to Auburn.....
 
2013-06-29 12:57:29 PM
If subby had gone to college, (s)he might've learned how to use commas correctly.

/or elementary school
//or read a book
 
GBB [TotalFark]
2013-06-29 12:57:56 PM

Aidan: I read a longer version of this article a couple months ago and while I'm hugely interested in knowing how they did it, I have some doubts. It seems to me that younger children learn best by doing things - being able to touch the blocks they're counting, etc. Then at some magic age they resign themselves to learning by book (because that's how we teach). How do you teach a 12 year old by book?

This is not an academic question, either. I've got a 7 year old electrical engineer.  His toy box is a bunch of legos and the parts for every computer and piece of electronics that we've allowed him to take apart (and some we didn't). But there's a huge cognitive leap between sticking a lightbulb and a battery on a piece of wire and rebuilding a remote control. How does this family do it? I really don't understand.


There comes a point when experimentation becomes frustrating.  That's where books come in.  He's interested in how it works and has taken it apart but doesn't know how the parts work and can only tear down to a certain level.  Books will teach him about what capacitors, resistors, and transistors do and how to arrange them.  Let him play with that for a while until he wants to start building things.  Then a lot of math will come into play.  But, be sure he's really into the electronics and not the mechanics.  My parents thought I was destined for Electrical as well, but I grew more into Mechanical.

One thing you should look for is his learning technique.  Is it completely procedural (step 1, step 2, step 3....) or is it conceptual (start here, end there, here's the path and why you want to go this way and not that way).
 
2013-06-29 12:58:02 PM
Much as she claims it doesn't, I think the fact that the parents are likely both exceptionally intelligent has something to do with it but I'll agree that I'm not a genius and I probably could have condensed much of what I learn in K-12 into a much shorter time.  We spend a lot of time in school repeating things and trying to keep the pace slow enough for one teacher to cover with 30-40 kids.  Plus add in the challenge of trying to get more conservative parents to agree to more advanced or controversial lesson plans and I could see how a smart person, dedicating her time with complete autonomy to tailor it to each child could get her kids through the material quickly.
 
2013-06-29 12:58:54 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: [mychinaconnection.com image 508x314]


Another bonus of the Harding approach: less homework and more free time for play and family. The Harding kids not only don't sit in a classroom all day, but they also don't have the mountains of homework that burdens most public school kids. In fact, on many days, the Harding bunch is done by 1 or 2 in the afternoon and can devote the rest of the day to just being kids. Which means running around the backyard, playing with friends, participating in local sports, attending church youth group, and, yes, even bickering in the back seat of the car.
 
2013-06-29 01:01:32 PM

GBB: Let him play with that for a while until he wants to start building things. Then a lot of math will come into play. But, be sure he's really into the electronics and not the mechanics. My parents thought I was destined for Electrical as well, but I grew more into Mechanical.

One thing you should look for is his learning technique. Is it completely procedural (step 1, step 2, step 3....) or is it conceptual (start here, end there, here's the path and why you want to go this way and not that way).


I hear you on that one. I strongly suspect he's like you in that respect. Heavy mechanical. And right now his learning technique is to a) make small things like basic circuits b) talk about all the amazing things he's going to make and c) try to get us to make them for him. So clearly I don't have to worry YET. I just really wish there was a step between basic circuits and bomb-detonating robots! :P But I'm gonna try the Dummies series of books for him. We're already reading old Radio Shack books at bedtime (Jesus those are dull).
 
2013-06-29 01:11:26 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12 (home-schooled or not)?

I don't like those douchebag helicopter parents who hold their kids back so they can have a competitive advantage, but at least they have the right idea.  Accelerating can lead to some botched adults.  Not all of them can turn out like Steve Wolfram.

If your kids are too smart for their classes, then sure, let them take college courses early but mix in some time off with travel and paid or volunteer work. Then send them to college properly at 18.


It would be interesting to do a study on what percent of public school graduates/failures end up with such destinies as robbing a gas station and going to prison vs. what percent of early college grads end up dying of autoerotic asphyxiation while humping their 4ft Sakura body pillow because they were never able to develop age appropriate "people skills".

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the people left to the mercies of public schools are more likely to end up failures by a factor of at least 10,000 to 1.
 
2013-06-29 01:14:42 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12 (home-schooled or not)?


This. And I'm speaking as a guy who was offered a chance at college when he was 10.

My parents didn't let me do that (or any of the other freakishly narrow, specialized things I could've done) so I wouldn't turn into a nut job. And it was the right move - I went to college at 17 and it didn't kill me.

/tip for aspiring baby brains
//SF&F fiction/games
///and run around a lot
////studying isn't healthy
 
GBB [TotalFark]
2013-06-29 01:27:53 PM

Aidan: GBB: Let him play with that for a while until he wants to start building things. Then a lot of math will come into play. But, be sure he's really into the electronics and not the mechanics. My parents thought I was destined for Electrical as well, but I grew more into Mechanical.

One thing you should look for is his learning technique. Is it completely procedural (step 1, step 2, step 3....) or is it conceptual (start here, end there, here's the path and why you want to go this way and not that way).

I hear you on that one. I strongly suspect he's like you in that respect. Heavy mechanical. And right now his learning technique is to a) make small things like basic circuits b) talk about all the amazing things he's going to make and c) try to get us to make them for him. So clearly I don't have to worry YET. I just really wish there was a step between basic circuits and bomb-detonating robots! :P But I'm gonna try the Dummies series of books for him. We're already reading old Radio Shack books at bedtime (Jesus those are dull).


Hopefully ONLY that respect.

One thing that I got into in Middle and High school was RC car racing.  Has both electrical and mechanical aspects.  Also adds social skills (teamwork, management, conflict resolution, camaraderie, etc), money management, time management, and various other skills.  It also led me down a path that was more manual labor than I was expecting.  But there is nothing wrong with makers, builder, and fixers.

Either way, the sooner he figures out what he's good at and passionate about, the better.
 
2013-06-29 01:34:58 PM
Perhaps she simply spends all her time teaching actual skills rather than spending all that time trying to teach kids to be nice to everyone in an environment where everyone is mean to each other.
 
2013-06-29 01:38:22 PM
You better believe it's possible.
 
2013-06-29 01:44:56 PM
i169.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-29 01:57:01 PM
...because everyone knows all you need now is a college degree - social skills and real-world experience are so
passe'.
 
2013-06-29 02:01:52 PM
They're churchgoing homeschoolers whose kids are succeeding and show no evidence of psychosocial dysfunction.

The haters are going to flock to this thread like seagulls to spilled garbage.
 
2013-06-29 02:05:43 PM

trippdogg: ...because everyone knows all you need now is a college degree - social skills and real-world experience are so
passe'.


It looks like their children who have graduated are doing well professionally. I don't think you get to be a Naval officer and physician with no social skills.
 
2013-06-29 02:14:28 PM

Aidan: I read a longer version of this article a couple months ago and while I'm hugely interested in knowing how they did it, I have some doubts. It seems to me that younger children learn best by doing things - being able to touch the blocks they're counting, etc. Then at some magic age they resign themselves to learning by book (because that's how we teach). How do you teach a 12 year old by book?

This is not an academic question, either. I've got a 7 year old electrical engineer.  His toy box is a bunch of legos and the parts for every computer and piece of electronics that we've allowed him to take apart (and some we didn't). But there's a huge cognitive leap between sticking a lightbulb and a battery on a piece of wire and rebuilding a remote control. How does this family do it? I really don't understand.


That's what gives home-schooling families an evolutionary advantage over you.  You can't expect them to reveal the secret.  The purpose of getting publicity for good results is to gain political and legal support for what they're doing, without revealing how they do it.
 
2013-06-29 02:20:47 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12 (home-schooled or not)?

I don't like those douchebag helicopter parents who hold their kids back so they can have a competitive advantage, but at least they have the right idea.  Accelerating can lead to some botched adults.  Not all of them can turn out like Steve Wolfram.

If your kids are too smart for their classes, then sure, let them take college courses early but mix in some time off with travel and paid or volunteer work. Then send them to college properly at 18.


If your kids are smart enough not to be little assholes, why should they learn to be little assholes from their peers?
 
2013-06-29 02:22:30 PM

FARK rebel soldier: Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12 (home-schooled or not)?

This. And I'm speaking as a guy who was offered a chance at college when he was 10.

My parents didn't let me do that (or any of the other freakishly narrow, specialized things I could've done) so I wouldn't turn into a nut job. And it was the right move - I went to college at 17 and it didn't kill me.


But it cost the State seven years' worth of your taxes.
 
2013-06-29 02:26:03 PM
I know I got very bored by age 11 and stopped putting in much effort at school. When grade 9 science is covering stuff you taught yourself at age 9...

That said, I will be pleased when my 5 year old starts having a lot of school hours. She never stops talking at full speed unless she's snuck off to dissamble something. No more scissors or screwdrivers or butter knives.
 
2013-06-29 02:34:50 PM
BarkingUnicorn:

If your kids are smart enough not to be little assholes, why should they learn to be little assholes from their peers?

I agree with this statement.

Now, as a disclaimer, I'm not a parent so my views on this are very much those of an outsider.  However, I really don't see the social environment of public schools to be really that important.

Undesirable behavior among children in public schools are never corrected, given this overwhelming fear teachers and schools have of being sued.  Some harmless or desirable behavior IS altered when it's politically defensible, churning out a never-ending stream of adolescents encouraged to never stick out from their peers.

Outstanding individuals are rarer than they should be.  I hope I'm wrong; I hope every one of us who claims society is not as essentially good as it used to be is wrong.  However, too many anecdotes follow similar strains.  At what point does an anecdote become a data point?  Especially in such a subjective topic such as the worth of a human?  Why is the ratio of great people to population size not the same as it used to be?

The difficulties in defining the problem cannot be denied, and I fully accept my concerns are very hard to justify; but so is the claim that there is nothing to be concerned about.  With what's at stake here, it definitely needs more study.

On the subject of the article, however, on face value the parents certainly deserve commendation.  May more people find such success.

/Just saw "The Offspring" from TNG season 3.  Interesting questions it raises.
 
2013-06-29 02:40:25 PM

tiamet4: Much as she claims it doesn't, I think the fact that the parents are likely both exceptionally intelligent has something to do with it but I'll agree that I'm not a genius and I probably could have condensed much of what I learn in K-12 into a much shorter time.  We spend a lot of time in school repeating things and trying to keep the pace slow enough for one teacher to cover with 30-40 kids.  Plus add in the challenge of trying to get more conservative parents to agree to more advanced or controversial lesson plans and I could see how a smart person, dedicating her time with complete autonomy to tailor it to each child could get her kids through the material quickly.


I agree, the fact that they are intelligent has everything to do with how well the kids did with homeschooling.  They understand the topics they are teaching them, and understand when the kids are ready to learn them.  For our public schools it'd be great if we could get teachers that are that awesome and to have individualized plans, but I don't think folk want to spend the money.
 
2013-06-29 02:53:37 PM
my 14 yr old is skipping high school (sort of) and going to college next year. it is the dual enrollment program at FAU.

my 13 yr old actually has a higher IQ and almost photographic memory but he is much lazier. the older one works hard.

we have always had problems with school not wanting them to get any farther ahead. they wouldn't give extra work or let them learn more. they used to use them as extra helper to teach other kids how to do stuff.

i am thankful that i served in brussels for awhile and was able to send them to a montessori school for preschool thru grade 1 and 2.
 
2013-06-29 02:55:41 PM

BarkingUnicorn: But it cost the State seven years' worth of your taxes.


I know you're joking but now I'm trying to figure it out... It was a state university (one of the crappier ones) that tried to recruit me and offered to pay for everything, full scholarship. I wonder what their college tuition was at the time versus the federal/state/local costs for the schools I went to instead.
 
2013-06-29 03:10:31 PM

BarkingUnicorn: If your kids are smart enough not to be little assholes, why should they learn to be little assholes from their peers?


They'll learn how to deal with assholes. That's something that no book, only time, can teach.
 
2013-06-29 03:19:47 PM

bigwf2007: trippdogg: ...because everyone knows all you need now is a college degree - social skills and real-world experience are so
passe'.

It looks like their children who have graduated are doing well professionally. I don't think you get to be a Naval officer and physician with no social skills.


I've met naval docs who have the social skills of Teri Schiavo--which is to say, they had none. The military, it seems, is more interested that a physician wants the comparably low pay than if they can get along.

Hospitalmen, on the other hand, are by and large awesomely friendly. Marine medics? Even better.

/Just try not to out-drink them
//There are photos of me on a kitchen floor because of that
///My mother took them...
 
2013-06-29 03:26:13 PM
TFA:  We find out what the child likes first and then we broaden as we go.

I like this approach. First get them engaged learning something, anything. It's just more fun to learn stuff you care about. Once a kid learns that learning can be fun, then you show them how the other subjects can be interesting too.

But that kind of learning requires the teacher to know the students very, very well: something on the order of home schooling with its high teacher/student ratio and its extended teacher/student relationship.
 
2013-06-29 03:31:20 PM

Tanukis_Parachute: my 14 yr old is skipping high school (sort of) and going to college next year. it is the dual enrollment program at FAU.


So, sorry if this question sounds sort of elitist but I don't think it's much different from how you view your local schools being inadequate for your gifted kids:

Upon completion of the FAU program, can your kid just kind of treat that as "difficult high school" and then enroll at UF Honors, or maybe go for a full ride at an Ivy-type school?  The reason why I ask this is that I don't see the purpose of moving up the timetable when you can just stick to the standard sequence and just "raise the stakes" so to speak.  If Level X isn't challenging enough at your local institutions, seek out more competitive institutions for Level X instead of replacing it with Level X+1.
 
2013-06-29 04:06:45 PM
Guess Rachel Jeantel's parents missed the memo.
 
2013-06-29 04:12:09 PM

Son of Thunder: They're churchgoing homeschoolers whose kids are succeeding and show no evidence of psychosocial dysfunction.

The haters are going to flock to this thread like seagulls to spilled garbage.


Is this part of your "positive psychology", Oh Professor?
 
2013-06-29 04:20:38 PM

BokerBill: TFA:  We find out what the child likes first and then we broaden as we go.

I like this approach. First get them engaged learning something, anything. It's just more fun to learn stuff you care about. Once a kid learns that learning can be fun, then you show them how the other subjects can be interesting too.

But that kind of learning requires the teacher to know the students very, very well: something on the order of home schooling with its high teacher/student ratio and its extended teacher/student relationship.


Yeah, there's no reason a wealthy family couldn't put 12 years worth of education into 6 or 7 years.  Especially when you've got only four or five students at a time.  The problem is that public schools have to target the median and run a class that doesn't leave anybody behind.  Unfortunately, that makes it difficult to let anybody get ahead either.

And it's not always a good idea.  These kids seem to be doing fine, but they also have a natural, built-in support structure that a lot of students don't have.  It worked for them, but I'd hesitate to push it as a recommended course.
 
2013-06-29 04:46:11 PM
I think they're extra motivated to get away from those horrible names.
 
2013-06-29 04:57:06 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: BarkingUnicorn: If your kids are smart enough not to be little assholes, why should they learn to be little assholes from their peers?

They'll learn how to deal with assholes. That's something that no book, only time, can teach.


Assholes do not teach how to deal with assholes properly.  They teach how to BE assholes, and the joys thereof.

Anyway, home-schooling does not require walling a kid off from his peers 24x7.  It's a way to manage his learning experiences with less risk of harm or acquiring bad habits.  Yes, some parents wall their kids off with disastrous results, but that is not inherent in the home-schooling paradigm.
 
2013-06-29 05:00:48 PM

Aidan: Then at some magic age they resign themselves to learning by book


That's exactly the opposite of what's being claimed in the article. A big part of what they're saying that 1) age is irrelevant 2) not all subjects must advance at the same rate, or in the same way 3) there's no need to be "resigned" to anything, because self-directed learning doesn't require that kind of compromise.

The idea that kids will only "play" and never be interested in doing anything more complex or constructive without strict intervention and rules from adults is the whole concept this family is fighting against. Yes, children benefit from the guidance of more experienced people -- as do adults -- but just like you they're much more likely to learn things they're actually interested in.

Reading is a common example. Reading is definitely an important thing to teach children. But teaching them to read before they want to is frustrating for everyone. Instead you can integrate reading into things they already want to do, and at some point they'll want to read because it will further their own goals. So instead of forcing children to slough through bad stories and hoping they take pride in the abstract achievement of learning to read they can instead read about how to build better sand castles and take pride in achieving their own goals. We see exactly this same behavior in adults, where they learn some trade craft not because it's academically important, but because it furthers their broader goals; we should give children that same opportunity.
 
2013-06-29 05:03:47 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12


Why would you tolerate a society that requires lockstep age-driven advancement in academics in order to be considered well-adjusted? What's so damaging about collegiate study that 12-year-olds can't recover from attending lectures?

We're not talking about situations where children are locked in a room and force to study 18 hours a day. We're talking about situations where children actually have more time to for undirected play, where they are more interested in the things they are learnings about, and where they're not tied to some external advancement schedule. Why would any of that lead them to be less "well-adjusted"?
 
2013-06-29 05:05:52 PM

profplump: Aidan: Then at some magic age they resign themselves to learning by book

That's exactly the opposite of what's being claimed in the article. A big part of what they're saying that 1) age is irrelevant 2) not all subjects must advance at the same rate, or in the same way 3) there's no need to be "resigned" to anything, because self-directed learning doesn't require that kind of compromise.


Yes, that's my point. :) I'm saying that in normal educational settings, kids eventually resign themselves to learning from books (and I should have said from books alone, but I didn't, so my bad). I'm not saying it's necessarily bad or unnatural, but I can argue that a sharp shift away from hands-on to hands-off is not optimal. I'd prefer a more graduated shift. But then I'd also prefer more real-life practice in the classroom, and a pony. :)
 
2013-06-29 05:12:54 PM

Aidan: I'd also prefer more real-life practice in the classroom


That's an oxymoron. We put children in a classroom because it's cheap and convenient, not because it's effective.

My objection is to your use of the word "resign". It's only a resignation if it's a choice made because the preferable alternatives are not available. In schools that's often the case. But it doesn't have to be.
 
2013-06-29 05:29:35 PM

rugman11: Yeah, there's no reason a wealthy family couldn't put 12 years worth of education into 6 or 7 years.  Especially when you've got only four or five students at a time.  The problem is that public schools have to target the median and run a class that doesn't leave anybody behind.  Unfortunately, that makes it difficult to let anybody get ahead either.

And it's not always a good idea.  These kids seem to be doing fine, but they also have a natural, built-in support structure that a lot of students don't have.  It worked for them, but I'd hesitate to push it as a recommended course.


If public schools teach at the median's pace, won't they leave 50% of kids behind?  I think the target is set just above "potato" these days.  (Thanks, GW!)

This family does not seem wealthy.  The only working parent (in a family of 12!) seems to be dad, retired military and a FEMA functionary.  Mom claims to be a physician, but I can't find a word about any practice; I don't believe she could earn any significant money as a doctor will tending 10 kids, let alone home-schooling them.  She sells phone consultations; maybe that's doing well.    Oh, and she writes for "Mormon Times," which is telling but hardly lucrative, I imagine. In any case, she claims to have schooled the kids herself, not hiring expensive tutors.

I don't think "1% wealthy" parents would choose home-schooling.  Much of their kids' career preparation depends upon schmoozing with other rich brats and their families.  (Note that a "career" does not involve productive work, necessarily.)

I really don't know what to make of this extreme outlier family.  They're selling the message that home-schooling is easy for any (two-parent) family and can produce extraordinary results.  Smells like "get rich quick in real estate" seminars.
 
Ral
2013-06-29 05:40:07 PM
One of those kids is named Thunder.

I think this is an important clue to the kinds of people the parents are.
 
2013-06-29 06:09:49 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Assholes do not teach how to deal with assholes properly. They teach how to BE assholes, and the joys thereof.


You don't think it stands to reason that exposure to X is an important part of learning how to deal with X? Yes, one possible outcome is becoming like X, but the two concepts aren't mutually exclusive.

Either way though, I think your argument is more about home schooling. Mine was about early college, regardless of home- or conventional schooling.
 
2013-06-29 06:10:24 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12 (home-schooled or not)?

I don't like those douchebag helicopter parents who hold their kids back so they can have a competitive advantage, but at least they have the right idea.  Accelerating can lead to some botched adults.  Not all of them can turn out like Steve Wolfram.

If your kids are too smart for their classes, then sure, let them take college courses early but mix in some time off with travel and paid or volunteer work. Then send them to college properly at 18.


What better way to raise a child into being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by having them interact with only well-adjusted socialized adults?

Most people get the socialization of children wrong.  You're not raising (most) children to be able to interact with other children...you're raising children INTO adults.  Childhood is such a short period in a person's life.  Why put so much emphasis on interacting with other children when the goal is to be able to interact positively with the peer group you will spend the vast majority of your life interacting with?
 
2013-06-29 06:17:53 PM

profplump: Why would you tolerate a society that requires lockstep age-driven advancement in academics in order to be considered well-adjusted?


Nobody is requiring anything. I'm talking about the way things inherently are, not necessarily how they should be.
 
2013-06-29 06:29:31 PM

SarcasticFark: Why put so much emphasis on interacting with other children when the goal is to be able to interact positively with the peer group you will spend the vast majority of your life interacting with?


I don't believe 12-year-olds can properly relate to adults, but even if they can, good luck getting a bunch of college students to hang out with a 12-year-old.
 
2013-06-29 07:01:39 PM

profplump: Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12

Why would you tolerate a society that requires lockstep age-driven advancement in academics in order to be considered well-adjusted? What's so damaging about collegiate study that 12-year-olds can't recover from attending lectures?

We're not talking about situations where children are locked in a room and force to study 18 hours a day. We're talking about situations where children actually have more time to for undirected play, where they are more interested in the things they are learnings about, and where they're not tied to some external advancement schedule. Why would any of that lead them to be less "well-adjusted"?


Because they will be maladjusted when it comes time for their cube job and their asshole double digit IQ boss.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report