領譯專欄 | 天才兒童教育

05-16

Educating gifted children

天才兒童教育

Talent shows

「天才選秀」

New research is encouraging a rethink of gifted education

新研究正在鼓勵對天才教育的反思

EVERY year in Singapore 1% of pupils in the third year of primary school bring home an envelope headed 「On government service」. Inside is an invitation to the city-state』s Gifted Education Program. To receive the overture, pupils mustace tests in maths, English and 「generalability」. If their parents accept the offer, the children are taught using a special curriculum.

在新加坡，每年有1%的小學生在小學三年級時帶回家一個信封，打頭寫著「政府服務」，裡面是一封這個城市型國家「天才教育項目」的邀請函。小學生們必須要高分通過數學、英語和能力測試，才能獲此函。如果他們的父母接受該邀請，孩子們就會接受特殊課程計劃。

Singapore』s approach is emblematic of the traditional form of 「gifted」 education, one that uses intelligence tests with strict thresholds to identify children with seemingly innate ability. Yet in many countries it is beingoverhauled in two main ways. The first is that educationists are using a broader range of methods to identify highly intelligent children, especially those frompoor households. The second is an increasing focus on fostering the attitudes and personality traits found in successful people in an array of disciplines—including those who did not ace intelligence tests.

新加坡是傳統「天才教育」的典範，即採用嚴格高門檻的智力測試來鑒別具有某種天賦的孩子。其他國家在模仿過程中做了兩大改造：其一，教育者用更寬泛的方式來鑒別智商兒童，尤其是窮人的孩子。其二，愈發關注孩子們身上體現出的成功人士的特質，包括那些沒有在智力測試中得高分的孩子們。

New research lies behind these shifts. It shows that countries which do not get the most from their best and brightest face big economic costs. The research also suggests that the nature-or-nurture debate is a false dichotomy. Intelligence is highly heritable and perhaps the best predictor of success. But it is far from the only characteristic that matters for future eminence.

基於這些改造人們開展了新研究。它表明，那些沒有挑選到最優秀和最聰明孩子的國家，會面臨巨大的經濟開支。這項研究還表明，關於先天後天決定論的爭論是個二元對立的偽命題。智力具有高度遺傳性，最可能預測孩子未來成功與否，但其於關係到未來卓越成就的特質還相差甚遠。

The study of gifted children goes back at least a century. In 1916 Leta Holling Worth—a psychologist whose doctorate refuted the idea that women struggled at science because of destabilizing menstrual cycles—began some of the earliest research on children with high IQs. Two decades later she started work at the Speyer School in New York City,one of the first schools with a challenging curriculum for these pupils.

關於天才兒童的研究始於一個世紀前。1916年，心理學家勒塔·霍林·沃斯——其博士論文駁斥了女性學理科吃力的原因是因月經周期不穩定所致的觀點——展開了最早的關於高智商兒童的研究。二十年後，她開始在紐約Speyer學校任職，這所學校是第一批專為天才兒童開設挑戰性課程的學校之一。

Like,really smart

真的很聰明

IQ tests have attracted furious criticism. Speaking for the skeptics, Christopher Hitchens, a journalist, argued that: 「There is...an unusually high and consistentcorrelation between the stupidity of a given person and [his] propensity to be impressed by the measurement of IQ.」 Like any assessment, IQ tests are not perfect. But as Stuart Ritchie of the University of Edinburgh points out in 「Intelligence」, researchers in cognitive science agree that general intelligence—not book learning but the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly and so on—is an identifiable and important attribute which can be measured by IQ tests.

智商測試招致了激烈的批評。記者克里斯托弗·希欽斯曾為之辯護：「一個人的愚蠢和他的智商測試給人的印象總是異常緊密且持續聯繫在一起的。」像其他測試一樣，智商測試並不完美。但正如愛丁堡大學的Stuart Ritchie在《Intelligence》一書中指出的那樣，認知科學領域的研究者們認為一般的智力——不是書本學習，而是推理、規劃、解決問題、抽象思維等的能力——是可識別的重要屬性，可以通過智商測試來衡量。

Just how important is suggested by the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY), founded in 1971. Julian Stanley, then a psychologist at Johns Hopkins University, over 25 years recruited 5,000 precocious children, each of whom had intelligence-test scores in early adolescence high enough to gain entry to university.

數學早慧少年研究（縮寫SMPY，建於1971年）認為這些很重要。彼時，約翰斯·霍普金斯大學的心理學家朱利安·斯坦利，在25年間里招募了5000名智力早熟的孩子，他們在青春期早期的智力測試分數，都高到足以進入大學。

Research into how these children did in adulthood has emerged over the past two decades. Of the SMPY participants who scored among the top 0.5% for their age-group in maths and verbal tests, 30% went on to earn a doctorate, versus 1% of Americans as a whole. These children were also much more likely to have high incomes and to file patents.

研究跟蹤了過去二十年間這些兒童在成年後的表現。那些當初在數學和語言測試中排名前0.5%的SMPY參與者中，有30%的人獲得了博士學位，而美國人的這一整體比例為1%。這些人也更有可能擁有高收入和提交專利。

There is variation even among the top scorers (see chart on next page). This runs contrary to the idea, proposed by some psychologists, that there is a ceiling to IQ, after which its influence wanes. Of the top 0.01% of children, 50% went on to earn a PhD, medical or law degree.

甚至在頂尖得分者之間也存在差異(圖表如下)。這與之前心理學家主張的觀點不同——智商有一個上限，那之後其影響力就會變弱。在排名前0.01%的參與者中，有50%的人獲得了博士、醫學或法律學位。

Findings from studies led by Ian Deary of the University of Edinburgh, meanwhile, undermine the idea that gifted children go on to become disproportionately troubled. There are of course exceptions. But on average having a high IQ as a child is associated with better physical and mental health as an adult. Being moved up a school-year, as many are, tends to do them little harm. SMPY pupils who skipped at least one grade were 60% more likely to file patents than those who did not.

與此同時，愛丁堡大學的Ian Deary主持的一項研究結果，削弱了「天才兒童會不同程度陷入麻煩」的觀點。當然也會有例外，但平均而言，一個孩子擁有高智商，意味著成年後身心會更健康。跳級往往對他們沒什麼負面影響。那些至少跳過一級的SMPY參與者提交專利的可能性，比沒有跳過級的高60%。

Officials often cite the SMPY as the inspiration for the creation in 2014 of two specialist maths schools in England. Based on the Kolmogorov School in Moscow, these schools accept only those pupils who excel in maths at exams at age 16. In January the government said it wanted to open more as part of its 「industrial strategy」, a plan to boost Britain』s woeful productivity growth. Linking gifted education to economic growth may horrify some people. But it has long seemed like common sense in countries without many natural resources, such as Singapore.

官員經常引用SMPY，以此為啟發於2014年在英國開辦了兩所專業數學學校。以莫斯科的Kolmogorov學校為藍本，兩校只接受16歲數學考試中表現優異的學生。今年1月，英國政府表示希望開辦更多類似的學校，作為其「工業戰略」的一部分，這一計劃旨在提高英國糟糕的生產增長率。將天才教育與經濟增長掛鉤可能會讓人感到恐懼，但在自然資源匱乏的國家如新加坡，這似乎是一種長期以來的共識。

Sadly, however, the potential of poor bright children is often wasted. In December Raj Chetty of Stanford University and colleagues published a paper lamenting 「lost Einsteins」. They found that children who score in the top 5% of standardized tests in the third year of primary school are many times more likely than the other 95% to file patents in later life. But the likelihood is still much greater among smart kids from rich families.

然而遺憾的是，窮人家的聰明孩子，他們的潛力往往荒廢了。去年12月，斯坦福大學的Raj Chetty和他的同事發表了一篇論文，痛惜「丟失的愛因斯坦們」。他們發現，在小學三年級的標準化考試中排名前5%的孩子，比其他95%的孩子在未來提交專利的可能性要高出許多倍。但這種可能性對來自富裕家庭的聰明孩子來說還是會更大。

Philippe Aghion of the London School of Economics and colleagues found similar results in Finland. Those with high IQs but from poor backgrounds were especiallyat risk of not fulfilling their potential. That is not only unfair. It also implies that a lot of talent, which could have been harnessed to cure diseases or design better toasters, is being squandered.

倫敦經濟學院的Philippe Aghion和他的同事在芬蘭也發現了類似的結果。智商高但背景不佳的人尤其有可能無法發揮自己的潛力。這不僅不公平，同時也意味著，許多原本可以用來治病或研發出更好的烤麵包機的人才被埋沒了。

There are many reasons why poor-but-smart children struggle. Yet gifted schemes have often not helped. When applications are voluntary, they come mostly from rich or pushy parents. In New York City, for example, tutoring companies often charge $200 per hour to help four-year-olds prepare for admissions tests for gifted education programs starting in kindergarten. Tutoring may temporarily bump up scores by only a few points, but that can make all the difference. In 2015 70% of pupils admitted to such programs were white or Asian, though they represent just 30% of the school-age population.

貧窮但聰明的孩子們成長艱難的原因有很多。不過當前的天才計劃往往幫不上忙。當申請是自願的，他們多來自富裕家庭或虎爸虎媽。以紐約的輔導機構為例，通常會收取每小時200美元的培訓費用，以幫助那些4歲大的孩子們從幼兒園就開始準備天才教育項目的入學考試。輔導可能會使分數暫時提高几分，但這會帶來大不同。2015年被這些類似項目錄取的學生中，70%是白人或亞裔，儘管他們只佔學齡總人口的30%。

It helps when schools test every child, rather than rely on parents to put children forward. In a paper from 2015, economists David Card and Laura Giuliano found that when a school district in Florida introduced universal screening for its gifted education scheme, admissions increased by 180% among poor children, 130% among Hispanics and 80% for black pupils. (Admissions among white children fell.)

如果是學校對每個孩子都進行測試，而不是依靠父母來推動孩子進步，天才計劃就會有用。在2015年的一篇論文中，經濟學家David Card和Laura Giuliano發現，當佛羅里達州的一個學區對其天才教育計劃實行全體篩選時，貧困兒童的入學人數增加了180%，拉美裔學生增加了130%，非裔學生增加了80%。(白人兒童的入學率下降了。)

Some programs go further. Miami-Dade, America』s fourth-largest school district, uses universal screening. It has a lower IQ threshold for poor children or those for whom English is a second language, so long as they show other signs of promise, such as learning English quickly or high scores in other tests. In Miami-Dade 6.9% of black pupils are in the gifted program, versus 2.4% and 3.6% in Florida as a whole and nationwide respectively.

還有些項目走得更遠。美國第四大學區邁阿密-戴德，採用了全體學生篩選。對於貧困生或者英語是第二語言的人來說，只要他們表現出一些其他潛能的跡象，比如快速學習英語或者在其他測試中獲得高分，智商測試門檻會降低一些。在邁阿密-戴德，6.9%的非裔學生進入天才項目，在佛羅里達和在全美，這一比例分別為2.4%和3.6%。

In America 48 out of 50 states have programmes for brainy children, but in the decade before 2013, 24 redefined them, typically ditching the 「gifted」 label in favor of 「high-ability」. Today no state relies on a single IQ score to select students. In his book 「Ungifted」 Scott Barry Kaufman of the University of Pennsylvania calls this a 「huge change from just 20 years ago」. European countries have seen similar shifts.

美國50個州中有48個州為聰明的孩子們提供了這種項目，但截止到2013年的過去十年間，有24個州重新定義了它們，通常是放棄「天才」的標籤，轉而傾向「高能」。如今沒有一個州單純依賴智商測試來選學生。賓夕法尼亞大學的斯科特·巴里·考夫曼在他的著作《絕非天賦》中稱，這是「20年間的巨大變化」。歐洲國家也出現了類似的轉變。

School districts are also testing for other attributes, including spatial ability (ie, the capacity to generate, manipulate and store visual images). Jonathan Wai, a psychologist, notes that spatial ability as a child is strongly linked to achievement in science and technology in later life. The Finnish study also found this. But it is less correlated with income during childhood than are verbal and mathematical scores. So testing for it gives talented poor children a better chance to shine, says Mr Wai.

學校也在測試其他能力特質，包括空間能力(即生成、操作和存儲視覺圖像的能力)。心理學家喬納森?韋指出，兒童的空間能力與日後的科技成就密切相關。一項芬蘭的研究也發現了這一點。但與語言和數學成績相比，空間能力與其孩童期的家庭收入的相關性要低一些。韋說，因此測試這一點，能給有才華的窮人孩子一個更好的機會讓自己凸顯。

The power of persistence

堅持的力量

Other researchers worry, though, that no matter how good the selection process, relying only on measures of intelligence will fail to find children with the potential to excel in adult life. Psychologists such as Mr Kaufman argue that there are many more possible paths to success in adulthood than often assumed, and that education must do more to foster attributes such as passion, determination and creativity.

然而，其他研究人員擔心，無論挑選過程有多好，僅依賴智力測試，仍難以發現成年後能成功潛力的兒童。像考夫曼這樣的心理學家認為，成年後通向成功的路徑比通常認為的要多得多，而且必須有更多的教育投入到諸如激情、決心和創造力等特質的培養上。

Whether termed 「grit」, 「task-motivation」 or 「conscientiousness」, more psychologists are emphasizing the role of persistence. 「As much as talent counts, effort counts twice,」 writes Angela Duckworth of the University of Pennsylvania, in 「Grit」, published in 2016. For Anders Ericsson of Florida State University,deliberate practice over a long period (popularly understood as 10,000 hours) is critical.

無論遣詞為「堅毅」、「任務導向」還是「認真盡責」，更多心理學家都在強調堅持不懈的作用。賓夕法尼亞大學的安吉拉·達克沃斯在其2016年出版的《堅毅》一書中寫道：「天賦固然重要，努力是其兩倍重要。」對於佛羅里達州立大學的Anders Ericsson而言，長期刻意練習(即為人熟知的1萬小時定律)是至關重要的。

Such statements are simplistic. But few researchers disagree with the idea that talent requires development, and that should involve promoting hard work as well as intelligence. Gifted programs from Singapore』s to England』s specialist maths schools make it a priority to help children pursue their passion. Roboticsprodigies, for example, may be given the opportunity to shadow university students.

這樣的言論有點過分簡化。但幾乎沒有研究者反對「天賦需要發展」的觀點，且需要勤奮工作和智力。從新加坡到英國的專業數學學校，天才項目都會將幫孩子尋找熱情所在放在首位。例如，可以給機器人天才提供PK掉大學生的機會。

There is evidence that aspects of gifted education should influence education more broadly. Project Bright Idea, developed at Duke University, saw 10,000 typical nursery and primary-school pupils taught using methods often reserved for brainier kids—fostering high expectations, complex problem-solving and cultivating meta-cognition (or 「thinking about thinking」). Nearly every one of them went on to do much better on tests than similar peers.

天才教育應在各個方面更廣泛地影響教育。杜克大學開發的「聰明計劃」見證了1萬名典型的幼兒園和小學生，採用了針對大腦更聰明的孩子使用的教學法——培養高期望值、解決複雜問題的能力和培養元認知(即「思考思考過程本身」)，幾乎每個人在測試中都比類似的同齡人做得好得多。

Some researchers go further. Carol Dweck of Stanford University emphasizes children』s 「mindset」 (the beliefs they have about learning). Children who think they can change their intelligence have a 「growth mindset」, she says. Those who believe they cannot do much to change their 「D」 grades have a 「fixed」 one. According to Ms Dweck, children who adopt the first mindset quickly start to do better in tests.

一些研究更進了一步。斯坦福大學的Carol Dweck強調兒童的「思維模式」(對學習的信念)。她說，那些認為自己智商可以改變的孩子擁有「成長心態」，那些認為沒法改變自己糟糕成績的人則是「固化心態」。根據德韋克女士的說法，第一種思維模式下的孩子在考試中會提升更快。

Teaching methods that draw on Ms Dweck』s work are now found in schools across Britain and America. The World Bank is running trials of the approach in countries such as Peru. One technique, for example, might see a pupil told to add the word 「yet」 to their statements, as in 「I can』t do long-division—yet.」

基於Dweck女士研究成果中發現的教學方法，英國和美國的學校都在進行嘗試。世界銀行也正在秘魯等國進行試驗。例如，有一種技巧，讓學生把「yet」這個單詞添加到他們的語句中，比如，「我-還-不能做長期的區分」。

However, a recent meta-analysis suggests that interventions based on growth- mindset are less effective than their hype implies. The study suggests that the effects of interventions drawing on the idea have no effect on the typical student』s outcomes and at best a small effect on those of poorer students. Other psychologists have struggled to replicate Ms Dweck』s results.

然而，最近的一項綜合分析表明，基於成長心態的教學干預並沒有其宣傳的那麼有效。研究顯示，其介入效果對典型學生沒有效果，在基礎薄弱的學生身上效果也不大。其他的心理學家努力複製Dweck女士的研究結果。

The idea that intelligence is highly malleable also jars with research on itsheritability. Studies led by Robert Plomin of King』s College London suggest thatroughly 50% of the variance in IQ scores is due to genetic differences. These findings do not dismiss the role of nurture; hard work and social backgroundmatter. But they undermine the idea that supreme intelligence can simply be willed into being.

智力的高度可塑性也與其遺傳性觀點相齟齬。倫敦國王學院Robert Plomin主持的研究表明，約50%的智商差異是由於基因差異造成的。這些發現並沒能否認後天培養的作用；努力工作和社會背景都很重要。但他們動搖了人們認為高智力可以輕鬆獲得的觀點。

A broader approach to gifted education ensures that more children reach their potential. But the evidence suggests that, so long as they are open to everyone, IQ tests still have a vital role to play. To find lost Einsteins, you have to look for them.

天才教育方法更廣泛的應用，可以確保更多的孩子發揮他們的潛能。但證據表明，如每個人都能獲得這樣的教學方法，智商測試仍會起到關鍵作用。想要發現失去的愛因斯坦，你必須先尋找他們。

領譯/陌白

編輯/Sakura

英文素材來源/TE 2018-03-24