I was googling about this topic and one of the results was a thread here on AAC. And big surprise, I'm the one who started it over 10 years ago. So this is something I've been pondering for a decade but would still like to discuss for better understanding; 10 years pondering - I guess that's the epitome of "slow thinking."

This came to the forefront of my mind because two of my kids were just tested for the GT (Gifted/Talented) program at school and the results illustrate this. As parents, we know our kids; we know which of them is a morning person and which is not, which is most likely to win a beauty pageant, which has more friends, etc. We know which ones are more intelligent.

Or do we? How do you define intelligence? Speed is a component, I think. Both my kids got into the GT program but the one I consider "more intelligent" didn't do as well on the test as the other one because she didn't finish it; she ran out of time. She is like me; brain like a giant flywheel. Takes forever to get up to speed but once it's there it's unstoppable. If someone asks me a question while I'm deep in thought, I have a hard time downshifting and changing mental directions. For kicks, wife times the lull between when she asks me a question and when I respond. Sometimes it takes as much as 10 seconds.

My "slow smart" daughter is the same way. She gets in trouble for "ignoring" instructions sometimes but I feel for her; that's simply how long it takes the instructions to filter through the chaos into the processor. And once she gets started talking about something, she can't stop until she gets it all out. If conversation were an automotive "Moose Test" and interruptions the moose, she would slam into the moose every time and just keep going straight. Then at the end, ask if she hit the moose.

I say that my "slow smart" kid is smarter because of her interests and the nature of the questions she asks, among other things. She can tell you how a flywheel stores energy and ask how a battery does the same, while my "quick smart" kid will tell you about a funny cat video she saw and ask you something about Harry Potter as if you've read the books more times than she has.

So I'm wondering to what extent these aptitude tests do, or should, reflect "intelligence." I feel that "slow smart" had an unfair disadvantage; she should have been given more time. But the other side of my head argues that speed is a component of intelligence and complaining about needing more time is no different than complaining that the questions should be easier. I honestly don't know where I stand on this.

It's been my experience that speed isn't as much an issue in the real world as it is in an educational setting. Maybe that's only because I found (put) myself in roles that suited my abilities. But in the real world I am rarely literally racing the clock in the same way as a timed test. If I need more time, I take more time. It may come at the expense of sleep and family time, but I get the job done, and I come up with better solutions than most others.

So, what's your opinion (don't worry about my feelings) - is "slow smart" really just, "not that smart?" Is "slow smart" really more about determination than innate intelligence (ex: Tesla vs Edison)?

 

Ironman, God of irony, hath weighed in. I'm not sure how to interpret his input, but look what was waiting on the floor for me when I came out from typing the OP. What 8 y/o girl does this?

 

Now that you mention it, I must be a "smart but slow" person too.
At the dinner conversation table, I am always one conversation behind with my responses. My family knows me well enough and they just smile and put up with my tardiness.

I remember in my 1st year Chemistry final, I should have aced it. But my over abundance of knowledge got in the way. I spent too much time answering the first 20 easy questions which I should have completed in less than 30 minutes. Then I ran out of time answering the remaining four longer questions, each of which was worth the same 20% marks as all of the first 20 questions.

Let's say I have poor time management skills. My latest motto is: "Why do today what you can put off for tomorrow?"

 

As a parent I like to view my role as an enabler, not as a director. It is tempting to listen to smart people who try to blow smoke in your ear, but the person you should be listening to is definitely your children. Trying to make them do something they do not want to do or are unsuited for doing is the road to perdition. Trust me on this they will be just fine.

 

Now that you mention it, I must be a "smart but slow" person too.
At the dinner conversation table, I am always one conversation behind with my responses. My family knows me well enough and they just smile and put up with my tardiness.

Exactly! I'm sure I'm a treat to have along at meetings at work, as I'm always rewinding the meeting to something that was said 3 topics ago. Nobody seems to really mind it, because almost always when I do that, I'm pointing out something that really did need to be revisited and the consensus that was reached was premature, so after my input there is a new (different) consensus; it just would have been more convenient for everyone if I had brought it up when it was the active topic. But, they know me... And they know that about an hour after meeting there will be an email from me with all my latent thoughts from the last few topics.

 

As a parent I like to view my role as an enabler, not as a director. It is tempting to listen to smart people who try to blow smoke in your ear, but the person you should be listening to is definitely your children. Trying to make them do something they do not want to do or are unsuited for doing is the road to perdition. Trust me on this they will be just fine.

I don't disagree you but what are you referring to? The GT program?

If so, I didn't force them into it. Both their teachers independently approached me about it, and I told them about it, and they decided it was something they wanted to try. So they took the tests and were accepted.

 

I don't disagree you but what are you referring to? The GT program?

If so, I didn't force them into it. Both their teachers independently approached me about it, and I told them about it, and they decided it was something they wanted to try. So they took the tests and were accepted.

I was speaking more generally about how some parents may approach the news. Not all parents, but some parents, and in those cases the results may not be what they expect.

 

​

 

I've got 4, with one getting married this week. Interesting subject but I've always been reluctant give more than casual opinions about others kids so I won't start now.

 

I've got 4, with one getting married this week. Interesting subject but I've always been reluctant give more than casual opinions about others kids so I won't start now.

Well I was less asking about my kids specifically and more about the whole idea of "smart but slow."

 

View attachment 291332​

I am automatically suspicious of Einstein quotes on the internet so I look them up when I see them. I can't find this one cited anywhere but it is shared by a number of quote repositories and seems fairly likely to be something he said.

I found discussions about Einstein earlier when googling this topic and it seems he didn't have a reputation for being "quick." I have a hunch that he wouldn't be very good at battle rap, which is something that I think requires the kind of quick thinking on the opposite end of the spectrum from where I am. That, improv comedy, car salesman, etc.

I am curious to hear more about, or from, quick thinkers. I read something from an educator on another site who said that the ones who finish tests first; while they arrive at the answer faster than others, arrive at their best answer in that time, and don't do any better if they force themselves to take more time. This is something I've wondered about; if I'm just slow, and anyone else with the same experience could do the same things I do as well as I do them, if they spent as much time on them as I do. Or if they would do it faster but not as well.

 

So I'm wondering to what extent these aptitude tests do, or should, reflect "intelligence."

The good ones do. They're carefully designed and studied to do so. Scores on such tests correlate well with later life performance - salary, health, longevity, etc. They are far from perfect in their predictive value, however. I mean they're great for talking about populations but not so useful at the level of the individual. A persistent and cheerful person with a 90 IQ may go much farther in life than the lazy mope with a 110 IQ. The naysayers always complain that the tests don't measure other aspects of "intelligence", but it's been shown over and over that any measure you can think of to measure "intelligence" will in fact correlate with IQ (as measured by a standard test) and that IQ is the superior measure.

It's been my experience that speed isn't as much an issue in the real world as it is in an educational setting.

Definitely. In the real world, the right answer isn't known at the outset. You need to spend a lot of time figuring out how to get to an answer, but then also how to check it and validate it. And how to distrust everything. The fresh-out-of-college types will jump to a quick answer per their learning but will stumble when reality is a factor. The slow-but-steady practitioner has seen some black swans up close and knows better than to rush. Doing it right but a little slower is much more effective than fast-but-wrong. This was a constant source of irritation throughout my career, though, when managers would get all worked up about goosing the monthly numbers. To hell with next year. As a lifer employee, that always bugged me.

So, what's your opinion (don't worry about my feelings) - is "slow smart" really just, "not that smart?" Is "slow smart" really more about determination than innate intelligence (ex: Tesla vs Edison)?

I think people will always be different, and most will do fine unless they try to be the square peg trying to fit in a round hole. Parents can use their mile-high perspective to nudge their children towards activities where they may find more fun and success, and not pressure them to work for goals that may not be attainable. Show them variety and encourage them to make their own decisions or at least to learn HOW to make decisions. Our current culture allows kids to sort of float along without thinking much about taking control over their lives to become true adults.

 

Regarding fast vs slow. When I was a young undergrad getting a math degree one of the profs talked about this. He made the point that British mathematicians were noted for their slowness but had nevertheless come up with spectacular results. Isaac Newton for example. I took that message to heart and I think it helped a lot over the years. One more thing about Newton was that some of his best work, calculus anyone? was done while in exile to the countryside while the plague was ravishing London. I wondered if Covid might have such a good effect when kids were kept home from school. Observing my high school aged grandson I was sorely disappointed. But he did become proficient in internet stuff. He spent all day everyday on his phone! Sigh.