2016 Child Genius

[loobylou]

Has anyone else seen this year's series? I had missed it entirely but happened to catch it earlier this week and have been catching up today.
After last year's - where they seemed much more reasonable - it seems to me we are back to crazy helicopter parenting
I really really want to know if anyone on this forum knows the family with Curtis and Sophia. As he's at Habs and they live in N London, there must be someone here who knows them a bit... I'd love to know whether Habs has welcomed them with open arms or rolling eyes

[ToadMum]

Has anyone else seen this year's series? I had missed it entirely but happened to catch it earlier this week and have been catching up today.
After last year's - where they seemed much more reasonable - it seems to me we are back to crazy helicopter parenting
I really really want to know if anyone on this forum knows the family with Curtis and Sophia. As he's at Habs and they live in N London, there must be someone here who knows them a bit... I'd love to know whether Habs has welcomed them with open arms or rolling eyes

DH has just admitted to having seen a review - and obviously didn't mention it to me, in case I went and downloaded it . I have now, to catch up with as soon as DD and DS2 have cleared off to Jamboree tomorrow, albeit with trepidation, given your opinion that last year's lot were 'much more reasonable'

[loobylou]

DH has just admitted to having seen a review - and obviously didn't mention it to me, in case I went and downloaded it . I have now, to catch up with as soon as DD and DS2 have cleared off to Jamboree tomorrow, albeit with trepidation, given your opinion that last year's lot were 'much more reasonable'

I confess I can't remember all of last year but the boy who won was sweet wasn't he? This year there isn't one whom you'd want to win (imo) - although to be fair some of the children seem pleasant enough but it's very much despite their parents rather than because of them.
Do come back and let me know when you've watched them!!

[mad?]

I agree Loobylou, although apart from Mog's parents, who I thought were beautifully un-pushy if a little simperlingly indulgent. There are at least two sets of parents whose behaviour I would certainly consider to be abusive. Not to self, turn the dam thing off!!!

[ToadMum]

Have now watched the first one (fortified by methi gosht, a glass of Cobra and a complimentary Bailey's - we are currently a full complement of family plus one of DS1's university friends, every corner of the house is occupied by Jamboree stuff or rejected Jamboree stuff, and the expense of a visit to one of our friendly local Indian restaurants was well worth the relief of not having to cook or wash up. Or find somewhere to put plates and glasses down in between ).

Never mind the kids or their parents, Richard Osman making himself out to be a dunce every five minutes is getting a bit wearing . Or did he fulfil an 'EE' offer from Cambridge and go on to graduate with a pass degree?

[ConfusedFather]

I find the show irritating. They edit it for maximum drama, cutting the "boring" bits. As a result, we only got introduced to a girl who matched Mog only in the last show. Why only now?? Because she is normal and her parents too???
They highlight the most quirky children, or rather parents, rather than show it like a quizz show and see how each kid perform.

And I agree, one of the parents was pushy in an unhealthy way. He kept saying how "I" would win rather than "my son" or "we". At least the South African dad was pushy and ambitious, but he clearly was doing it from his son's point of view.

[Stroller]

The format is well-known. Anybody who brings their child to it must welcome the limelight. I don't consider it suitable viewing for primary school kids. I would never consent to participation.

No way does it identify "the brightest child" either - just the most bomb-proof little pony whose stable was willing to race. The bomb-proof pony wording was used somewhere else on the forum about 11+ candidates, but the pressure of the 11+ is insignificant compared to allowing your child, family and home to be captured on national TV for the entertainment of others. For what? The downside is clear to anyone with half a brain.

[Guest55]

No amount of money would entice me to watch this programme. In my opinion it is close to child cruelty to 'throw' your child into this bear-pit.

[Amber]

No amount of money would entice me to watch this programme. In my opinion it is close to child cruelty to 'throw' your child into this bear-pit.

+1

I have to confess to being someone who has to ask how to turn the telly on every time I do it, as I do it so rarely, but what I read here makes me wonder what we have come to. I don't 'get' reality TV at all and especially 'vote 'em off' shows, but this sounds like a new low. What will become of children whose parents parade them like this? It is awful; very sad.

With the caveat that I have never seen it but don't intend to either.

ETA I have just read about a programme where people take all their clothes off and then choose (by looking at their bodies) who to date. Perhaps this Child Genius thing isn't so bad after all!

[JaneEyre]

Here is an excerpt of an article which shows how a group of low-achieving pupils’ demeanour changes once they have understood that intelligence is not only innate:

Life Sciences is a health-science magnet school with high aspirations but 700 students whose main attributes are being predominantly minority and low achieving. Blackwell split her kids into two groups for an eight-session workshop. The control group was taught study skills, and the others got study skills and a special module on how intelligence is not innate. These students took turns reading aloud an essay on how the brain grows new neurons when challenged. They saw slides of the brain and acted out skits. “Even as I was teaching these ideas,” Blackwell noted, “I would hear the students joking, calling one another ‘dummy’ or ‘stupid.’ ” After the module was concluded, Blackwell tracked her students’ grades to see if it had any effect.
It didn’t take long. The teachers—who hadn’t known which students had been assigned to which workshop—could pick out the students who had been taught that intelligence can be developed. They improved their study habits and grades. In a single semester, Blackwell reversed the students’ longtime trend of decreasing math grades.
The only difference between the control group and the test group were two lessons, a total of 50 minutes spent teaching not math but a single idea: that the brain is a muscle. Giving it a harder workout makes you smarter. That alone improved their math scores.

Here is the article ( a bit long, sorry , but it is rather interesting ):
http://nymag.com/news/features/27840/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;