
13 year old prodigy claims age discrimination by UConn - dmoney
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100325/ap_on_re_us/us_prodigy_study_abroad
======
SlyShy
I was a classmate of Colin's, and I want to emphasize that he is extremely
well adjusted. When he was in high school he struck everyone as a bright--if a
little smaller than usual--high school student. So I'd love to not hear any
"he should go back and play with his age-mates so he can develop social
skills, yadayada." The truth is, 13 year olds are obnoxious, and if I could've
skipped that and started interacting with adults earlier I would've.

~~~
jedberg
I started college when I was 12, and yes, I was more mature than most of my
classmates.

However, I didn't go full time. I still went back to high school. There is
some social learning that you just miss out on if you don't spend time with
your age-peers.

High School sucked, but I'd still do it all over again.

In the best interest of the kid, they should really send him to interact with
some age-peers in some sort of activity, if not High School.

That said, I don't think UConn should be preventing him, especially if his mom
will go at her expense.

~~~
fnid2
Several times during my education, my teachers petitioned the school to
promote me to more advanced grades. They felt my potential was being stunted.
My mother, and sometimes other teachers, thought it would be better to stay
with kids my own age, so I never progressed.

I didn't get _anything_ out of interacting with my age group. I may have been
_worse_ off for it. I was constantly frustrated by my classmates who asked
questions and held up the lesson. We went too slow. I was repeatedly asked to
help other students with their homework and even test questions. I always won
the math contests, spelling bees and the like to the chagrin of students and
even _teachers_ in higher level classes. It created resentment that I faced
when I became their students in later years.

When I went to college, I had APed out of almost every freshman class and went
straight to sophomore level courses in Physics, Mathematics, and Computer
Science. I was never treated differently by the older kids and felt more
comfortable with them. They didn't mind asking me for help even.

So I see little anecdotal evidence that stunting a child's potential to give
them time to interact with kids their own age is beneficial. Really, what does
age have to do with it? As a child, I had better conversations with adults
than with children. As a kindergartner I had better conversations with the
seniors in high school. I went to a school with K-12 in the same building, so
it was easier to interact with older kids, which I much preferred and they
seemed to be quite entertained by me as well, so in retrospect, I think
everyone would have benefited had I been able to progress at my intellectual
rate, rather than the rate at which the earth moves around the sun.

~~~
jedberg
Just to clarify, I wasn't advocating holding the kid back. I was just saying
it is important to have that social interaction with your age-peers,
especially as a teen.

As some anecdotal evidence, take some of my college classmates who also
started early. Most of us went back to high school, but a few just went full
time college. After two years, this one guy wanted to transfer to Cal Tech. He
was more than smart enough, but after the interview, they told him he wasn't
social enough. They suggested to him that he join some youth clubs and get
some social interaction with his peers, and they would reconsider him.

So he joined every club he could find, and it made a _huge_ difference. He was
much easier to talk to and just more fun to be around.

And then he transferred to Cal Tech.

~~~
jerf
"I was just saying it is important to have that social interaction with your
age-peers, especially as a teen."

Why?

No, seriously, step back a moment. Why is it important that I socialize with
high schoolers just because they share the same chronological age? Do you
spend a lot of time interacting with people in a high-school fashion? I sure
don't.

High-school culture is a dead end; it's an artificial construct brought on by
artificial constraints that don't exist in the real world. If high-school
culture is anything, it's a trap; all of use who have been out of it for at
least five years can probably name a group of people who are "still in high
school", to their social and professional detriment.

The only alternative worse than that is no acculturation at all, but that's
not usually what's on the table, and that's a pathological outcome regardless
of how you get there. School culture is just one step up from that, almost
anything else will get you more _real-world_ cultural skills than that.

~~~
ErrantX
In fairness every kid I know (about 6 or 7 I guess) who has been pushed up
several years in school is generally either completely anti-social or
officious and unfriendly (I am being nice here unfortunately). Obviously that
is not a complete metric; but all of them, I am sure, are that way due to a
lack of social proof/interaction at a crucial point in their lives (early
teens).

In this case Colin seems well adjusted and "not a prick" - but there could be
all manner of exterior reasons for that.

It's also wrong, I think, to consider high school as training for adult social
structure; it clearly is nothing like that. But it does teach you some
important things - you face the same issues at the same time as everyone else
(example: all of the kids I saw bumped up several levels were either
incredibly sexist or had serious issues with women. Typical of the kind of
insecurities you face at that age - but when everyone around you has already
dealt with that it is hard to sort out).

> all of use who have been out of it for at least five years can probably name
> a group of people who are "still in high school", to their social and
> professional detriment.

Agreed; however I don't agree that a different way would have produced any
different results. They are stuck there for a variety of reasons - none of
them directly _because_ of the high school culture.

~~~
jerf
In programming, I have found it's very useful to step back and remember _why_
we do things. Unit tests are not intrinsically wonderful, they are a great way
to accomplish certain things. If they don't accomplish those things, dump
them. Just as a concrete example.

If your goal is to produce a well-socialized child, _keep your eyes on the
prize_. You describe some cases where in fact following the suggestion of
leaving them in high school didn't work out; this also matches my experience.
My point here is that actually you _can't_ make a call about whether you
should leave a given person in high school; in the exact same environment, one
will flourish and learn a lot, the other will crash and burn and learn
horribly pathological things.

So, ultimately, my point is that if your goal is to have a "good child"
(without getting into whatever that may mean), debating whether "children"
should or should not be left in school or never accelerated or moved to
college or anything is actually a waste of time, because there is no such
thing as a "children" in the first place.

------
kljhgfvgbn
My university is banning under 18s after several centuries of admitting
brilliant child prodigies. Simply because government rules call for detailed
background checks for anyone working with children. We aren't sure if this
would only apply to a kid's teachers, all teaching staff, all researchers, all
staff or even every other >18year old student they met.

Not joking - there was a case about whether in high school any student who
turned 18 in their final year needed a police check if they helped a still
17yro student with their work and so were 'in a teaching position'

------
arethuza
The university should have told him when he enrolled for the course that some
classes might not be possible because of his age.

"Summer field work" sounds like it could have a marked degree of risk and/or
physical effort required. If that is the case, then I can see that it might
not be a good idea for a kid to do them (regardless of how bright or mature he
is).

~~~
joshfinnie
Right, but replace a 13 year old with a 20 year old in a wheel chair and you
can see where this gets interesting. If it is a requirement for his degree, I
am not sure physical fitness can be used as a determent.

I have to say though, I just finished up a fields method class and they are
not easy. And mine was just in the woods of Connecticut not in Africa.

~~~
badgerbombs
It's different. Just because a 13 year old succeeds academically does not mean
he has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment.

The world will not care what his IQ is and will not treat him as special. He's
a liability in South Africa, full stop. It would take a lot of money and/or
risk to send him, so I support their choice.

~~~
roboneal
So what assessment is made to ensure that any given 18,19,20+ year old " has
the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment"?

That's right, none, but the arbitrary assumption that they are "old enough".

It's just as arbitrary assuming THIS 13-year old is "not capable".

~~~
allenp
There is the difference in legal responsibility of the university. I think
this is probably the biggest stumbling block here - even with parental consent
there is risk to the school.

Imagine facing the newspaper headline "UConn loses 13-year-old prodigy in
South Africa" . . .

~~~
roboneal
Per the article, his mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense...makes
your point kind of moot.

~~~
allenp
How so? He is still participating within the school's program. Just because
his mom signs the field trip slip (or tags along herself) doesn't absolve the
school from any and all responsibility for his well being. What sort of
insurance policy do you think a school needs to fly a 13 year old from
Connecticut to South Africa for a week? How about a 13 year old prodigy?

I'm all for Colin being able to have this experience - I absolutely would have
been thrilled to participate in something like this at any age. I don't think
the school has any obligation to allow him to participate in this activity
however.

~~~
roboneal
If they allowed him to enroll in this field of study but are now limiting his
access to the curriculum, they should have just refused his tuition. That's
the legal obligation.

Did you read the article? She offered to sign an explicit legal waiver and
accompany him on the trip at her own expense?

It appears they family is willing to go to extraordinary lengths to
compromise. If the university would look to "solve" the problem vs. outright
denial - the family would probably pay cost of any "additional insurance"
rider.

------
postfuturist
It's not a question of whether or not age discrimination is going on (as the
title seems to suggest), the question is whether or not the discrimination is
legally justified. The courts will decide that at no small expense to the
family and the university. There is plenty of legal discrimination regarding
minors designed to protect them. You don't really have same rights as other
adults in the US until you turn 18 or (even 21).

In my opinion, the university should allow him to go with the provision that
he is chaperoned by a legal guardian.

~~~
kellishaver
I agree. With his mother willing to sign a waiver releasing the school of any
liability and being willing to go with him, at her own expense, I think they
should allow him to go. Without those two things, I think they're perfectly
justified in saying "no" but with both of those in place, he should be allowed
to go and study.

------
kevinh
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it acceptable to discriminate based on age,
except under the terms of the ADEA, which only protects people >= 40 in the
workplace?

