Freeman or Howe:
Howe et al.s compromise position is consistent with this account,
and they cite Ackermans (1988) explication of it to support their
argument. Hence, their paper does not reject the talent account in
principle but rather rejects the pragmatic value of current methods
of talent-based selection, which, however, doesnt allow them to rule
out the as-yet-unmapped influence of biology on special expertise<
This is true as Howe, accepts that there are biological individual
diffrences, but disagrees with current evidence for the talent acount,
and in a way boths accepts and rejects the talent view.
>In order to refute the logical argument that the asymptote for
performance has to be constrained by unmodifyable components (innate
talents), it would be necessary to identify practice conditions
under which individuals could acquire skills to circumvent basic
innate characteristics (talent) or modify the basic components.
Ericsson and Charness (1994) claimed that the acquisition of expert
performance involved such practice conditions where the performance
attained after years and decades of daily deliberate practice
(Ericsson, Krampe & Tesch-Rmer, 1993) is often mediated by
qualitatively different mechanisms compared to those observed for
everyday skill acquisition. There are, at least, three qualitative
differences between expert performance and everyday skill
acquisition (Ericsson & Lehmann, 1996).<
This is true many examples Howe cites are not exmples of extreme talent
but just of skill. Another author cites the experimental method of
testing the limits were extremes of skill can be tested but first you
must have subjects who are experts, then you may be pre selecting your
subjets on genes giving talent, thus no conclusion could be drawn
Freeman
>The authors cannot find any "firm" evidence of early manifestations
of advanced abilities, which must emerge "in the absence of special
opportunities to learn." (P. 11). However, as all children have some
opportunities it is necessary to look at the strong indications from
very early development. For example, work at the Fels Institute
(Lewis & Michalson, 1985) found that by 2-4 months measured infant
memory could indicate future IQ, early motor development could
predict subsequent physical aptitude, and there are distinct but
related paths of development which are stable over the first three
years of life (Lewis at al, 1986: Lewis and Louis, 1991). The
strongest path, which can be traced from three months, is verbal.
Even newborns who habituate faster are providing indications of
future higher level intelligence (Messer, 1990), and they do have
innate preferences, such as for flavour<
The authors present counter evidence that Howe ignored for early signs.
Showing Howe may have selectiely presented evidence
>This denial of early signs appears to be based on questionnaire
responses from the parents of 257 children selected for a
prestigious school of music: no such signs were recalled. But when I
had carried out similar research at the same school of music on the
parents of 24 children with personal interviews, the parents often
recalled distinct early signs, which was why they had taken trouble
to encourage them (Freeman, 1995)<
Authors also report different results in a replicatrion of Howes
experiment that are not in line with Howes hypothesis
<That early advancement was not sustainable at an outstanding level,
no matter how hard the youngsters worked. In fact, the music school
has been forced to broaden its initially highly focused music
education to accommodate such pupils who discovered that talent is
more than practice and enthusiasm. This also happened in Feldman's
study of 6 boy prodigies (Feldman with Goldsmith, 1986): in spite of
heavy tutoring and practice, their advancement fizzled out<
They also present evidence although autobiographical of instances
were talent fizzled out with practice
Thus they claim untill some firm evidence for either side of the
argument emerges, nothing can be determined. This may be true but the
extreme argument stimulates argument that will eventually discover
the answer.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:23:21 GMT