Why "hot-housing" programs that expose children to academics at an early age are being found to cause learning problems, depression, anxiety, and other psychosomatic illnesses later in life.
Why, while hot housing increases academic performance and IQ scores at first, in the "the dreaded fadeout" stage that occurs in later years those advantages are lost.
That many of these hot-housed kids end up being less creative, have a greater need to compare their intelligence to others, develop an inability to work independently, and lose the joy of learning.
How hot-housed kids with especially hard-driving mothers tend to be less innovative than children in nonacademic programs.
Why, during the first seven years of life, free play may be a much more important activity to the developing brain than academics.
Why Jean Marzollo and Janice Loyd say in their book Learning Through Play, "We used to think play and education were opposite things. ... Now we know better."
Why, by ignoring when our children's windows of super-learning opportunity open and close, our educational system may be causing more harm that good.
That all young children have the gift of a type of photographic memory, which is wiped out when they start to read.
That, because children don't get 20/20 vision until they reach 7 years old, we may be starting reading programs way too soon.
That many educators and parents have the misconception that forcing a child to learn to read at a very young age will support him in academics later in life.
That many of today's leaders in business and other fields, such as Charles Schwab and Richard Branson, had reading problems as children.
That if we look at 1,000 tadpoles all born on the same day, we would not expect them all to sprout rear legs and become frogs at the exact same time. But as they pass through the educational system, we expect this perfect timing from our children's brains and genetic plans.
That, because there is a three-year window for normal brain maturation, intelligence tests (like IQ) that use fixed ages to determine normal scores will continually gives false readings.
That, because our learning systems are set up as if all children develop motor, speech, reading, writing, and abstract thinking capacities in lockstep, we label a 3-year-old reader a genius and an 8-year-old non-reader a dunce. When all it means is that the specific window that allows efficient reading opened sooner in the 3-year-old than it did in the 8-year-old.
That, because boys and girls go through different windows of learning opportunity at different times, we need to present specific kinds of information to them at different times.
How some children are pushed so hard to learn that they have nervous breakdowns, like Yo-Yo Ma's older sister, who said she traded her childhood for the violin.
That in an effort to emulate the success of golfer Michelle Wie, parents in China, Korea, and Japan are sending their children off to sport camps at the tender ages or 3 and 4.
That we must remember the ultimate task of parents and educators is to use the relevant science, not to create super children, but instead to nurture their souls by helping them to build meaning and purpose into their lives.
