Cambridge University and the Twenty Year Delay.

Cambridge University is famous the world over. It has inspired an untold number of books and films set in its idyllic surroundings – yet, is it an inspiration to actually go there, study there and be there for three years? Does Cambridge University have a positive effect on a life?

I am moved to write of this now, because of a thought that is never too far from my mind: life is brief and sudden and the one thing none of us know about it, is its length. If I did not write of this, it might forever go unwritten and never be known. That is something I cannot let happen. So, today, I have decided to write of Cambridge University’s effect on my life path – well, one of those effects. I write knowing that very few people will read of it, here, and it will still largely go unknown, even so – however, it shall serve the purpose of making a record of these thoughts, so that they are to be found, in the world, should anyone choose to look for them.

I went up to Cambridge with such high expectation – and perhaps, in fact, that was part of the problem. I expected to be surrounded by enlightened, intelligent, lively minds with humane outlooks and understanding personalities, informed by premature wisdom. I thought they would be the best of the best. Sadly, they weren’t like that at all. There was relatively little of any of these characteristics present – or at least not to the degree I sought. They were not as bright as I had hoped and many tended to be rather conformist and intolerant of difference. In fact, they exhibited an exaggeration of the negative characteristics I had observed in colleagues at school: a narrowness of mind, that liked to exclude anything or anyone that didn’t match their rather limited range of expectations. Yet, I am not here to write of the students, even though many of them were disappointing, in some ways. I am here to write of the institution itself, and its staff.

Firstly, there is the legend that Cambridge has good teachers. I don’t know how this impression ever took hold, because very few of the lecturers I had, were decent teachers. Some of them were truly appalling. One, in particular, has never been forgotten. He “taught” Physical Chemistry, using blueprint style preprinted overheads, which he would flash up before a lecture hall filled with hundreds of people and point at a dense mass of mathematical equations and say: “As you can see, this implies that”, as he pointed to the top and bottom line, without explanation or introduction of what, actually any of it was about. He never gave any indication of what any of the symbols represented or what, in fact, was being communicated by the equations. At times like this, I would look around the lecture hall and see what I expected to see: a sea of incomprehending faces. If any of these people were to work out what was being discussed they would have to do all the work themselves. The lecturer was not going to be of any help at all.

I remember another occasion, years later, in a Philosophy of Science lecture when a very earnest and intelligent young man came to me after the lecture and asked: “Did you understand any of that?”

“Yes.”, I said, because I had.

He looked most discomfited, because it was clear that he hadn’t – even though I knew from conversations with him, that he was very intelligent.

What perhaps, I should have said, is that I approached his lectures with a very open mind and let all his words fall upon my mind. There they would link up and form meaning, or be pieced together as one great puzzle, until all became clear. The only reason I understood that lecturer's work was because of my own peculiar approach to listening, not because of any communicative skill on the part of the lecturer. Then again, of course, I may have been seeing my own meanings in his work and not the ones he had intended.

The truth was, of course, that the lecturer was extremely opaque and he did not talk in a way designed to convey understanding. He spoke as if in a private language, of immense complexity. Looking back, it is possible he had some innate disorder that affected his ability to communicate – because he was inherently very bad at it.

At Cambridge, bad lecturers were much more common than good ones – at least in the sciences. They were bad in two primary ways: they did not know how to communicate well – and they were very dull to listen to.

Those failings, however, are minor compared to the ones that bothered me more deeply about Cambridge.

There were two other aspects that troubled me. Firstly, whenever I showed creativity or enthusiasm, in my written work, I invariably was greeted with great hostility, by the academic staff. It appeared that creativity deeply offended them, perhaps by sparking some envy of some kind. I found it most unnerving to be welcomed so, each and every time I showed a creative response to an assignment. So unpleasant were the reactions I received, which varied from being reported, by “Dr Robert Lee Kilpatrick” for writing an essay of “inappropriate length” (for which I had to see a disciplinary committee!), to my essay being screwed up into a ball, by Dr. Barbara Politynska, who didn’t like its thesis. These were deeply scarring experiences. They made me understand that to express my inner thoughts, on any subject, would only be to court a hostile reaction. The effect on me was stark: I didn’t really want to be there anymore. This was a place that loathed creativity. It was a suffocating feeling, actually – for I could not, thereafter fully express what I thought, without knowing that it would be unwelcome. Cambridge, I learned, was a place for intellectual conformists – at least, at the undergraduate level, in the subjects I studied. Anyone with the merest spark of creativity, was definitely unwelcome.

Then there was another side: the plagiarists. Cambridge had those, too – both among the staff and among the students. One staff member, some of whose work was derived from something I said to him, was Nick J Mackintosh, a Psychology Professor, at Cambridge. He wrote an entire book based on something I said to him – of course, he didn’t acknowledge his original source, at all. I will tell that tale, in another post, to give it, its due. Another person who plagiarized some of my thoughts, appears to be Marc Quinn, the British “artist” – for some of his most striking works are simply embodiments of things I said to the editor of a magazine at Robinson College Cambridge (the Bin Brook), about my own work, in the presence of several other students who had not been introduced. Marc Quinn was a student at Robinson College (my college). Again, I will give the full tale another day, to give it fair space.

Anyway, the weight of all these experiences was truly disheartening. It did something I could never have expected it to do: it put me off pursuing a career in science, altogether. So, even though I had been a physicist at the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, Middx, before going up to Cambridge, after Cambridge, I wanted nothing more to do with science. So, for twenty years, I did just that: I avoided science and did other things.

Slowly, my feelings on the matter of science, healed. What really accelerated the healing was Ainan. Working with my son on his passion for science, reawakened my own and reminded me what I had so enjoyed before Cambridge put me off. So, after a twenty year delay, I returned to science and started doing research into Psychology. I am now a Senior Lecturer in Psychology at HELP University, Kuala Lumpur, focusing on research.

I know this: had I never gone to Cambridge, it is likely that I would never have been put off working in science. It is likely that there would never have been a twenty year delay before returning to science. Thus, going to Cambridge, far from “advancing my career”, as I had expected, cost me twenty years work as a scientist.

My experience at Cambridge, really colours my view, now, as to what is a suitable place for Ainan to study at. There is no way I would subject him to Cambridge, for instance. I look, now, not for brand names, in Universities – but for a friendly welcoming culture and good teaching. I see no attraction in any institution whose culture resembles the Cambridge I knew. In a way, this is a blessing, for guided by what I went through, I am now seeking to ensure that Ainan never has to suffer similarly. So, some good can come of it, at least, that is my hope.

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page. To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 4, this month, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here: http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

An alternative to AWARE's war.

Presently, the women's advocacy group, AWARE, in Singapore is engaged in what amounts to a civil war - or perhaps a hostile takeover.

As any Singaporean reader will know, but no overseas reader would...AWARE has recently been hijacked by what appears to be an organized group of outsiders, who have moved in, and elected themselves into the positions of authority in AWARE. Basically, they have taken over the show...although none of them has a history of volunteering or working with AWARE before. Another issue to note is that they seem mainly to be associated with a Christian fundamentalist Church and to be strongly anti-gay. AWARE had previously spoken up on behalf of all women, gay or not. That non-discriminatory stance now appears to be in danger.

From what I understand, there is now a war on, at AWARE...and a dirty war it is too. The "old guard" and the new are fighting...and the incomers are doing everything they can - including such moves as changing the locks on the offices, to make life difficult for the old guard.

There is shortly to be an EGM at which a vote of no confidence has been called, in an attempt to thwart the incomers.

At this stage, it cannot be determined whether the incomers, led by Josie Lau the new President and Thio Su Mien (the ostensible puppeteer in the background, pulling the strings), will win out and push out the old guard for good. Perhaps, at the EGM, the new guard will be ousted. We will see.

I have, however, a suggestion to the losers: start a new organization. There is no need to fight over AWARE. The old guard, who say they believe in standing up for women, of all situations, and the new guard, who mainly seem to stand for stamping out lesbianism, clearly have incompatible views of how AWARE should be run. Clearly, they cannot work together. Were both groups to remain as part of AWARE, no work would be done, for all would be fighting each other. The answer is to split off and form a new organization. If the old guard lose, they can simply take their ideals and their experience elsewhere and set up a new organization, for themselves, with a constitution that doesn't allow outsiders a vote, or the ability to take it over.

The same applies to the new guard. If they strongly believe in something (other than a fundamentalist Christian God and gay bashing), then they can set up their own organization if they lose. However, I foresee one problem with this: the approach of the new guard seems to suggest that their primary interest is in suffocating the voice that AWARE represents, rather than expressing their own voice. So, perhaps, the new guard at least, wants control of AWARE precisely so as to snuff out that voice. The new guard would not be happy then, just starting a new organization, because that would not snuff out the voice they want silenced.

My suggestion, though, at least works for the old guard, who do have a voice they want represented. They can simply take that voice elsewhere and re-establish themselves. If they lose the vote, they should most certainly do this.

I don't know how AWARE is funded...but it would be interesting to see which way their natural funding will flow: will it follow the old guard, or flow to the new?

In my eyes, starting a new organization to embody the other voice, is an ideal solution. It is one that prevents a war and provides a peaceful solution.

The irony of this is that AWARE's strength was its weakness. In being open to all, they allowed outsiders to come in and hijack their organization. If they had been a more closed, less accessible organization, this could never have happened. Perhaps, unfortunately, they should give up some of their openness, should they reform and create a body that cannot be taken over, to maintain the voice that they wish to express.

I wish those who are sincere in what they wish to say, in all of this, the opportunity to be heard.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

The gifted and the future of society

The future of a community and a society may be measured easily: simply ask how do they treat their most gifted?

It is an undeniable fact that almost all human advance depends on a few creative individuals. Without the input of these individuals, little new would actually occur. One need only look at the productivity of the most creative compared to those who are bright but less outstanding...the total productivity difference can be orders of magnitude. Think of Leonardo da Vinci - his productivity was equivalent to that of many creative people, the output of dozens of lifetimes.

Thus, how a society nurtures such people really has an impact on the future health, prosperity and soundness of that society. If the gifted are nurtured and nourished, encouraged and supported, then that society will flourish. However, if the gifted are opposed, discouraged, vilified and left unsupported, it is almost certain that that society will fail, in the long-term - it will slowly dwindle away due to lack of innovation; lack of creativity, lack of leadership.

I write this because of attitudes I have picked up around the world.

In America, if the gifted boards are anything to go by, support for the gifted is not what it should be: there is a lot of envy and intolerance of anyone more gifted than themselves (from "gifted" people themselves). I don't think this bodes well for the future of the USA. In the city-state of Singapore, however, we have so far, been greeted very well...it is uncanny really. For Singapore has a reputation for oppressiveness - on which I cannot comment - and America has a reputation for freedom. Yet, the country that is free has citizens that have attacked us, verbally - and the country that is reputedly not free has citizens who have been kind to us. It really is telling.

So which country has a future? The country that is "free" - but giftist...or the country that is not free - but is meritocratic?

It will be interesting to find out.

Are you giftist?

I think that "giftist" is a new word I have coined. Why do I coin it and what does it mean?

Well, I have noticed two kinds of reactions to Ainan's achievement. There have been some very positive ones. Ainan has been cheered by his school; greeted in the street with smiles and cries of "Ainan!"; congratulated by almost everyone he has known...and then there is the other type.

There is the neighbour who used to speak to me, whenever he saw me, who now finds his eyes unable to meet mine - and who doesn't reply if spoken to.

There are a few anonymous people - they are always anonymous, aren't they - who write envy filled words, trying to diminish Ainan's achievement and disparage him for it.

It is these latter two types that I call "giftist". There is something in them that loathes those of gift. The strange thing is - and the really sad, sad thing - is that many of these "giftist" people are themselves gifted. The problem is, that they have something in them that doesn't wish to be challenged. No-one is allowed to be as "great" as they are. No-one is also allowed to be gifted. There is a "gifted community board" that is filled with this kind of nonsense. It is an American board and most of the commenters are from that nation - but the hate and envy that sometimes comes off them is shocking to see. They simply will not tolerate anyone of greater gift than themselves. They seek to bring down anyone who is truly gifted.

It is this kind of giftist individual who is most poisonous. They should know better. Their own experiences of intolerance towards them, by some of lesser gift, should have taught them to be more tolerant of those of greater gift - but it hasn't. Somehow, somewhere, they have learned hate and envy. These feelings have become their core - and they vent it at every opportunity.

Giftism should not be allowed. It diminishes the world and makes the path of gifted people a much more difficult one to tread. Yet, the oddest thing is that many of these giftist people are the gifted themselves...or those who appear to be gifted because they are on a gifted board.

I find that fact the most puzzling of all.