• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Natural talent or just a lot of hard work put in? (1 Viewer)

louise08

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2008
Messages
114
Gender
Female
HSC
2009
Do you guys believe that the people who receive UAI's of 99+ are naturally smart.. like ever since primary school ha.
OR
do you think they are the people who work their butt off?


Just a random question..
 

sonyaleeisapixi

inkfacewhorebitchpixie.
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
1,327
Gender
Female
HSC
2008
Its a mixture of both to succeed at that level.

Youve got to be gifted, but you've also got to be prepared to work.
 

white ferret

Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
100
Gender
Female
HSC
2008
a combination of both. coz u needa be smart.. but if u dont put in the effort, it's not gna get u anywhere.. unless u have an AMAZING memory or something..
 

lyounamu

Reborn
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
9,998
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
louise08 said:
Do you guys believe that the people who receive UAI's of 99+ are naturally smart.. like ever since primary school ha.
OR
do you think they are the people who work their butt off?


Just a random question..
I think it's a nice combination of natural talent, effort, and a bit of luck.
 
Last edited:

white ferret

Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
100
Gender
Female
HSC
2008
theshortykatt said:
so the adopted one is naturally smart and got high 90's and the other put heaps of effort in and also got high 90's
i feel sorry for the one that had to work to get the marks.. whilst it seems the other one didnt do much, apart from being born slightly smarter!
 

Caitlin63

:-)
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
343
Location
In my house
Gender
Female
HSC
2008
to get really high marks you do need some degree of natural talent, but in reality if you dont work your butt off you don't get the marks
 

lyounamu

Reborn
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
9,998
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
I shall change what I said above. I don't think the role that the natural talent plays is significant. I think it's all about choosing subject that suits you and doing well in it. That is because HSC is designed so that you can just ace it without studying. You have to understand the concepts, memorise the contents, apply it and know every aspect of it.

Everyone is talented in something. It is just that we need to choose subjects where we actually fit in. For example, if I did Food Technology, I would absolutely flunk the subject whereas I can expect better marks in Mathematics.

I realised that there are stacks of people who choose subjects wrongly and as a consequence of that, they are performing poorly.

As long as you choose your subjects right and as long as you know what you are doing, all you need is to put adequate effort to set the bar up. I reckon effort plays about 90%. Then, where does 10% come from? Well, you tell me. :)
 

runnable

Active Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
1,412
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Natural talent is very important at this level, but working is also essential.
 

Nat3skiz

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
272
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
louise08 said:
Do you guys believe that the people who receive UAI's of 99+ are naturally smart.. like ever since primary school ha.
OR
do you think they are the people who work their butt off?


Just a random question..
you could be the most naturally gifted person there is but you have to put in the work. simple.
 

Pace_T

Active Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
1,783
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
i kinda disagree with the statement that 'you aren't born smarter'. i think the difference lies in how well a student can absorb information given to them by their teachers and resources. i guess this is dependent on if you were born that way but also on your effort.
i believe anybody can get 99+ but it depends on how quick they get the hang of things. if they struggle to understand and hold information in comparison to their classmates, they'll have to put in more effort.
with that said however, to achieve 99+, even if you naturally hold information really well, it also takes a lot of work.
 

dux&src

just a star-crossed lover
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
1,370
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2010
Like most people have said a combination of natural talent and effort is required for a 99 UAI!

I have a friend who wasn't doing so well till year 10 when he suddenly put in maximum effort and achieved Dux of his year (his in year 12 now) he suprised everyone. He told me he did not care about study/school when he was in year 9. In year 10 he put in effort and got close to dux and year 11 he duxed his year convincingly!

According to him he studies 7 hours a night! 5pm to 12am
 
Last edited:

Tully B.

Green = procrastinating
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
1,068
Location
inner-westish
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
I know people who lasted on natural talent up until the end of year 10, at which time they went downhill and are totally flunking year 11 :)

I'm not naturally smart, but I do work pretty hard
(By the way, 7 hours a night is just idiotic.)
 

Aplus

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
2,384
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Effort must always be applied.

If a person who is naturally talent, neglects to apply the effort towards their education, then gradually, over time, that person's ability will decrease.

If a person who is not as talented (not to be rude), applys a high level of discipline, consistency and effort towards their education, then over time, the amount of time and work that person is applying towards their education will cause their abilities to increase.
 

sle3pe3bumz

glorious beacon of light
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
970
Location
under the sheets
Gender
Female
HSC
2008
I personally believe that it's effort. Especially if you're talking about 99+. I know many people who withhold this "natural talent" but still don't so well.
 

Jachie

it ain't easy being white
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
1,662
Gender
Female
HSC
2008
all my teachers say it's the hardest working students who end up ripping year 12, not necessarily the brightest.

i say fuck that :(:(
 

Aplus

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
2,384
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Nautral talent and no effort: Ranges from satisfactory to high level of achievement
Natural talent with effort: Expect an outstanding level of achievement
Ordinary talent and effort: Expect your motivation and hard work ethic to reward you with excellent level of achieve
Idiot and no effort: Start praying
 

bawd

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
889
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2009
fOR3V3RPINKKKK said:
fucking lol. hey it worked for me.

:lol:

P.S. <3 God
Seriously?

I think Hard-work > Natural Aptitude

HOWEVER: Over working, studying several hours flat and not giving yourself a break =/= Hard-work. People who study like this are usually (and I do say usually) using time inefficiently with an inappropriate study method, and could possibly augment into a total break down.
 
Last edited:

kurt.physics

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
840
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
How does one rate 'natural' talent?

I conclude its relative, I shall use an example of some of the Australian International Mathematics Olympiad (IMO) contestants to show this.

Lets take Max Menzies for example, he went to the IMO in 2007 and got a silver medal. One might say that he is genius! (this is what one may say) Wow, look at him, he won a silver at the most difficult mathematics in the WORLD. I would agree with this hypothetical person, he should be regarded as gifted.

But (no offense to Max), Another Australian IMO contestant is regarded to be superior to Max. Terrence Tao is the youngest perfect scorer Gold medalist at the IMO at age 13! He had already been to the IMO twice before this achievement, receiving a bronze and silver!

And also compare this to the Dux of your school (if your not in a selective school like Ruse :p ) They are regarded as fairly talented compared to their peers within that school.


So i believe through these examples, that 'natural' talent is relative.

Also consider how these people got to the IMO. Both Max and Terrence 'fell in love' with mathematics. This is their motivation, just being talented would not have got them to the IMO, they are interested and intrigued. Whats the difference, could it be because Max fell in love with mathematics when he was in year 9 and Terrence fell in love with mathematics at roughly age 3? Or is it genetic?

So without hard work i.e. determination then talent is just something made up.


Thats my opinion!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top