Do High IQ Individuals Prefer Self-Teaching Over University Lectures?

[IjustlikeMaths]

Do you think people with a high iq or high intelligence go to lectures or prefer to self-taught the things from University ?

So instead of going to lectures they learn it without a professor or teacher.

Is there a way to say make a conclusion ? Or is it too different ? And some high intelligence people go to lectures and the others not ?

And another question is:

Do you guys go to lectures ? Or do you learn by doing instead of visiting lectures?

 

[fresh_42]

I went to lectures and learned how to study on myself.

The question doesn't have a lot to do with intelligence, how ever this is measured. Learning a science, or at least it's basics, is much more of a matter of learning a language than people usually think. Now you can certainly learn a language by books. But unless you talk to real people and learn the common usage, it won't be especially helpful. E.g. you could get used to translate instead of applying the new language correctly, plus there are real many patterns used in everyday language, which cannot be found in a Shakespeare drama. The situation with STEM areas is certainly a different one, but less than you probably think.

 

[Orodruin]

First of all, high IQ is certainly not to be confused with "high intelligence". There are many types of intelligence and IQ only measures a very specific aspect of it. I would not assign much inherent value to IQ.

That being said, I think you will find people with different learning styles at all different levels of intelligence - whatever measure you put in place for it. What I can tell you from several years of experience as a lecturer is that you really do not want to be the person who just stays at home trying to learn the subject directly from the book. You will be missing out on any sort of contact with people who actually know the subject (your teachers) as well as an opportunity to discuss the subject matter with others who are also learning (the other students). These are both things that are invaluable to your learning process and your stimulus as well as being a litmus test to give you feedback on how you are actually doing in your learning process.

Can you learn a subject without guidance? Sure, but I would not call it a very intelligent thing to do if you have the option to get proper guidance.

 

[mpresic3]

There are many reasons to go to lectures. I expect almost all students with high IQ's and high intelligence, and high performers go to lectures. You may know which of your colleagues are struggling and which are doing well. If you go to lectures yourself, you can answer your own question.

Feynman in his book, " Surely your joking " tells anecdotes where he is attending lectures. He also tells of his presentation with Albert Einstein in the audience. Apparently Albert Einstein went to lectures.

Here are some reasons to attend lectures.

1. Suppose you have a physics textbook written by a top quality educator, e.g. Dr. Sasparilla. You learn everything from the textbook, and can solve all your problems just like Dr Sasparilla hopes you would as put forward in the preface of your book.

Suppose further you are being taught in lecture by an equally good educator, Dr. Gingerale. Dr Gingerale decides he does not like Dr. Sasparilla's treatment
of the harmonic oscillator and wants to introduce the class to his own treatment. If you did not go to lectures, you will miss out on Dr. Gingerale's treatment.
When Dr. Gingerale gives a test, he may give a problem where his method has significant advantage over the treatment of Dr. Sasparilla.

My freshman physics lectures provided methods that were significantly more advanced (in many ways) than the freshman physics textbooks. I learned this years later when revisiting my freshman physics notes.

2. I found that my lecturers were inspiring. I took assiduous notes, but I was always impressed by the tenor of the class, and his reverence for the subject as well as the presentation itself. Unless you are a consummate introvert, I do not think you would be able to maintain as much energy as equally talented students who can relate positively to the lecturer.

3. You may need a recommendation from the lecturer some day. Is Dr. Gingerale going to give a good recommendation to someone he doesn't know and someone who skipped many lectures, no matter how well that person did on tests. Dr. Gingerale might save his good recommendations for students whom he knows well, and also did well on tests. He or She might also be put off because the student chose to learn from Dr Sasparilla, (second hand) from his textbook, rather than attend his own lectures. Dr Gingerale might suggest the student get a recommendation from Dr Sasparilla.

I could go on but I am positive the most talented students are using the lectures to the greatest advantage.

 

[symbolipoint]

This very important discussion posting needs to be revised, edited, expanded for clarity:

I went to lectures and learned how to study on myself.

The question doesn't have a lot to do with intelligence, how ever this is measured. Learning a science, or at least it's basics, is much more of a matter of learning a language than people usually think. Now you can certainly learn a language by books. But unless you talk to real people and learn the common usage, it won't be especially helpful. E.g. you could get used to translate instead of applying the new language correctly, plus there are real many patterns used in everyday language, which cannot be found in a Shakespeare drama. The situation with STEM areas is certainly a different one, but less than you probably think.

 

[wrobel]

There are a lot of things those you can not take from textbooks but only from communication with professional. You can get a proof of a theorem from a textbook but genesis of this theorem, informal ideas that drive to such a theorem and such a proof you can not get from a textbook as a rule