The book that can help us rethink our early achievement culture

Rich Karlgaard wants to put an end to something he has profited off for years— our early achievement-obssesed culture—which he contributes to as publisher of Forbes Magazine with its annual 30 under 30 list

In Late Bloomers, Karlgaard sheds a light on the negative consequences of our culture\’s early achievement-obsession, chronicles the history of standardized testing that lead to its creation, and lastly, gives anecdotes and scientific evidence for the benefits of achievement later in life.

The first part of the book detailing the negative consequences of our culture will resonate with Millenials, Gen Zers, and the people who taught and raised them. Karlgaard shares some haunting statistics that show what all the unnecessary pressure has done: like that children in the United States are 14 times more likely to be on medication for ADD than in the U.K., that American teenagers are 5 to 8 times more likely to be depressed than teenagers 50 years ago, and that rates of depression and anxiety have jumped by 70% in 20 years.Past this first part, the book dragged on and felt like it could have been condensed into an article. But I still greatly appreciated its message and recommend to skim through it at a bookstore or library.

Rate of depression now is higher than during the Great Depression, World War II and the Vietnam WarMore weight is given to tests and grades and young people are ranked and rewarded all the time by adultsSocial media has become our most toxic cultural mirrorAlfred Binet-created first intelligence test to measure capabilities of children 3 to 13

Lewis Terman- eugenicist that creates Human Betterment Foundation and popularizes IQ testing even moreWorld War I- high scorers of IQ test went into intelligence, low scorers went into trenches

Carl Brigham – created the SAT for CollegeBoard, later admitted that his test was a “glorious fallacy”

Donald T. Campell- Campbell’s Law: the more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social process it is intended to monitor