<p>Sort of like the kid who rarely opens a book but the night before the midterm pulls an all-nighter and gets an A.</p>
<p>Well, that’s what I do in high school and most of my friends consider me smart, so yea.</p>
<p>I mean, I got like a 3.95 GPA and a 32 on the ACT so it can’t be too bad of a strategy.</p>
<p>No, I do this all the time and it’s the dumbest thing you can do. I slack off all semester and don’t do half the readings, now it’s Finals Week and I’ll be cramming all week. Next semester I promise I’ll do all the readings/hw on time to avoid this mess at the end of the semester. I always procrastinate during the day and end up cramming at night, this is a really stupid thing to do. I could enjoy so much more of my free time if I didn’t procrastinate. </p>
<p>Now, if someone slacks off and get’s A’s in difficult classes without too much effort, then I’m guessing they’re smart. I’ll probably get an A on my Western Civ final after pulling an all-nighter tonight, but I bet every kid in the class is doing this right now and that sure doesn’t make us smart. </p>
<p>It doesn’t really matter if you’re smart pmvd since you’ll never have a real job anyhow, as you’ve established in your half dozen threads on the issue :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I forgot. Thanks for reminding me :)</p>
<p>This is pretty relevant:
[Bright</a> Child v Gifted Student](<a href=“http://pages.framingham.k12.ma.us/sage/brightchild.htm]Bright”>http://pages.framingham.k12.ma.us/sage/brightchild.htm)</p>
<p>It’s not necessarily better to be bright vs. to be gifted, and vice versa. But it is an interesting classification.</p>
<p>^^that’s an interesting comparison.</p>
<p>hell yeah, I’m a gifted learner <3</p>
<p>bright children are those annoying kids in class. gifted learners ftw</p>
<p>No, the smart people slack off and get A’s without pulling all nighters</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>pretty much this</p>
<p>Well, the good-looking people need neither natural talent nor learning ability.</p>
<p>^ right, all you need is to get somebody to manage your life.</p>
<p>no, they’re considered lucky procrastinators</p>
<p>No, I believe those that do well cramming have a higher short term memory capacity is all. I’d like it see how well these procrastinators remember the information they studied after they have taken the test. It seems rather pointless to cram for a test if you’re not even going to remember the information after wards even if you do ace the test.</p>
<p>Then again, some people thrive under intense pressure such as time limits. I don’t believe it makes one student brighter then the other. The way one’s brain works is not comparable to another.</p>
<p>I always put everything off and get an A, because I am pretty f’ing intelligent.</p>
<p>Your study habits have nothing to do with your intelligence though.</p>
<p>The fact is, you have to read 500 pages for the test. Either you do that little by little, or blaze through 400-500 the night before, spending several hours.</p>
<p>No one chooses to do things the night before as some sort of advantage or “learning style.” I put it off because I am completely unmotivated to do it unless the pressure is on. This applies more to papers than tests. Both things, however, - papers and tests - are utterly pointless endeavors. Your classroom papers on idiotic prompts and rehashed theories from years ago are of use TO F’ING NO ONE. You are producing nothing for society, or yourself. Pointless hoops for you to jump through to prove that you can retain information, have basic literacy, and will be obedient/ meet deadlines in a thankless corporate cubicle world. Meh</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You should probably enjoy that while it lasts.</p>
<p>College is a completely different animal.</p>
<p>I think that distinction between bright and gifted students is silly, everyone’s learning style is different. We barely understand how memory/intelligence works, how can we make these distinctions so early?</p>
<p>I don’t think pulling an all-nighter and doing fabulously the next day necessarily makes you smart. You can have a person who studies at reasonable times consistently, passes everything all the time, and they’re actually quite dumb.</p>
<p>Everyone’s definitions of smart and stupid vary, so it’s up to you, I guess?</p>
<p>However, if I were to go with a logical, morally-correct answer… I’d say no. Just because you were able to memorize something under pressure, and keep it fresh in your mind long enough to pass an exam or something, doesn’t mean you’re a genius. Anyone of average intellect should be able to pull that off (it’s their own choice of if they want to do that or not), so you’re not special. I’m not saying that makes you stupid, of course. Although, it would be a lot smarter if you studied at a time that would be a lot more beneficial to your learning process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I know nothing about psychology and while you definitely have a point, I don’t really agree. Everyone has a learning style, and that’s always different. Bright vs. gifted isn’t about learning styles, though. It’s not really about how a student learns, it’s about the default level of capacity. Let’s put it this way - you can work long and hard to become a master pianist. Then, someday, a seven-year-old will come along and best you. That’s an EXTREME example, but it’s the same basic principle. Are you smart, receptive, hard-working, dedicated, interested? Bright and gifted students are all of those things - but gifted students have something more. I mean, I can follow a recipe to a tee and make a delicious dinner (bright), but my mom can turn the last four items in our pantry into a four course meal for the fifteen members of my family (gifted). Similarly, a bright student can study and ace a test (bright) whereas another student can not study, listen less, employ testing techniques, and still ace the test (gifted). They may both have a linguistic learning style or a kinetic learning style, that doesn’t really matter. What matters is the base they start off with. Some people are gifted with the ability to retain information but some people have to work harder (listen in class vs. study). Some people have to know the material to score well on a test, others only need the basics (content vs. test-taking skills, guessing skills, seeing the finer points). </p>
<p>However, like I said, it’s not necessarily better to be gifted or bright. Especially gifted students have trouble in the school system. Some low-to-moderately gifted students have a poor work ethic. Some bright students don’t apply themselves, and other bright students burn themselves out (especially in my old high school, where there was a clear divide between the bright and the gifted and therefore a lot of stress).</p>
<p>
No, because some classes are useless and students treat them as such. I’m a freshman and I’ve taken many required classes I didn’t care about, where I procrastinated and put in litle effort. You’re right, I won’t remember it a month from now, but who cares? I don’t need to remember usless dates and facts about Picasso. Now, in classes like Biology and Chemistry I study hard and pay attention cause I’ll need those for my career. When I’m interested I put in a lot more effort to retain the material.
Be grateful doctors, surgeons, lawyers, engineers, dentists, etc had to jump through these hoops or you’d be screwed 
Papers are a waste of life though, useful to no one, and require no real research, just restating available info. I just wrote a 12 page paper on how Greenwich Village has developed in the past century. I know I’ll get an A on it, but what the hell was the point?! I’m just repeating info already available to humanity and drawing connections between things already known.</p>