Hello again,
Here [is] some really interesting information that I have found while browsing the net, hope you enjoy reading them as well.
Take care everyone and Bye for now :)

(Winston) was, in fact, remarkable. His grasp of history was outstanding. Yet he was considered a hopeless pupil. It occurred to no one that the fault might lie, not in the boy, but in the school. Samuel Butler defined genius as "a supreme capacity for getting its possessors into trouble of all kinds," and it is ironic that geniuses are likeliest to be misunderstood in classrooms. Studies at the University of Chicago and the University of Minnesota have found that teachers smile on children with high IQs and frown upon those with creative minds. Intelligent but uncreative students accept conformity, never rebel, and complete their assignments with dispatch and to perfection. The creative child, on the other hand, is manipulative, imaginative, and intuitive. He is likely to harass the teacher. He is regarded as wild, naughty, silly, undependable, lacking in seriousness or even promise. His behaviour is distracting; he doesn't seem to be trying; he gives unique answers to banal questions, touching off laughter among the other children. E. Paul Torrance of Minnesota found that 70% of pupils rated high in creativity were rejected by teachers picking a special class for the intellectually gifted. The Goertzels concluded that a Stanford study of genius, under which teachers selected bright children, would have excluded Churchill, Edison, Picasso and Mark Twain.- (From: The Last Lion)


Don't judge a book by its cover. Don't judge a man by his looks. Only judge them by what's inside.

A wise man holds his tongue for he is at peace with his own mind, while a fool blurts out what he knows or even worse yet what he does not.

Hmmmm, it seems Winston Churchill was a late developer, like the gentlemen in this IELTS preparation course!

Thanks for the post, Mouza, it is all good!

Tony