So depth is the direction that I feel benefits from more active support and encouragement. Sticking with things when they're no longer exciting and new. Refining skills even when the law of diminishing returns has kicked in, when you have spent twenty hours learning to do something passably and another forty hours is needed to learn to do it slightly-better-than-passably. Identifying subtle improvements that can be made and devising strategies that will allow that learning to take place. Reaching out for help from outside sources, learning the discipline of actively studying something in depth, monitoring progress, breaking down problems. In my observation most of these more advanced learning skills are developed to a much greater extent when one is pushing past what comes easily into the deeper complexities of a subject or skill.
So, responding to my original line of thought.
"Traditionalists" are of the school that learning to do something you don't like anyway is character building. I think all of being unschoolers, or at least child-led, in general reject the extreme of that. The other hypothetical extreme is (unrealistically perhaps?) someone who can explore depth with complete joy and all but the most fleeting frustration. [Let's say hypothetically, for the sake of simplicity, that this person is a young adult, or at least a child can operate at such a level, for the purpose of eliminating the pressure-requirement-from-parents-etc digression.]
What is valuable lesson from these extremes-- depth? perseverance? Clearly we don't want to operate from the stand point of "getting slightly too hard, I'm turning my back on this even though my heart yearns for it"... Again, wanting to keep "imposed learning" issues entirely out of this, if that's possible.
damn. Lost my train of thought because I should be packing....
Have I already made my point and asked the right question? My mind is kerfuffled. I have this down so now I can go away and think about it some more (inadvertently, of course)