In the United States, there is a broadly held presumption that the journey along the pipeline from kindergarten to early career success gradually reveals each child's innate abilities. This presumption is widespread not only in the general public, but among students themselves, who self-identify and identify each other as either academically gifted or generally undistinguished. All too often, these beliefs about one's talents and the talents of one's peers become self-fulfilling prophesies. In this study, the authors test the idea that demonstrated achievement is a perfect reflection of innate ability by tracing children's journeys through and beyond the educational system, from their academic performance in childhood to their early career outcomes as young adults. They find that there is substantial churn in children's demonstrated abilities as they travel through the K-12 system and onward to college and careers. These findings suggest that talent is not fixed: innate ability can be nurtured over time, or it can remain underdeveloped. The education system can play a role in whether children reach their full potential. Their findings also suggest both a good-news and a bad-news story. The good news is that early academic performance is not destiny and that individual striving, educational quality, and policy matter. The bad news is that the existing systems distribute opportunity based on income, class status, race, and ethnicity rather than hard work and talent. As a result, race and class also matter when it comes to children's life chances. [For the executive summary, see ED599950.]