Replies to post #40660 on Biotech Values

[rstor1]

Good morning all, and Happy New Year.

Dew, read "The Mismeasure of Man" by Gould for a refutation of the concept of unitary intelligence and for a good exposition of the fallacies employed by Murray and Hernstein in The Bell Curve.

Regards,
Bob

[Biowatch]

Lead paint and poor nutrition can lower IQ, plus incompetent teachers don't help. Remember my telling you about an elementary school where the person "in charge" of the chess club didn't know how to play chess? It was kind of them to volunteer their time to be there so the children who wanted to could play chess, but clearly the teacher wasn't helping teach the students chess skills.

Yes, people with low IQs will never excel, but they can still achieve very impressive results by doing what they do well. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to build a rocket or repair a road or keep the plumbing working in a school or create art. It does take someone who cares about their work.

The "no child left behind" approach may be missing the big picture, because "teaching to the test" won't work for everyone, but it doesn't mean that education is not important, even for those with low IQs.

"It's no use coming up with the example of a child who was getting Ds in school, met an inspiring teacher, and went on to become an astrophysicist. That is an underachievement story, not the story of someone at the 49th percentile of intelligence."

There are also many stories of people inspired by a teacher to believe in themselves and not give up on life, regardless of what they wind up doing.

[iwfal]

Nor can we look for much help from the Flynn Effect, the rise in IQ scores that has been observed internationally for several decades. Only a portion of that rise represents an increase in g, and recent studies indicate that the rise has stopped in advanced nations.

He is missing and has always missed the point here. No one understands why the Flynn effect occurs. (The Flynn effect being where it has been observed that as a nation moves up the economic chain the median IQ score, even if measured using tools that don't require education, improves hugely - something more than 15 points since the 30's for the US) So there is hope that there is a Flynn effect within the US for the economically disadvantaged. But we have to systematically look ... and historically we haven't because it is too politically challenging?

BTW - I respectfully disagree with rstor1 inre Gould being a good refutation. Most of the refutations were so politically motivated (and thus tainted by strawmen etc) that they were worthless. I don't rememeber the specifics from Gould, but do remember that he was especially egregious inre the insinuation of his politics. The only refutations I saw that were even passable was a compendium by different scientists in the field.

BTW2 - Another very good book on a related subject is the Nurture Assumption (runner up for the Pulitzer if the year it was released)

[daved]

OT Re Intelligence in the Classroom?
Thanks for the interesting article.

It seems incredible that I.Q.s are not part of the process of evaluating teachers and schools.

Relevant paragraphs follow:

"What IQ is necessary to give a child a reasonable chance to meet the NAEP's basic achievement score? Remarkably, it appears that no one has tried to answer that question. We only know for sure that if the bar for basic achievement is meaningfully defined, some substantial proportion of students will be unable to meet it no matter how well they are taught. As it happens, the NAEP's definition of basic achievement is said to be on the tough side. That substantial proportion of fourth-graders who cannot reasonably be expected to meet it could well be close to 36%.

The second problem with the argument that education can be vastly improved is the false assumption that educators already know how to educate everyone and that they just need to try harder -- the assumption that prompted No Child Left Behind. We have never known how to educate everyone. The widely held image of a golden age of American education when teachers brooked no nonsense and all the children learned their three Rs is a myth. If we confine the discussion to children in the lower half of the intelligence distribution (education of the gifted is another story), the overall trend of the 20th century was one of slow, hard-won improvement. A detailed review of this evidence, never challenged with data, was also part of "The Bell Curve."

Dave

[Lewis R Goudy]

Murray clearly overstates the immutability of human intelligence when he tacitly premises that the architecture
and neural functioning of the brain are static. A case in
point is the enhancement of neuroplasticity by Adderall
(already being prescribed off-label for that specific purpose,
eg for professional musicians).

He is also spouting BS in claiming that he is g-constrained
from understanding a proof in a mathematical journal.

He accepts that low intelligence leads to emotional deficit
and so to social and economic problems, but lacks the wisdom
if not the wit to acknowledge causation in the other direction
(neurons cannot be recruited to higher centers if they are in
high demand below for coping mechanisms because of ubiquitous
stressors, eg racial demonization of white children by grade
school curricular materials, worrying about getting killed
on the way to an inner city school, etc.).

HG Wells drew the same battle lines a century ago:
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/11696

If society needs more g in aggregate, and public schools are
first and foremost stress factories, then the indicated course
is an end to public education.

[Newly2b]

Thanks, DD, very interesting article. Couple of comments.

Schools cannot do everything. Parents have a responsibility to nurture in their children a desire to learn (and the confidence and discipline to do so) at least up to the child's ability.

The Flynn Effect IMO is due to the exposure to more sophisticated concepts in an advancing/advanced society than in one where survival (finding food, shelter, clothing) is the primary concern.

The unfortunate part in the American education system (and elsewhere in our society) is that everything comes down to a common denominator, everyone must be equal (God did not make us equal in abilities, but we try to at least offer equality of opportunity). That means the quality of education in a classroom drops to the level where 'most' of the students can achieve it, leaving the bottom and top 15% at a disadvantage.

Instead of the schools concentrating on giving all students the same basic education, perhaps we can take a lesson from the English school system, where at two points during the educational process exams are given to assess a student's ability and achievement level. Those that score high go on to an education stressing intellectual concepts. Those that score low go on to an education stressing occupational subjects. In other words, the brightest are given an education commensurate with their abilities instead of being left to boredom in a class below their intelligence level, and the least bright are given a thorough grounding in some sort of occupation ensuring that they can support themselves and contribute to society by holding a job requiring less intelligence, but perhaps more skill, and where they can achieve up to their abilities without being made to feel inferior. Thus the entire population of students is suitably educated in accordance with their ability.

Like every system, there are problems with this one, too, but overall, it appears to me to be far superior to what we have here in America. JMO, of course.

Newly

[corky]

nice

btw

"multiple intelligences"

well we all can do better

corky