|
|
| Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success (897350) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Tue Jan 10 10:24:21 2012, in response to Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success, posted by Concourse Express on Sun Jan 8 17:37:11 2012. you're saying that the pool of potential KIPP students would have higher average IQs than that of the remaining population because low-IQ families lack the initiative needed to apply. Wouldn't the same be said for applying and/or testing into specialized schools and gifted programs?Probably yes. Almost certainly yes, because I was recruited by my guidance counselor who likely wouldn't have suggested it if I didn't show some ability. Certainly, a student who struggles through a gifted class may become discouraged and demotivated. However, I'm not sure they'd all be at the bottom We're talking about students who just missed the mark. By definition they'd be at the bottom. In short, it may still be possible for students who narrowly miss the cutoff for specialized middle or high schools to do well in a gifted program at a normal school. Probably. But it may serve to be counterproductive because of bullying by the low-IQ (and violent) elements of the student body. As for the Black IQ curve, I thought σ was set to 15 (or is that just for Whites)? The SD for the Black curve is given when you normalize White scores with μ = 100 & σ = 15. The Black scores then cluster such that μ = 85 & σ = 12. Now, you stated in a previous reply that you were "one of the few liberal believers in HBD." Maybe I haven't paid close attention to the arguments in the media, but is there a concerted effort among conservatives to use HBD to justify cutting some social programs based on (1) the overrepresentation of Blacks/Latinos and (2) the perception that "most" of them may be perpetually dependent on such? Not in the mainstream media (MSM) since the MSM doesn't talk about HBD, but if you read through HBD blogs (Steve Sailer, Half Sigma, etc...) you'll notice a definite right-wing lean. So far I seem to be the only liberal who believes in HBD. While HBD makes Utopian liberal arguments (sort of like the ones you've professed here) untenable, HBD by itself doesn't vindicate conservativism, and that's my position. The biggest thing most right-wing HBD bloggers advocate is cutting down on Mexican immigration (legal and illegal), a point for which I'm in agreement. I guess this means any hope of fostering temperance (not just sexual) will depend a person's (or group's) willpower and/or understanding of risks and consequences, which I suppose brings us back to IQ... In general, it's not a wise recourse to try to get people to change their behavior, especially when such behavior has strong genetic roots (the serenity thing). No, you're not going to get the underclass and low-IQ elements to behave responsibly through education, because owing to their low IQ and impulsivity, they are immune to discussion of consequences for the most part. >>>>think you're missing something important. Allow me to illustrate: If a person is a born with a "genetic" IQ of 80, and is given some sort of intervention early on (like Head Start, for example), he will initially test higher than this during his childhood. But slowly but surely, as he gets older, his tested IQ will fall and approach 80; that is, he will have had retained no lasting benefit from the earlier intervention, and will perform as does a person with an IQ of 80. The reverse is true of a smarter person who is held back from enrichment opportunities early on. His tested IQ will rise to his genetic potential IQ. Mayhap I did miss it; though I'd still advocate for a stable/positive home environment on account of morale and/or self-esteem during youth. It's important to keep in mind the meaning of "heredity." People who become dysfunctional adults come from "broken homes" because of inherited factors that influence both. You're not going to change anything by trying to make an impact here. Indeed, the Ozzie-and-Harriet family that White culture espouses is very much a White invention, particularly a NW European one. Look here about how families are traditionally arranged in West Africa and see if you can spot anything familiar. As a matter of educational policy, I'd invest more resources in the initiatives that I mentioned before (gifted programs, music/arts, etc.) than in programs like Head Start since I believe the former will achieve a similar (likely greater) effect than the latter. This, to me, means that teaching to the test renders the test less effective at gauging student's aptitude and cognitive ability (and possibly real understanding of material as well) - which is exactly why I oppose test-based curricula and the lowered standards it often comes with! School tests (apart from the old SAT) were never about measuring cognitive ability, but about the performance of teachers. NCLB is solely focused on closing the "achievement gap" and nothing else. It was never about failing schools, but failing students, since that is the real source of the problem. welfare moms would only be paid welfare if they agree to undergo sterilization once they become pregnant with their third child or remain on the dole longer than five or six years, whichever comes first. ...because it could also act as a deterrent to being a so-called "welfare queen" (e.g. "motivate" individuals to seek employment or other routes through which they can better themselves) A potential added plus. and/or being sexually reckless (at least where pregnancy risk is concerned; as I said earlier sterilization doesn't preclude this). I don't expect that to stop. I can see how some people object to having to pay for it, though. |
|
|
|