|
|
| Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success (895296) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
|
| (896724) | |
Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jan 8 17:40:05 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. Do we have a junior genius/genius in our ranks?Clearly you can't see through smokescreens. |
|
|
| (897350) | |
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. |
|
|
| (898984) | |
Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Fri Jan 13 18:20:07 2012, in response to Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success, posted by JayMan on Tue Jan 10 10:24:21 2012. 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 bottomWe're talking about students who just missed the mark. By definition they'd be at the bottom. I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not talking about such student's standing relative to those who did make it into the specialized schools, but their standing relative to the normal population. An example: suppose that a specialized middle school had an admission exam worth 800 points and the cutoff was 500. Suppose a student scores 496 (just missing the mark) in a school whose test average is 375. While it may be true that their academic rank may be lower than those who tested 500+, they won't be at the bottom relative to those who didn't (since they'd still be above average among the normal population) - that's my point. Mayhap the equivalent of a "gifted" program at a normal school would be honors courses... 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. You're likely correct. As someone who endured the hell of bullying nearly every day while in junior high school, I understand how such can impede a student even if they are gifted (though in my case I managed to overcome, being one of only two kids in my class who tested into a specialized high school; the other chose not to go). Even now, bullying is a problem that has hardly abated... That said, this could also be an argument for gifted programs in normal schools, since gifted cats will likely have higher average IQs than the rest (and consequently, a lower probability of being violent). 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 ... 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 have noticed; indeed, immigration is a big talking point on some of those blogs. Once more, I will state that I agree that illegal immigration (not just from Mexico) should be fought, but not so much legal. As for the "utopian liberal" remark, I'll admit that some of my ideas and arguments are a bit idealistic; it comes from wanting to see the best in people and see cats overcoming the odds and changing for the better (especially in education since the current system is sub-par). Of course, I don't expect everyone to do this, given that some cats are set in their ways for better or worse... 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. If by "anything familiar" you mean the low paternal investment/single mother/foster care environment, then yes I spotted it. In further digging into Sailer's blog, I also found a post (from 2000) which touched on the sexual revolution, welfare reform, and of course immigration. I guess you weren't joking when you said many right-wing HBDers want to curb Mexican immigration... 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. Ah, the oh-so-ineffective NCLB...lowering standards to make it look like they're narrowing the achievement gap while implying that disadvantaged groups can't measure up to regular standards. When students and schools alike (and not just poor/disadvantaged ones!) have to cheat to win, methinks it's an indictment of the system's inefficacy. How ironic, that tests used to assess teacher performance are designed in ways that don't allow the teachers to teach as they ought! my blog |
|
|
| (899554) | |
Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Jan 15 18:21:18 2012, in response to Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success, posted by Concourse Express on Fri Jan 13 18:20:07 2012. Just like learning to be a Jedi (and in real life, a lot of other things), to learn HBD, you must, to some extent, unlearn what you have learned. I see that you're doing that, and that's good, but you have a way to go. AEM and I are having a discussion about whether it would be a good thing for knowledge of HBD to be widespread. While there's bound to be problems, I'm of the mind that it should be. If we are to have any hope of combating the problems that face society, we need to understand how they really work, not hide behind idealistic PC beliefs.>>>>>>>>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. You're likely correct. As someone who endured the hell of bullying nearly every day while in junior high school, I understand how such can impede a student even if they are gifted (though in my case I managed to overcome, being one of only two kids in my class who tested into a specialized high school; the other chose not to go). Even now, bullying is a problem that has hardly abated... That said, this could also be an argument for gifted programs in normal schools, since gifted cats will likely have higher average IQs than the rest (and consequently, a lower probability of being violent). Yes, but as long as they're in the same school, there's going to be interaction. In low-IQ (mostly minority) schools, bullying is a major problem, and always will be. Only by getting the smart kids out would things for them improve. This is most acute at the middle school level where real violent behavior tends to begin. As for the "utopian liberal" remark, I'll admit that some of my ideas and arguments are a bit idealistic; it comes from wanting to see the best in people and see cats overcoming the odds and changing for the better (especially in education since the current system is sub-par). Of course, I don't expect everyone to do this, given that some cats are set in their ways for better or worse... HBD'ers tend to be right-of-center. Needless to say, to conservative HBD'ers, they see liberalism as the source of HBD-denial, and while to an extent that's true, they also sit with blinders against the obvious anti-science streak among conservatives, especially in America. To them, HBD validates conservative policies, such as about welfare, when in reality, it doesn't necessarily. However: I have noticed; indeed, immigration is a big talking point on some of those blogs. Once more, I will state that I agree that illegal immigration (not just from Mexico) should be fought, but not so much legal. They are correct when it comes to immigration. I am in favor of selective immigration. Immigrants, regardless of from where they come, should demonstrate that they can contribute to our society. This means some sort of record of achievement in their home country, sort of like what many other countries have in place for their immigration requirements. And any immigrant who commits a serious crime, particularly violent ones, should be deported. About the bit on reforming education, the PISA scores indicate that, if anything, our students are doing great, considering that they outscore all their brethren in their home countries. Is there room for reform? Yes, but probably not necessarily what you have in mind. For example, the only real way to significantly improve the student performance in a given school district is to change the students. That is why all the magic cures have failed: they are doomed in principle. |
|
|
| (900453) | |
Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success |
|
|
Posted by Concourse Express on Wed Jan 18 13:05:08 2012, in response to Re: OP-ED: What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success, posted by JayMan on Sun Jan 15 18:21:18 2012. Lest you should think I've forgotten this thread, here's a response; I've several important matters to tend to in the meanwhile...Just like learning to be a Jedi (and in real life, a lot of other things), to learn HBD, you must, to some extent, unlearn what you have learned. I see that you're doing that, and that's good, but you have a way to go. AEM and I are having a discussion about whether it would be a good thing for knowledge of HBD to be widespread. While there's bound to be problems, I'm of the mind that it should be. If we are to have any hope of combating the problems that face society, we need to understand how they really work, not hide behind idealistic PC beliefs. I'll be honest: some of the tenets of HBD are hard to swallow. I guess they are more so for me given the activities I engage in (professional tutoring, ministry, etc.) and my passion for education (plus being a reasonably intelligent Hispanic - one of the groups with a not-so-stellar average IQ). I'll also say, however, that this conversation has warmed me up to HBD a little bit. As for making the knowledge of HBD widespread, I have mixed feelings on that. You'll definitely run into problems, seeing as one must possess a great degree of understanding to properly interpret the findings of HBD. I suppose, however, that such can't be much worse than the debates we commonly see today (i.e. politics, religion, climate change, etc.)... As for being PC...while I did share some of my ideals in this thread, I'm not exactly a proponent of political correctness. Taken to the extreme, you get your "nanny" policies and other nonsense designed to placate the easily offended, uptight, etc. In low-IQ (mostly minority) schools, bullying is a major problem, and always will be. Only by getting the smart kids out would things for them improve. This is most acute at the middle school level where real violent behavior tends to begin. Yes, getting the smart kids out of rough environs will make things better for them; however, we cannot allow the bullying problem to remain unabated for the remaining population. Since interventions appear to have an effect on students at middle school age (typically 10-13 AFAIK), we should not stop fighting it. What we can discuss or debate, however, is how such should be fought. HBD'ers tend to be right-of-center. Needless to say, to conservative HBD'ers, they see liberalism as the source of HBD-denial, and while to an extent that's true, they also sit with blinders against the obvious anti-science streak among conservatives, especially in America. To them, HBD validates conservative policies, such as about welfare, when in reality, it doesn't necessarily. This "anti-science streak" is rather unfortunate, though I think this is due to attribution bias (which everyone has, to varying degrees). Specifically, since scientific arguments are mostly advanced by the atheistic side of the religious debates, some fundamentalists have "attributed" these sciences to atheism/blasphemous beliefs and thus rail against them (that's the bias; incidentally there are Christian evolutionary biologists/scientists - here is a (somewhat old) article on one of them). FTR, I don't deny evolution, as I believe evolution does not preclude a "Creative" origin. Call me crazy, but as a Christian I believe that discussing certain aspects of HBD can actually enhance faith. In this thread alone we've discussed how a person's biological/genetic makeup reduces the efficacy of certain interventions (especially where IQ is concerned). If anything, this is evidence of the futility of the flesh (cf. Romans 8, especially the bits on the "carnal mind") and can exemplify the need for God and faith-based interventions to believers. Incidentally I recently picked up a book that has statistical evidence suggesting that faith-based organizations (FBOs) are considerably effective in reducing crime; as I've only begun reading, I haven't looked at the numbers in-depth yet. However, even with this in mind, introducing HBD is rather dicey IMO since the Christian believers with the loudest voices in politics and such (at least for now) appear to be those who subscribe to the literal fundamentalist ethos. (If you haven't figured it out yet, I subscribe to the redemptive ethos.) However: They are correct when it comes to immigration. I am in favor of selective immigration. Immigrants, regardless of from where they come, should demonstrate that they can contribute to our society. This means some sort of record of achievement in their home country, sort of like what many other countries have in place for their immigration requirements. And any immigrant who commits a serious crime, particularly violent ones, should be deported. So you want higher standards for legal immigration, then? You'd need to effectively combat illegal immigration first so that, if new standards are enacted, the rate of illegal entry does not increase. Also, regarding deportation, would you have the criminals tried in their home land or in the US? I think this is important because of (1) the different judicial standards between nations and (2) because, rather than straight deportation, it can be used as part of his/her sentence (i.e. if tried in the US and found guilty, would you have them deported and then serve time in a prison in their homeland)? About the bit on reforming education, the PISA scores indicate that, if anything, our students are doing great, considering that they outscore all their brethren in their home countries. Is there room for reform? Yes, but probably not necessarily what you have in mind. For example, the only real way to significantly improve the student performance in a given school district is to change the students. That is why all the magic cures have failed: they are doomed in principle. Probably not, probably so - if we don't try, we won't know! :) Seriously though, "changing the students" solves the problem for the gifted, but interventions would still be necessary IMO for the remaining student population. my blog |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||