Skip to main content

View Diary: Heritage study co-author wrote paper on 'substantially lower' IQ of Hispanic, other immigrants (194 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That's a nice sentiment. Is there evidence? (0+ / 0-)
    ou can "get smart." Learning is primarily determined by their effective effort and use of appropriate strategies. "Intelligence" is not a fixed inborn limit on learning capacity. All children have the raw material to do rigorous academic material at high standards.
    From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/...
    In general, educational interventions, as those described below, have shown short-term effects on IQ, but long-term follow-up is often missing. For example, in the US very large intervention programs such as the Head Start Program have not produced lasting gains in IQ scores. More intensive, but much smaller, projects Abecedarian Project have reported lasting effects, often on Socioeconomic status variables, rather than IQ.[36]
    •  There cannot be evidence for this: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sitting Jack Flash
      All children have the raw material to do rigorous academic material at high standards.
      All children?  Nonsense.  (I am a school teacher.)

      The Republicans are defunding, not defending, America.

      by DSPS owl on Thu May 09, 2013 at 02:12:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Obviously, "All" is ridiculous (0+ / 0-)

        Some children have clear mental disabilities.

        But is there even any evidence even that children in the fourth quintile (so 20 - 40%) can successfully do serious honors level work with any level of intervention at the level that seriously challenges second quintile (60% - 80%) children?

        •  You'd actually have to read the research (0+ / 0-)

          whose conclusions you have rejected a priori to answer that question, wouldn't you?

          When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

          by litho on Thu May 09, 2013 at 07:25:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  The assertion is less strong than you appear (0+ / 0-)

        to believe.  Read it again, carefully:

        All children have the raw material to do rigorous academic material at high standards.
        Note what it does not say: All children can do equivalently rigorous academic material at the highest standards.

        RBT in its teaching is very clear that effort provides a delta between where students currently are and the level they are capable of attaining.  It is also very clear that not all students perform at the same level.

        When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

        by litho on Thu May 09, 2013 at 07:24:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  OK... Does it mean anything with this (0+ / 0-)

          interpretation?

          I suppose it is possible to design a rigorous curriculum for a mainstreamed mentally handicapped child with standards that are high given his/her capabilities.  But now it has become a syllogism.

          And how do you explain the rest of the paragraph?

          You can "get smart." Learning is primarily determined by their effective effort and use of appropriate strategies. "Intelligence" is not a fixed inborn limit on learning capacity. All children have the raw material to do rigorous academic material at high standards.
          Obviously, at least at the extremes, intelligence is a fixed inborn limit on learning capacity.  A profoundly mentally retarded child with an IQ of 50 is not going to learn calculus - his "intelligence" is a fixed inborn limit on his learning capacity.

          The only question is how far to those limits extend to children closer to the middle of the bell curve.

          •  The point is that while there may be (0+ / 0-)

            limits on either end intelligence is not fixed, but rather fluctuates through an individual's lifetime according to the effort they exert.

            When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

            by litho on Thu May 09, 2013 at 08:19:37 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Results fluctuate based on efford (0+ / 0-)

              A smart guy can flunk if he blows off his work, but that's the whole point - he will pass unless he blows off the work whereas someone not so smart will need to work his ass off or not be able to pass even if he does so.

              When I was in college I joined a military frat.  I had to run 2 miles in 15 minutes and doing it damn near killed me - I was up at 6am for 3 months running running running trying to cut my time so I could make the cut.  There were other guys who were not runners, were not athletes, but who could just go to the track, start running, and do 2 miles in well under 15 minutes.  I made my time with huge effort, but claiming that I was as athletic as they were would have just been stupid.

              On the other hand, academics always came easily to me.  I barely studied and got As.  In high school I tutored a girl in calculus who just could not get it.  She worked and worked and worked - we spent hours and hours on problems and review - but she didn't seem to be able to apply the concepts to the problems.  I got her to the point where she passed (although she skipped the AP test), but only with huge effort on both our parts (and frankly lenient grading by her teacher since I had told him how hard she was working).  She put in huge effort and it let her get by, but claiming that it somehow made her smarter would just be silly.

    •  Following links is a good thing (0+ / 0-)

      At tthe second link aboved link above, RBT provides the following bibliography:

      Gould, S. J. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W. W. Norton, 1996.
      Herrnstein, R. J., and Murray, C. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994.
      Howard, J. "Getting Smart: The Social Construction of Intelligence." Lexington, Mass.: Efficacy, 1991.
      Jensen, A. "How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?" Harvard Education Review, Winter 1969, pp. 1-123.
      Resnick, L. "From Aptitude to Effort: A New Foundation for Our Schools." Daedalus, Fall 1995, 124(4), 55-62.
      Rist, R. "Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations: A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education." Harvard Educational Review, Aug. 1970, 40(3), 411-451
      Saphier, J. John Adams' Promise. Acton, Mass.: Research for Better Teaching, 2005.
      Steele, C. "Race and Schooling of Black Americans." The Atlantic Monthly, Apr. 1992, pp. 68-78.
      Judging from the titles, I would assume the Howard, Resnick, and Saphier articles are the ones that provide the foundation for the assertion.

      In the reality based community, we need to assess the evidence before rejecting the conclusion...

      When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

      by litho on Thu May 09, 2013 at 07:18:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Most of those cites are pretty old - 60s to 90s (0+ / 0-)

        with one from 2005.

        I cannot find the Saphier paper online, but the journal name does not sound like a peer reviewed scientific journal.

        Based on the abstract, Resnick admits that he is just assuming that "effort actually creates ability".  See http://www.eric.ed.gov/....

        The Howard "paper" is actually a newsletter from an advocacy organization.  http://www.efficacy.org/....

        In short, there is nothing here you would give the slightest weight to if it did not say things you want to believe.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site