Posted on 01/16/2007 6:19:46 AM PST by Pharmboy
Half of all children are below average, and teachers can do only so much for them.
Education is becoming the preferred method for diagnosing and attacking a wide range problems in American life. The No Child Left Behind Act is one prominent example. Another is the recent volley of articles that blame rising income inequality on the increasing economic premium for advanced education. Crime, drugs, extramarital births, unemployment--you name the problem, and I will show you a stack of claims that education is to blame, or at least implicated. One word is missing from these discussions: intelligence. Hardly anyone will admit it, but education's role in causing or solving any problem cannot be evaluated without considering the underlying intellectual ability of the people being educated. Today and over the next two days, I will put the case for three simple truths about the mediating role of intelligence that should bear on the way we think about education and the nation's future.
Today's simple truth: Half of all children are below average in intelligence. We do not live in Lake Wobegon.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Don't argue IQ statistical ranges with me. This is part of my bread and butter.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You are counting the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin, and completely missing the point of Murray's argument.
You are counting the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin, and completely missing the point of Murray's argument
I perfectly understand the point of Murry's argument and still think that this is a very poor opening sentence.
Well, if you are an expert, you should be able to explain it to a non-expert. The simple point is as follows: there is a median intelligence (which is commonly referred to as "average"; those who are smarter are smarter than average; and those who are less smart are less smart than average. This is a necessity of logic, aside from any expertise in statistics.
So why does this simple logical necessity not apply to intelligence, in your view?
How many PhD's in orbital mechanics does one really need? School is not the only place where one can get an education. Many educated in the "school of hard knocks" learn to do quite well.
Half of all children are below average...Murry more than anyone knows how bogus this sentence is... Half the children are not below average. Average IQ is a range and a substantial range, 68% of the population lies between 84 and 116 which is considered the average range. Another 16% is in the "smarter than average bear to genius range. Which leaves about 16% below average.
Half of all children are below the median.
I think my daughter with below average IQ could get a PhD in math if she really wanted to.
You have to figure out why they have low IQ before you make blanket statements.
My daughter's IQ is low because of speech problems. It also affects her writing and somewhat her reading. However, her math abilities are better than most people posting in this forum.
Also, IQ can be raised. We are working on ways to improve my daughter's IQ. One of her problems is short term memory, and there are ways to improve it.
Also, she is in intensive speech therapy to improve her verbal IQ scores.
My daughter is also a hard worker, and tends to strive for things that she has to work for. She steps up to the plate when presented with a challenge.
For example, she is in a new private Christian school for 4th grade. They have Spanish at the new school. She cannot say a lot of the Spanish words, and the whole class is very hard for her. We could have probably gotten her out of the class. However, we haven't, and my daughter is stepping up to the plate. She has an A in the class. Her teacher lets her write words instead of saying them. Also, if you show her the Spanish word, she can say the English word for it. She also keeps on learning how to say more and more Spanish words.
By the way, I am not a big fan of the public school system. Last year, my daughter was totally screwed by them. They said she was doing okay even though her reading level had stopped growing, and she was 6 months behind in 3rd grade. We moved her out of public school, and placed her in a multi-sensory reading program at her private school. Her reading is making huge strides this year.
IQ changes. Also, kids can be good at other things. IQ does not tests mathmatical, artistic or musical abilities. It does not show a child's work ethic.
There are a lot of things that make a child successful.
I had an old boyfriend in college who was a member of Mensa and a National Merit Scholar. He got kicked out of college because he rarely went to class and he didn't study. I have average (or maybe a little above average) intelligence, and I got a degree in engineering because I worked for it.
I agree with you about vouchers and free market in education!!!
I also think that schools (or at least classes) should be tailored to meet different learning styles. My daughter with brain damage is a visual learner, but my other daughter is a auditory learner. Some kids (especially boys) also do better in noisy, active, hands-on classes.
I also don't think there should be grades per-se. I'd rather kids be separated by both ability and age. Grant it, I wouldn't want a 7th grader who can't read with my 3rd grader. I think kids who are good at math or reading need to be grouped together and kids who are struggling in those areas should be grouped together.
I am not an phychometrician nor do I play one on TV. I have read Murray's book, have graduate level classes in mathematics and statistics on my resume, and stand behind what I said. My "blanket statement" is certainly true, even though there may be some exceptions i.e. some variability in the data.
Given what you have said about her age, you are in no position to say whether or not she'll be doctorate material. Neither am I for that matter. You will probably react very negatively to that statement, so be it. Math Ph.D.s don't take only math classes btw.
Good luck to your daughter in any event.
"the smartest are held back and the slowest never catch up" Yep. Add to the fact that large numbers of kids in public schools don't speak English as a first language and presto, we have a real problem.
What I am saying is that IQ alone does not tell whether a person will be successful. It is a very limited test of certain aspects of a person's abilities. People thought Helen Keller was mentally retarded. She wasn't. She did learn differently than other people.
I do know that math PhD's don't take math classes only. I also know that if she wanted it she could do it. There are quite a few scientists, math mathmeticians that have had learning disabilities.
Actually a math PhD is not a good career choice for her because most PhDs also teach, and I don't think that would would be a good match.
I'm encouraging her to look into accounting. She loves money, she's good with math, she wouldn't have to talk much, she could work at home, and she could work part-time when she has kids.
I'm not even worried about her non-accounting classes. By the time she is in college, she'll be writing very proficiently. She is turning into a good reader thanks to a multi-sensory reading program. Plus, lots of colleges have programs for kids with learning disabilities: note takers, time extensions on tests, etc.
The SAT correlates quite well with IQ and one whole section is math alone.
mark.
Half of all children are below the median.
On the scale they are. But because of confidence intervals, one cannot say exactly who.
I'm encouraging her to look into accounting.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I have two daughters. Both have B.S. degrees in math from our flagship state university. The older recently earned a masters in mathematics. Their emphasis was in statistics.
There are jobs for statisticians in every type of business imaginable.
Intelligence in the class room - oxymoron considering the NEA and the interloping schoolboards.
I remember grouping and think it would be a great idea.
So why does this simple logical necessity not apply to intelligence, in your view?
When one uses a static unit of measurment such as... ohh...inches and measure many item of different inches and average them, one has a true average of all those grouped inches.
When you measure an IQ one uses not inches but IQ intervals. Thus if your IQ is 100 it means that it is 100 with a plus or minus of 5 points or more depending on the confidence of the instrument used. That amount of variablility is normal in psychological measurments and testing. So the people immediately above and below the median may or may not be there. One doesnt really know.
I objected to Murry's opening statement because precision is important in psychometrics. And it is more elusive than in other subjects such as engineering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.