3 ms·

I'm sure segregating students based on a genetic test that tries to predict their intelligence wouldn't cause any kind of reinforcement of those trends at all o

I'm sure segregating students based on a genetic test that tries to predict their intelligence wouldn't cause any kind of reinforcement of those trends at all or create disadvantages for those now branded dumb for their entire school career. Surely this could never happen.

Scaevolus 9y ago
Why bother doing that when we already segregate students by more accurate IQ tests for gifted programs?
- barry-cotter 9y ago
  Indeed. And the older the testees get the more stable the results are. Infant and early childhood tests are predictive but by 14 or so the results are basically the adult results
- behindmyscreen 9y ago
  Was that meant with a tongue in cheek?
- MagnumOpus 9y ago
  Selection of the smartest (also tallest, least disease-prone etc) embryo during IVF. A trillion dollar industry once it is accurate enough - in 15-20 years.
Cyberdog 9y ago
Giving ammo to racists that already take delight in associating intelligence with race… prompting individual or institutional abortion of fetuses that don't appear they will be smart enough after birth… I, for one, hope that this story isn't true.
- Ancalagon 9y ago
  Thank you. I don't understand the optimistic smell coming from HN regarding this story.
  - swebs 9y ago
    Denying science because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions? How is that any different than anti-vaxers or global warming deniers? I'm afraid that soon we'll have anti-genomers.
    - TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
      Because anti-vaxing is bullshit, but the science of heritability is vastly more subtle and complex. As is the psychology of intelligence. And the relationship between g and being a good developer. All of this is called doing science - because it's currently a work in progress - not denying it.
    - mattnewton 9y ago
      The definition of intelligence and how it should be interpreted is what’s being debated. There is a rich history of people making pseudo-scientific claims based on hereditary intelligence. It’s not clear how close this is from anti-vaxing and how close it is to anti-phrenology to me right now.
flukus 9y ago
> create disadvantages for those now branded dumb for their entire school career We already do this too an extent, schools have "smart" classes and "dumb" classes, typically for things like math. The biggest problem is that they don't apply this until high school. Aside from any innate ability, kids have different learning speeds and letting them fall behind on a subject they don't understand while the rest of the class moves on does no good for anyone.
- j4mes_w 9y ago
  It also doesn't help children that do understand what is being taught to have to repeat basic concepts multiple times for the benefit of children that are slower. Intelligence, physical ability, beauty are not distributed evenly about the population of humans. Pretending it is for the sake of feelings is foolish and short-sighted. If we could be adults about the facts and foster each individual's strengths and weaknesses without being cts to each other we would be much better off. Why is intelligence such a touchy subject??? Some people are short, some tall. Some fast, some slow. Some smart, some dumb. It doesn't make them any less human. And denying that certain identifiable groups have clusters of one or the other attribute around their genetics is equally unproductive. Obviously it isn't deterministic in EVERY individual but its a starting point. Give everyone a chance but please stop pretending that everyone is the same or capable of the same things. Human biodiversity is real
- stormbrew 9y ago
  There is a huge huge difference between recognizing a student's need for a different learning style empirically and forcing them into a path based on a genetic test from kindergarten. I am absolutely not in favour of one size fits all education styles, but this is definitely not the answer.

Scaevolus 9y ago

Why bother doing that when we already segregate students by more accurate IQ tests for gifted programs?

barry-cotter 9y ago
Indeed. And the older the testees get the more stable the results are. Infant and early childhood tests are predictive but by 14 or so the results are basically the adult results
behindmyscreen 9y ago
Was that meant with a tongue in cheek?
MagnumOpus 9y ago
Selection of the smartest (also tallest, least disease-prone etc) embryo during IVF. A trillion dollar industry once it is accurate enough - in 15-20 years.

Cyberdog 9y ago

Giving ammo to racists that already take delight in associating intelligence with race… prompting individual or institutional abortion of fetuses that don't appear they will be smart enough after birth… I, for one, hope that this story isn't true.

Ancalagon 9y ago
Thank you. I don't understand the optimistic smell coming from HN regarding this story.
- swebs 9y ago
  Denying science because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions? How is that any different than anti-vaxers or global warming deniers? I'm afraid that soon we'll have anti-genomers.
  - TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
    Because anti-vaxing is bullshit, but the science of heritability is vastly more subtle and complex. As is the psychology of intelligence. And the relationship between g and being a good developer. All of this is called doing science - because it's currently a work in progress - not denying it.
  - mattnewton 9y ago
    The definition of intelligence and how it should be interpreted is what’s being debated. There is a rich history of people making pseudo-scientific claims based on hereditary intelligence. It’s not clear how close this is from anti-vaxing and how close it is to anti-phrenology to me right now.

flukus 9y ago

> create disadvantages for those now branded dumb for their entire school career We already do this too an extent, schools have "smart" classes and "dumb" classes, typically for things like math. The biggest problem is that they don't apply this until high school. Aside from any innate ability, kids have different learning speeds and letting them fall behind on a subject they don't understand while the rest of the class moves on does no good for anyone.

j4mes_w 9y ago
It also doesn't help children that do understand what is being taught to have to repeat basic concepts multiple times for the benefit of children that are slower. Intelligence, physical ability, beauty are not distributed evenly about the population of humans. Pretending it is for the sake of feelings is foolish and short-sighted. If we could be adults about the facts and foster each individual's strengths and weaknesses without being cts to each other we would be much better off. Why is intelligence such a touchy subject??? Some people are short, some tall. Some fast, some slow. Some smart, some dumb. It doesn't make them any less human. And denying that certain identifiable groups have clusters of one or the other attribute around their genetics is equally unproductive. Obviously it isn't deterministic in EVERY individual but its a starting point. Give everyone a chance but please stop pretending that everyone is the same or capable of the same things. Human biodiversity is real
stormbrew 9y ago
There is a huge huge difference between recognizing a student's need for a different learning style empirically and forcing them into a path based on a genetic test from kindergarten. I am absolutely not in favour of one size fits all education styles, but this is definitely not the answer.