6 ms·

Exactly, you take one group and label them "gifted" and tell them how wonderful they are and how they all are and going to become doctors, engineers, lawyers, a

Exactly, you take one group and label them "gifted" and tell them how wonderful they are and how they all are and going to become doctors, engineers, lawyers, and accountants. Then you take the other group and tell them they're "sufficient" and "average". No wonder the kids who are gifted are going to excel--they have confidence. The "average" kids have already had their dreams crushed. No more art/photography, jazz band, advanced chemistry or computer labs for you! Now all your electives are college readiness programs and that suck the fun out of learning. I remember honors chemistry at my high school was allowed to do experiments, but regular chemistry wasn't. No wonder the kids in honors chemistry liked chemistry more and were excited to learn. I remember watching my chem teacher taking pure sodium and dropping it in water and watching it explode. The other class had to read out of a textbook.

Daniel_Newby 15y ago
No wonder the kids who are gifted are going to excel--they have confidence. The "average" kids have already had their dreams crushed. This hypothesis has been tested and refuted. When identical twins are separated at birth and adopted by different families, they often have wildly different environments. Some go to good schools, some to bad. Some go to families that nurture academic achievement, some to sports families. Nonetheless, the achievement level of one twin is predicted mostly by that of the other twin, not by the adoptive environment. The underlying cause appears to be general intelligence, as measured by IQ. The effect holds even for highly intelligent people who are diverted from the university track. They simply direct their achievements in other directions.
- kragen 15y ago
  As explained in other branches of this discussion thread, this hypothesis has also been tested and confirmed: kids of different countries are distributed on dramatically different bell curves, much further separated than kids of different ethnicities in the same country. Probably the twin studies you're describing didn't find much of an environmental effect because the environments they were looking at were actually very similar, in part because only extremely bad families have a major environmental effect.
  - Daniel_Newby 15y ago
    Compare the study in question[1] with a list of the nations ranked by IQ[2]. The lists are in about the same order, because math accomplishment is driven by IQ, IQ is strongly influenced by genetics, and different countries tend to have different genetics. much further separated than kids of different ethnicities in the same country No. African-Americans, for example, have an average IQ of 85, very much like an up-market African country. Go read The Bell Curve. only extremely bad families have a major environmental effect The siblings in the adoptive families have nearly the full range of accomplishments of the general public. The possible explanations are (1) a sibling's accomplishments are mostly determined by internal causes, or (2) a sibling's accomplishments are substantially influenced by environment, and they experience a wide range of environments (even within the same family). Other studies use twins raised together. The twins are more similar to each other than to their non-twin siblings, and the differences are explained mostly by IQ. This suggests that accomplishment comes mostly from internal causes. the environments they were looking at were actually very similar In terms of opportunity, they are extremely similar by adulthood. In the U.S., annual income at age 30 depends mostly on IQ, regardless of race, ethnicity, and other factors. [1] http://pirls.bc.edu/timss2007/PDF/T07_M_IR_Chapter1.pdf http://pirls.bc.edu/timss2007/PDF/T07_M_IR_Chapter1.pdf [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations
    - kragen 15y ago
      In fact, although IQ explains more academic achievement and income than any other measurable psychometric factor, it still doesn’t explain very much of them. It explains only about 15-25% of variation in individual income and only about 25% of variation in individual academic achievement. Most of the rest is due to factors that are not measured. By contrast, per capita income explains 46% of variation in average IQ among countries, and even more of the variation in academic performance. (Average academic performance explains over 50% of the variation in average IQ among countries.) So, does high average income cause people to have high IQs and good academic performance, or the other way around? http://sitemaker.umich.edu/salas.356/more_money__better_grades http://sitemaker.umich.edu/salas.356/more_money__better_grad... documents a study that found children’s academic performance improves when their parents’ income increases. The TIMSS data you’re citing show the opposite of what you claim them to. The variations in academic achievement between countries are much larger than variations in IQ between ethnicities. TIMSS doesn’t include a lot of African countries, but of those it does include, 8th-grade achievement in Ghana is 309, in Botswana is 364, in Egypt is 391, and in Tunisia is 420, compared to 508 in the US. The TIMSS scale is normalized so that one standard deviation is 100 points. If we estimated that the 508 score were a weighted average of 85% “white people” and 15% “black people” one standard deviation lower, then the “white people” would be at 523 and the “black people” would be at 423 --- closer to the “white US people” only one s.d. higher than to the Ghanaians 1.14 s.d.s lower. Even Botswana (perhaps the “upmarket” African country you’re thinking of?) would be 0.59 s.d.s below the “black US people”. (The above breakdown is roughly correct. In the NAEP, the grade 8 mathematics average score for white students in 2009 was 293, the s.d. was 33, and the average for black students was 261, almost exactly one s.d. lower. http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/ http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/ doesn’t let me link the results, though.) In general, the TIMSS rankings are much better explained by median income than by average intelligence. The Taiwan average is almost two s.d.s above the international average, which would be like an average IQ of 130, while the Qatar average is almost two s.d.s below, which would be like an average IQ of just over 70, “borderline mentally retarded”. If you’ve ever traveled, it’s obvious that Qatar isn’t actually half populated with mentally retarded people and Taiwan isn’t actually half populated with geniuses. According to the book you linked, the measured average IQs are 105 for Taiwan and 78 for Qatar. If you look at this map, you can see how little relationship there is between ethnic composition and national IQ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:National_IQ_Lynn_Vanhanen_2006_IQ_and_Global_Inequality.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:National_IQ_Lynn_Vanhanen_... There are enormous differences between Brazil and Congo, between Vietnam and China, between Singapore (which you can’t even see) and Indonesia. The Bell Curve has been amply debunked already, and in any case is decades out of date.

Daniel_Newby 15y ago

No wonder the kids who are gifted are going to excel--they have confidence. The "average" kids have already had their dreams crushed. This hypothesis has been tested and refuted. When identical twins are separated at birth and adopted by different families, they often have wildly different environments. Some go to good schools, some to bad. Some go to families that nurture academic achievement, some to sports families. Nonetheless, the achievement level of one twin is predicted mostly by that of the other twin, not by the adoptive environment. The underlying cause appears to be general intelligence, as measured by IQ. The effect holds even for highly intelligent people who are diverted from the university track. They simply direct their achievements in other directions.

kragen 15y ago
As explained in other branches of this discussion thread, this hypothesis has also been tested and confirmed: kids of different countries are distributed on dramatically different bell curves, much further separated than kids of different ethnicities in the same country. Probably the twin studies you're describing didn't find much of an environmental effect because the environments they were looking at were actually very similar, in part because only extremely bad families have a major environmental effect.
- Daniel_Newby 15y ago
  Compare the study in question[1] with a list of the nations ranked by IQ[2]. The lists are in about the same order, because math accomplishment is driven by IQ, IQ is strongly influenced by genetics, and different countries tend to have different genetics. much further separated than kids of different ethnicities in the same country No. African-Americans, for example, have an average IQ of 85, very much like an up-market African country. Go read The Bell Curve. only extremely bad families have a major environmental effect The siblings in the adoptive families have nearly the full range of accomplishments of the general public. The possible explanations are (1) a sibling's accomplishments are mostly determined by internal causes, or (2) a sibling's accomplishments are substantially influenced by environment, and they experience a wide range of environments (even within the same family). Other studies use twins raised together. The twins are more similar to each other than to their non-twin siblings, and the differences are explained mostly by IQ. This suggests that accomplishment comes mostly from internal causes. the environments they were looking at were actually very similar In terms of opportunity, they are extremely similar by adulthood. In the U.S., annual income at age 30 depends mostly on IQ, regardless of race, ethnicity, and other factors. [1] http://pirls.bc.edu/timss2007/PDF/T07_M_IR_Chapter1.pdf http://pirls.bc.edu/timss2007/PDF/T07_M_IR_Chapter1.pdf [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations
  - kragen 15y ago
    In fact, although IQ explains more academic achievement and income than any other measurable psychometric factor, it still doesn’t explain very much of them. It explains only about 15-25% of variation in individual income and only about 25% of variation in individual academic achievement. Most of the rest is due to factors that are not measured. By contrast, per capita income explains 46% of variation in average IQ among countries, and even more of the variation in academic performance. (Average academic performance explains over 50% of the variation in average IQ among countries.) So, does high average income cause people to have high IQs and good academic performance, or the other way around? http://sitemaker.umich.edu/salas.356/more_money__better_grades http://sitemaker.umich.edu/salas.356/more_money__better_grad... documents a study that found children’s academic performance improves when their parents’ income increases. The TIMSS data you’re citing show the opposite of what you claim them to. The variations in academic achievement between countries are much larger than variations in IQ between ethnicities. TIMSS doesn’t include a lot of African countries, but of those it does include, 8th-grade achievement in Ghana is 309, in Botswana is 364, in Egypt is 391, and in Tunisia is 420, compared to 508 in the US. The TIMSS scale is normalized so that one standard deviation is 100 points. If we estimated that the 508 score were a weighted average of 85% “white people” and 15% “black people” one standard deviation lower, then the “white people” would be at 523 and the “black people” would be at 423 --- closer to the “white US people” only one s.d. higher than to the Ghanaians 1.14 s.d.s lower. Even Botswana (perhaps the “upmarket” African country you’re thinking of?) would be 0.59 s.d.s below the “black US people”. (The above breakdown is roughly correct. In the NAEP, the grade 8 mathematics average score for white students in 2009 was 293, the s.d. was 33, and the average for black students was 261, almost exactly one s.d. lower. http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/ http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/ doesn’t let me link the results, though.) In general, the TIMSS rankings are much better explained by median income than by average intelligence. The Taiwan average is almost two s.d.s above the international average, which would be like an average IQ of 130, while the Qatar average is almost two s.d.s below, which would be like an average IQ of just over 70, “borderline mentally retarded”. If you’ve ever traveled, it’s obvious that Qatar isn’t actually half populated with mentally retarded people and Taiwan isn’t actually half populated with geniuses. According to the book you linked, the measured average IQs are 105 for Taiwan and 78 for Qatar. If you look at this map, you can see how little relationship there is between ethnic composition and national IQ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:National_IQ_Lynn_Vanhanen_2006_IQ_and_Global_Inequality.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:National_IQ_Lynn_Vanhanen_... There are enormous differences between Brazil and Congo, between Vietnam and China, between Singapore (which you can’t even see) and Indonesia. The Bell Curve has been amply debunked already, and in any case is decades out of date.