4 ms·
In this article, "value" means "perform standardized testing for". In that sense, we don't value much at all, because even the things we test for ("verbal", "m
by bediger 15y ago
In this article, "value" means "perform standardized testing for". In that sense, we don't value much at all, because even the things we test for ("verbal", "math") we reduce to some inane blather for the purposes of testing.
From a larger viewpoint, what does this author think we do for football players? Do we not "value" them? In large part, what the players do is the "spatial intelligence" of the article. Do we not "value" airplane pilots? Same thing there.
- ndefinite 15y agoAgreed!
- ndefinite 15y agoI got minus'd a point for that? I still agree though. The first thing that comes to mind when I think of the "elite" spatially intelligent are professional athletes and race car drivers. Value is subjective and some fields value traits that vary from what is valued in other fields. To be a successful mathematician, you don't need to be particularly capable when it comes to spacial intelligence. The article highlights concerns but reality is different; the statistical analysis I conduct in a day requires very little spacial intelligence. The most productive athletes in my city do require a superior level of spacial intelligence and they are compensated incredibly well for their contributions (paid more in a year than I am likely to be paid in may entire career).
- jaggederest 15y agoRight, by his description the only things we value are 'skill at taking standardized tests'. I'd say if you look at peak salaries, some of the most valued professions are spatial.