- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Some thoughts on IQ
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:17 am to BhamTigah
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:17 am to BhamTigah
quote:
If you can’t tell me who the 1st, 3rd, and 16th presidents were, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote for the next one.
Why? What does memorizing the order of presidents prove?
Rote memorization doesn't indicate intelligence.
2
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:20 am to 4cubbies
quote:Our bang for the buck in public schools is poor. We need improvement. Performance improvement necessitates accountability. Teacher accountability requires measurement.
This is my biggest complaint about forcing public school kids to take the state test and then blaming teachers if the kids don't do great.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:20 am to anc
I wonder what Hank Johnson’s I q is . That guy is Forrest Gump level . His mom must have really cared about his schooling
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:21 am to 4cubbies
quote:
yeah, but this is America.
Snot Boogie RIP
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:24 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Our bang for the buck in public schools is poor. We need improvement. Performance improvement necessitates accountability. Teacher accountability requires measurement.
This line of thought assumes that student's academic performance is solely determined by his/her teacher. We already know that SES is the biggest indicator for academic success or failure.
LINK
LINK
LINK
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:27 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Do you think IQ is a useful measurement in modern times?
There are usually better measures. SAT better measures college success. There is quite a debate on whether LSAT or undergraduate GPA better measures law school success. ASVAB better measures military career effectiveness, etc. We have taken the work of Binet, Terman, etc., used their concepts, and developed better metrology for the items we wish to measure. For most areas that I have an interest, there is a better test and a better path to education for achievement in certain fields.
Nevertheless, it could be the optimum current test for many pursuits. When you get several standard deviations from the mean, many things break down. There was a controversial proposal once that your ability to effectively communicate to other populations is based on a band around your IQ score. That is, Paul Dirac may have had trouble explaining quantum mechanics to a randomly selected group of people, but was able effectively communicate to an audience of high-achieving physicists. Of course, since that time, we discovered Dirac may have had his own cognitive issues that are separate and apart and not correlated with his IQ. Indeed, one of the things that Terman did was to dispel the "nerdiness" trope. There is no correlation between achievement potential and physical and social skills. The only correlation to any such limitation was myopia. There could be value in determining the efficacy of certain techniques of education at extreme ends of the spectrum, but in trying to find this out, we tend to turn young kids who measure high in IQ into lab rats.
Thus, it still has value, and it's still complete as a test, but most often, we have something better.
This post was edited on 7/30/25 at 9:46 am
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:35 am to 4cubbies
quote:NEGATIVE!
This line of thought assumes that student's academic performance is solely determined by his/her teacher.
This line of thought assumes that the student's teacher has a role in determination of academic performance, and should be accountable for underperformance in that role.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:40 am to dukkbill
Wow, the thread is getting long so haven't read much in the last 20 hours. But here is an item re: Genetics vs. Environment.
I read The Bell Curve when it came out. Then I read the 2 years of critiques and then the responses by the authors debunking all the critiques. The book says IQ is more important than environment. Not because of theory. It's because of a very large and long term study.
They took lots of identical twins given up for adoption to separate parents. It happens a lot because most couples don't want two new babies. Some split between middle class and upper class adopters. Some split between middle class and lower class adopters. And some were between upper and lower class. The twins did not know each other. But the researchers kept track of where they were and handed the info down to the next generation of researchers. Finally, when the twins were all in their 50s and 60s they were interviewed. They all had the same net worth. The kids of the poor made the same money as the kids of the rich because they had the same I.Q.
I read The Bell Curve when it came out. Then I read the 2 years of critiques and then the responses by the authors debunking all the critiques. The book says IQ is more important than environment. Not because of theory. It's because of a very large and long term study.
They took lots of identical twins given up for adoption to separate parents. It happens a lot because most couples don't want two new babies. Some split between middle class and upper class adopters. Some split between middle class and lower class adopters. And some were between upper and lower class. The twins did not know each other. But the researchers kept track of where they were and handed the info down to the next generation of researchers. Finally, when the twins were all in their 50s and 60s they were interviewed. They all had the same net worth. The kids of the poor made the same money as the kids of the rich because they had the same I.Q.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:45 am to 4cubbies
quote:
True, but some students didn't sleep well (and we know how sleep deprivation impacts cognition), or maybe didn't eat breakfast that morning, or got in a fight with someone at home and went to school upset, etc. etc. There are countless variables that could negatively impact a child's ability to score well on the state test that have nothing do with aptitude or knowledge retention.
Yes, and some students that just have a "good day." Individual test scores, only taken once, have less value than a collection of test scores. That's why qualification is usually multivariate, and testing is usually done more than once for any person. Across the entire population, you can glean information about that population.
For example, consider the LSAT. You could right now, create an LSAC account, take a practice test, and get back a score report. That report alone is not going to give you a prediction on your law school success, is not going to give you a GREAT predictor on admission, nor is it going to show if you had a "bad day" (although most reasons for a bad day, such as anxiety can be improved with the right education plan). It can give you a baseline on what you should consider your targets, show where you have skill deficiencies, show where you have potential knowledge deficienies, show where you haven't likely been exposed to communication patterns in certain disciplines, and possibly even show other reasons for "don't test well".
If you're motivated to obtain a certain score to achieve admission, you should be able to rate how well another can help you achieve a score increase to ensure admissability into a reasonable selected school. You can take other tests, and over time, they should converge to a score that is a reasonable predictor of the score you can expect to obtain. If your reasonable about your expectation, why wouldn't you shop for the persons that can help you the most in that area.
When you are a child, you don't have that executive function and we depend on our society to help in that evaluation. Even if there are a few "underachievers" and a few "overachievers", it can balance out to get to an effective measure.
quote:
Funding is tied to hgiher (sic) state test scores, as well.
Probably. I don't typically pay attention to those studies. I'm sure like most metrology, it is quantized. A certain level of funding is necessary, and there is a certain level of funding where there is diminishing return. I doubt there is a linear relationship.
This post was edited on 7/30/25 at 9:48 am
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:48 am to 4cubbies
quote:
quote:
If you can’t tell me who the 1st, 3rd, and 16th presidents were, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote for the next one.
Why? What does memorizing the order of presidents prove?
Rote memorization doesn't indicate intelligence.
I don't think he is saying you should memorize the order of the presidents, but rather those 3 specific presidents are such major figures in American history that you couldn't not know that if you have a basic understanding of American history. It seems like every article, book, and documentary on Lincoln mentions multiple times that he was the 16th president.
I could tell you every president in order, not because I sat and memorized a list of presidents, but because I enjoy reading and learning about American history. The order of presidents is information I can extract from my knowledge of US History.
Therefore, if someone asked me who was the 6th US president, I couldn't tell you instantly, but in my head I can quickly go through a timeline of US politics to count to 6, and tell you it's John Quincy Adams.
History should be learned as collection of stories with characters, events, and the consequences of actions. It should not be learned by memorizing the specific dates and locations of events. That knowledge comes naturally over time as you better understand the story.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:48 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
This line of thought assumes that the student's teacher has a role in determination of academic performance, and should be accountable for underperformance in that role.
But you only want to hold teachers accountable for state test scores.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:50 am to 4cubbies
quote:bullshite!
We already know that SES is the biggest indicator
Sorry, but the income gap crap excuse is beyond old.
The biggest indicator is family stability, culture, parental emphases.
Insofar as failure in those areas often corresponds to poor economic status, there certainly is an association. But throwing more money at it (as Canada has tried) will only beget further demands for more, more, more (as evident in the Canadian study findings you cited) via continued findings associated with SES variance.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:53 am to 4cubbies
quote:No.
But you only want to hold teachers accountable for state test scores.
But I do want to hold teachers accountable for state test scores because there absolute is accountability there.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:55 am to dukkbill
quote:
Probably. I don't typically pay attention to those studies.
These aren't studies It's educational policy. I actually need to correct myself though. No Child Left Behind tied federal funds to state test achievement. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) passed in 2015 replaced that funding model.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:57 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The biggest indicator is family stability, culture, parental emphases.
SES is a great measurement of these factors.
quote:
But throwing more money at it (as Canada has tried) will only beget further demands for more, more, more (as evident in the Canadian study findings you cited) via continued findings associated with SES variance.
Throwing money at something is very reactionary. We need an intentional, proactive approach that I haven't come up with yet.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:58 am to Zach
quote:You're going to need to cite that bit, Zach. I'd be surprised if the facts lay out quite like you remember.
Finally, when the twins were all in their 50s and 60s they were interviewed. They all had the same net worth. The kids of the poor made the same money as the kids of the rich because they had the same I.Q.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 9:58 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
No.
Who else do you want to hold accountable and what metrics do you propose using to do that?
Posted on 7/30/25 at 10:01 am to 4cubbies
quote:
This line of thought assumes that student's academic performance is solely determined by his/her teacher. We already know that SES is the biggest indicator for academic success or failure.
SES doesn't make a family more successful as a whole.
Families with good impulse control and work ethic rise into/maintain high SES.
Once again 4chubbies doesn't understand cause and effect...
Posted on 7/30/25 at 10:02 am to 4cubbies
quote:
But you only want to hold teachers accountable for state test scores
I can't speak for the person you replied to, but what's wrong with giving teachers their aliquot share of both responsibility and praise.
You could be the best teacher in the world, and you would not get a class of hypothetical 82 IQ students to score as high as the hypothetical class of 125 students. If you had the one 82 student that was highly motivated with high executive function, you might be able to make that student competitive to the student in the other group who is like "Bro, I'm so smart, I'm going to take this stoned, get a middling score and brag how I took it stoned."
Nevertheless, that's not the job or the appropriate measure. The job is usually taking that population and increasing their educational attainment. If your only good working with motivated students one-on-one, then get an account on Wyzant and become a tutor. You will have just as many people assing-off in an honors class as a you will from a standard population class.
To wrap this back to your other questions, that is the deficiency in the IQ type measures. We are devoting extra resources to that student that is assing-off that could be spent on the motivated student in the other population set. Also, it's rarely because "they are bored" or some other trope. There are usually the same type of factors at work that are other predictable success factors.
That is why that many programs where we devote additional resources also have an achievement function as part of the qualification.
Posted on 7/30/25 at 10:07 am to 4cubbies
quote:Negative.
SES is a great measurement of these factors.
It happens to associate in lowerclass households.
It undersamples similarly contributional family dysfunction in middle and upper class households
Page 14 of 33
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News