Posted by special_k on March 25, 2006, at 23:35:44
In reply to Re: critique of the bell curve, posted by special_k on March 25, 2006, at 23:15:43
I mean... If a score on an intelligence test is due to innate ability rather than being significantly affected by environmental factors then...
Why have accelerated learning programs for the high scorers? I mean.... If they are in the top 2% then they are likely to remain in the top 2% and given the importance of scoring high on intelligence tests for such things as getting a good job and going to college then the people scoring high are going to do that anyway so why bother giving them accelerated learning programs?
and if people score low then why bother with remedial programs?
i mean... they are destined to remain low scorers to what is the point?
you could say that there are other skills that these groups can be taught.
sure.
but why seperate them to teach em?
i was streamed in high school. there were general tests and they seperated our classes in high school on that basis. i was put in the 2nd top class (my math score pulled me down). i was also a behaviour problem. they moved me to the top class because they thought i was bored. i continued to be a behaviour problem. but it was considered worse becasue i was leading the teachers kids astray (it was kinda funny that teachers kids and the kids of university lecturers and the like tended to do best in these general intelligence tests). so they moved me back to a lower class...
intelligence.
funny because i guess a lot of people in the world would consider you would have to be pretty intelligent to come out with a phd. pretty intelligent. how many people come out with phds?
what measure of intelligence do you want to use?
but why why why?
that is what i don't understand.
identifying problems for remedial action sure. if people come up with cognitive impairment on certain kinds of tasks then remedial help could make a significant difference to their future (i believe).
with the high scorers...
typically social skills training can go a long way (some schools do this). they have found that kids who do well on intelligence tests typically benefit from more phys ed amongst peers who are similarly unconfident.
etc etc
remedial once more.
make sense?
poster:special_k
thread:622738
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20060322/msgs/624686.html