So, what should be the difference between educating smart and stupid people?

[Drake Tungsten]

As I was reading through the thread, I thought I had missed all the condescension and insults and was stuck with the ****ing love-in that followed. Way to bring it back to my comfort zone, Kuci...

[Impaler[WrG]]

1st Article - The author is ofcorse correct that low IQ limits the maximum amount one can lern but he sets the bar blatantly too high, a person with an IQ of 88 would not be doomed to functional illiteracy, We know literacy is >90% which would be everyone above 70. Though its true that ones inteligence cant be changed its only after the age of ~5 that thats true. Prior to that the whole nuture component of inteligence is being recived greatly determining the final IQ. I dont have any firm numbers but my guess is that the average genetic potential IQ is >120 and enough people fail to attain it to bring the avage down to 100. Improving that early nurture would be the most effective means to raise the collective IQ.

2nd Article - Yep the college system is absorbing far more people then it should, the huge drop out rate even spawned its own educational level "some college" which we could say is in the 105-115 range.

3rd Article - He hit the nail on the head about gifted children not having their feet put to the fire. Intelectualy I put my own feet to the fire more the educational system, school was tedium with the ocassional nuget of interest. Society should definatly devote more resorces to developing gifted children, many like myself just learned to skate through school and though that in itself did no harm (IQ wasn't diminished because that simply dosn't change short of brain-damage and nothing taught in HS is of any value) it didn't instill any great deal of ambition or responsibility in me which would have served society better (not that I dont enjoy witling my time away playing Civ and posting here).

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
1st Article - The author is ofcorse correct that low IQ limits the maximum amount one can lern but he sets the bar blatantly too high, a person with an IQ of 88 would not be doomed to functional illiteracy, We know literacy is >90% which would be everyone above 70.

Actually, 90% is above ~82

[KrazyHorse]

Though its true that ones inteligence cant be changed its only after the age of ~5 that thats true. Prior to that the whole nuture component of inteligence is being recived greatly determining the final IQ.

Where are you getting this?

[KrazyHorse]

I dont have any firm numbers but my guess is that the average genetic potential IQ is >120 and enough people fail to attain it to bring the avage down to 100.

That's quite simply a giant pile of steaming horse****.

[VetLegion]

This image will probably be helpful:

[KrazyHorse]

You might also want to once more note that (depending on the test) sigma = 15 or 16

[VetLegion]

Though its true that ones inteligence cant be changed its only after the age of ~5 that thats true. Prior to that the whole nuture component of inteligence is being recived greatly determining the final IQ.

Various tests of twins' IQ indicate that it is mostly nature, not nurture that determines it.

[TCO]

It does not make you a better person in God (or evolution's) eyes if you are smarter. Just like being taller or whatever doesn't make you better. Being smarter makes you do better at complex work tasks and particularly, it helps in school and difficult classes. Way too many people (of both the pro and anti Bell Curve bent) seem to conflate mental power with overall superiority to server society.

For those interested, I recommend taking a look at Rickover's monograph from the 50s on education. He makes some similar points as above (this is not a new problem). In particular, of interest, he is very much against the tendancy for "enriched classes". (Amazing that they had that crap back in thed 50s...the French are right, things never change...) Instead of spending time getting enriched versions of calculus or chemistry or whatever, stronger students should be accelerated and moved along to higher level material sooner.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I was waiting for the answer to the question in the title to show up.

So, what should be the difference between educating smart and stupid people?

And you're saying the difference between educating smart and stupid people should be someone who posts here on poly?

I guess I'm not getting this joke.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Geronimo
I guess I'm not getting this joke.

He's mocking Odin.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Wycoff


He's mocking Odin.

that would be fine if the statement:

"Odin should be the difference between educating smart and stupid people"

Made the least bit of sense either at face value or ironically.

[KrazyHorse]

It was a poorly-worded joke, but it still managed to convey the important bit: that Odin has been educated, yet remains stupid.

It was enough to make me laugh.

[TCO]

Geronimo: The point was that we think Odin is a bit slow for thinking this the most interesting was who wrote the material rather than discussion of the issues themselves.

[Kuciwalker]

Oh I was going to say the same thing regardless of what his post was about.