Anonymous wrote:OK one of the problems in the U.S. is this assumption that IQ is determinative in terms of learning. Brilliant people on an IQ level often don't accomplish a great deal because they lack the work ethic. Also it is worth thinking about this in terms of working memory and fluidity. If we have a fixed amount of space in our working memory say 10 concepts, over time you can chunk concepts together so you can know more. Think spelling, math facts, vocabulary, That is dependent on work and being introduced to the right sets of information. Crappy schools amplify the gap between people with less working memory/fluidity i.e. IQ. Higher quality schools would enable students to work harder to know and make up for some of the advantages of IQ. They may actually accomplish more because they do have a work ethic. Quite a few researchers think this is really the difference you are seeing between the US and Europe and many Asian countries like S. Korea or Japan.
The issue in the U.S. is we do not have systematized curriculum that helps kids build a wide range of knowledge.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
The achievement gap has proven stubbornly hard to close and probably reflects fundamental social problems that cannot be addressed by education alone. Thus, if closing the achievement gap is a condition precedent to serving the needs of high quality students, the needs of those student will sadly continue to go unmet.
Or there are fundamental differences in the abilities of the different groups. I think this will become clear one way or another in the next 15-20 years as genetic testing/analysis progresses.
Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
The achievement gap has proven stubbornly hard to close and probably reflects fundamental social problems that cannot be addressed by education alone. Thus, if closing the achievement gap is a condition precedent to serving the needs of high quality students, the needs of those student will sadly continue to go unmet.
Or there are fundamental differences in the abilities of the different groups. I think this will become clear one way or another in the next 15-20 years as genetic testing/analysis progresses.
Wait, what?
Do you really want a response to this? Could it do any good, other than maybe prompt a disturbed laugh?
People keep coming back to ideas like this and strangely, they keep not quite finding enough proof... Hmmmmmm.......
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
The achievement gap has proven stubbornly hard to close and probably reflects fundamental social problems that cannot be addressed by education alone. Thus, if closing the achievement gap is a condition precedent to serving the needs of high quality students, the needs of those student will sadly continue to go unmet.
Or there are fundamental differences in the abilities of the different groups. I think this will become clear one way or another in the next 15-20 years as genetic testing/analysis progresses.
Wait, what?
Do you really want a response to this? Could it do any good, other than maybe prompt a disturbed laugh?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
The achievement gap has proven stubbornly hard to close and probably reflects fundamental social problems that cannot be addressed by education alone. Thus, if closing the achievement gap is a condition precedent to serving the needs of high quality students, the needs of those student will sadly continue to go unmet.
Or there are fundamental differences in the abilities of the different groups. I think this will become clear one way or another in the next 15-20 years as genetic testing/analysis progresses.
Wait, what?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
The achievement gap has proven stubbornly hard to close and probably reflects fundamental social problems that cannot be addressed by education alone. Thus, if closing the achievement gap is a condition precedent to serving the needs of high quality students, the needs of those student will sadly continue to go unmet.
Or there are fundamental differences in the abilities of the different groups. I think this will become clear one way or another in the next 15-20 years as genetic testing/analysis progresses.
Anonymous wrote:"High quality?" Really?
Anonymous wrote:"High quality?" Really?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?
The achievement gap has proven stubbornly hard to close and probably reflects fundamental social problems that cannot be addressed by education alone. Thus, if closing the achievement gap is a condition precedent to serving the needs of high quality students, the needs of those student will sadly continue to go unmet.
Anonymous wrote:Will we have to close the achievement gaps across demographics and class before we can implement top quality DCPS options to draw in high quality students?