Anonymous wrote:Skip the conspiracy theories. The achievement gaps are real, however. There will clearly be resentment of a school or schools with thresholds for entrance set above the top percentages of black, Hispanic, free-lunch, language learner, Ward 5 5th graders, etc.
However, the mere taking of an entrance exam is some indicator of motivation, either child or parental or community-based. So I would set any testing thresholds at a level that would not eliminate diversity and would still indicate some motivation and preparation. And I would nor substitute in the DC wide tests as a basis for entry. I would also locate any such school far away from Ward 3 and not on the Hill, maybe in Wards 4 or 5.
I believe there is a sweet spot on achievement levels that we can set and we just need to be cognizant of not breaking political support for such a school.
Anonymous wrote:Of course genetics matter but kids cannot fully access their full potential without a stable beginning. The point is to not write off poor kids with the "not everyone can be Einstein" before seeing what they are fully capable of. Why can't we get everyone to a point where they can feel stable and cared for so that they can concentrate on school?
Right, not everyone is genius material-we come in all varieties. My own kids are all generally bright but one is a go-getter, one is lazy and the other just has things fall into her lap-same genetics, same environment-different levels of achievement. But because they are well nourished, well rested, are allowed to follow their interests and have their individual difficulties pointed out and worked on, we get to see what their potential really is.
I have worked in schools for years, special ed/regualr ed/privileged/diverse etc. What we see often are kids who come to school from a chaotic background. They come to school and experience some stability/routine, get food, have adults talk to them, care for them, help them, but they are not really ready to fully access all the academics yet, they are just working off the chaos. Just my opinion, but I have seen it, worked with it, been frustrated by it for years.
Anonymous wrote:Of course genetics matter but kids cannot fully access their full potential without a stable beginning. The point is to not write off poor kids with the "not everyone can be Einstein" before seeing what they are fully capable of. Why can't we get everyone to a point where they can feel stable and cared for so that they can concentrate on school?
Right, not everyone is genius material-we come in all varieties. My own kids are all generally bright but one is a go-getter, one is lazy and the other just has things fall into her lap-same genetics, same environment-different levels of achievement. But because they are well nourished, well rested, are allowed to follow their interests and have their individual difficulties pointed out and worked on, we get to see what their potential really is.
I have worked in schools for years, special ed/regualr ed/privileged/diverse etc. What we see often are kids who come to school from a chaotic background. They come to school and experience some stability/routine, get food, have adults talk to them, care for them, help them, but they are not really ready to fully access all the academics yet, they are just working off the chaos. Just my opinion, but I have seen it, worked with it, been frustrated by it for years.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.......
The race-IQ connection is the third rail of genetics, e.g., James Watson. Thus, it's not strange at all, especially given that there is never enough evidence for die-hard skeptics.
Nevertheless, the question will likely be resolved in the next decade, especially as geneticists redefine the question as the more nuanced "population structure"-IQ connection.
For an interesting article on the subject, try "How the race, intelligence, and genetics question will semi-resolve within the next 10 years," by Razib Khan:http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/how-the-race-intelligence-and-genetics-question-will-semi-resolve-within-the-next-10-years/#.UqtylPRDuJE
The hypotheses espoused by "The Bell Curve" have largely been discredited by people who understand statistics. See, for instance, the work of Michael Kremer.
I read the blog post you suggested. The author has written some things that are factually incorrect, such as their suggestion that African-Americans with more European features have more European DNA. There is no scierntific basis for that assertion. Appearance does not necessarily reflect underlying differences in DNA. However, even if you accept his premise, when he said the question will be settled, the testing regime that he suggests could just as easily reveal no difference in intelligence across races, as his blog post indicates.
IQ tests also aren't really great at measuring inteligence. They invariably measure some component of learned knowledge, and they presume intelligence is static. Lessened knowledge can be altered, which is why all of those parents in upper NW and Manhattan are tutoring kids for the WPPSI exams, which supposedly measure intelligence. Intelligence sand cognitive performance also aren't static, and things like learning music and foreign languages can alter them.
Anonymous wrote: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.......
The race-IQ connection is the third rail of genetics, e.g., James Watson. Thus, it's not strange at all, especially given that there is never enough evidence for die-hard skeptics.
Nevertheless, the question will likely be resolved in the next decade, especially as geneticists redefine the question as the more nuanced "population structure"-IQ connection.
For an interesting article on the subject, try "How the race, intelligence, and genetics question will semi-resolve within the next 10 years," by Razib Khan:http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/how-the-race-intelligence-and-genetics-question-will-semi-resolve-within-the-next-10-years/#.UqtylPRDuJE
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.