Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters? • Hacker News Board

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#81

Post by syops » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:28 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #70

syops wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no onus on either of us to do anything. We are just strangers posting on the internet without pay or other compensation. Your experience and knowledge about teaching help me to decide the merits of your beliefs. It appears from my perspective that you know quite little about what you are posting. I know slightly more by having a lot of anecdotal evidence but this certainly doesn’t imply that I’m more likely t…

It's clear to me that this belief has wormed its way into your identity somehow, and you're unable to discuss it in a detached and curious way. I'm sad for you that such is the case, but I am now more empathetic towards your colleagues who have to deal with your false assertion that some people are too stupid to learn the math you teach. Also not for nothing, but "retarded" hasn't been a medical term for some time no…

It’s easier to type retarded than intellectually disabled on an iPad. I wrote the modern version in my original comments. Clearly I have been discussing this topic in a detached way. You’ve formed an image in your mind about me that isn’t supported by the evidence.

I’ll read whatever response you have but won’t comment further. I wish you well. Keep up the good fight!

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#82

Post by beej71 » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:30 PM UTC

ctrlp wrote: post #6

syops wrote: post #2

From the article: Over the next year, a biosciences working group revised the program’s funding guidelines, stipulating in the final draft that it would not support any research into the first-order effects of genes on behavior or social outcomes. The fact that this area is controversial suggests to me that it is worth exploration. I’ve taught mathematics at community colleges for over 20 years and I’m absolutely con…

If you want everyone to pass, lower the standards. The end result will be that certificates from schools without high standards will be worth less in the eyes of employers (while still costing the same to the student). As they progress through such a system, some students will be placed in advance of their abilities and fail out at a higher rate than they might otherwise when they reach an institution with non-negoti…

Why not improve at teaching the material instead of lowering the standards?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#83

Post by gharman » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:30 PM UTC

bserge wrote: post #25

Why are people jumping from environment straight to genetics? There's so much in-between.

Like what? Serious question, not trying to be snarky. My understanding of these “nature vs nurture” discussions is that environment commonly refers to anything other than genetics - effects not “in-built” that could be caused by upbringing, society, nutrition, etc.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#84

Post by DangitBobby » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #79

DangitBobby wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty clear you've never instructed a remedial math class. My university would conditionally admit students who had a math score below a certain threshold on their ACT, I think it was 19 or something. Anyway, as part of their admittance criteria, they had to attend an after class lab for an additional hour an a half for a total of three hours per week dedicated to learning pre-algrebra. There were four modules…

> There were four modules where they would do some reading, work through some example problems through interactive software, and then have some homework to work through that was almost identical to the examples. This just does not look like a universally effective way of teaching to me, irrespective of the topic. It's hardly any wonder that some people fell through the cracks if they were unfamiliar with the subject…

They used Pearson software to learn to modules. I didn't explain that part in much detail, but it was highly interactive and had instructional videos.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#85

Post by syops » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

DangitBobby wrote: post #64

TameAntelope wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I require evidence to not believe something you've stated? Or do you require evidence to assert something you've stated? I don't think the onus is on me to prove you wrong, so much as the onus is on you to prove that your experience is scientifically rigorous and representative of more than just your personal experience. And to be clear, I don't doubt that many people "can't" learn calculus in the same way I "can'…

It's pretty clear you've never instructed a remedial math class. My university would conditionally admit students who had a math score below a certain threshold on their ACT, I think it was 19 or something. Anyway, as part of their admittance criteria, they had to attend an after class lab for an additional hour an a half for a total of three hours per week dedicated to learning pre-algrebra. There were four modules…

It’s interesting reading the responses of people who never taught in the classroom.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#86

Post by beej71 » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:32 PM UTC

sjwalter wrote: post #33

shashwatak wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

perhaps some people cannot learn algebra / calculus the way it is traditionally taught in the classroom. perhaps the students who are failing just need a different environment, more time, more patience, different resources?

Obviously there are people who couldn't learn a given topic under one type of educational regime but who could under a different regime. But that doesn't eliminate the obvious: Some people can't learn a given topic at all, under any circumstances. OP's example of the mentally retarded (which I learned recently is a valid medical descriptor) is just an extreme example. It's so funny watching people scramble to avoid a…

So if someone bombs your class, you're certain they're just mentally deficient? And if you're not certain, how can you tell?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#87

Post by syops » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:38 PM UTC

beej71 wrote: post #69

syops wrote: post #2

From the article: Over the next year, a biosciences working group revised the program’s funding guidelines, stipulating in the final draft that it would not support any research into the first-order effects of genes on behavior or social outcomes. The fact that this area is controversial suggests to me that it is worth exploration. I’ve taught mathematics at community colleges for over 20 years and I’m absolutely con…

Here's some food for thought on "further study": * What percentage of your students hate math? * How do you differentiate between someone who doesn't get it because it's beyond their mental skill level versus someone who doesn't get it because they'd rather be doing literally anything else? * When you say "mentally disabled", what exactly does that mean in the context of a spectrum of ability levels across the specie…

Oh, I’ve thought a great about these things. None of your questions are new to me or are ones I’ve not considered. I did not come to my conclusion quickly.

Here are some more thoughts to ponder:

Children are easier to brain wash than adults and teaching basic math involves a great deal of brain washing. To what extent is it the case that a person with no exposure to algebraic concepts growing up is at a disadvantage to learning algebra as an adult? There is a theory that if one doesn’t learn a language in childhood then it is impossible for them to learn one as an adult. Is something similar applicable to Mathematics?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#88

Post by creato » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:39 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #55

syops wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My belief comes my experience teaching math the past 20 years. I think we both agree that mentally disabled people can’t learn algebra. Do you have any evidence that these are the only people incapable of learning algebra? I have lots of anecdotal evidence that the set of people who can’t learn algebra is much larger than the set of mentally disabled people.

Do I require evidence to not believe something you've stated? Or do you require evidence to assert something you've stated? I don't think the onus is on me to prove you wrong, so much as the onus is on you to prove that your experience is scientifically rigorous and representative of more than just your personal experience. And to be clear, I don't doubt that many people "can't" learn calculus in the same way I "can'…

> And to be clear, I don't doubt that many people "can't" learn calculus in the same way I "can't" run a marathon; we don't have the desire, discipline, and free time necessary to do the work required. This does not speak in any way towards our capacities to do so, only our desire.

Your VO2max, max heart rate, and other factors appear to be significantly determined by genetics, and will absolutely contribute to your capacity to run a marathon. If it takes you a year of hard training, but it takes me a few practice runs a few weeks before, it's not fair to say we required the same amount of desire, discipline, or free time to succeed. I would instead say we had a very different capacity to run a marathon.

Are you saying that similar things could not possibly be true for learning math? Or really anything else that humans do?

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#89

Post by syops » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:43 PM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #71

syops wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can accept your belief, in principle, about putting enough effort in early education and that lack of such efforts contributes to poor outcomes in college. I also think though that some people just can’t grok algebra. You would agree that a mentally disabled person can’t learn algebra, right? So where is the line below which a person can’t learn algebra. I suspect it is much higher than being mentally disabled.

I am not sure what "mentally disabled" means in this context. I would be surprised that a psychiatrist would find it a useful term - in the same way that any doctor would not look at the paralympics and see only one illness / disability but dozens of conditions. I am fairly certain there are Rain Man like people who can do algebra or calculus but would for most people sit under the term "disabled". Perhaps it might b…

I used the phrase in a colloquial sense. Replace mentally disabled with intellectually disabled. That’s the proper modern term for what was once called mental retardation.

I gave no indications that people ought to be ranked in terms of value to society based on intelligence or any other criteria.

Re: Can progressives be convinced that genetics matters?

#90

Post by zozbot234 » Mon, Sep 06, 2021, 9:50 PM UTC

syops wrote: post #81

TameAntelope wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's clear to me that this belief has wormed its way into your identity somehow, and you're unable to discuss it in a detached and curious way. I'm sad for you that such is the case, but I am now more empathetic towards your colleagues who have to deal with your false assertion that some people are too stupid to learn the math you teach. Also not for nothing, but "retarded" hasn't been a medical term for some time no…

It’s easier to type retarded than intellectually disabled on an iPad. I wrote the modern version in my original comments. Clearly I have been discussing this topic in a detached way. You’ve formed an image in your mind about me that isn’t supported by the evidence. I’ll read whatever response you have but won’t comment further. I wish you well. Keep up the good fight!

You can use "cognitively impaired" as a more neutral and factual descriptor than either (and "cognitive impairment" as the generic term). It's also more broadly applicable. (I.e. If you got whacked in the head once too many while playing rugby, that might not count as "intellectual disability" according to some since it's not developmental. But it might interfere with learning math, so it's pretty indistinguishable in a practical sense!)