Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 553 posts

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#481

Post by tptacek »

hirvi74 wrote: post #464
sangnoir wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My question was specifically about the outliers: has any research been done if outlying achievements go hand in hand with outlier IQs? Without any research or evidence, it's an area prone to a Just World fallacy where extraordinary achievements "ought" to be achieved by extraordinary talent. Rephrasing my doubts in perhaps an oversimplified manner: given the correlation you mentioned: is it reasonable to expect the t…

So, the closest that I am aware of is the multi-decade study conducted by, the psychologist and intelligence researcher, Lewis Terman. The study was originally called, "Genetic Studies of Genius." You can read about it here: https://gwern.net/doc/iq/high/2018-kell.pdf This one is somewhat tangental, but I find, "The Munich Model of Giftedness Designed to Identify and Promote Gifted Students" to be an interesting read…

It would probably be weird to build many conclusion off the Terman study at this point, right? I've been dunking lately on people citing '90s and 2000's era twin studies as calling back to the phlogiston era of quantitative psychology; I don't even know what you'd call the raw material Terman had to work with; alchemical?

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#482

Post by couchdb_ouchdb »

TeaBrain wrote: post #403
couchdb_ouchdb wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Seattle, there's actually a test you can take to get you into the "HCC" program which is the gifted program in Seattle Public Schools. Seattle, however, has been trying (successfully) for years to dismantle it. So even if you pass the test, there's not very many places that you can go to get these services.

Was this a test that a child could be voluntarily signed up for by their parents? In my district in a different state, the students were first selected based on standardized testing to then take the IQ test like exam to get into the program.

I think that's correct. She was first flagged with standardized tests.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#483

Post by aguaviva »

int_19h wrote: post #421
HDThoreaun wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cultural revolution began by lynching all the teachers and kicking the bureaucrats out of the cities. Stalin did much of the same. It was a horrible strategy which is why they came up with the new ones.

I can think of many nasty things that Stalin did, but I don't recall anything even remotely similar to "lynching all the teachers and kicking the bureaucrats out of the cities". In fact, teacher was probably one of the most respected occupations throughout the Soviet period.

The Katyń forest massacres (to the extent that about a third of the victims were targeted for being members of the intelligentsia) come to mind as a reasonably similar instance of the kind of "lynching" you're referring to. Within the USSR itself we have the purges of leading intellectuals in Ukraine -- the number of victims is more difficult to quantify, but was likely far beyond the few hundred known by name:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executed_Renaissance

The June 1941 (and later) deportations in the Baltics (involving inevitably a very high mortality rate) seem to have at least partially targeted the intelligentsia as such in those Republics (in addition to the other usual suspects).

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#484

Post by [deleted] »

bobfromsf wrote: post #90

As a father with a son with IQ over 160, I can tell you unequivocally that California thinks gifted kids are the enemy. Gifted children, especially profoundly gifted kids like mine are special needs. He can’t function in a regular class because he would become bored and would act out and constantly get in trouble. Since my kid was a toddler we have had to completely rely on ourselves to figure everything out and we w…

[deleted]

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#485

Post by lern_too_spel »

exe34 wrote: post #205
lern_too_spel wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, people who use the term "virtue signalling" don't understand the problems that the supposed virtue signalers are trying to solve and simply use the term as a cheap dismissal of their policies. If the policies are bad, explain why they're bad. Don't just say that people putting the 10 Commandments in schools are virtue signalling.

Or indeed, it's possible that neither you nor the virtue signallers understand why they're doing it.

I understand that they're trying to fix a perceived problem. In the case of the people pushing the 10 Commandments in schools, they earnestly believe they're going to solve teen pregnancy, drug usage, etc. Saying that they're virtue signalling ignores the problem and strawmans the reason for their proposal. Saying why their policy won't work and another will addresses the problem.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#486

Post by int_19h »

aguaviva wrote: post #483
int_19h wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of many nasty things that Stalin did, but I don't recall anything even remotely similar to "lynching all the teachers and kicking the bureaucrats out of the cities". In fact, teacher was probably one of the most respected occupations throughout the Soviet period.

The Katyń forest massacres (to the extent that about a third of the victims were targeted for being members of the intelligentsia) come to mind as a reasonably similar instance of the kind of "lynching" you're referring to. Within the USSR itself we have the purges of leading intellectuals in Ukraine -- the number of victims is more difficult to quantify, but was likely far beyond the few hundred known by name: https…

Right, but that's just the classic occupier tactic - target the (usually independent-minded) intelligentsia of conquered territories to suppress any budding national liberation movements. But OP was talking about Maoist purges of their own intelligentsia. Bolsheviks indiscriminately purged the nobility, which certainly did disproportionally affect intelligentsia, but they weren't ideologically anti-intellectual the way some Maoist strains or Khmer Rouge were.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#487

Post by lelanthran »

maronato wrote: post #468
Animats wrote: post #191

> But others said the admissions exam and additional application requirements are inherently unfair to students of color who face socioeconomic disadvantages. Elaine Waldman, whose daughter is enrolled in Reed’s IHP, said the test is “elitist and exclusionary,” and hoped dropping it would improve the diversity of the program. Recognizing gifted students is inherently discriminatory. Because these are the numbers: Ave…

Let’s say I have a set of newborn white rats and another of gray rats. The gray rats get nutritious meals at periodic intervals, have access to their rat mamas, and are allowed to roam free in a large, comfortable and safe environment. As they grow, I give them intellectual challenges in exchange for food, incentivize them to exercise and continue giving them all nutrients they need. The white rats, however, are kept…

> Obvious conclusion: Gray rats have higher IQ than white rats on average.

Well, they did, didn't they?

The wrong conclusion would be "This is the limit of what white rats can do", which is not how I interpreted GP's comment.

TBH, this is not an easily solved problem: some cultures are better at producing superior students and productive people than other cultures. Those superior individuals are not superior due to inherent traits, but due to environment (culture).

How on earth do you change those under-performing cultures? Any attempt to do so will be met with cries of racism or similar.

[As an aside, my general observation with the the GP's list of IQ is that those cultures who prioritize sport less do better. While GP showed a correlation between race-groups and IQ, I observe the same correlation, but inverse, between sports-focused-cultures and IQ. Removing pro-sports-tracks programs from schools is probably going to do wonders for the bottom 10% of performers in a school]

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#488

Post by echoangle »

jmyeet wrote: post #454
echoangle wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example: homelessness. The number one cause of and solution to homelessness is... housing. Is that true? Without having a deep insight into the subject, homelessness seems to often be a symptom of mental illness and substance abuse. I don’t think having cheaper housing would really fix the issue of homelessness.

Here's the best description I've heard of homelessness. It goes in stages: 1. You are evicted or priced out of your apartment or house. You are still working but you are now housing insecure. You might couchsurf, stay temporarily with friends or relatives or otherwise hop around until those options run out; 2. You are now living in your car. You likely still maintain a job. There's a constant cat-and-mouse with local…

This makes sense when laid out like this. The reason I’m doubting it is that I live in a country (Germany) where theoretically everyone could get housing assistance at step 1. And there’s still homeless people here. So I don’t think eliminating the housing problem from this pipeline would suddenly lead to no more homeless people.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#489

Post by 999900000999 »

In the State of California your lucky if you can read and write.

Basic literacy requirements to graduate, like the high school exit exam, are often called racist and removed.

Plus California is essentially a state of socioeconomic apartheid. The gap between the rich and poor is insane. You have kids who are semi homeless being told they just need to work harder, etc.

Hell on earth.

Honestly education itself is outdated. Instead of acting as part day care part jail let kids test out of the system early. If you can pass a GED test at 16 and do something more productive do that.

This is partially offset by California's University system which is probably the best on earth ( at least publicly funded). The community colleges are top notch and a great option for anyone who's iffy on continuing school.

I went from my 2nd eviction to getting enough aid for my own apartment. I did pretty well in college, dated girls from all over the world and made life long friends.

It's not perfect, if your parents aren't stable you might have a really hard time getting aid. Interestingly enough they carved out exceptions for LGBT students who had falling outs with their parents, but other were out of luck.

You have a real conundrum here. Say both your parents make 75k, that's only going to be 120k after taxes. Where's that extra 20 to 30k for school expenses supposed to come from ? You're well past qualifying for aid.

If I ran the world I'd make state college completely free contingent on 2 years of community college.

You don't even need a degree to benefit which I think a lot of people forget.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#490

Post by belkala »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #336
thrance wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue the parent's socioeconomic status is a much better predictor of IQ than "race".

But that never shows up in the data? Seriously, people always like to bring this idea up like it's not been studied to hell and back. Socioeconomic is not a stronger factor.

Your data shows one of two things:

1. IQ scores differ between race because of inherent differences in intelligence.

2. IQ scores differ due to outside factors such as racism and socio-economic factors.

Point 1 is racist, you provide no proof for it, and all studies I can find indicate that this is not the case.

So that leaves us with point 2, which is precisely the point the article is making.

P.S: Literally the first result when searching for "socio economic factors iq": https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4641149/ It probably does not explain the full difference because there are more disadvantages such as racism, cultural factors.

Post reply on HN