A question for the Democrats of this board. - When are the American people to blame?

[quote name='dohdough']Also, an IQ is not indicative of any real intelligence, just the ability to pick up on social cues that favor the white experience.[/QUOTE]


Wow. Just, holy wow...
I was almost there before, but you've now proven that you simply cannot be reasoned with in any fashion.

Here's an example of an IQ test question:
What is the next number in this sequence 1 - 4 - 7 - 10 - X
9, 13, 27, this question is racist?

You're insane man. Completely 100% insane and so deluded on the concept of race as to be completely unable to function in a normal society. But I'm just suffering a case of white denial/superiority/privilege so wtf do I know right? I know the answer is 13, that's a start.
 
[quote name='nasum']Wow. Just, holy wow...
I was almost there before, but you've now proven that you simply cannot be reasoned with in any fashion.

Here's an example of an IQ test question:
What is the next number in this sequence 1 - 4 - 7 - 10 - X
9, 13, 27, this question is racist?

You're insane man. Completely 100% insane and so deluded on the concept of race as to be completely unable to function in a normal society. But I'm just suffering a case of white denial/superiority/privilege so wtf do I know right? I know the answer is 13, that's a start.[/QUOTE]

He's not making stuff up. There has been numerous studies that found cultural bias in IQ tests. Most came out after that "The Bell Curve" book made arguments about blacks having lower IQs than whites. Research after that found it was because of cultural bias in the IQ test.

Granted, the tests have been changed since then, and I have no idea what current research says about current forms of the IQ test and any cultural bias.

Even aside from direct bias, there is the fact that a much larger percentage of minorities live below the poverty line. Which means they're more likely to be going to crappy schools, more likely to have parents who don't care about their education, more likely to skip school etc.

So there's thus always a class/race bias in IQ tests as if you haven't received proper education you're likely going to be deficient in the logic/critical thinking skills the IQ tests assess.
 
geez, intelligence is racist. I can follow you if you're talking about calculus or whatever, that's a trained skill that requires access to the better education and such. But your average IQ test has less to do with fact retention and more to do with spacial reasoning and conceptual thinking. These are skills that you either have or you do not. Case in point, I have a friend that is scientifically brilliant but will score low on IQ tests because she doesn't grasp spacial reasoning. Hell, she can't even play pool because bank shots and such don't even register in her mind.
 
[quote name='nasum'] But your average IQ test has less to do with fact retention and more to do with spacial reasoning and conceptual thinking. These are skills that you either have or you do not. .[/QUOTE]

Again, there are scientific studies out there that found cultural bias in the old IQ tests used at the time the Bell Curve book came out. Lots of them. Go look it up. Go type "cultural bias in IQ tests" in the search at scholar.google.com.

And they aren't all skills that people are born with or not. IQ increases as people get older and get more education. They are skills that get developed by using them and learning to improve your logic and critical thinking ability etc.

Sure there are genetic impacts on IQ, not disputing that. But their are also social impacts on how much one's IQ increases as they age that's largely influenced by whether they get proper education and a proper chance to develop their reasoning abilities etc.

A lot of schooling isn't important from the standpoint of learning specific knowledge (be it history or grammar or math), but in developing your intellect, improving critical thinking skills, and learning how to learn essentially.
 
[quote name='nasum']geez, intelligence is racist. I can follow you if you're talking about calculus or whatever, that's a trained skill that requires access to the better education and such. But your average IQ test has less to do with fact retention and more to do with spacial reasoning and conceptual thinking. These are skills that you either have or you do not. Case in point, I have a friend that is scientifically brilliant but will score low on IQ tests because she doesn't grasp spacial reasoning. Hell, she can't even play pool because bank shots and such don't even register in her mind.[/QUOTE]
Wow...its almost as if there was some sort of cultural bias as to why women aren't as good as spacial reasoning as men! There are also many studies on this as well.

Having been in competitive 8-ball tournaments and seeing beginners become decent players, your analogy is shit and further reinforces dmaul's argument. Bank shots are fairly advanced shots and there are many others that require lots of practice to even conceptualize. Not to mention that you have to actually witness them in action to even know they exist. Which again, is another form of bias and exposure like above.

Now that you've been shown that you clearly don't know what you're talking about, I think I deserve a bit of an apology or at least an acknowledgement that your impression of IQ tests is completely based on ignorance. I'm not the deluded one here.
 
Bank shots are complex? I mean c'mon really? It's geometry in its most simple application.
If you've been to pool tounreys then you know that women are just as good as men. Hell, you may have even seen a racial minority succeed (gasp!) All in the practice of the game and learning it. You're deflecting.

RE: Bell Curve
Published 17 years ago with data presumably more than three weeks old. Changes may have taken place since then? Nah, that's unpossible!
 
[quote name='nasum']Bank shots are complex? I mean c'mon really? It's geometry in its most simple application.[/QUOTE]
Awesome! More fodder from you.

Again, you've shown that you have a very shallow level of knowledge on another subject. If banks were simple and easy, then you'd see those shots all the time. I mean why bother setting up the next shot if you could bank your way to victory! It's not like you can never scratch off a bank shot amitrite! Or just maybe, and I know this is a stretch for you, but not every bank shot is lined-up perfectly and depending on the angle, the cue ball will actually block the object ball. Add foward, draw, or english, which is what you usually need to do, and those basic geometry shots aren't so basic anymore.

If you've been to pool tounreys then you know that women are just as good as men. Hell, you may have even seen a racial minority succeed (gasp!) All in the practice of the game and learning it. You're deflecting.
Click to expand...
So how do you explain the disparity in the numbers of men to women?

You make a point to say that your friend is good as sciency stuff and bad at pool. Now you say that women an people of color can be good as well, which means that IQ can change according to someone's experience within a subject. Sound familiar? Cause that's what I AND dmaul are saying. What exactly is being deflected?

RE: Bell Curve
Published 17 years ago with data presumably more than three weeks old. Changes may have taken place since then? Nah, that's unpossible!
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point of the Bell Curve and it's criticisms. IQ tests aren't the only culturally biased tests out there. But hey, stay ignorant boyo.
 
IQ tests weren't an issue of "lowering standards" it was an issue of making sure the test really measured intelligence equally across cultural groups.

i.e. that all question wordings, concepts used etc. where equally understood by anyone who and not culturally biased by using wording on concept that people from certain demographics were less likely to be familiar with.

Anyway, I'm tired of beating my head on the wall in this subforum. Time for a break and some more ignore list additions.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I think a man of a minority race covered the subject of lowering standards because of "cultural bias" best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxnxsqUjNwk[/QUOTE]
So sanctioned child abuse by the State is an acceptable way of enforcing "high standards?" Maybe you're not as liberal as you think.

Did you watch the video I posted? Any comments? There was acually a study done on those students and the results might surprise you.
The latino students enrolled in elective ethnic studies classes were doing better than the white students in math and science. It's almost as if having a culturally relevant curriculum helps motivate them to do better rather than being marginalized! Who knew!
 
[quote name='dohdough']Awesome! More fodder from you.[/quote]
I aim to please.

Again, you've shown that you have a very shallow level of knowledge on another subject. If banks were simple and easy, then you'd see those shots all the time. I mean why bother setting up the next shot if you could bank your way to victory! It's not like you can never scratch off a bank shot amitrite! Or just maybe, and I know this is a stretch for you, but not every bank shot is lined-up perfectly and depending on the angle, the cue ball will actually block the object ball. Add foward, draw, or english, which is what you usually need to do, and those basic geometry shots aren't so basic anymore.
Click to expand...
Oh damn you found out that I'm not a nationally ranked professional pool player. Whatever shall I do now? Let's be sure to take the application of a relatively simple concept (geometry as applied to billiards) and add so much jargon as to obfuscate the original point. Bravo, you've won this round! Must be lonely up there in that Ivory Tower. Or Ebony Tower? I guess stick with what you prefer.


So how do you explain the disparity in the numbers of men to women?
Click to expand...
Some people aren't interested in playing pool regardless of race/gender? Let's say there are 100 people at the pool hall. We'll divide people into 4 equal categories amongst race and gender. 25 minority women so on and so forth. Equality isn't 25 of each category. Equality is anyone that wants to come in can come in. You might not have 25 people of one category in the area that wish to engage in playing pool. So let's say it's 40 of one category, 20 of another and 15 each of the last two. That doesn't mean inequality or barrier to access. It just means some of the people in category X don't feel like playing pool.

You make a point to say that your friend is good as sciency stuff and bad at pool. Now you say that women an people of color can be good as well, which means that IQ can change according to someone's experience within a subject. Sound familiar? Cause that's what I AND dmaul are saying. What exactly is being deflected?
Click to expand...
Curious, I read what you were saying as that black people can't be smart based on a standard measuring stick, in this case an IQ test. I offer that you can still be smart and not skilled in a certain area where the standardized test measures. You somehow or another get on your white people suck soap box yet again because you're, I don't know bored and it's your go to thing? This in referrence to your "cultural bias against women with spacial reasoning skills". Yeah, and asian women are stereotypically the worst drivers yet the only famous pool player I know apparently needs a chaufer to her tourneys.


I think you missed the point of the Bell Curve and it's criticisms. IQ tests aren't the only culturally biased tests out there. But hey, stay ignorant boyo.
Click to expand...
And you have the ability to find any applicable -ism that you so choose. Congrats, let me fetch you a cookie. I still claim that "identify the next item in pattern X" is not racist but just a measurement of one's ability to think critically and/or in an abstract fashion. If you're stating that minorities aren't capable of thinking critically, then you've once again shown your bias towards your pet project issue. It's like TIm Wise all over again, find the easiest issue to exploit and laugh all the way to the bank. As long as you tell the people that they're being held down, they're not likely to get up for much. If you're party to that holding down but speaking out against it, suddenly you're the hero yet by your very definition you're part of the problem.
 
I agree with the OP on this one, the individual is the building block for a healthy American nation--and for every individual who's not taking the incentive / waiting for someone else to do it for them, the more the folks in power will remain unaccountable.

Personally I think it's more than just about voting; it's about fighting corrupt systems of government and business 24/7, whether you're dealing with the institutions on the outside or working for them on the inside. Nobody wants to stick their neck out because they might risk losing a few crumbs from the table, not realizing that there are worse things to lose, like one's principles and liberty.
 
[quote name='nasum']Oh damn you found out that I'm not a nationally ranked professional pool player. Whatever shall I do now? Let's be sure to take the application of a relatively simple concept (geometry as applied to billiards) and add so much jargon as to obfuscate the original point. Bravo, you've won this round! Must be lonely up there in that Ivory Tower. Or Ebony Tower? I guess stick with what you prefer.[/QUOTE]
If you don't know shit about pool, what makes you think that you're any kind of authority on how to judge the simplicity of the game? You've clearly shown how little you know about it, so why should your interpretation have more weight than mine when I'm the one pointing out the nuance when you see none? The only obfuscation is your weak attempts to hide your blatant ignorance.

Some people aren't interested in playing pool regardless of race/gender? Let's say there are 100 people at the pool hall. We'll divide people into 4 equal categories amongst race and gender. 25 minority women so on and so forth. Equality isn't 25 of each category. Equality is anyone that wants to come in can come in. You might not have 25 people of one category in the area that wish to engage in playing pool. So let's say it's 40 of one category, 20 of another and 15 each of the last two. That doesn't mean inequality or barrier to access. It just means some of the people in category X don't feel like playing pool.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's a numbers game and never did. What I'm asking is how do you explain the fact that pool is a male dominated sport? What is it about pool, or sports in general, that women are under-represented even when there IS access.

Curious, I read what you were saying as that black people can't be smart based on a standard measuring stick, in this case an IQ test. I offer that you can still be smart and not skilled in a certain area where the standardized test measures. You somehow or another get on your white people suck soap box yet again because you're, I don't know bored and it's your go to thing? This in referrence to your "cultural bias against women with spacial reasoning skills". Yeah, and asian women are stereotypically the worst drivers yet the only famous pool player I know apparently needs a chaufer to her tourneys.
Click to expand...
There's nothing "standard" about the IQ test that can be used as a universal measure of intelligence. I'm not the one heavily invested in that measure; you are. If you can't see how heavily gender roles are enforced in society in reference to the cultural bias I've been brining up, there's just no helping you.

And you have the ability to find any applicable -ism that you so choose. Congrats, let me fetch you a cookie. I still claim that "identify the next item in pattern X" is not racist but just a measurement of one's ability to think critically and/or in an abstract fashion. If you're stating that minorities aren't capable of thinking critically, then you've once again shown your bias towards your pet project issue. It's like TIm Wise all over again, find the easiest issue to exploit and laugh all the way to the bank. As long as you tell the people that they're being held down, they're not likely to get up for much. If you're party to that holding down but speaking out against it, suddenly you're the hero yet by your very definition you're part of the problem.
Click to expand...
For someone that stresses the importance of "critical thinking," you sure don't use it much. If you used something called "reading comprehension," you'd see that I'm not saying that people of color can't think critically, but that your idea of what defines critical thinking is flawed because you don't factor cultural bias into the equation, so standardized testing is a flawed method to measure someone's intelligence. To go back to the pool example, if we made an intelligence test based on scenarios and terminology in a game of pool, I'd be a genius and you'd be considered mentally disabled. Is this simple enough for you to understand now?

I don't get why you keep bringing up Wise as a way to get under my skin. Do you have a crush on him or something? And then you go back to arguing that I'm the one keeping people down by speaking out against racism? And you call ME insane?
 
[quote name='Indigo_Streetlight']I agree with the OP on this one, the individual is the building block for a healthy American nation--and for every individual who's not taking the incentive / waiting for someone else to do it for them, the more the folks in power will remain unaccountable.

Personally I think it's more than just about voting; it's about fighting corrupt systems of government and business 24/7, whether you're dealing with the institutions on the outside or working for them on the inside. Nobody wants to stick their neck out because they might risk losing a few crumbs from the table, not realizing that there are worse things to lose, like one's principles and liberty.[/QUOTE]

I think you wouldnt need to fight corruption if people educated themselves before voting, the politicians would do their job and do it for us.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Wow...its almost as if there was some sort of cultural bias as to why women aren't as good as spacial reasoning as men! There are also many studies on this as well.

Having been in competitive 8-ball tournaments and seeing beginners become decent players, your analogy is shit and further reinforces dmaul's argument. Bank shots are fairly advanced shots and there are many others that require lots of practice to even conceptualize. Not to mention that you have to actually witness them in action to even know they exist. Which again, is another form of bias and exposure like above.

Now that you've been shown that you clearly don't know what you're talking about, I think I deserve a bit of an apology or at least an acknowledgement that your impression of IQ tests is completely based on ignorance. I'm not the deluded one here.[/QUOTE]

You know, there is such a thing as phenotypical specialization in biology based on gender. Sure, it's possible that one's spatial perception could improve with training; however it's also possible that over the course of evolution males with greater spatial abilities were selected for (being more successful hunters, giving their offspring a greater chance at survival) whereas in the female spatial abilities may not have been as critical for her survival.

There's always going to be differences in the innate abilities of any given organism--they exist for sure--but when it comes to measuring that sort of thing in humans there's always going to be feelings and politics involved. Personally, I think quoting your I.Q. score is about as meaningful as saying your sign is Aquarius, like I'm supposed to be impressed because you were able to spit out what the tester wanted to hear? It's all pat on the back, designed so that some people can feel smart and try to impress others.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I think you wouldnt need to fight corruption if people educated themselves before voting, the politicians would do their job and do it for us.[/QUOTE]

Some folks are educated and (a few) politicians and corporate leaders may be engaged in productive activities, the thing is a good citizen has to be forever vigilant against all of those who aren't! You can't "wish" badness out of other people, you have to empower the right way of doing things from within.
 
1.) Again you seem to have confused analogy for statement of fact. You do this a lot with me, probably 85% of the time.

2.) Perhaps women tend to not have the competitive drive that males do in our society. Sports are basically a penis measuring tool and women aren't usually into having their dicks measured. Perhaps "the man" has held women out of sports for so long that they've been bred to not want to play. Option A is more likely.

3.) You're talking about two different things here. Standard of measurement and cultural bias. Let's approach standard of measurement first. That's what the IQ test is there for. Is it perfect? Probably not. Does it serve a purpose? Most definitely. What purpose? Well it's gotta be to continue subjugating minorities right? Mike Powell is envious of that leap...
Cultural Bias: Seems like you're going for another -ism in disguise here. So sexism is now the reason that women don't play as many sports? Maybe lack of interest? Going back to #2, why is there under-representation when there is access? You're the one that knows everything, you tell me? I'll stick with a practical answer in the meantime, not enough interest in the population. Why aren't there many death metal bands coming out of Somalia? Not enough interest in the population? Could might be. That was one of those analogies.

4.) There is no cultural bias in critical or abstract thinking. A person either has the skill or does not. It can be nurtered to a certain degree, but if you're a person that can't see out of the box there's not much help to be had there. Is there cultural bias in the measurement? Perhaps, though if there is I don't really care because that doesn't interfere with the fact that there is no cultural bias. Analogy mode once again: I've got a 4yr degree, but if I went to go take a 2nd grade spelling test in Russian I'd fail miserably. That doesn't mean I'm stupid, I just don't possess that skill set. However, seeing that this obstacle is there, I could learn basic Russian and prepare for the test which would be a mark of critical thinking and intelligence.
Was that too hard?

5.) It's not a way to get under your skin, you don't register on my radar enough to make such attempts. It's an illustration of seing both sides of a coin, what you often fail to do. You automatically go to the -ism as I've said numerous times. When people attempt to point out logical possibilities you flame them for being the -ist of that particular -ism. Continually failing to see that there are reasons for things outside of some cabal of #1 Majority pressing the buttons for all things in the world. If that were truly the case, we'd still be living under Ceasar for crying out loud. Actually, probably someone a millenia before that era.
RE: You keeping people down
If you consistently tell someone they're opressed, they start to feel opressed and give up. Anytime that someone around here shows minority success, your response is "well they're in entertainment/sports" or something along the lines of "the man creates a system where a few can get out so that it isn't TOO obvious".
The point is this; you brag about forgetting more than any of us ever knew about -ism, but all you ever do is piss and moan. You've crowned yourself emperor of societal woes around here and then tell anyone that objects that they are racist/suffering a case of white denial/etc... You know so much yet do so little. You barely speak out against racism it seems, you just point out that any situation where a minority fails it is an -ism.

And yes, I do call you insane. Though, delusional is certainly the more correct term.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='nasum']
Is there cultural bias in the measurement? Perhaps, though if there is I don't really care because that doesn't interfere with the fact that there is no cultural bias. [/quote]

Measurement bias is a huge issue. No test or assessment is valid of their is bias in the measurement.

And again, there is a HUGE scientific literature showing tons of measurement bias in IQ tests and other standardized test.

And much of this evidence does show that there is cultural bias, gender bias etc. by showing that demographic groups score just as high as say white males if they're given different versions of the tests that ask about the same concepts but with different question wordings etc.

For instance, you note that abstract thought etc. shouldn't vary culturally. And you're right. But various other things like vocabulary, understanding of concepts used in the questions etc. used to measure abstract thinking can definitely vary culturally. And that biases the tests.

Someone may answer a question wrong simply because they didn't understand a word or example used to ask the question, when they can get it right with a different question using wording they understand. Thus the questions aren't only measuring the concept they are designed to measures, but also the persons vocabulary and other factors unrelated to the abstract thinking ability it's supposed to be measuring.

Sure, simple questions like the choosing the next item in a series example you keep citing aren't so applicable to wording issues. But that's just one item. Other items are more complex and involve more explanation in the question etc. that can throw people off.

But anyway, you're ranting on this topic is why this subforum gets so fucking frustrating to try to participate. There's HUGE volume of scientific research showing cultural bias in IQ and other standardized tests, but just keep spouting off you're uniformed opinions over and over again like it's fact. If you want to have a leg to stand on, go read some of the research on the topic and see if you find studies that support your assertion of no cultural bias in IQ/standardized tests. Otherwise shut the fuck up.

And this kind of crap is why this whole country pretty much sucks donkey balls. It's full of opinionated dimwits who only care about their own opinions and beliefs and put no effort into becoming educated and informed and using scientific evidence where possible to form their beliefs, opinions and stances they take.

Being intelligent and educated and relying on science is becoming the 21st century's version of witchcraft, and the country is being ran by whichever group of uninformed morons can shout their rhetoric the loudest and shout their opinions often enough that they start to be taken as fact.

There's that old quote of "Everyone is not entitled to their own opinion. They're entitled to their own informed opinion." or something along those lines. People really need to heed that and knock off the trend of being super opinionated about things they know little about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Did I not just give the analogy of taking a 2nd grade russian spelling quiz? You have to devote 7 paragraphs to calling me an ass when I supported your very same conclusion in 3 sentences?

Tell me this, is the "standardized" IQ test not given in native languages? Apparently so as a google search identifies multiple languages when I ask for IQ Test In Polish (seriously, not an oxymoron). So, if we're using a translated version of the standardized test, are we not leveling the playing field? If you want to argue that we're using an English IQ test to assess non-native speakers then I'm right on board with you. However, they're available across many cultures and languages. That is a fact. One which unfortunately kind of shits on your theory. Was all of this available 17 years ago? Maybe not. But the point is that it is now and you're (well maybe not you specifically) STILL bemoaning that it wasn't 17 years ago.

In terms of playing nicely in the vs. subforum is concerned, I'm all for it. I'm open to new and interesting perspectives. I'm not however open to everything everywhere being under the control of #1 Majority Cabal Inc. and just complaining about that. It's bullshit. Or is that just my white denial shining through? Nah, it's bullshit. If you refuse to step out of the notion that it is indeed all due to the cabal, you're arguing from just as much of an ignorant view because you're refusing to acknowledge certain facts.

I'm also completely with you on your last statement. It just so happens that sometimes people have to shout loudly when they're correct as well, if only to overcome the din of the dim.
 
Native language doesn't mean everyone has the same vocabulary ability.

An English speaker can, and often times does, get questions on standardized tests given in English wrong because they don't understand a word used, or because it uses a concept they're unfamiliar with. The tests are meant to test logic, abstract thinking etc., not vocabulary ability. Thus the measurement is flawed if people are missing question due to those kinds of reasons rather than lacking the intellectual ability to solve the problem (i.e. they could solve it if someone asked it to them in wording they understood 100%).

Research has found that these types of reasons are why blacks/lower class people tended to do worse on IQ tests than whites/middle class and up people. It wasn't that they were less intelligent. It was that they were more likely to have problems understanding the wording of questions, or to have been exposed to a certain concept used in an example etc.

That's what you're missing here. Other things besides intellectual ability can cause a person to score lower on an IQ test, and research has shown repeatedly that their are race/class/gender bias in measurement. The tests are generally created by well educated, middle to upper class folk (and usually white) and they natural write at their own vocabulary level, use examples relevant in their lives etc. Thus the questions are readily interpreted properly by people in that demographic, but they may not make as much sense to say a poor black girl from the ghetto who has a different vocabulary and different set of life experiences etc.

That's why I'm so annoyed with your posts in this thread. You keep shouting the same misinformed opinion over and over, when there's a fucking mountain of high quality, scientific research showing your wrong.

I don't expect people to be experts on everything. Just not to be loud mouthed and super opinionated about things they know nothing about and are just letting their personal beliefs get in the way of seeing the facts.
 
It's like you're bordering on the difference between "book smart and street smart" but just not getting there. So these tests are written by happy go lucky upper middle class white folk which means that the terminology and examples don't apply to ghetto folk.

I'm going to leave that there for a moment. Apparently since I never think critically or use reading comprehension I'm going to go off into my fantasy land here. Pardon my dalliance.
If you're suggesting such things, is one to also believe that you're suggesting that there need to be different standards? I realize that this is a logical leap, but couldn't that also mean that this whole institutional racism thing is less a cabal of powerful people fucking with others for a hobby and maybe simply because what has been established as "american culture" hasn't been adopted by those that lack success? Adapt to survive right?

Now back to your real world example, but blending my theory back in there.
So why is it that your ghetto girl doesn't understand the colloquialisms of mid-upper class whitey? These "cultures" aren't geographically separated by more than a couple of blocks sometimes. Forget barrier to access for socieconomic blah blah blah that you always go on about. Why can't somone figure shit out that's going on two blocks away? In my mentioning that it is you guys that are keeping people down by providing a steady hand of support to the downtrodden, you're essentially stating that ghetto folk can't be white folk smart, but apparently sociologists who are educated peoples and therefore predominantly white can study and understand ghetto folk. Do you see how absurd this is? By constantly saying "you can't do this because the system is setup against you", people will eventually not even bother to try. No, that isn't the bootstrappin BS either. That's providing an honest to god barrier even greater than access to credit/education/space travel. You're creating a barrier to hope. On the side you're also creating greater animosity towards whites amidst the minority. That's a great idea and will certainly add to any success people of any minority population!

You apply such seething negative connotation to "the cultural bias of standardized testing", yet your example of mid-upper class whitey writing the test with the application of their immediate surroundings just shows that the test writer is using what comes to them naturally.

In a roundabout way this addresses my beef with you and dohdough, you automatically jump to this notion that the world is setup against minorities. Not only that, but it is done so with intent and malice. Instead of making that conclusion in every facet of life, let's just assume that evil people aren't tinkering with other people for something to do. Rather let's momentarily just see that there are cultural differences even within a single city and those differences aren't some evil thing. They just are. You've just said it yourself, the ghetto has a language and life that is extraordinarily different from the Martha'a Vineyard lot. Farmers and city-folk have completely different life experiences.
Now instead of jumping down my throat and assuming that I think city folk are better than farm folk because they're better able to read subway maps, are more apt to use new technology, have nicer shoes, etc... You also need to understand that I think farmers are fine folks and while different their type has advantages that city folk will never understand either. It's all a balance.

p.s.
from a previous thread hopefully you'll recall that I actual prefer rural and farming types because they tend to bypass all the bullshit and be honest with each other. Having lived in large cities, suburbs and beyond exurb middle of nowhere places, I like the people out there better, but I certainly like the access closer to the city as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, we can all agree that the IQ test measures something, whether or not that is actual intelligence is the question. From what I remember, the IQ test tends to be stratified along SES more so then race. I agree that there probably is some small amount of cultural bias, but I don't think it's enough to completely say that IQ testing is not measuring anything. I guess the biggest problem is how much stock is put into IQ tests really, people are using it for things it was not meant to be used for.
 
[quote name='nasum']
In a roundabout way this addresses my beef with you and dohdough, you automatically jump to this notion that the world is setup against minorities. [/QUOTE]

I don't think that at all. And I'm not saying IQ tests and other types of standardized tests are deliberately biased against minorities or the lower class etc.

What I'm am saying is that there is a HUGE body of scientific research out there that shows that their are cultural biases in many of these types of tests. HUGE. Hundreds, if not thousands, of studies. Including lots of high quality, experimental studies where people were randomly given different versions of test instruments etc.

You keep acting like these studies don't exist and just stating your opinion that cultural bias in tests is BS. And that's just the textbook definition of ignorance. And willfully so since you refuse to go read up on it.

Opinions don't matter when it comes to an empirical question like "Is their a cultural bias in IQ tests." That's an empirical question, and their are a ton of empirical studies that show there is such a bias.

This doesn't mean that the world is out to keep minorities down or anything. It means that some IQ tests and other standardized tests are not reliable measures of the constructs they mean to measure as their accuracy is not consistent across demographic/cultural groups. It doesn't mean this was intentional. It just means the tests fail to work in a universal fashion for various reasons.

But anyway, I'm done with you and back to the ignore list you go. I have no interest in what people think opinion wise about anything empirical in nature. Anyone who's not sharing factual knowledge on topics like this is getting disregarded by me from now on.

I don't go around acting like an expert on things I know nothing about, I keep my mouth shut or make mild statements and clearly state that I'm not an expert in that area. I have no patience for people who do the opposite, and are huge opinionated assholes even of topics they know jack squat about. Much less people who actively disregard scientific evidence which is the only valid basis for opinions on any empirical issue.
 
[quote name='dohdough']The latino students enrolled in elective ethnic studies classes were doing better than the white students in math and science. It's almost as if having a culturally relevant curriculum helps motivate them to do better rather than being marginalized! Who knew![/QUOTE]

Can you explain how a ethnic studies class is taught differently. I believe you, I'm just curious. Are you talking about something like "Stand and Deliver"? (Pardon my use of movies but it's my only frame of reference)
 
[quote name='camoor']Can you explain how a ethnic studies class is taught differently. I believe you, I'm just curious. Are you talking about something like "Stand and Deliver"? (Pardon my use of movies but it's my only frame of reference)[/QUOTE]
In Arizona, the Mexican American Studies program used a Mexican/Mexican American centric curriculum as a way to educate the kids in various subjects as opposed to the usual stuff about the FOUNDING FATHERS etc. My understanding, and I could be off, is that through learning about their heritage to enhance critical thinking and whatnot, they were more able to navigate other classes like math, science, etc. Students in the program had a 93% graduation rate, which is about 20% higher that other students in the district. The disparity might be off by a few percentage points, but I know the graduation rate is accurate.

It's kinda like Stand and Deliver in that you have very dedicated teachers teaching kids abandoned by the system to help them succeed, just not centered on AP calculus...heh

There's actually a documentary out on the program called Precious Knowledge. Supposedly, it'll be on PBS in the fall, but it's been in a few select theatres.

*If this is a bit incoherent, it's because I'm suffering from a bout of insomnia.
 
On the phone so pleas excuse tpus and such.

Ignore me as thou whilst, but I'm curious as to why since we're drawing the same conclusion (IQ tests not completely accurate as they aten't perfect) from a different starting point. The only difference is that you find it insulting and I find it curious.

So let's take your high falutin' whitey written test that is biased against ghetto folk. Would it not garner a higher score for said ghetto child as they have expanded their learning base and demonstrated an ability to learn and think criticaly when they learn the foreign concepts?

I must admit, I'm fascinated by how easily failure is accepted and nurtured.

We're not so different you and I. It's just that I want all to succeed while you focus strictly on the downtrodden and call me a dick for not wanting
 
[quote name='dohdough']In Arizona, the Mexican American Studies program used a Mexican/Mexican American centric curriculum as a way to educate the kids in various subjects as opposed to the usual stuff about the FOUNDING FATHERS etc. My understanding, and I could be off, is that through learning about their heritage to enhance critical thinking and whatnot, they were more able to navigate other classes like math, science, etc. Students in the program had a 93% graduation rate, which is about 20% higher that other students in the district. The disparity might be off by a few percentage points, but I know the graduation rate is accurate.

It's kinda like Stand and Deliver in that you have very dedicated teachers teaching kids abandoned by the system to help them succeed, just not centered on AP calculus...heh

There's actually a documentary out on the program called Precious Knowledge. Supposedly, it'll be on PBS in the fall, but it's been in a few select theatres.

*If this is a bit incoherent, it's because I'm suffering from a bout of insomnia.[/QUOTE]

How do we know that the "culturally relevant cirriculum" is the cause of the higher graduation rates? I would put my money on the "very dedicated teachers."
 
[quote name='chiwii']How do we know that the "culturally relevant cirriculum" is the cause of the higher graduation rates? I would put my money on the "very dedicated teachers."[/QUOTE]
Then you'd lose your money.;)

Content is just as important as the presentation.

There's plenty of stuff on the internets about MAS straight from the students and teachers, so if you want to learn more about the program, it isn't difficult.
 
[quote name='dohdough']In Arizona, the Mexican American Studies program used a Mexican/Mexican American centric curriculum as a way to educate the kids in various subjects as opposed to the usual stuff about the FOUNDING FATHERS etc. My understanding, and I could be off, is that through learning about their heritage to enhance critical thinking and whatnot, they were more able to navigate other classes like math, science, etc. Students in the program had a 93% graduation rate, which is about 20% higher that other students in the district. The disparity might be off by a few percentage points, but I know the graduation rate is accurate.

It's kinda like Stand and Deliver in that you have very dedicated teachers teaching kids abandoned by the system to help them succeed, just not centered on AP calculus...heh

There's actually a documentary out on the program called Precious Knowledge. Supposedly, it'll be on PBS in the fall, but it's been in a few select theatres.

*If this is a bit incoherent, it's because I'm suffering from a bout of insomnia.[/QUOTE]

Thanks.

It's interesting that while Americans seem to understand marketing, they lose sight of the concept when it comes to kids and education.

If it works then why fight it? Like a sales guy making his numbers, if you find a better way to get the kids to learn what's the problem?

As long as the kids learn math, science, and the basics of the social democracy, who cares if their studies have an ethnic flavor? I honestly could care less whether the kids read Emily Dickinson or Maya Angelou as long as they are reading.
 
All that kind of stuff matters, but graduation rates are probably most effected by the family.

Curriculum and teachers can't have much of an impact if the kid's parents don't care (or aren't around) and aren't stressing the importance of doing well in school, making sure they're going to school, not letting them drop out etc.

For those that have such families then the content of the curriculum and quality of teaching both can have an impact. Which matters more would vary by subject.

There's not so much you can do really to make say Algebra or English (grammar focused course, not literature focused) culturally relevant. But as dohdough noted, maybe keeping them more interested in general with culturally-relevant history classes etc. can lead to better overall academic performance by keeping them engaged.
 
[quote name='camoor']
As long as the kids learn math, science, and the basics of the social democracy, who cares if their studies have an ethnic flavor? I honestly could care less whether the kids read Emily Dickinson or Maya Angelou as long as they are reading.[/QUOTE]

Agree 100%. Getting math, science and english/reading ability scores up is the key. That's where we're lacking severely compared to other countries and why we're falling so far behind in generating new scientists etc. compared to other countries.

If culturally relevant history or literature etc. classes help keep kids engaged and doing better in the core classes, there's no reason anyone should be opposed other than pure ethnocentrism.
 
[quote name='camoor']Thanks.

It's interesting that while Americans seem to understand marketing, they lose sight of the concept when it comes to kids and education.

If it works then why fight it? Like a sales guy making his numbers, if you find a better way to get the kids to learn what's the problem?

As long as the kids learn math, science, and the basics of the social democracy, who cares if their studies have an ethnic flavor? I honestly could care less whether the kids read Emily Dickinson or Maya Angelou as long as they are reading.[/QUOTE]
I agree. To be honest, I think it's important to be familiar with both as they're both extremely important to give a clearer picture of how much society has changed, yet stayed the same. You can expand on themes to examine patriarchy, feminism, classism, racism, etc which all require critical thinking and a lot of knowledge. Like dmaul said, I think the hook is important.

[quote name='dmaul1114']Agree 100%. Getting math, science and english/reading ability scores up is the key. That's where we're lacking severely compared to other countries and why we're falling so far behind in generating new scientists etc. compared to other countries.

If culturally relevant history or literature etc. classes help keep kids engaged and doing better in the core classes, there's no reason anyone should be opposed other than pure ethnocentrism.[/QUOTE]
Right, but considering it's Arizona, I find it hard to believe it's just a problem of ethnocentricity. But that's mostly because the powers that be couldn't figure out a way to show that students enrolled in the program were worse off by any "objective standards" so they had to use a "race-baiting" and "increased militance" argument...LOLZ:lol:
 
[quote name='dohdough']Then you'd lose your money.;)

Content is just as important as the presentation.

There's plenty of stuff on the internets about MAS straight from the students and teachers, so if you want to learn more about the program, it isn't difficult.[/QUOTE]

I've only been able to find one study on the effectiveness of the Mexican American curriculum in Tucson. The author did find that test scores and graduation rates increased (not by 20%, though). He stated that the data is not inferential. So, unless there are better studies, I think my question is still valid.

All of the information that I find for culturally relevant cirriculums mentions teachers and the quality of the teaching, which leads me to believe that there is an emphasis on high quality teaching in these programs. The teachers need to believe the students can achieve success, they need to adjust their methods for different learning styles, ect. Aren't these the traits of good, high quality teachers? Wouldn't we expect test scores to improve if the quality of teaching improved?

Again, I haven't found any studies to prove or disprove any of this, but which seems more likely to you - math test scores improved because the quality of teaching improved, or math test scores improved because the students learned about Mexican American history?
 
I don't think it has to be an either/or situation.

I'd garner that both mattered. Quality of teaching in both the math and the Mexican history classes probably mattered more I'd agree.

But keeping students engaged through culturally relevant could improve overall achievement by just preventing them from getting bored and jaded on school as easily.

Could is the key word. As you note this is a new program and has no rigorous empirical research evidence yet. So only time will tell how much of an impact those culturally relevant classes have on academic achievement.
 
What about Asians? I know we talk a lot about the other minorities, but Asians seem to do well on standardized tests. Are they just an anomaly?
 
Well I think most of the "racial" bias that's found is really more a class bias tied with race since such a high percentage of blacks (and Hispanics) are living in poverty. Where as Asians in the US are pretty well off on average.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Well I think most of the "racial" bias that's found is really more a class bias tied with race since such a high percentage of blacks (and Hispanics) are living in poverty. Where as Asians in the US are pretty well off on average.[/QUOTE]

I agree, like I said above, most standardized testing is stratified more by SES then anything, so I don't think race is the major component of the problem.
 
[quote name='docvinh']What about Asians? I know we talk a lot about the other minorities, but Asians seem to do well on standardized tests. Are they just an anomaly?[/QUOTE]

[quote name='dmaul1114']Well I think most of the "racial" bias that's found is really more a class bias tied with race since such a high percentage of blacks (and Hispanics) are living in poverty. Where as Asians in the US are pretty well off on average.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='docvinh']I agree, like I said above, most standardized testing is stratified more by SES then anything, so I don't think race is the major component of the problem.[/QUOTE]
Asians are an interesting case. When people talk about Asians/Asian Americans, the Model Minority myth seems to always permeate the discussion. The correct answer is that some Asians do well, but most don't. When it comes to Southeast Asians like Vietnamese, Hmong, Cambodian, Laotian, Thai, etc actually have similar problems to the black and Latino communities. East Asians like Chinese, Korean, Japanese, etc have similar stats to whites. The difference is in the immigration origin and status. Southeast Asians tended to be from poorer countries as well as the influx through refugee status. East Asians tend to be from more wealthier countries that have very a very selective immigration process that favor the already educated and well-enough-to-do class. This is why it shouldn't be a surprise when it comes to certain Asian/Asian Americans "doing well." But despite "doing well," you'll still see a disparity in wage, promotions, and management positions. You'll also see that in economic downturns, Asians suffer higher levels of unemployment when factoring race and class.

I'm also fairly certain that SES doesn't account for middle-class black students not having similar test scores compared to whites. There are a lot of studies out there about this as well.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Asians are an interesting case. When people talk about Asians/Asian Americans, the Model Minority myth seems to always permeate the discussion. The correct answer is that some Asians do well, but most don't. When it comes to Southeast Asians like Vietnamese, Hmong, Cambodian, Laotian, Thai, etc actually have similar problems to the black and Latino communities. East Asians like Chinese, Korean, Japanese, etc have similar stats to whites. The difference is in the immigration origin and status. Southeast Asians tended to be from poorer countries as well as the influx through refugee status. East Asians tend to be from more wealthier countries that have very a very selective immigration process that favor the already educated and well-enough-to-do class. This is why it shouldn't be a surprise when it comes to certain Asian/Asian Americans "doing well." But despite "doing well," you'll still see a disparity in wage, promotions, and management positions. You'll also see that in economic downturns, Asians suffer higher levels of unemployment when factoring race and class.

I'm also fairly certain that SES doesn't account for middle-class black students not having similar test scores compared to whites. There are a lot of studies out there about this as well.[/QUOTE]

Well, yeah, if you break out Asians into specific categories like that, I'm not sure if whites and hispanics can be broken out like that, so it's possible that they would show similar results. From some of the studies I've read (I can't remember what they are to link, plus I think you have to pay for them or have access to psychinfo anyway), although there is slight differences between the Asian groups, they still scored higher or were equal to whites on average in the math portion of the SAT. I freely admit that the reading and writing portion can definitely be biased, so we can exclude that for now. As far as disparity for wages, I was pretty sure that Asian males tended to be the highest paid, but I could be wrong about that. As far as middle class blacks, I haven't read enough studies there to really have an opinion, I just remember the study I read said controlling for SES, the students scored very similarly.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Well, yeah, if you break out Asians into specific categories like that, I'm not sure if whites and hispanics can be broken out like that, so it's possible that they would show similar results.[/QUOTE]
The large variety of ethnic diversity within the Asian community is exactly why we need to seperate them. It gives the impression that Asians don't need any social services because of "high success rates" and that is patently unrealistic.

Hispanics are actually broken down to white Hispanic(European Spanish and some Cuban) and non-white Hispanic(Latin American). Colonization plays a large part in this and to be honest, its legacy still sticks around in countries south of our border.

From some of the studies I've read (I can't remember what they are to link, plus I think you have to pay for them or have access to psychinfo anyway), although there is slight differences between the Asian groups, they still scored higher or were equal to whites on average in the math portion of the SAT.
Click to expand...
It's more than slight differences in Asian groups though. It's especially bad for Cambodians in MA and Laotians in RI compared to Chinese and Koreans in CA. Issues regarding class, education, immigration type all intersect. We're talking about crime rates, inprisonment, graduation rates, poverty, wages, ect. I'm not saying that if you're Cambodian or Vietnamese that your going to drop out, join in gang, and end up in jail, but that as a group, outcomes tend to trend in that direction due to most Southeast Asians being refugees and all the baggage that comes with it. Just like how most East Asian immigration of the last 60 years consists of the educated/business/monied class and the fact that they were allowed to immigrate makes a huge difference in SES today.

The problem with studying institutional racism with Asians is that no one is really doing collecting data to allow more research. Pretty much everyone has been saying that they need more data for the last 30 years. Not to say that there isn't any good research out there, just that its tough if the Feds aren't collecting the data they need.

I freely admit that the reading and writing portion can definitely be biased, so we can exclude that for now. As far as disparity for wages, I was pretty sure that Asian males tended to be the highest paid, but I could be wrong about that.
Click to expand...
Asian men are paid less than white women, who already get paid 22% less than white men on average accounting for education, experience, etc. The was reported in a study published April 2010.

As far as middle class blacks, I haven't read enough studies there to really have an opinion, I just remember the study I read said controlling for SES, the students scored very similarly.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, even considering SES, black students still score lower. Just because you might be in the same class as higher achieving students, it doesn't mean that you'll be treated in the same way. It becomes increasingly more obvious as you go down the socio-economic ladder when you look at suspension and expulsion rates as black kids are punished more severely than white students for the same offenses. The most recent study I can think of was published a month ago with data from the Texas school system.

Now here's a really interesting statistic: college graduation rates for men of color are not only lower than women of color, but has been dropping for the last few years. This study was published more recently by the College Board(SAT peeps) a couple months ago.
 
[quote name='dohdough']


Asian men are paid less than white women, who already get paid 22% less than white men on average accounting for education, experience, etc. The was reported in a study published April 2010.
[/QUOTE]

Can you show me where that study is, because literally every study I've ever read recently shows that Asian males make the most on average, though maybe it doesn't break down into accounting for education and experience. Are they comparing the same jobs, or is it just broken down into years of education and experience?
 
[quote name='docvinh']Can you show me where that study is, because literally every study I've ever read recently shows that Asian males make the most on average, though maybe it doesn't break down into accounting for education and experience. Are they comparing the same jobs, or is it just broken down into years of education and experience?[/QUOTE]
I tried fishing through my old posts because there was a link for it. Couldn't find it.

edit: found the article http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html

Study is actually from 1998 and the article is from April 2010. Data cited in the article go to 2007. I don't see references to the studies, so you'll need to google them on your own if interested.

I found the stats you were referencing though, so I see what you're saying that Asians make more money per capita, but I find that a generalized data set like that to not tell a very complete story. Kinda like you could say that almost half of the violent crime that led to convictions in the US were commited by black males. Sure, that's true, but that doesn't really mean anything.
 
[quote name='dohdough']I tried fishing through my old posts because there was a link for it. Couldn't find it.

edit: found the article http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html

Study is actually from 1998 and the article is from April 2010. Data cited in the article go to 2007. I don't see references to the studies, so you'll need to google them on your own if interested.

I found the stats you were referencing though, so I see what you're saying that Asians make more money per capita, but I find that a generalized data set like that to not tell a very complete story. Kinda like you could say that almost half of the violent crime that led to convictions in the US were commited by black males. Sure, that's true, but that doesn't really mean anything.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I agree to a certain point, it's just that it's easy to break out the Asian population, where it's harder to do that with whites and blacks, for obvious reasons. I'm just curious myself if there are any differences among those two populations. Has anyone ever tried?
 
Asians make more per capita because so many who immigrate here came here for college/grad school and then stick around, and a disproportionate number of them work in higher paying fields like engineering and the hard sciences etc.

But there's still a pretty big chunk of Asians living in poverty who just work in restaurants, run shops etc. That just gets lost in the per capita numbers as the high salaries of the top earners in the Asian demographic pull the average up.

Also, even among those working in high paying jobs, the fact that their per capita income is high as a racial group doesn't mean that an Asian male working for company X isn't getting paid less than his white colleague who has the same position and experience etc.

So Dohdough is right that it does little good to look at aggregated data. Lots of biases, trends etc. only become apparent when you break things down into smaller groupings. Aggregation masks variation, so in my opinion the smallest practical unit of analysis is usually best.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Yeah, I agree to a certain point, it's just that it's easy to break out the Asian population, where it's harder to do that with whites and blacks, for obvious reasons. I'm just curious myself if there are any differences among those two populations. Has anyone ever tried?[/QUOTE]
Do you mean breaking down whte European immigrants compared to black immigrants? To be honest, I don't even think there's a need to considering how the US racially socializes whites and black people regardless of their origin, not to mention that immigration rates broken down by country instead of continent are so low in number and percentage that it would be even easier to see a trend in who's allowed to immigrate and who isn't.

There are certainly studies on breaking down white and black populations, but they still pretty much align with what we already know about success rates. I'm not sure if this is the obvious reason you're talking about or the one above. I'd also go as far to say that we don't really study white people because we use the white experience as a baseline, which in turn means we use a deficit model to explain any group doesn't meet that subjective level of achievement.
 
The baseline thing is also a statistical thing. You want the group with the greatest numbers in the sample to be the reference group/baseline for statistical reasons. I've sometimes used blacks or Hispanics as the baseline/reference group where I had samples from neighborhoods where those groups were the majority.

Also, there are practical reasons that make it difficult to break down whites into original nationalities. Very few have one country of origin in their genes any more since most people's families immigrated a long time ago and have mixed a ton over the generations. And there are plenty like me who have family trees no one's traced back very far, and thus have no idea what their ethnic origins are. Most just consider themselves white and American, so it's hard to get the level of specificity you get if you ask Hispanics, or example, their nationality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dohdough']Do you mean breaking down whte European immigrants compared to black immigrants? To be honest, I don't even think there's a need to considering how the US racially socializes whites and black people regardless of their origin, not to mention that immigration rates broken down by country instead of continent are so low in number and percentage that it would be even easier to see a trend in who's allowed to immigrate and who isn't.

There are certainly studies on breaking down white and black populations, but they still pretty much align with what we already know about success rates. I'm not sure if this is the obvious reason you're talking about or the one above. I'd also go as far to say that we don't really study white people because we use the white experience as a baseline, which in turn means we use a deficit model to explain any group doesn't meet that subjective level of achievement.[/QUOTE]

I don't really have any type of angle here, I'm just more curious to know if there are differences within the white and black populations themselves as there are in the Asian populations. Like Dmaul said, from a practicality standpoint though, I understand that there are huge difficulties in accomplishing this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top