Obama Back to School Speech For Kids

[blackfalcon]

exactly. u can take classes that help u reason and problem solve better and develop better study habits etc.

[Ningyotsukai-san]

Eh, I wouldn't say you specifically grow in intelligence, but moreso in fine tuning your "intelligence"; your "ability" of understanding something...like relating to shit that'll help you see clearly the specifics in the concern to your understanding whatever topic.

Though thinking back kinda shows a slight fallacy in that statement.... if you can learn to approach something in a different manner, you can increase in this "intelligence" or understanding to give more opportunities for getting to know things...

I've never quite had a hard time understanding things and I was one of those "kids" who sat infront of tv a lot growing up....hardly watch it nowadays, though...

I normally just start off easy and build my way up from the things I already know to understand things I'm not 100% sure of....that and try to see things from all angles that I can think of.

the only problem I have is keeping to complete my work more than understanding it...lol

[_Scarlett_]

Eh, I wouldn't say you specifically grow in intelligence, but moreso in fine tuning your "intelligence"; your "ability" of understanding something...like relating to shit that'll help you see clearly the specifics in the concern to your understanding whatever topic.

Though thinking back kinda shows a slight fallacy in that statement.... if you can learn to think a different way, you can grow in this "intelligence" or understanding to give more opportunities for getting to know things...

I've never quite had a hard time understanding things and I was one of those "kids" who sat infront of tv a lot growing up....hardly watch it nowadays, though...

I normally just start off easy and build my way up from the things I already know to understand things I'm not 100% sure of...

the only problem I have is keeping to complete my work more than understanding it...lol

Did everyone just blow over my summary of Bloom's Taxonomy '~,o? It goes in with what you guys are talking about >.<.

I was also one of those kids who was thrown in front of the T.V. It doesn't really affect intelligence all that much; if anything it has effected my study/work habits more than my ability to use what I know to apply, analyze, and create new thoughts.

[Ningyotsukai-san]

Did everyone just blow over my summary of Bloom's Taxonomy '~,o? It goes in with what you guys are talking about >.<.

Yea, no ;P

I was also one of those kids who was thrown in front of the T.V. It doesn't really affect intelligence all that much; if anything it has effected my study/work habits more than my ability to use what I know to apply, analyze, and create new thoughts.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^

[XemnasXD]

There are probably as many definitions of intelligence as there are experts who study it. Simply put, however, intelligence is the ability to learn about, learn from, understand, and interact with one’s environment. This general ability consists of a number of specific abilities, which include these specific abilities:

* Adaptability to a new environment or to changes in the current environment
* Capacity for knowledge and the ability to acquire it
* Capacity for reason and abstract thought
* Ability to comprehend relationships
* Ability to evaluate and judge
* Capacity for original and productive thought

Additional specific abilities might be added to the list, but they would all be abilities allowing a person to learn about, learn from, understand, and interact with the environment. Environment in this definition doesn’t mean the environment of the earth, such as the desert, the mountains, etc., although it can mean that kind of environment. It has a wider meaning that includes a person’s immediate surroundings, including the people around him or her. Environment in this case can also be something as small as a family, the workplace, or a

now as i said before.. im not saying that the children in other countries do better because they know more information.. they have greater intelligence because parents and teachers and society over in other countries might push them to have to have a higher intelligence level. this can be argued forever but think about it. there is no way a kid is born more intelligent than another. it just depends how they develop and what forces are acting on their development. if u have a child that is thrown in front of a tv all day of course they will be less intelligent.

edit: goin to bed, tty guys about this tomorrow ><

this isn't hard

UC Irvine
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/6512

UC LA
http://www.loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/MEDIA/NN/nyt.html

Your intelligence is determined by biological factors.

In fact you're really starting to irk me with the lack of intelligence you are displaying. Intelligence is the brains ability to understand and comprehend. It can develop, yes but only to a certain point just like everything else in your body. Your brain eventually stops developing and thats where your intelligence is set in stone. The limit on how much data it can process and how well it can process it is set in stone.

Environment has a role to play but only in the way that brain must have access and must be fed knowledge in order to make that intelligence viable. Kids should always study, the human potential for intelligence is higher than any animal on the planet. That does not mean that if you study hard you will be a genius eventually. It doesn't work like that. The capacity for genius isn't learned, its innate. Its genetic. Its in your genes. Kids who are forced to study hard by their parents will realize eventually that no matter how hard they study they will not be able to keep up with certain students. They will eventually realize that certain students are just more intelligent than they are. That certain students who may even study less than they do learn things faster and understand them quicker and better.

I will not keep repeating myself so you can feel good about yourself. NO you will never be more intelligent than some people. YES some people were just born more intelligent than you. YES if you and them learned and studied at the same rate they'd get alot more out of it than you. YES this is determined from the get go, you are doomed from birth to your life of mediocre intelligence.

That is life. Some people are born with capacity to be taller, some with the capacity to be stronger, some with capacity to be faster, and some with the capacity to be more intelligent.


If you don't have it, you can't get it.


deal with it...

[Ningyotsukai-san]

<3

[John_Doe]

lol now I feel the need to bow to any forgien kid from China, Africa, or any other "smart" country that has already been mention or I might get mind crushed by them if I don't. Honestly if your driven enough you can do anything, we all have different goals if you feel the need to learn Calculus before 6-12 grade then so be it your choice.

[woutR]

Aww I thought this was an interesting subject and now it's about pre algebra, intelligence and asians being smarter.

Thing about European countries testing higher is that kids who dont pass a hard ass exam dont move on through high school they stop and join the workforce while the smarter kids are represented as china. Whilst in the U.S even the dumbasses are counted in. I gaureentee if we took our smart kids vs china smart kids it wouldnt be much of a difference.

This is not true, a lot of European countries work with levels and you can redo a year if you failed. Besides we have 'leerplicht' which literally translates to 'learn duty'; up until the age of 25 you will be encouraged to get a diploma. Until the age of 18 it is obligatory to follow some type of education.
Our 'dumb' students drop down a level or redo the year, they don't get thrown away to increase our test results.

Besides, I don't think it's fair to accuse European countries of inflating the scores when America is using the 'No Child Left Behind' act, which is the biggest score inflation ever to see the light in public education. If you score X you get money, if not, you don't get money. Gee, how hard would I make the tests if I needed money as a principal?

[JuelzSantana]

There are probably as many definitions of intelligence as there are experts who study it. Simply put, however, intelligence is the ability to learn about, learn from, understand, and interact with one’s environment. This general ability consists of a number of specific abilities, which include these specific abilities:

* Adaptability to a new environment or to changes in the current environment
* Capacity for knowledge and the ability to acquire it
* Capacity for reason and abstract thought
* Ability to comprehend relationships
* Ability to evaluate and judge
* Capacity for original and productive thought

Additional specific abilities might be added to the list, but they would all be abilities allowing a person to learn about, learn from, understand, and interact with the environment. Environment in this definition doesn’t mean the environment of the earth, such as the desert, the mountains, etc., although it can mean that kind of environment. It has a wider meaning that includes a person’s immediate surroundings, including the people around him or her. Environment in this case can also be something as small as a family, the workplace, or a

now as i said before.. im not saying that the children in other countries do better because they know more information.. they have greater intelligence because parents and teachers and society over in other countries might push them to have to have a higher intelligence level. this can be argued forever but think about it. there is no way a kid is born more intelligent than another. it just depends how they develop and what forces are acting on their development. if u have a child that is thrown in front of a tv all day of course they will be less intelligent.

edit: goin to bed, tty guys about this tomorrow ><

this isn't hard

UC Irvine
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/6512

UC LA
http://www.loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/MEDIA/NN/nyt.html

Your intelligence is determined by biological factors.

In fact you're really starting to irk me with the lack of intelligence you are displaying. Intelligence is the brains ability to understand and comprehend. It can develop, yes but only to a certain point just like everything else in your body. Your brain eventually stops developing and thats where your intelligence is set in stone. The limit on how much data it can process and how well it can process it is set in stone.

Environment has a role to play but only in the way that brain must have access and must be fed knowledge in order to make that intelligence viable. Kids should always study, the human potential for intelligence is higher than any animal on the planet. That does not mean that if you study hard you will be a genius eventually. It doesn't work like that. The capacity for genius isn't learned, its innate. Its genetic. Its in your genes. Kids who are forced to study hard by their parents will realize eventually that no matter how hard they study they will not be able to keep up with certain students. They will eventually realize that certain students are just more intelligent than they are. That certain students who may even study less than they do learn things faster and understand them quicker and better.

I will not keep repeating myself so you can feel good about yourself. NO you will never be more intelligent than some people. YES some people were just born more intelligent than you. YES if you and them learned and studied at the same rate they'd get alot more out of it than you. YES this is determined from the get go, you are doomed from birth to your life of mediocre intelligence.

That is life. Some people are born with capacity to be taller, some with the capacity to be stronger, some with capacity to be faster, and some with the capacity to be more intelligent.


If you don't have it, you can't get it.


deal with it...

listen man were just havin a friendly conversation, no need to insult me because my iq is 129 and im a visual mathemetician and im a pre med student, if i have shitty intelligence then i would hate to see how retarded people do. were debating something, if ur gonna get mad about it and stomp your feet and call people names and insult their intelligence, do me a favor and dont reply. idc if ur e penis is gigantic, in real life, off the boards, im NOT a scrub. just because u wanna be mirriam webster and know the definition of everything doesnt give you the right to insult me, in medicine, everything can be argued.

It can develop, yes but only to a certain point just like everything else in your body.

contradiction. by just saying that, u said that people can gain intelligence to a certain point. and like i was saying before. in early life, critical years. if your being forced to read instead of watching teletubbies.. whoever said they were 1 of those kids that watched tv and did fine in school, thats fine. im not saying that tv is the only thing that would make you less intelligent, but if you werent challenged as a child then what do you expect?

going over my gf's house i'll be back later, keep the flame low, it makes u look like a little girl if you start cursing because people dont see it your way. im not having an argument with anyone in this thread so..

but xemnas, seriously r u really gonna get that upset cuz im trying to debate over something with u? people debate if vitamins actually help u. do you see the majority of people that accept that they do cursing at them? if ur gonna talk about intelligence, be intelligent and be classy

[TheDrop]

Yeah Pre-Algebra isn't that hard. Still though, pre-algebra in the US is taught in 8th grade (in a unaccelerated course), which is pretty lame.
BTW, I didn't say asians are smarter than non-asians, its just that they have more pressure from their parents and teachers, so they work harder.

no pre-algebra is taught anywhere from 4th-6th in the US depending on the state. Average is 5th though...

Maybe where u live (different school systems have different curriculum after all) Here its 8th pre-algebra, 9th algebra, 10th geo, 11th algebra 2, 12th geo 2, for an average course. You can do algebra at 7th grade if you pass a special test, or do pre-algebra at 7th if you have honors/or are in the gifted/talented program. Anyways, there is no point arguing about that since different states have different courses

No one confronted you with 2+_=7 until you were in middle school?

I think you got the wrong idea about pre-algebra. This is what i meant by pre-alegbra=
(u^2v)(-6uv^2) or (3b^2)(1/3)abc)(-c)

[Jstar1]

Yeah Pre-Algebra isn't that hard. Still though, pre-algebra in the US is taught in 8th grade (in a unaccelerated course), which is pretty lame.
BTW, I didn't say asians are smarter than non-asians, its just that they have more pressure from their parents and teachers, so they work harder.

no pre-algebra is taught anywhere from 4th-6th in the US depending on the state. Average is 5th though...

Maybe where u live (different school systems have different curriculum after all) Here its 8th pre-algebra, 9th algebra, 10th geo, 11th algebra 2, 12th geo 2, for an average course. You can do algebra at 7th grade if you pass a special test, or do pre-algebra at 7th if you have honors/or are in the gifted/talented program. Anyways, there is no point arguing about that since different states have different courses

No one confronted you with 2+_=7 until you were in middle school?

I think you got the wrong idea about pre-algebra. This is what i meant by pre-alegbra=
(u^2v)(-6uv^2) or (3b^2)(1/3)abc)(-c)

hahhaa ok you guys are on different boats. In america 3+x=17 is pre algebra. Your example is already algebra 1 here.

Anyways if anything should be done about american education system, obama should create a national standard so that everyone follows the same curriculum that is strong enough to compete against other developed countries. This is the only way to ensure that every student gets a good education and preps them for college. All the states are a bunch of douchebags they fudge all their stats about progress. /preach

[noobert mclagg]

They are having us listen to it at our high school.

[XemnasXD]

Jstar gets me, not bad. Devil when you said your mother was exposed to pre-algebra, the basic concepts, in 4th grade i thought you meant 2+_=7 because in the US thats standard 4th-6th grade level pre-algebra. It shouldn't be hard for most kids who have basic math skills. If your mother was being taught (3b^2)(1/3)abc)(-c) in the 4th grade than that is something i have never heard of and i find extremely hard to believe unless she was in some type of advanced program. Thats not basic algebra concepts at all and most kids would certainly be unable to understand that by age 10.

listen man were just havin a friendly conversation, no need to insult me because my iq is 129 and im a visual mathemetician and im a pre med student, if i have shitty intelligence then i would hate to see how retarded people do. were debating something, if ur gonna get mad about it and stomp your feet and call people names and insult their intelligence, do me a favor and dont reply. idc if ur e penis is gigantic, in real life, off the boards, im NOT a scrub. just because u wanna be mirriam webster and know the definition of everything doesnt give you the right to insult me, in medicine, everything can be argued.

In medicine not everything can be argued. Medicine is applied biology. Biology is applied chemistry. There are rules to things. X>Y because the chemical structure of X neutralizes Y. If you don't want to be talked to like a scrub than break out some of that pre-med students knowledge and lay it down. If i find myself talking down to someone its not because i think im better than them its because they come off ignorant. You were wrong about the way Asians and Africans teach their kids. They make work them harder but they clearly draw lines between who is more intelligent than whom and those who pass are the ones to go on. If the student isn't smart they get cut, go join the workforce. In America we have dividing lines but thanks to the standards set up by things like No Child Left Behind ALL students are required to have met a certain level of education by the time they graduate high school which means that regardless of the students intelligence teachers are FORCED to teach them all the same. If No Child Left Behind has proven anything its that all students are not created equal no matter how hard you try to teach them.

contradiction. by just saying that, u said that people can gain intelligence to a certain point. and like i was saying before. in early life, critical years. if your being forced to read instead of watching teletubbies.. whoever said they were 1 of those kids that watched tv and did fine in school, thats fine. im not saying that tv is the only thing that would make you less intelligent, but if you werent challenged as a child then what do you expect?

See this kind of stuff is the reason im coming off so snippy to you. You call yourself a pre-med student but i don't see any of that here. When i said people can gain intelligence up to a certain point i was referring to the fact that the mind is still developing while young. All parts of the mind are still growing to take the shape they eventually will. This physical development is different from the social development that also takes place. The physical development is determined by genetics. The size of certain lobes, the formation of the brain itself. The social development is what a child learns during these critical years. A person who is not taught any language at an early age will still have the physical language part of his brain develop but he will be unable to make much use of it because he was not taught the skills required.

The part of the brain that houses intelligence has a set shape it will eventually take. This shape is determined by genetics. This part will grow(gain) intelligence until it reaches the point where, determined by genetics, it stops growing and the maximum size it can achieve is formed. This development is completely different than the social development that accompanies it. A child who sits in front of the TV all day watching garbage will absorb different skills than one who is studying. Think of intelligence like a glass. Even if people have the same size glasses if one is studying his glass gets filled while the if the other is not his glass remains empty. The shape and size of the glass in finite. It has limits. But it is only as good as what is put in. They both have the same intelligence in this case but one is utilizing it and the other is not. That is why the child in front of the TV seems dumber than the one who is studying even if in fact they have same intelligence. One of the worlds most intelligent people grew up on a farm so all he knew for a long time was basic farm knowledge however because his intelligence was so high he became a very successful autodidact. His glass was very large from an early age but nobody was filling it so had you and him been compared you probably would've come off as smarter but in reality he would've been the intelligent one.

Finding out you were a pre-med student was a huge disappointment. It was my job for a long time to set up the labs that pre-med students used so i know what you're supposed to be learning and you displayed none of that here. Also don't wave an IQ in front of me, intelligence not applied is intelligence wasted and you have shown nothing here that proves you may have above average intelligence so don't expect me to be impressed. If you want me to be classier than show me some of that pre-med stuff to back up your claims. Show me that there is some thought or sense of logic behind anything you've been posting because i was only reacting to what you were posting and TBH your post came off like a desperate plea to prove that you still had room to grow. As if you could, through some intense studying or something become more intelligent than you are. You can fill you mind with knowledge but your capacity for understanding and applying it is limited. Certain people can only go so far and will have to watch as the truly gifted go so much further...

[Barotix]

I'm an Econ Major trapped in a Comp Sci Major's body. nuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
A national standard sounds dandy but what works for bob won't work for Jimbo. Just saying.

[IceCrash]

very nice thread guys

usa can't be that bad, it's usa after all, seriously.

i agree that, in the best european countries, education's really good.

about the intelligence stuff, i think it's relative but, xemnas is more close to the truth imo.

i find myself to be an intelligent guy and.. i honestly think it's something you're just born with... you can improve your ways of understanding something, that doesn't mean you improve your intelligence tho.

[TheDrop]

Jstar gets me, not bad. Devil when you said your mother was exposed to pre-algebra, the basic concepts, in 4th grade i thought you meant 2+_=7 because in the US thats standard 4th-6th grade level pre-algebra. It shouldn't be hard for most kids who have basic math skills. If your mother was being taught (3b^2)(1/3)abc)(-c) in the 4th grade than that is something i have never heard of and i find extremely hard to believe unless she was in some type of advanced program. Thats not basic algebra concepts at all and most kids would certainly be unable to understand that by age 10.

Well that example was what I meant by pre-algebra, as it was one of the questions in one my homeworks (taking pre-algebra atm). They might have been taught a simpler expression, like 5(2n^2+n). 2+_7 are usually taught while learning addition/subtraction, arent they? :\
And yes, most kids would probably not get it. But they have their parents helping them (or more like forcing them), and if they still dont get it, they will be left behind :\

[Jstar1]

I'm an Econ Major trapped in a Comp Sci Major's body. nuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
A national standard sounds dandy but what works for bob won't work for Jimbo. Just saying.

other countries do a national system and they are able to produce many smart and knowledgeable workers. The effects are not being felt right now because they are still in school but once these high school asian and european people grow up, like 10 years from now, american workers are going to be up against something they can't imagine. And american companies are gonna go like wtf is this when they see a bunch of shitty american workers' resumes while there are a ton of well qualified foreign people who can speak english well and do the job right.

[Barotix]

Look at it this way: A National curriculum, though appealing, would be difficult to implement in the United States because of regional differences. First one must change the mindset of the people from "I'm from <insert state>" to "I'm American." Also, parents have to get involved, we can't put the burden of Education on the government alone. Parents pressure kids to excel in their studies/athletics not government. What the government tries to do is make education even or "equal" across the board so bob & jimbo both do well. Other countries cater to the hardworking and leave the lazy behind so if you want Nationalized Education you have three choices:

1]Education for those who will put in the work. This cuts off the lazy & slow students effectively defeating the purpose of universal/socialized education.
2]Education that works for everyone. In order to implement a system like that one must start from the bottom up.
3]Personalized standards for each student. Costly & can't be executed well by government, this is where private & homeschooling take over.

We want everyone to be educated but we don't care how or with what. That's what I gather from the current system (2), I would be fine with options 1 or 3.

[XemnasXD]

Jstar gets me, not bad. Devil when you said your mother was exposed to pre-algebra, the basic concepts, in 4th grade i thought you meant 2+_=7 because in the US thats standard 4th-6th grade level pre-algebra. It shouldn't be hard for most kids who have basic math skills. If your mother was being taught (3b^2)(1/3)abc)(-c) in the 4th grade than that is something i have never heard of and i find extremely hard to believe unless she was in some type of advanced program. Thats not basic algebra concepts at all and most kids would certainly be unable to understand that by age 10.

Well that example was what I meant by pre-algebra, as it was one of the questions in one my homeworks (taking pre-algebra atm). They might have been taught a simpler expression, like 5(2n^2+n). 2+_7 are usually taught while learning addition/subtraction, arent they? :\
And yes, most kids would probably not get it. But they have their parents helping them (or more like forcing them), and if they still dont get it, they will be left behind :\

learning that type of math [(3b^2)(1/3)abc)(-c)] or similar things in 4th grade is something i've never heard of before. I'd be interested to know where they learned this, how far the grades went up to, what they were expected to have learned by 12th grade, and whether all all the students were expected to and able to learn it.

@Baro. The US just needs to get back into the habit of sectioning students off. There are two kinds of special ed, one for fast learners and one for slow learners. This type of system just needs to be enforced more heavily and the students who qualify for the better learning should be able to be sent to the schools that have the adequate facilities and faculties to train them. Thats what i think would help anyway.

[JuelzSantana]

In medicine not everything can be argued. Medicine is applied biology. Biology is applied chemistry. There are rules to things. X>Y because the chemical structure of X neutralizes Y. If you don't want to be talked to like a scrub than break out some of that pre-med students knowledge and lay it down. If i find myself talking down to someone its not because i think im better than them its because they come off ignorant. You were wrong about the way Asians and Africans teach their kids. They make work them harder but they clearly draw lines between who is more intelligent than whom and those who pass are the ones to go on. If the student isn't smart they get cut, go join the workforce. In America we have dividing lines but thanks to the standards set up by things like No Child Left Behind ALL students are required to have met a certain level of education by the time they graduate high school which means that regardless of the students intelligence teachers are FORCED to teach them all the same. If No Child Left Behind has proven anything its that all students are not created equal no matter how hard you try to teach them.

Finding out you were a pre-med student was a huge disappointment. It was my job for a long time to set up the labs that pre-med students used so i know what you're supposed to be learning and you displayed none of that here. Also don't wave an IQ in front of me, intelligence not applied is intelligence wasted and you have shown nothing here that proves you may have above average intelligence so don't expect me to be impressed. If you want me to be classier than show me some of that pre-med stuff to back up your claims. Show me that there is some thought or sense of logic behind anything you've been posting because i was only reacting to what you were posting and TBH your post came off like a desperate plea to prove that you still had room to grow. As if you could, through some intense studying or something become more intelligent than you are. You can fill you mind with knowledge but your capacity for understanding and applying it is limited. Certain people can only go so far and will have to watch as the truly gifted go so much further...

ok first off medicine is way more than "applied biology". biology is such a general term for a broad range of topics. of course biology as a whole can be seen as "applied chemistry". also i never said you were talking down to me, i said you insulted me there is a difference and you have to admit you did insult me. its only an uneducated person that has to insult a person that doesnt see eye to eye with them. anyway.. i was NOT wrong about african and asian parents, of course i was only generalizing but saying that a child is not smart enough is bullshit, they may be a little lazy but with enough force from the parents they can be A students. saying go join the workforce, like they arent equally important is ignorant of you because just like the world isnt just black and white, working doing hard labor isnt easy as well. im sure there are things they know about what they do that i couldnt have possibly imagined. life isnt like a football team, u dont cut people and say go join the knitting club if they arent up to par. now i understand that some people say "im just not cut out for school" YES that CAN be the case, BUT most of the time its just pure laziness. u have to see things from all perspectives. people that drop out of school, why do they do it? is it the high school emo? too depressed to go to school, could be the kid is a criminal in the making, organized crime, gang related crime. it could just be that they would rather play pokemon red version when they get home than open up a book. u dont know, i dont know. it could be that they are actually retarded. i feel that the no child left behind act is a bunch of bullshit myself but its for a good cause so why not what the hell.

finding out im a pre med student was a disappointment? lol you set up labs for pre med? what did you do have us identify what is a genotype and a phenotype?? get real man a lab is shit its just doing experiments and recording data, basically applying what you learned in lecture to practical situations. i also dont have shit to prove to you, so mr truly gifted let me lecture u so you can do me a favor and shove that pompous attitude up ur ass.

Intelligence is something that can be changed. Intelligence can be affected by biological and environmental variables. The biological variables that arguably effect intelligence such as heredity are bullshit at best. the family environment can affect intelligence and measures of intelligence quotients show that.

example -

Code: Select all

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/magazine/23wwln_idealab.html?ei=5090&en=2c93740d624fe47f&ex=1311307200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

"A study of French children adopted between the ages of 4 and 6 shows the continuing interplay of nature and nurture. The children came from poor backgrounds with IQs that initially averaged 77, putting them near retardation. Nine years later after adoption, they retook the IQ tests, and all of them did better. The amount they improved was directly related to the adopting family’s status. "Children adopted by farmers and laborers had average IQ scores of 85.5; those placed with middle-class families had average scores of 92. The average IQ scores of youngsters placed in well-to-do homes climbed more than 20 points, to 98."

IQ or intelligence quotient is a measurement of intelligence assessed from standardized tests. so therefore for the rest of this you can assume that a higher IQ would mean a higher intelligence and vice versa.(of course there can be errors with sampling but i assure you the errors are marginal)

understanding the impact of the environment on IQ is very important. there is no such thing as a set capacity in your brain (please link me to something respectable that can prove to me otherwise if you must). the human brain has no limit unless inhibiting factors are present i.e. down syndrome, autism. All humans without inhibiting factors are born with the same level of intelligence. Intelligence is then developed as they grow. How their environment (family, parents level of intelligence, activities child is challenged with) affects them DRAMATICALLY. No human is born with a mental capacity greater than another unless as mentioned before has an inhibiting factor. Heretibility of IQ is extremely arguable because even if a person did inherit some IQ from their parents the environment they are put in can alter that. if their parents are of genius intelligence, and the environment they are put in challenges to think and reason with the same standard of intelligence then yes that child will APPEAR to have inherited intelligence. But say a child was adopted by the parents of the first child. He/she will also have a chance to be of the same intelligence.
You claim that some people are born with mental capacity over others and that some people have to watch them be better than they ever could wish to be.

BULLSHIT

The earlier you are effected by environmental variables the higher or lower your intelligence could be. the reason for this is synaptic plasticity.

Code: Select all

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T0V-470V3B2-B&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=251aea0258d96538cd79703376bb97e8

(below is an abstract of a full report - read full report for more info)
“Activity-dependent long-term changes in synaptic efficacy are thought to be important in learning, memory formation, neuronal development and pathological states of neuronal excitability in the CNS. For the past two decades, numerous studies have investigated long-term changes in synaptic efficacy at excitatory glutamatergic synapses. Although inhibitory synapses are essential for proper functioning of the neuronal network, attention has focused only recently on describing and characterizing plasticity at these types of synapse. Not surprisingly, different forms of plasticity at GABAergic, and the closely related glycinergic, synapses have been reported in several regions of the brain. Here we review these different forms of plasticity and focus on their possible roles in developing and adult neuronal networks.”

In lay mans terms : There are tons of environmental influence on intelligence that are divided into biological and non biological variables(i.e. social and cultural variables). The most common difference is exposure in early childhood. Exposure to positive/negative influences need to happen before the neuronal connections have stopped forming.(as you said before when this stops forming is genetic but how much developing happens before hand is not genetic)
So therefore. In EARLY childhood as I was saying before when your African/asian mother is beating you half to death for you to understand something and you magically start to understand it. THAT is why you are more intelligent than other people not because you were born better. **** that perfection complex that’s such bullshit and u know for a fact it isn’t true.

disappointed now? And next time don’t talk out of your ass like u know wtf ur talking about u don’t know shit. Gf.

edit: it would have been fun to debate with u if you werent so damn pompous lol meh oh well, and also this is the internet, so Farking relax man idc if u were my lab TA or my professor himself, dont talk shit if u dont know what your dealing with. u can reply but i think im done in here, going to bed and i dont like arguing over the internet with people

[XemnasXD]

Oh ho ho i could write a book for a response on your pretentious first paragraph alone...you assume too much, prove too little, and in the end say alot of nothing at all...

im going to enjoy tearing that post apart...but give me time...

*chuckle*

[JuelzSantana]

Oh ho ho i could write a book for a response on your pretentious first paragraph alone...you assume too much, prove too little, and in the end say alot of nothing at all...

im going to enjoy tearing that post apart...but give me time...

*chuckle*

lol have fun i probably wont read it. i dont care enough to argue with u just because u want to win the argument, i know wtf im talking about and my post is based on facts so if u want to disprove facts then go do something more worthwhile like proving that if u throw a ball up it wont come down. or better yet get a hobby.

edit: and i enjoy the fact that the best u could come back with was "give me time". stop trying to look smart.. thats what i hate about people. if u dont know wtf ur talking about, just admit it, why argue??

pfft w/e have fun kid

[Goseki]

Eh, this shit is still going?

There's truth in both sides.

I think the way smart people end up can be divided into 3 groups:

1) Some grow up quite normal, while others start off brilliant. Prodigies can arise and continue to flourish in later life. Others start of with avg or below avg IQ, such as Einstein, but later are able to make a breakthrough once they realize something. The thing about this first group is that they may or may not necessarily be smarter than everyone else. It's just that they are able to see the problem at hand differently and come up with an entirely new solution.

2) The second group involves children that start of very smart at a young age. These prodigies however, will grow up and eventually be caught up by other children that were once smart. They now face the difficult task of realizing they are no longer special. Their mind was just able to be developed at a rapid pace, but eventually slowed down. This group basically shows that while some start off smart, and others dumb, they will eventually meet at some later point in time.

3) The last group are simply kids that are too un-motivated to care. Some see the poverty they are in and want to get rid of it asap. They don't see the long-term benefits of studying in school and being smart. They want it now.

Now we have an argument of whether intelligience is inborn or gained. It's both. We see some kids that are obviously born with a special talent, but depending on how it is nurtured, it could continue to grow throughout the individual's life or stop short. We also see other kids that bloom later. These examples are all showing that intelligience can be found internally. That sometimes you are just smarter while other times you just aren't smart. We also see evidence for the contrary. Some kids may be smart, but never show it until they are motivated. Some families may have children that may seem border-line retarded, but are actually quit intelligent. One of the problems is that we often test intelligience based on our criteria. The test giver may think that knowing big words, and being able to do math is defining smarts, but the test taker may think that knowing how to deal with others, how to take apart a M4, or how to stay alive is smarts. Some families or environments simply don't encourage the child to learn. With no motivational factors, the child falls behind and is perceived to be retarded.

A problem with Xemnas's view though is that it often leads to wrong choices. We see in history how the "superior" race thought the "inferior" were too dumb or wild and ended up eliminating them. Only to find out centuries later that their race was actually smarter and more peaceful. Just because someone shows their intelligience differently or behaves differently doesn't mean they are dumb. We may think that praying to a rock is stupid, but if the person praying has a full working plumbing system to their system and all we have is a bucket, the other person is probably smarter.

A problem with Devil's view is that we often try to help all children find the potential to learn, the root of the problem is the child's environment. The government and family can only do so much. Sometimes, economic or social factors makes it too difficult to help the child progress further. At other times, if we keep all children behind to help that poor kid who has a bad life, we end up keeping back many smarter and brighter kids.

A solution as Xemnas said was to strictly enforce the splitting of smarter and dumber kids. However, this could easily backlash. Sure the smarter kids could advance quicker, but the dumber kids would most likely feel like they were separated from their friends and be less inclined to try hard. Why try when you already know you're dumb. This also leads to the problem of late-bloomers. What if the child won't reach his thinking potential until a later age? Because of early separation, he might not have the chance to progress further.

[JuelzSantana]

Eh, this shit is still going?

There's truth in both sides.

I think the way smart people end up can be divided into 3 groups:

1) Some grow up quite normal, while others start off brilliant. Prodigies can arise and continue to flourish in later life. Others start of with avg or below avg IQ, such as Einstein, but later are able to make a breakthrough once they realize something. The thing about this first group is that they may or may not necessarily be smarter than everyone else. It's just that they are able to see the problem at hand differently and come up with an entirely new solution.

2) The second group involves children that start of very smart at a young age. These prodigies however, will grow up and eventually be caught up by other children that were once smart. They now face the difficult task of realizing they are no longer special. Their mind was just able to be developed at a rapid pace, but eventually slowed down. This group basically shows that while some start off smart, and others dumb, they will eventually meet at some later point in time.

3) The last group are simply kids that are too un-motivated to care. Some see the poverty they are in and want to get rid of it asap. They don't see the long-term benefits of studying in school and being smart. They want it now.

Now we have an argument of whether intelligience is inborn or gained. It's both. We see some kids that are obviously born with a special talent, but depending on how it is nurtured, it could continue to grow throughout the individual's life or stop short. We also see other kids that bloom later. These examples are all showing that intelligience can be found internally. That sometimes you are just smarter while other times you just aren't smart. We also see evidence for the contrary. Some kids may be smart, but never show it until they are motivated. Some families may have children that may seem border-line retarded, but are actually quit intelligent. One of the problems is that we often test intelligience based on our criteria. The test giver may think that knowing big words, and being able to do math is defining smarts, but the test taker may think that knowing how to deal with others, how to take apart a M4, or how to stay alive is smarts. Some families or environments simply don't encourage the child to learn. With no motivational factors, the child falls behind and is perceived to be retarded.

A problem with Xemnas's view though is that it often leads to wrong choices. We see in history how the "superior" race thought the "inferior" were too dumb or wild and ended up eliminating them. Only to find out centuries later that their race was actually smarter and more peaceful. Just because someone shows their intelligience differently or behaves differently doesn't mean they are dumb. We may think that praying to a rock is stupid, but if the person praying has a full working plumbing system to their system and all we have is a bucket, the other person is probably smarter.

A problem with Devil's view is that we often try to help all children find the potential to learn, the root of the problem is the child's environment. The government and family can only do so much. Sometimes, economic or social factors makes it too difficult to help the child progress further. At other times, if we keep all children behind to help that poor kid who has a bad life, we end up keeping back many smarter and brighter kids.

A solution as Xemnas said was to strictly enforce the splitting of smarter and dumber kids. However, this could easily backlash. Sure the smarter kids could advance quicker, but the dumber kids would most likely feel like they were separated from their friends and be less inclined to try hard. Why try when you already know you're dumb. This also leads to the problem of late-bloomers. What if the child won't reach his thinking potential until a later age? Because of early separation, he might not have the chance to progress further.

very nice reponse man i see u dont have your head up your ass

edit: and im glad u agree with me partially

[cpinney]

can a man get some tl;dr in this bitchhhhhh

[_Scarlett_]

Some kids may be smart, but never show it until they are motivated.

That sooooo describes me; I only really try when something's challenging, and that's usually my motivation. That was my problem in High School, most of my teachers thought I was stupid because I didn't do anything, but when I actually tried they realized I was just lazy lol.

[XemnasXD]

Im going to get the relevant part of this out of the way first. You should really read the articles you post. I didn't need to find counter arguments because the articles you selected just confirm everything i've been talking about....

Code: Select all

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/magazine/23wwln_idealab.html?ei=5090&en=2c93740d624fe47f&ex=1311307200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

This one you must've skimmed because the author uses the term genetic potential several times. As in the potential, determined by GENETICS.

In a widely-discussed 2003 article, he found that, as anticipated, virtually all the variation in I.Q. scores for twins in the sample with wealthy parents can be attributed to genetics. The big surprise is among the poorest families. Contrary to what you might expect, for those children, the I.Q.’s of identical twins vary just as much as the I.Q.’s of fraternal twins. The impact of growing up impoverished overwhelms these children’s genetic capacities. In other words, home life is the critical factor for youngsters at the bottom of the economic barrel. “If you have a chaotic environment, kids’ genetic potential doesn’t have a chance to be expressed,” Turkheimer explains. “Well-off families can provide the mental stimulation needed for genes to build the brain circuitry for intelligence.”

See the bold. Though this is just one example of a time the phrase is used. Turkheimer admits that that 3/4 of intelligence is determined by genetics alone. He goes on to explain that environment has a key role in bringing out the last part of intelligence. Turkheimer makes it very clear that intelligence is predetermined but he also makes it very clear that kids who aren't in the best growing environment may never live up to their full potential. He acknowledges that there are genetic limits to how intelligent a person can be, see his use of the word capacity. Limit. Finite. Remember what i was saying about the glasses and how just because a persons glass is empty doesn't mean they aren't intelligent. Remember what i told you about the farmer man.

I think you are putting too much emphasis on IQ without recognizing the proper way to apply it to a situation. You assumed that because the children's IQs went up their genetic potential for intelligence went up. Turkheimer does not agree with this. He submits that their IQs went up because they were finally able to live up to their genetic potential ONLY after being moved into a more stable, education friendly environment. No where in that article does Turkheimer state that a childs genetic potential for intelligence can be increased by a change in environment.

The better-off the family, the more a child’s genetic potential is likely to be, as Turkheimer puts it, “maxed out.”

The test with the orphans being moved into families does not refute Turkheimers hypothesis but only confirms it and further proves the roll environment has on all children. No where in their research did the psychologist find evidence that said a child genetic potential for intelligence could be increased. Their studies prove

1. IQ is not static and therefore cannot measure potential intelligence
2. A child in a better environment is more likely to "max out" their genetic potential.

Intelligence not utilized is intelligence wasted but the study i posted confirms and this study does not refute that the potential for a persons intelligence is determined by genetics. Whether they live up to that POTENTIAL or not is in most cases a matter of environment.

Code: Select all

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T0V-470V3B2-B&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=251aea0258d96538cd79703376bb97e8

I didn't pay for the article. If you did you know more about it than me but trust me i can read the thesis just fine.

Activity-dependent long-term changes in synaptic efficacy are thought to be important in learning, memory formation, neuronal development and pathological states of neuronal excitability in the CNS.

That is the thesis. It doesn't need interpreting or laymans terms, it is in very plain English. In fact the entire paragraph makes no mention of intelligence at all. Learning. Memory Formation. Neuronal Development. None of those words is Intelligence or can be read as Intelligence. I can clearly understand what it means and it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. The only thing that connects it is that is also deals in neuroscience.

The article deals with how synaptic plasticity(changes in synapses) impacts learning, memory formation, neuronal development and pathological states of neuronal excitability. Infact judging by the keywords and the terms used in the article its obvious that this has nothing to do with environmental factors. Its discussing the chemical factors that affect plasticity in developing and adult minds. If environmental factors contribute to these it is irrelevant to the article they are focused on the chemical and eventually physical changes brought on by these factors. Again, Intelligence or the development of is not addressed. That is its own category like Learning or Memory Formation when talking about neuroscience. We already know that chemical changes can affect a persons learning etc. The article is simply outlining new information on the subject...

Your laymans terms were a fanciful interpretation but like i said, the article is written in English. Written as plainly as possible considering the subject matter and it doesn't read anything like what you are trying to make it sound like.

<insert paragraph of follow-up insults>

ok first off medicine is way more than "applied biology". biology is such a general term for a broad range of topics. of course biology as a whole can be seen as "applied chemistry".

Not really. Medicine is based on biological functions and at its furtherst how chemistry is applied to these biological functions. Its applying biological knowledge therefore its applied biology. Is that term broad, yes, its intended to be but it is still true. You can't get into med school without having some type of biology classes before hand. There's a reason for that. Its because medicine applies those things you learn in biology and puts them to use. Its applied Biology...


also i never said you were talking down to me, i said you insulted me there is a difference and you have to admit you did insult me. its only an uneducated person that has to insult a person that doesnt see eye to eye with them.

"If you can’t ignore an insult, top it; if you can’t top it, laugh it off; and if you can’t laugh it off, it’s probably deserved." - J. Russell...

anyway.. i was NOT wrong about african and asian parents, of course i was only generalizing but saying that a child is not smart enough is bullshit, they may be a little lazy but with enough force from the parents they can be A students. saying go join the workforce, like they arent equally important is ignorant of you because just like the world isnt just black and white, working doing hard labor isnt easy as well.

I never said i didn't value the workforce. I understand the hierarchy. Even those at the top would crumble without the pillar needed to support them. Everyone serves a purpose as long as they contribute. Also an "A" student isn't the same as an intelligent person. If you need that explained to you you'll find it out soon enough.

im sure there are things they know about what they do that i couldnt have possibly imagined. life isnt like a football team, u dont cut people and say go join the knitting club if they arent up to par. now i understand that some people say "im just not cut out for school" YES that CAN be the case, BUT most of the time its just pure laziness. u have to see things from all perspectives. people that drop out of school, why do they do it? is it the high school emo? too depressed to go to school, could be the kid is a criminal in the making, organized crime, gang related crime. it could just be that they would rather play pokemon red version when they get home than open up a book. u dont know, i dont know. it could be that they are actually retarded. i feel that the no child left behind act is a bunch of bullshit myself but its for a good cause so why not what the hell.

Here is your hypocrisy at its worst. You claim that every level of society is valuable but you go on to say that most of those who opt out of higher education are simply lazy. I don't understand how you can reconcile these. The construction is valuable and important BUT he could've been a professor, he was just to lazy. The garbage man could've been a neurosurgeon BUT he was just too lazy. With this statement you imply that most of the people who opt out of school to pursue jobs of manual labor are simply to lazy to go to college but not too lazy to work 9 hour shifts doing back breaking work. Or they were either depressed or criminal or immature. You are asking me to see things from all perspectives when you aren't seeing things from their perspectives. Believe it or not to some people college is a waste of time. To some people they actually don't think they are cut out for that kind of life. For some people doing the plumbing or drywall or the construction is the kind of life that they are more suited towards. Everyone can be geniuses and the ones who choose not to be are just the lazy ones or the depressed ones or the criminals? You're supporting the No Child Left Behind mentality yet saying you don't. It was that everyone can be geniuses attitude that got NCLB put in place in the first place. This paragraph is just a sea of contradiction...


finding out im a pre med student was a disappointment? lol you set up labs for pre med? what did you do have us identify what is a genotype and a phenotype?? get real man a lab is shit its just doing experiments and recording data, basically applying what you learned in lecture to practical situations. i also dont have shit to prove to you, so mr truly gifted let me lecture u so you can do me a favor and shove that pompous attitude up ur ass.

I had to look at snot nosed kids like you coming to labs everyday. I literally had to shut the door because i couldn't stand the mindless thoughtless chatter that you guys called learning. We know more back there than you think. The person who coordinates those labs knows everything about the subject matter, all the biology, all the chemistry, all the biochemistry. We know your lesson plan. We know what you're supposed to have learned during the week. If you don't think applying knowledge to practical situations is important than i think you should switch your major because there is no better lesson than actual hands on experience and ALL teachers know and recognize its importance. There is a reason why internships exist and why its normally required or expected to have gone through one. Nothing beats hands on experience, don't sell it short.

*yawn*

Im still disappointed btw. That was almost shameful. I told you to show me some of that pre-med knowledge and the only thing you showed me was that you can't read....

respond or don't, it doesn't matter. My responses are reactions to your ignorant post. Posting more ignorance will only get you another reaction, maybe, this is getting old and you've yet to WoW me or even provide solid grounding for your theory...maybe you should enter pre-pre-med school...

[Jstar1]

can a man get some tl;dr in this bitchhhhhh

hahaha thats what i was thinking just now. You people writing a college thesis lol?

americans need to stop microanalyzing how to fix the education standard. Gonna get nowhere with that. The whole point is that obama needs to up the education standard by a law like "every american kid starting today will be required to finish precalculus by senior year". Boom there you go millions of kids will become smarter than they would be. Sometimes I wish we had the top-down kind of thing china has. American congress is full of idiots who can't get anything done fast.

And math should be something everyone be required to learn. Its not about whether each student can learn it or not...doing math itself makes you smarter generally. The stimulation it gives you when you solve a math problem its pretty worthless in real life but the problem solving aspect and the logic involved is very very valuable skills everyone will need in any job. No other subject comes close to stimulation like math.

tl;dr
every american student should be required to take pre-calculus by senior year if america wants to continue to produce high quality workers. period.

[Barotix]

can a man get some tl;dr in this bitchhhhhh

Summarizing everything

1. tl;dr People are complaining about indoctrination
2. People are bitching because Obama is black (I STRONGLY DISAGREE)
3. People are bitching because they're ignorant (I disagree)
4. tl;dr Foreign Schools bust their students' asses
5. tl;dr Dedicated parents push students to excel irregardless of ethnicity
6. Public schooling may need further nationalization (I disagree)
7. Public school needs to be more competitive
8. Intelligence is innate
9. Intelligence is learned (disagree)
10. Intelligence is innate but can be nurtured
11. People need to focus on Maths & Science if they plan on competing with Foreign Job markets

That's the whole thread with my opinion thrown in.

when I actually tried they realized I was just lazy lol

My Teachers knew I was lazy because I was always such a beast 1st & 2nd semester, but after Christmas break all I ever want to do is sleep and slide by.

[JuelzSantana]

lol listen man i have nothing against you xemnas but i think your acting a little way too pompous and i really dont care if u think im a bad pre med student or im a have low intelligence, this is the internet and i have nothing to prove to you and you are a nobody to me.. ur opinion on my life literally means nothing, when i get off the computer ur words dont even bother me the slightest bit, so acting like u know more than me, which u dont because the post that u posted is the biggest load of bullshit ever means literally shit. it only shows that u didnt understand what i was saying so if there is anyone that can't read, its you. i said that intelligence can be effected by the environment before the synaptic plasticity develops fully and also that genetics is VERY arguable and it only sets the rate of the synaptic plasticity formation. so therefore yes in a way i will admit u were right but the intelligence of a human being is determined by how that human being is effected as a child. simple. truth. if u dont like it oh well.

edit:

can a man get some tl;dr in this bitchhhhhh

Summarizing everything

1. tl;dr People are complaining about indoctrination
2. People are bitching because Obama is black (I STRONGLY DISAGREE)
3. People are bitching because they're ignorant (I disagree)
4. tl;dr Foreign Schools bust their students' asses
5. tl;dr Dedicated parents push students to excel irregardless of ethnicity
6. Public schooling may need further nationalization (I disagree)
7. Public school needs to be more competitive
8. Intelligence is innate
9. Intelligence is learned (disagree)(<- i never said that u assumed i said that)
   
10. Intelligence is innate but can be nurtured(ok it wont go bold, but thats what i was saying u were simply just saying that it was innate.)
11. People need to focus on Maths & Science if they plan on competing with Foreign Job markets

edit: fail but it wont go bold twice in a quote im guessing LOL >< but yea i was trying to argue #1 but oh well, gotta do laundry bbl