Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
maybe in 100 years or more, certainly not 20 years
we have had the "war on poverty" for over 50 years...no real gain
we have had affirmative action in one form or another for 150 years...no measurable gains in test scores
doesn't matter the color, the poor, tend to perform poorly in schools...mostly from parents who don't care, and are poorly educated themselves
Low intelligence usually results in low achievement, and is usually passed on to progeny. As much as been tried to discount IQ and its effect on performance, it persists to this day with a full 20% difference in the average of top "groups" compared to those on the other end of the spectrum. Interestingly, Asians are at the top with an average quotient of 105, and it shows in their performance. It is, however, a difficult subject to discuss for PC reasons.
I attended an event where the superintendent of schools spoke to the community. He was talking about the differences between various ethnic groups in academic test results. He told the audience that he firmly believed that in 20 years that there would be no difference in academic performance and test scores between Black, White, Asian and Hispanic students. Then someone asked if there would any difference in test scores between rich and poor students. He doubled down and said that in twenty years that gap would be eliminated too.
Everyone clapped and looked so proud of themselves for being in a society where this could happen.
Do YOU think there will be a time in your life where all races and income levels will be equal in academic performance?
Agreed-
Academic performance and test scores will no longer be measured, as liberals will consider them "racist". Academic advancement will only be measured by belief in global warming, magic, ghosts, and LBGT supremacy.
Do YOU think there will be a time in your life where all races and income levels will be equal in academic performance?
There is zero chance of this happening. You can’t change, legislate, or manage the cultures or environments that don’t value education
Before a kid gives a crap about school, they often have to know what purpose it will serve. Many parents won’t provide any purpose/motivation and many kids don’t have a clue how important school is before it’s too late.
Even with the advancement of online education, some kids will use it to obtain more education while others will use it to play computer games and watch YouTube videos.
Education must be ingrained into the Hispanic and black American culture like it is with the Asian, Jewish, and African immigrants culture. There is no school and politician that can do it, ever. It must come from within
I attended an event where the superintendent of schools spoke to the community. He was talking about the differences between various ethnic groups in academic test results. He told the audience that he firmly believed that in 20 years that there would be no difference in academic performance and test scores between Black, White, Asian and Hispanic students. Then someone asked if there would any difference in test scores between rich and poor students. He doubled down and said that in twenty years that gap would be eliminated too.
Everyone clapped and looked so proud of themselves for being in a society where this could happen.
Do YOU think there will be a time in your life where all races and income levels will be equal in academic performance?
And WHY did he believe this would happen in twenty years, specifically?
There are huge cultural differences in how academics are viewed. You're not going to change that in 1 generation.
This is why even when East Asian kids and say Hispanic or Native American kids grow up in similar economic conditions, the East Asian kids still beat the brakes off them in regards to academics.
Add to this that in you believe in evolution, it would be impossible to assume intelligence doesn't have a genetic root. There is simply no way that two groups of people with vastly different diets and living conditions evolved the same, including brain function. That's not to say that there are huge gaps in certain areas of intelligence between different groups, but to say they don't exist is to simply deny reality. Look at Rome 2,000 years ago, and look at Papua New Guinea today. To say that genetics don't play into that is simply dishonest as much as we don't want to believe it.
What do you consider to be the definition of "intelligence."
It differs based upon the person/group doing the defining and studying and is also heavily based upon the cultural traditions of said person/group.
In regards to Rome and Papua New Guinea - what makes you think that Romans were more intelligent than Papua New Guineans or vice versa? There is nothing to show that they were/are.
And note, I do think that genetics plays a role in cognitive ability; however, there is no such thing really as "races" of humans, race is a socio-political construct so differences within a nation in various statistical factors by "race" are just measuring the historic (and continued legacy of) socio-political discrimination and/or lack of discrimination against social groups for the most part. We all evolve from specific ancestral communities, of which were there are many and they cannot be confined to the 5 commonly believed "race" categories. For instance Ashkenazi Jews have a higher IQ than non-Ashkenazi Jews. They are all Jews but there is a difference. Ashkenazi Jews are considered "white" in this country as are people primarily of Irish descent. Irish people have a considerably lower IQ versus Ashkenazi Jews even though they are sociologically of the same "race."
Often people overlook the fact that what we consider "white, black and Asian" (and others) do not define the smaller ethnic communities genetic traits that are heritable, including a knack for certain skills/abilities that are considered to be of importance to one's "intelligence." Genetic clustered communities (ancestry) is much more important in studying genetics for various traits versus just "race" because there are a lot of socio-political factors involved in "race" and those of that particular "race" (like Ashkenazi Jews) have the potential to heavily impact the median and/or average scores of that particular socio-political "race"on these sorts of tests.
I'll admit that I often see people on this forum in particular who make all sorts of silly comments about intelligence based on race and I think about how Jews in particular and other "white" groups have a higher median IQ than the European group that that person more than likely hails from. Yet the poster seems to exude a lot of pride about their 101 IQ when they more than likely are a 90 or 85 IQ lol.
Will note again though, that IMO IQ really is only measuring what is valuable for a society and that throughout the world, due to colonization especially, intelligence is based upon a Eurocentric view of what constitutes "intelligence" (i.e. what Europeans historically viewed/view as important and valuable in a society, based upon their definition of "success"). That the attempt to "close gaps" especially is kind of silly. I personally don't want to be more valuable to a Eurocentric worldview and would rather just live my life as I see fit and value my own culture's tenets versus getting scores on a test or making a lot of money (which it seems are the primary American definitions of "success").
What do you consider to be the definition of "intelligence."
It differs based upon the person/group doing the defining and studying and is also heavily based upon the cultural traditions of said person/group.
In regards to Rome and Papua New Guinea - what makes you think that Romans were more intelligent than Papua New Guineans or vice versa? There is nothing to show that they were/are.
And note, I do think that genetics plays a role in cognitive ability; however, there is no such thing really as "races" of humans, race is a socio-political construct so differences within a nation in various statistical factors by "race" are just measuring the historic (and continued legacy of) socio-political discrimination and/or lack of discrimination against social groups for the most part. We all evolve from specific ancestral communities, of which were there are many and they cannot be confined to the 5 commonly believed "race" categories. For instance Ashkenazi Jews have a higher IQ than non-Ashkenazi Jews. They are all Jews but there is a difference. Ashkenazi Jews are considered "white" in this country as are people primarily of Irish descent. Irish people have a considerably lower IQ versus Ashkenazi Jews even though they are sociologically of the same "race."
Often people overlook the fact that what we consider "white, black and Asian" (and others) do not define the smaller ethnic communities genetic traits that are heritable, including a knack for certain skills/abilities that are considered to be of importance to one's "intelligence." Genetic clustered communities (ancestry) is much more important in studying genetics for various traits versus just "race" because there are a lot of socio-political factors involved in "race" and those of that particular "race" (like Ashkenazi Jews) have the potential to heavily impact the median and/or average scores of that particular socio-political "race"on these sorts of tests.
I'll admit that I often see people on this forum in particular who make all sorts of silly comments about intelligence based on race and I think about how Jews in particular and other "white" groups have a higher median IQ than the European group that that person more than likely hails from. Yet the poster seems to exude a lot of pride about their 101 IQ when they more than likely are a 90 or 85 IQ lol.
Will note again though, that IMO IQ really is only measuring what is valuable for a society and that throughout the world, due to colonization especially, intelligence is based upon a Eurocentric view of what constitutes "intelligence" (i.e. what Europeans historically viewed/view as important and valuable in a society, based upon their definition of "success"). That the attempt to "close gaps" especially is kind of silly. I personally don't want to be more valuable to a Eurocentric worldview and would rather just live my life as I see fit and value my own culture's tenets versus getting scores on a test or making a lot of money (which it seems are the primary American definitions of "success").
This entire post is wishful PC thinking, but it's just not reality. All actual evidence pretty much supports that intelligence (the ability to learn) is heavily a genetic trait. There have been endless studies with mono-zygotic twins and adopted children that clearly demonstrate that there is a huge genetic factor in regards to intelligence.
Ashkenazi Jews have a higher IQ on average than non-Ashkenazi Jews because when really smart people have kids over and over, you get more really smart people. You need to understand that humans can be bred like dogs. We're just animals at the end of the day. Does this make sense?
Also, if race was just a socio-political construct they wouldn't be able to use things like bone structures, internal organs, or DNA tests to determine it. Eventually they will just keep changing the definition of race until what you're saying becomes true. I have no doubt about that, but in 2018, race still exists unless you support junk science, which you obviously do.
You're a better person than me..............Carry on
This entire post is wishful PC thinking, but it's just not reality. All actual evidence pretty much supports that intelligence (the ability to learn) is heavily a genetic trait. There have been endless studies with mono-zygotic twins and adopted children that clearly demonstrate that there is a huge genetic factor in regards to intelligence.
I agree with this to a point, but I would like to share the experience I had with my adopted son. He came into our home at the age of three as a foster child and was estimated to have an IQ of about 75, and this was "confirmed" a couple of months later at our local Children's Hospital.
After being with him as a SAHM for weeks and spending almost every waking hour with him and his two-years-older sister, I knew that he was not "slow", but just lazy. (For example, at his preschool, his teacher said he could only count to three, but when I told him he could have as many pennies as he could count, he counted to about 17, if memory serves. The problem, was that his sister had taken care of him and did everything for him -- his bio mom had severely neglected him due to her drug addiction -- and he was just unmotivated. It was like, "Why should I answer your stupid questions when there's nothing in it for me?")
Long story short, he was reading Harry Potter books at the end of the second grade, and his vocabulary was tested at the 91st percentile in the fourth grade. All it took was someone to work with him and not just take the supposed experts' word for it that he wasn't very intelligent. He also went on to get all A's and B's in his high school math tests, although he refused to do any homework; and he scored in the 90th percentile on the ASVAB. (The Armed Forces vocational aptitude test.)
He died at the age of 19, so we will never know what he could have achieved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
