are kids getting smarter?

Post Reply New Topic

I was going to say that! I'd doubt they'd be able to use protection. And txting is overtaking actual English as the common language they use (one student of mine submitted an English paper entirely in txt thinking it was legit).


I can! I liked maps as a kid, so I know! Some people don't even know where London is (apparently when told of the London bombings, they were like "Where's London?").

Oh, and Mercury, Venus, Earth/Gaia/Terra, Mars, Jupiter, Neptune, Uranus (no jokes please) and Pluto, if this were a year ago.

As for Anna Nicole Smith, I don't spend my time obsession over one person whom I don't care about. She acts and looks hot. So? I've got better things to do than scream and go "I SOOO wanna be her!!" Ugh.

T.T

There is only ONE way to raise the IQ of a given area! That is if their average IQ goes up on average relative to others. That can happen by them getting smarter, smarter people coming in, dumber people leaving, or others getting dumber. In any event, a 3 point gain is relatively insignificant. For a 20 year old, that is about 7 months!

Steve

AV-geek,

You expressed my sentiments exactly! Geography is one of my favorite subjects. I once made a list of every country and its capital when I had terrible insomnia and needed something to do other than lie in bed wide awake. I am a rather unusual person anyway.

Q is a measure of raw cognition in psychometric tests. It is independent of language, culture and acquired learning. It can be measured quite accurately and is stable over one's lifetime, unless you suffer a brain injury, because it is defined as the inate cognition capacity one is born with.



The IQ test is a diagnostic instrument. All the other IQ quizzes are merely games.



People are statitisically more intelligent as measured by Q. It has nothing to do with which topics people choose to attend to. Pattern recognition is probably the purest way to measure Q as it is devoid of language, culture and educational level. The gap between the more able and less able is growing and we have a fairly stable underclass in the meritocracy of the US.

i think public schools are too crowded... it's more like herding than schooling...

they don't get decent recesses... i used to get at least a 30 min block (we rotated classes during lunch periods)... from what iv'e seen, recesses are now 15 mins... which is just enough to get them amped up... only to come back in and quiet them down with sugar snacks.... and the amount of snacks they get throughout the day is horrifying... not to mention their lunch menu...

and i don't know if it's just me misremembering my various capacities in elementary school... but the kids i've seen on whole, can't perform things my classes were doing at equivalent ages.

and the way things are set up now... there are no advanced classes/supplemental classes... everyone is kept together (think this has to do with the crowding issue again)... they even lump grades together with "blend" classes... which i think at such early ages, it's a bad thing cause there's just such a variety in developmental capacity...


and funding... don't get me started on funding for education.....................

GEE, my pattern matching capability isn't as good as it used to be. And Men are supposed to be better at that than women. Are you saying men are smarter? Odd, most women either say they are equal or smarter(as a group). BTW I hope you realize I am just playing. I know YOU'RE smart, and I guess the jury is still out on men and women as groups.

Steve

There's more to life than just Q. Women, as a group, are emotionally more intelligent and men, as a group, have a slight edge on raw cognition. That is true. We don't all chose to develop our talents and what we focus our attention on is more culturally dependent.

While I'm sure it's true that pattern recognition is probably the purest way to measure Q, a significant portion of the IQ test that someone is given does not have to do with pattern recognition. For instance, the "information" subtest on the Wechsler tests have questions like "What is the speed of light" and "Who wrote Faust?" Those are questions that really aren't measuring intelligence, but rather how good a kid's education was, or how privileged their upbringing was. I knew who wrote Faust because my parents own that book and it's in the shelf outside my room, so I would see it all the time. How many can say that though, especially kids from poorer families? Then there are other tests like "Coding", where you're at a real disadvantage if you have impaired motor skills. The vocabulary subtest is also highly biased towards kids from higher SES families and better districts.
Just like you said, the gap is growing between the able and less able (the question is how this is being measured), so I was wondering, how are they measuring "Q"? (I'd never heard that term before). If they are deriving it based on IQ scores, then it doesn't seem as if it is all that great a measure of intelligence to me. I'd love to hear more about it, though.

Q is just information processing ability and it is even defined for AI information processing. The best predictor of life outcome is "g"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_%28factor%29

A great amount of "q" won't do you much good if you are unable to use your processing ability. The more "g" loaded a test is, the more objective. "q" correlates to "g," and "g" correlates to SES.

No, they're getting lazier and more spolied. Kids these days won't play with a toy unless it has a talking feature and stuff like that. If they were truly smarter they could imagine away with it.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification, SeriousGirl.

As a high school student myself, I feel that I can safely say that today's youth is not getting smarter. Whenever I find myself in a "College Sequence"-level class, I feel surrounded by loud, obnoxious folks who don't really give a damn about education, and always pout whenever the teacher tells them to do something.

haaaaaaa haaaaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaa stupid kids prob dont eve know what they where doing