Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Live2Sail who wrote (45830)	12/16/2005 12:43:30 PM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

<The way math is taught in our schools bores most students. It could be taught in a better way, IMO> Like actually applied/related to the usage in real world situations and every day problems? Rather than 'two trains going opposite directions at 35mph, how far apart are they after 4 hours and when do they meet again', etc. Geometry example. Rather than talking about a bunch of triangles on the blackboard. Go physically prove or disprove the walls of the building/classroom are "square" using the Pythagorean (sp?) theory of right triangles.

To: Live2Sail who wrote (45830)	12/16/2005 2:00:31 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

Why do you believe what this guy has to say and not the economists that I quote to you? Do you think he does not have an agenda? His book is very well researched and the data is there for all to question. All his references are out in the open. I have far more knowledge about economics than I do knowledge about IQ and math performance. I can dismiss most of the economics stuff you've quoted to me because the flaws in it are well known to anyone who has a deeper understanding of economics than what passes for economics education at the average University. I've had excellent teachers on the subject of economics and as opposed to other areas of study, economics is complete. I think that you said that the Flynn did not say the reason for the difference in math scores. It looks like Flynn seems to think that his measured difference in math scores is due to cultural reasons I didn't say. I made no comments about what Flynn said or didn't say except the 15 extra IQ points needed by a white to do as well as an Asian in math. Actually I reread some of his book just now and it is 20 points for comparison to Chinese Americans and 10 points for Japanese Americans. The average is 15 points. Flynn, as do others, suggests that there is a formula for achievement. I quote: A familiar formulation of factors that contribute to achievement runs IQ + motivation + opportunity = achievement (Jensen, 1980, p. 241). If we control for IQ and opportunity (you could argue that Asian Americans have more opportunity than whites for achievement in the US but I think most researchers could shoot it down) where else is there to look but motivation.....which is an attribute which aligns itself pretty strongly with culture.