Alan
Legend
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2013
- Messages
- 9,766
Almost? Which one did I get wrong?RamsOfCastamere with a puzzler:
Anyone else answer A for almost all of them?
Almost? Which one did I get wrong?RamsOfCastamere with a puzzler:
Anyone else answer A for almost all of them?
Um... I call bullcrap. This is sadly a racial mantra based on a line from a sitcom. That hasn't kept it from becoming fact on the internet though. However, if you can actually find the test that the question shows up in, I'll kindly retract this. Good luck.
Yes sir! I guess Princeton or Yale would suffice but Harvard just sounds coolHarvard you say?
There will never be a perfect test.I don't think tests are inherently racists, but they are most certainly inherently biased to a group of testers who are most closely aligned to the test creators.
I'd actually say that the moral is that one can not test intelligence across all economic levels because there are no set of questions that are equally common to people of all economic levels.
Also, what if I told you that there is a early-20th Century logical proof that shows 2 can equal 3, you'd call me crazy or some other choice words, most likely. Well, but there is. So, why put so much faith in mathematics when it's merely another imperfect human-made device? To this day, the proof has never been disproved, but it did send the science community railing in the early-to-mid 20th Century. Now, it's mostly ignored, replaced by forced mathematics driven by superfast computers.are you saying inner city low income kids are incapable of learning basic maths and english? isn't that being a tad racist?
.
So, why use them?There will never be a perfect test.
I agree with you that poorly educated people don't score well. Now, let's define "education" before we go any further. You wanna go first?
So, why use them?
Or, why use them with such absoluteness?
Also, what if I told you that there is a early-20th Century logical proof that shows 2 can equal 3, you'd call me crazy or some other choice words, most likely. Well, but there is. So, why put so much faith in mathematics when it's merely another imperfect human-made device? To this day, the proof has never been disproved, but it did send the science community railing in the early-to-mid 20th Century. Now, it's mostly ignored, replaced by forced mathematics driven by superfast computers.
So, is it so bad when an inner-city kid "can't" do basic maths? Actually, perhaps they see through the absoluteness of the scientific field and choose not to rely on such imperfect models. Maybe then, they are more "intelligent" than the rest of us who go through this "educational" system and believe all that we're told about maths.
Wrong. You failed the test.Sorry, Maths is perfect and absolute. I couldn't imagine going through life without being able to perform basic Maths tasks. Everyone should attempt to learn it.
.
So does this not bring into question either the bent of your social studies professor or the basis of proof or evidence he is using as teaching models?My "bullcrap" point was taken from a story told to me and my class by my high school social studies instructor decades ago. A similar point was raised in a discussion with educational testers at the Educational Testing Service (ETS---you know, the psychometric testers who sponsor and supervise national testing/assessments such as the GRE, SAT, TOEFL, etc., designed to measure student learning) when I did an internship there decades ago. It was extremely interesting! to see these psychometry scholars react with embarrassed surprise when they realized how biased their testing had been towards children of upper/middle income brackets.
Good question by itself. But you would need to know the results you are looking for and the test itself in order to determine if the results of the test are useful to you. Otherwise, why indeed.So, why use them?
Or, why use them with such absoluteness?
So does this not bring into question either the bent of your social studies professor or the basis of proof or evidence he is using as teaching models?
Okay, that's a good one. So, say I have different ability to gain and apply different tasks than you do. Who decides whose ability is "intelligent" and whose ability is not intelligent? Or, who decides which tasks completed quickly determine intelligence?
Wrong. You failed the test.
Math is imperfect. The proof has existed for 90yrs.
It's called IncompletenessCurious if you have the formula that has 2=3. Just wanna see if it's the same thing I've seen before.
I don't. Actually, I'd prefer to find a doctor that "failed" institutionalized schooling's tests, because that at least points to the possibility that the doctor is actually thinking on their own. If they think on their own, they might actually be capable of finding solutions to human disorders rather than merely dispensing pharmaceutical symptom treating chemicals.Personally I'd like my surgeons and other medical staff to be able to pass tests, also my accountant, mechanic, plumber, AC guy and all the rest.
That's why tests are used with such absoluteness.
I don't. Actually, I'd prefer to find a doctor that "failed" institutionalized schooling's tests, because that at least points to the possibility that the doctor is actually thinking on their own. If they think on their own, they might actually be capable of finding solutions to human disorders rather than merely dispensing pharmaceutical symptom treating chemicals.
It's called Incompleteness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorems
Specifically, "The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first, shows that such a system cannot demonstrate its own consistency."
I don't. Actually, I'd prefer to find a doctor that "failed" institutionalized schooling's tests, because that at least points to the possibility that the doctor is actually thinking on their own. If they think on their own, they might actually be capable of finding solutions to human disorders rather than merely dispensing pharmaceutical symptom treating chemicals.
Wrong. You failed the test.
Math is imperfect. The proof has existed for 90yrs.