I believe this is now called "Making a mountain out of a molehill". Rule picks up on one little thing, tries to act clever, annoys other members and starts a debate/argument, completely taking it off topic. Happens all too often on TDC.
Originally Posted by Hayo That must be the smartest post on TDC since Paul Jeffries was banned. I still don't quite understand why you ask me this and I hope it won't become a habit but I have to agree with you about IQ in general. As a highschool teacher I often wondered why most teachers value the outcome IQ tests so much (in the Dutch education system at least).
But what should I have put in this case, TDCQ?
Good question, and I'm not sure - I'd probably personally have used 'intelligence' - but it's not that much better. The IQ thing was a small point that I picked up on for the sake of conversation, as you've caught me at a study time in that general subject area. Hope you didn't take it as an attack.
Anyway, why would I say intelligence - what does it actually mean? The layman's use of the word is usually used to describe someone articulate, incisive or academically capable, but it's much more than that. The term is a hold-all phrase used to describe everything from cognitive abilities, planning skills, lateral thinking... there's both physical and mental intelligence, creative intelligence, inherent skills in a specific academic field, and so on. The more psychologists learn about the way the brain functions on a psychological level, the longer the list becomes. And it's all just theory anyway; both psychology and psychiatry - which are inexorably linked - are fields in their infancy. I think IQ is a damaging, outdated tool which holds us back - particularly in education. I don't like the idea of kids effectively being 'scored' at an early age using a subjective, generalised test. Dunno whether as a teacher you'd agree that's what's happening, but I'd be interested in hearing your view on it.
So yeah, my original point was that everyone is both unintelligent and intelligent in different areas. I could call someone unintelligent based on their communication skills and that very same person intelligent for their musical ear, for example. I've yet to meet anyone who hasn't been competent in something when stimulated.
Also Adam, jeez. You can clumsily imply that I'm 'acting', 'blagging' etc if you like, but right now I'm confident you're basing that on nothing much beyond some petty internet politics, which don't really bother me. But if your own knowledge disproves what I said as wrong and reveals me as 'pretending to be clever', make a solid point and, uh, show me up or something, if that's what you'd like to do. Otherwise you're just name calling and being petty.
There won't be much of a debate as we both pretty much have the same opinion, plus my EnglishQ is pretty low. I didn't see it as an attack, more as a surprise.
In my country kids have to do a huge test in the last year of primary school that pretty much looks like an IQ-test. Based on their score they are sent to a certain kind of highschool (we roughly have 4 different versions of highschool here). A lot is going wrong with this, some kids are graded way too high and others way too low. A friend of mine had a bad day and screwed up with the test and was graded really low. He had to work his way up tru rules and shitty teachers and is a maths and science teacher now.
We had something similar when i finished primary school and it determined the level we were taught at in secondary school. Not sure if they still do it this way in England, maybe not if the Labour gov't has had anything to do with it! I didn't realise this had happened until i'd gotten older and thought about it, but i guess the "not knowing" mean't the results were more accurate. Sounds as though they screwed up at yours though, Hayo.
In my country kids have to do a huge test in the last year of primary school that pretty much looks like an IQ-test. Based on their score they are sent to a certain kind of highschool (we roughly have 4 different versions of highschool here).
Man, this makes me incredibly angry, it's the first I've heard of it. I can empathise with your friend; that's exactly the kind of 'bad day' situation I was thinking of that would ruin someone's whole prospects. Flunking an exam is one thing, but flunking a test that dictates your teenage education? Man.
Out of interest, what age does primary finish over there? If it's anything like over here (UK), that's way too young to know what someone's academic ability will be in their remaining formative years, imo.
Edit: Mark, they scrapped that system shortly after you left school. With the exception of a few counties, they now use the 'set' system only for the final two years of secondary/high school nationwide.
Non-comprehensives do things their own way, obviously.
Originally Posted by Mark Radon We had something similar when i finished primary school and it determined the level we were taught at in secondary school. Not sure if they still do it this way in England, maybe not if the Labour gov't has had anything to do with it! I didn't realise this had happened until i'd gotten older and thought about it, but i guess the "not knowing" mean't the results were more accurate. Sounds as though they screwed up at yours though, Hayo.
Year 7 exams determined that at my school. Until then everyone took classes in their form groups.
The test takes place when the kids are 11-12-ish, so way too young indeed. It really depends on the school how much the results will affect the placement of the kids on highschools, but in most cases it is 75% test score and 25% teachers' judgement. This actually carries on on the highschools, about everything is based on test scores. I ran into kids who had real potential but just weren't that good at revising things which meant they ended up real low. I have been fighting for these kinds of kids which is not a smart thing to do for a starting teacher in and age-old school system. I hope once the old generation of teachers is gone this will change.
Yep same here, i got send to a LTS school (lower Technical school) after i blew some of my tests simply because at the time school was supposed to be fun learing along the way but with tests i did not see the importance of them, I was acting like a normal kid, to busy playing games and discovering the girls, I did not see the importance at school at the age of 11-12
I paid for it because LTS were the 3 to 4 most horrible years ever, being put in a class with folks wanting to be painters and carpenters while I was starting to make games and very into the whole computer thing that the teachers there just did not get. I was mis placed and had to go to another Computer Course for another year after high scool just to catch up. It all worked out in the end since I got hired to make websites after the computer cource and after that job I worked at a local newspaper, making adds for both the paper and internet site but also writing my own internet column I did that for a good 7 ears until i came to canada. Good times.
Wow, my entire history right there.
Be sure to follow us on the twitters for the latest and greatest: @dailyclick