Unwanted Superman

24 09 2013


H/T Moderate Ricky. (BTW, I hope you grok why I call that blogger “Moderate Ricky.” It’s all part of the great art of snark.)

UK Telegraph:

Weakest pupils ‘suffer crisis of confidence in top schools’

Parents should avoid sending their less intelligent children to top-performing schools to prevent them languishing at the bottom of the class, researchers warned today.

Children who fall behind bright classmates at primary school can suffer a serious loss of confidence that holds them back for several years, it is claimed.

The study – by the London School of Economics – found that pupils’ relative ranking in the classroom up to the age of 11 had “sizeable, robust and significant effects on later academic achievement” at secondary school.

It emerged that boys were more likely to be affected by their position in lessons than girls.

The research, which was carried out by the LSE’s Centre for Economic Performance, challenges the assumption that being surrounded by high-achieving peers can drag up the performance of slower classmates.

Academics suggested that less intelligent pupils may actually be better off attending a “worse school” where they perform relatively well instead than being left behind in a high-flying institution.

Oh well, so much for the notion that slow students need all those grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat teachers to succeed.

This also means that for low IQ students, a “bad” school district and a “bad” teacher is a feature, not a bug.




3 responses

24 09 2013

British education is byzantine but from what I understand, the problem with adopting it’s method here is that the Brits have a specific system already set up to handle this division of capability whereas we don’t and likely couldn’t afford to set up what we instead assign to specialist vocational schools.

The (formerly) SAT or Standard Attainment Tests, now NCT or National Curriculum Tests are applied with _intent_ to separate the slow from the gifted at around age 11.

That’s at least two years before our ‘SATs’ are applied (when blacks and Hispanics will have been prepubescent for at least 2 years with rising sex hormones crystalizing the intelligence they have access to.) and so they indicate what the student is capable of only in primary literacy, numeracy and science areas. Not the ‘soft’ stuff like geography, history and IT which is taught in separate spirals and depths. This means that, for whites, the rapid acquisition of basic 3R capabilities indicates whether they are left or right brain dominant and how to specialize. But for other races, it simply indicates that they are -behind already-.

From here (in the UK), you could somewhat spell out your next 5 years of education as some subjects were taught through 2 and even 3 tiered levels of more esoteric subjects and for those not interested, paid-for education ended at 16 with the division of the classes between vocational and higher learning specialties.

But there is no ‘HSD for attendance’ /reward/ here. Rather you everyone was given a further GCSE or General Certificate Of Secondary Education which showed which specific areas they possessed basic competencies in as a function of final year education.

Employers as Educators could then look at these GCSE evaluations to judge who, among many applicants was suitable for hire and followon specialized Trades training. This would again not reflect well on American blacks who are, on average, anything up to 4 _years_ behind their white equivalents by the time they reach 18 and are gradded, GED’d or failed out of our state sponsored secondary education.

To receive a collegiate admissions offer, in the UK, in your 12th and 13th (15-16) years of school, you had to sit through pre-college prep courses in at least 2-3 and preferably 4-5 course studies and meet your ‘A(dvanced)-Level’ equivalent (proctored rather than GPA so it’s pass:fail) GCE-A requirements. Your subjects of interest having been based on your SAT/NCT and some pretty astute, difficult, target selections (courses support each other for certain specialties) _when you were 11_.

Whereas to get a GNVQ or General National Vocational Qualification, now no longer offered, you had to complete what might be thought of as an apprenticeship via 6-8 large, gradeable, group project assignments. The GNVQs were not collectivized and any person could earn them at any age in any field where he could find the training as certification.

The closest we have here would be things like certified journeyman/master electrician and similar construction ratings.

Assuming we offered such a system, Blacks who did miserably in their NCTs and coasted through High School thinking big testosterone dreams of tail and bling and athletics would not plan well for an A-Level exam, if they could even sit through the twice-yearly aptitude tests in the higher course levels.

Nor would they be in a great position to pick up a GNVQ without basic competencies in reading and mathematics. If they had a juvie record, even worse.

The educational system in England is failing because, culturally, the same value statements are not being made regarding the quality of standardized work product. As corrupt as it was, the guild system did at least ensure this.

‘Asians’ (i.e. Middle Easterners) and EE hire labor and trades from within and if work doesn’t meet code then a little gratuity ensures it doesn’t matter because it is never reported to the equivalent city records office (inspectors and recorders also being in-group selected for) and everyone is happy with unreported construction that doesn’t meet code. At least until the place burns to the ground.

Similarly, at higher levels, what used to a be a whites-only club of gentlemen is now disintegrating as the landed gentry are increasingly poor and the New Money comes from criminal states like Pakistan where again, bribes are a daily part of life and all hiring is done from within to foster the creation of powerbases.

In the U.S., the fundamental flaws of the education system are investing in the lower 50th percentile of IQs via race normalized education which dumbs down everyone. Lysenkoism says that if you water a seed grass often enough, it will grow as big and strong as any high quality wheat. As anyone with a lick of sense knows, this isn’t true because wheat doesn’t grow in a swamp.

Further, assuming that, in a welfare state, ‘someone will buy in’ if the standards are kept low enough, rather than simply dumping key specialties altogether and reverting to…well, Detroit is an exercise in disappointment from those who can’t afford the service or goods now and live in their absence.

Clear as mud? Hey-Hey, my work here is finished.

24 09 2013

“They’re great”

25 09 2013

So, this research has found that children who can’t keep up in primary school, tend not to keep up in secondary school? Tell me it isn’t so!

It's your dime, spill it. And also...NO TROLLS ALLOWED~!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: