Scores reveal disturbing trend

WHITE PRIDE wrote:

LMAO...even the mexicans are smarter then the groids.
Maybe you all should ask to be let back into the big house....lol
You all are a pitiful neolithic race. Bad thing, just like a cocroach, you will be the last ones left.

There is actually evidence that whites and Asians have similar primary learning styles while Blacks and perhaps Latinos have another primary learning style. American schools cater to certain learning styles (i.e. visual over kinesthetic, analytical over intuitive) and THAT is probably why there is a disparity in the tests.

And, for all the supposed stupidity of blacks and intelligence of everyone else, please note that I, a black woman, have made the only intelligent post in this thread so far. Intelligence... you should try it sometime.

According to the article:

"While more white and Asian students are taking the SAT and scoring above 500 on each of the college preparatory test's three parts, the gap is widening between them and African-American and Latino students."

This is not surprising, since both of the groups who are doing poorly on these tests are the same groups where parents DO NOT emphasize education. Moreover, most of the "parents" do not have the time, training or inclination to be parents at all. Rather these children are usually the product of the mother spreading her legs and the father leaving after the child is born.

It would be much better to spend money to give these women free abortions, plus a bonus for aborting, rather than allowing children to be born who will, at best, drop out. Money spent on these incorrigibles taking up school space is a waste, because they will probably drop-out of school anyway.

Algonquin J Calhoun wrote:

According to the article:
"While more white and Asian students are taking the SAT and scoring above 500 on each of the college preparatory test's three parts, the gap is widening between them and African-American and Latino students."
This is not surprising, since both of the groups who are doing poorly on these tests are the same groups where parents DO NOT emphasize education. Moreover, most of the "parents" do not have the time, training or inclination to be parents at all. Rather these children are usually the product of the mother spreading her legs and the father leaving after the child is born.
It would be much better to spend money to give these women free abortions, plus a bonus for aborting, rather than allowing children to be born who will, at best, drop out. Money spent on these incorrigibles taking up school space is a waste, because they will probably drop-out of school anyway.

The tests themselves have also been "dumbed down" too, so that Non-Asian and Non-White underachievers could claim that they rank just as academically qualified as Asians and Whites.

But even with the dumbing down of the tests and the relaxation of academic standards, African American and Latino/Hispanic students just can't measure up academically.

HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE TO LOWER OUR STANDARDS, JUST TO MAKE THESE CHRONIC UNDERACHIEVERS THINK THAT THEY ARE JUST AS GOOD ACADEMICALLY?

KayMo wrote:

<quoted text>
There is actually evidence that whites and Asians have similar primary learning styles while Blacks and perhaps Latinos have another primary learning style. American schools cater to certain learning styles (i.e. visual over kinesthetic, analytical over intuitive) and THAT is probably why there is a disparity in the tests.
And, for all the supposed stupidity of blacks and intelligence of everyone else, please note that I, a black woman, have made the only intelligent post in this thread so far. Intelligence... you should try it sometime.

Well, smarty-pants, it's La Vida Dulce! ;-)

No one has refuted differing learning styles. If educators are teaching in one learning style and kids learn in another, they won't learn as well and they won't test as well. Similarly, most people are better at language than at math or vice versa, but few are equally proficient in both. If a verbal prodigy is always taught math and tested in math, they won't test well because they're proficiency is in language.

Juan Soldado wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, smarty-pants, it's La Vida Dulce! ;-)

Well, smarty-pants, it's in Italian, not Spanish! ;-)

Does this surprise anyone? American Negros have an IQ average of 85, and African Negros 67.

"Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause," write the authors. The Black-White difference has been found consistently from the time of the massive World War I Army testing of 90 years ago to a massive study of over 6 million corporate, military, and higher-education test-takers in 2001.

"Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables," said Rushton. "Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That's why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence."

The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores. East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g). Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.

The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities. Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races.

Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

Trans-Racial Adoption Studies. Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89.

Racial Admixture Studies. Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race "Colored" population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.

IQ Scores of Blacks and Whites Regress toward the Averages of Their Race. Parents pass on only some exceptional genes to offspring so parents with very high IQs tend to have more average children. Black and White children with parents of IQ 115 move to different averages--Blacks toward 85 and Whites to 100.

Race Differences in Other "Life-History" Traits. East Asians and Blacks consistently fall at two ends of a continuum with Whites intermediate on 60 measures of maturation, personality, reproduction, and social organization. For example, Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their clothes earlier than Whites or East Asians.

Race Differences and the Out-of-Africa theory of Human Origins. East Asian-White-Black differences fit the theory that modern humans arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago and expanded northward. During prolonged winters there was evolutionary selection for higher IQ created by problems of raising children, gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, and making clothes.

Do Culture-Only Theories Explain the Data? Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict.

"Science consists in grouping facts so that general laws or conclusions may be drawn from them." --Charles Darwin

[QUOTE who="Gods warrior" Race Differences in Other "Life-History" Traits. East Asians and Blacks consistently fall at two ends of a continuum with Whites intermediate on 60 measures of maturation, personality, reproduction, and social organization. For example, Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their clothes earlier than Whites or East Asians.
[/QUOTE]

Which suggests that Black children are kinesthetic/experiential learners. Intelligence that focuses on movement or physical intelligence is not valued in Western society, so it isn't tested for or it's discounted as not "real" intelligence. IQ tests tend to focus on analytical/verbal intelligence and that is what Western school systems are designed for.

I would bet that not only black students are at a disadvantage in this. I wonder how many white kids are labelled "ADD" and given Ritalin when they need to be in a kinesthetic learning environment. If moving and touching and doing is the primary way a child learns and they are always being told to sit still and listen, they won't do well.

So the question is, what type of intelligence are they testing for and what are they defining as intelligence - and what are they leaving out?

BTW - 2 black parents - IQ of 125

This is not new news, this is common knowledge, new news would be blacks finally admitting it to themsleves and then making the best of what they do have.

Geneticists wrote:

"The expansion of Neolithic farmers from the
Middle East into Europe is also represented in
the NRY (Y chromosomal) data, although suggesting a relatively
localized area of impact. As mentioned before in
relation to African NRY history, a Mesolithic
population carrying Group III lineages with the
M35}M215 mutation expanded northwards from
sub-Saharan to north Africa and the Levant
(Fig. 3g). The Levantine population of farmers
that dispersed into Europe during and after the
Neolithic carried these African Group III M35}
M215 lineages, together with a cluster of (West Asian) Group
VI lineages characterized by M172 and M201
mutations (Fig. 3h).
"

- Underhill et al 2001, Phylogeny of Y chromosome Binary Haplotypes and the Origins of Modern Human Populations

http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AHG_200... [link]

Around 20% of black kids score as high as the average white kid. So, why don't we test all the kids and group them by their ability?
I realize that the lower testing class would be majority black but who cares?
Maybe KayMo is right... they could try and teach them differently. We need to try something new because what we are doing now is not working.

The original IQ test consisted of who, who talks first, motor skills, etc. Black babies scored higher than whites, so they changed it to a white biased test.

Where is the common sense and creativity test? Why do all black kids have these gifts and most white kids don't?

SAT and IQ tests are a joke.

Tsalagi wrote:

The original IQ test consisted of who, who talks first, motor skills, etc. Black babies scored higher than whites, so they changed it to a white biased test.
Where is the common sense and creativity test? Why do all black kids have these gifts and most white kids don't?
SAT and IQ tests are a joke.

Long term tests have shown a direct correlation between IQ test scores and success/income/life achievement. If SAT and IQ test scores are joke, how does that explain the correlation between high test scores and success in college and career achievement?

So Asians are out performing white students. cackle

So after white and Asian student spent thousands of dollars on private tutors and SAT prep classes they only got a 100 point increase!!!

Cackle cackle

No one wants to talks about how 8 of the 10 UC campuses, including UCLA and UC Berkeley have transitioned from white majority Universities to Asian majority Universities even though Asians are less than 10% of California’s population.

Undergraduate Campus Enrollment, Fall 2007

UC Berkeley
African American: 3.4%
American Indian: 0.5%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 41.7%
Chicano/Latino: 11.5%
White: 31.4%
Other: 1.5%
Not Stated: 6.7%

UC Irvine
African American: 2.3%
American Indian: 0.4%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 51.2%
Chicano/Latino: 12.5%
White: 24.4%
Other: 2.1%
Not Stated: 4.6%

UCLA
African American: 3.3%
American Indian: 0.4%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 38.4%
Chicano/Latino: 14.7%
White: 34.2%
Other: 2.3%
Not Stated: 2.5%

HopesDeadDreams wrote:

This is not new news, this is common knowledge, new news would be blacks finally admitting it to themsleves and then making the best of what they do have.

Haze wrote:

<quoted text>
Long term tests have shown a direct correlation between IQ test scores and success/income/life achievement. If SAT and IQ test scores are joke, how does that explain the correlation between high test scores and success in college and career achievement?

Uh, the answer to your question is coverage errors and nonresponse errors.

The sample you are referring to excludes some segments of the target population, coverage errors. The target population would include people who think they don’t or will not do well on the test, people who do not have the money to take an expensive SAT prep class, and a list other types.

First, schools use SAT scores to make the first cut (possible admission and rejection). You have no way of gauging all the other groups that fall below X percentile.

Second, US schools are tiered. To get into the top US schools, IVY, regional elite, or elite public, you have to have high SAT scores, status, or both. People who go to a low tier school are not going to have the same opportunity as those who go to a high tier school. A company that recruits at Yale is not going to pour the same level of resources into recruiting at the lowest tier school in Mississippi.

Third, a majority of schools below IVY, regional elite, or elite public (lower tier) are not going to discuss the problems with admission and SAT scores, nonresponse errors.

Fourth, go into any SAT prep class and demographic make up of the class gives the other part of the answer.

Fifth, prior to 1960 there were laws that blocked education for blacks so all those reports that use data prior to 1960 have systemic and un-systematic errors in them.

KayMo wrote:

<quoted text>
There is actually evidence that whites and Asians have similar primary learning styles while Blacks and perhaps Latinos have another primary learning style. American schools cater to certain learning styles (i.e. visual over kinesthetic, analytical over intuitive) and THAT is probably why there is a disparity in the tests.
And, for all the supposed stupidity of blacks and intelligence of everyone else, please note that I, a black woman, have made the only intelligent post in this thread so far. Intelligence... you should try it sometime.

What are the primary learning styles of each group?

Tsalagi wrote:

Where is the common sense and creativity test? Why do all black kids have these gifts and most white kids don't?

This is amusing at best considering the HIV rates among the American black population.

Preppy wrote:

So Asians are out performing white students. cackle
So after white and Asian student spent thousands of dollars on private tutors and SAT prep classes they only got a 100 point increase!!!
Cackle cackle
No one wants to talks about how 8 of the 10 UC campuses, including UCLA and UC Berkeley have transitioned from white majority Universities to Asian majority Universities even though Asians are less than 10% of California’s population.
Undergraduate Campus Enrollment, Fall 2007
UC Berkeley
African American: 3.4%
American Indian: 0.5%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 41.7%
Chicano/Latino: 11.5%
White: 31.4%
Other: 1.5%
Not Stated: 6.7%
UC Irvine
African American: 2.3%
American Indian: 0.4%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 51.2%
Chicano/Latino: 12.5%
White: 24.4%
Other: 2.1%
Not Stated: 4.6%
UCLA
African American: 3.3%
American Indian: 0.4%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 38.4%
Chicano/Latino: 14.7%
White: 34.2%
Other: 2.3%
Not Stated: 2.5%

No one has a problem accepting Asians are typically more intelligent than caucasians. It is the black IQ numbers (backed up with mountains of anecdotal evidence) that are disputed.

KayMo wrote:

<quoted text>
If moving and touching and doing is the primary way a child learns and they are always being told to sit still and listen, they won't do well.

But wouldn't that be an indication of an inability to envision or think about what isn't right in front of you,making the abstract incomprehensible?