In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robert J. MacG. Dawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Herman Rubin wrote: >> >> This is not done that often, and is generally quite difficult. >> >> It requires changing the form of the model. The more typical >> >> transformations attempt to get normal marginals, and there is >> >> rarely justification for this. It has done harm; many of the >> >> newer IQ tests never return "profoundly gifted", as this is >> >> beyond the range which the "normal" transformation of the scores >> >> from the too-small sample yields. >I responded: >> > This may not be a bad thing, as it is not clear that the tests are >> >designed to make accurate distinctions for that part of the range of >> >intellectual ability. >to which Herman Rubin responded: >> As it is used, it is a VERY bad thing. There is no way now >> that a gifted child can get anything like an appropriate >> education in the public schools, and failing to recognize >> giftedness, or its extent, is really criminal. >If the public school system had any interest in recognizing (and >giving an appropriate education to) highly gifted children it could >do so without IQ tests. If it doesn't, we cannot blame the tests. This is true, but this will not be done unless forced. If the child's IQ score is not enough to get into Mensa, the school can improperly claim that the child does not need more than the schools are now providing. If the IQ test reported 160 instead, more pressure could be made. > If the maximum score attainable is (say) interpreted as >an IQ of 140, and if that score is only attainable by somebody who >ought to be offered an enriched program, then that can be used >to make this decision. Scaling differently so that a perfect mark >was intepreted as 180 or as 90 out of 90 would not add any more >information. As I have said elsewhere, enrichment is a total waste of time and resources. Even the "ordinary" students should get much more, but this would make the curriculum too difficult for a fair-sized portion of the students; this seems to be the case already. At least 20% of the students should enter college in their early teens with the equivalent of the current "honors" high school program. > In short - schools that are prepared to admit to the >existence of gifted children had better learn to recognize >then by more valid criteria than IQ tests. > -Robert Dawson The easiest way to get this started is to disestablish the public schools, and to make alternatives affordable. Also, requiring teachers to understand subject matter as determined by subject matter scholars, not educatists, who would not be required or expected to pass the majority of the current teachers or applicants. -- This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
