Atlantic: Inequality in the Virtual Classroom (minorities suck at MOOCs)
| olive point messiness | 09/26/16 | | milky adventurous knife digit ratio | 09/26/16 | | olive point messiness | 09/26/16 | | spectacular slap-happy clown | 09/26/16 | | dashing juggernaut mother | 09/26/16 | | insecure histrionic menage bbw | 09/26/16 | | Amethyst contagious liquid oxygen site | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | passionate rebellious queen of the night | 09/26/16 | | Ultramarine wagecucks | 09/26/16 | | Sick center | 09/26/16 | | Multi-colored native | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | opaque arousing stage | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | trip public bath jew | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | rose mediation | 09/26/16 | | Scarlet Impressive Shrine Mental Disorder | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | Odious Gay Brunch Indirect Expression | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | Odious Gay Brunch Indirect Expression | 09/26/16 | | Scarlet Impressive Shrine Mental Disorder | 09/26/16 | | Frozen razzmatazz newt | 09/26/16 | | Exhilarant Church Building | 09/26/16 | | saffron business firm trump supporter | 09/26/16 | | Odious Gay Brunch Indirect Expression | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | Henna Location | 09/26/16 | | Wild theatre | 09/26/16 | | Wild theatre | 09/26/16 | | Wild theatre | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | Wild theatre | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | sepia soul-stirring range | 09/26/16 | | Wild theatre | 09/26/16 | | sepia soul-stirring range | 09/26/16 | | Wild theatre | 09/26/16 | | cerise irradiated toaster house | 09/26/16 | | Narrow-minded yellow marketing idea parlor | 09/26/16 | | Geriatric racy indian lodge cuck | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | Odious Gay Brunch Indirect Expression | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | aphrodisiac idiot ladyboy | 09/26/16 | | insecure histrionic menage bbw | 09/26/16 | | Vivacious Giraffe Piazza | 09/26/16 | | Geriatric racy indian lodge cuck | 09/26/16 | | Odious Gay Brunch Indirect Expression | 09/26/16 | | Angry Rehab Mad-dog Skullcap | 09/26/16 | | olive point messiness | 09/26/16 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 26th, 2016 12:50 PM Author: milky adventurous knife digit ratio
>Hansen, the Harvard researcher, calls the answer to that question the “MOOC paradox”: Democratizing education could actually compound existing inequality.
you don't say!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494083) |
Date: September 26th, 2016 12:53 PM Author: Vivacious Giraffe Piazza
Lol - it's almost as if when you remove all possible sources of bias and just blindly test students on raw ability there are differences between groups of people.
Not sure why this is hard for libs to understand - since they "love science" so much - humans migrated out of Africa - and survival pressures in different parts of the world genetically reinforced different skill sets - e.g. hunting in africa reinforces different skills from farming in East Asia or surviving cold winters in northern europe.
Hence we end up with different races having much different skill sets and abilities - so we see very unequal outcomes in the Olympics, NBA, NFL, and we also see very unequal outcomes in an economy that rewards cognitive skills.
Every piece of evidence in the world - including the genetics and IQ literature - points in the same direction on this issue - which is that different groups of people have very different skills which drives unequal outcomes - it's simple.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494111) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2016 1:21 PM Author: Vivacious Giraffe Piazza
Yes I used .edu - I have been lurking here since 2010ish when I was applying to grad school - I found a bunch of grad school forums back then and kept reading here b/c I thought it was hilarious (it was around the time of "hey bros, it's me again...")
No idea about whokebe.
You don't have to believe me - but my research focused on non-negative matrix factorization techniques (along with tensor decompositions) for clustering gene microarray samples. Microarray is a technology that let's us see gene expression levels on a probe/genetic level to identify individual genetic variation between individuals.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494337) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2016 1:12 PM Author: Vivacious Giraffe Piazza
This is a much deeper conversation - but it means that there are natural levels of inequality due to differences in ability.
There is still a question of how much people are entitled to other people's labor. But if we know genetics is a primary driver of inequality - on one hand we still want forms of social insurance (welfare) to insure against bad genetics which are out of our control - but OTOH most govt programs aimed at "closing gaps" or aimed at improving education through more school funding etc. are a huge waste (which is very consistent with what we see in the educational economics literature).
So it doesn't mean we should cut welfare - but it does mean that many govt programs are a big waste of money - and that we shouldn't focus on things like closing achievement gaps.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494244) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2016 1:32 PM Author: Vivacious Giraffe Piazza
I agree - race is a very large and sometimes arbitrary level of aggregation. OTOH it's one that we use so if there are programs focused on closing gaps according to this arbitrary aggregation - it's valid to look at the evidence of genetic differences between these groups and posit that there are natural levels of inequality between groups.
I get what you're saying that there's still large within race genetic variation - but OTOH our genetic variation is very geographically structured. If you cluster individuals based on individual genetic variation - the clusters will be highly correlated with geographic origin / ancestry. But you are still correct that there is still fuzziness / overlap to these clusters - as well as large within group variation.
Also to answer your question - yes we know from GWAS studies there are alleles (which strongly correlate to intelligence) that are highly correlated with country-level IQ
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494426) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2016 1:54 PM Author: sepia soul-stirring range
do you know about racial admixture and IQ studies? E.g. a study that looks at the correlation between African-American admixture (%african) and IQ.
This is one part of the story that I can't actually untangle. I've seen one study that found a correlation between educational attainment and % european, but nothing with IQ directly, except old studies.
This was supposed to be the "dispositive proof", aside from ad-hoc assortative mating explanations. for HBD
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494637) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2016 5:59 PM Author: cerise irradiated toaster house
this hasn't been studied much, but the old studies are broadly consistent with the HBD view and are fairly persuasive. the only exception i am aware of is the study done using blood type markers as an indicator of admixture, but since there is low variability in these between races the study has low statistical power. i thought this post from Charles Murray was pretty interesting:
"It is now possible using genetic markers to do much better than classify people as "black," "white" or "Asian." The method for doing so is implied in the studies using genetic markers, with the most recent being Tang, H., et al. (2005). "Genetic structure, self-identified race/ethnicity, and confounding in case-control association studies." American Journal of Human Genetics, 76, 268–275.
The next step seems obvious: take a large sample of racially diverse people, give them a good IQ test, and then use genetic markers to create a variable that no longer classifies people as “white” or “black,” but along a continuum. Analyze the variation in IQ scores according to that continuum.
And so I emailed some scholars on both sides of the IQ/race debate, suggesting that they jointly design and conduct such a study. I told them I would undertake to find someone to fund the study. It would be easy to find such a funder, but only if scholars from both sides were on board (otherwise, the funder would fear being called racist). I don't think I'm betraying a confidence when I say that Jensen and Rushton were enthusiastically in favor. Those on the other side, whom I will not name, declined. "
i think everyone knows how this study would turn out.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31496551)
|
Date: September 26th, 2016 1:09 PM Author: Vivacious Giraffe Piazza
Also - this is why political correctness is such a cancer and so dangerous - imagine telling this HBD evolution theory to a lib even while supplying academic research as evidence. There'a a lot of people who will cringe and their mind will reject this information b/c it sounds offensive.
This is why PC is so dangerous - it trains people's minds to align their beliefs with what sounds virtuous, tolerant, and progressive, not with what the Truth is. You can't shape people's beliefs by changing Truth - but you can certainly shape people's beliefs by changing what is considered tolerant and virtuous.
Political correctness and liberalism has become a game of virtue signaling - not truth seeking. They align their thought with what sounds tolerant and virtuous - and align their beliefs against perceived intolerance. This is an emotional way of thinking that can be shaped by those in power - rational thinking is harder to manipulate.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3364244&forum_id=2#31494209) |
|
|