This study doesn’t support the notion that differences in learning ability is inate, and that the classroom must accomodate the individual to assure equality in learning. Therefore, it will be ridiculed. The only surprise is that the NYT published it, but then, they probably think they are exposing a roach to light.
One thing missing from the article is reading to your children (something parents often do in varied environments.) I’ve noted (over a decade) an apparent higher IQ of children whose parents read to them. It could be coincidence or me seeing a pattern that isn’t really there, but like Titus my observations keep getting confirmed.
I doubt it’s reading per se, ken. I think it’s just involvement. Parents who read to their kids like to spend time with them. They begin by looking at them, smiling at them, engaging their little brains trying to figure out all the nonverbal ways humans communicate. Later on, they talk to them, explaining things, asking questions and listening patiently to the babbling as if it makes sense — rewarding the child’s effort to puzzle out and master speech.
Reading is late in the game, and by that time I suspect the major part of a parent’s influence on a child’s IQ is finished, since the child has completed all of the really big intellectual tasks of life: making sense of his sensory data, developing a theory of mind, and mastering language and communication. Even learning calculus or general relativity doesn’t compare to these feats.
I read to my 2 1/2 yo granddaughter and am I ever getting bored by care bears (her favorites, currently) Unfortunately I lack the talent to read her Feynman’s lectures in a sufficiently entertaining voice.
Ha ha, js. When my daughter was a wee mite, I had the entirety of Dr. Seuss’s Fox in Socks memorized. Not intentionally, you understand.
You could try slipping in a few errors for amusement. Occasionally when I was bored I’d do that.
Fox, socks, Knox, crocks…
No, daddy! It’s Knox, BOX.
Oh sorry. Fox, socks, Spocks, locks.
Noooo!
And so forth.
Well I think nutrition plays a big part in mental development and continued mental performance. After all we big brained apes need lots of protein and sugar to build and energize all that gray matter. In fact, it is because of the gradual improvement in food collection techniques that saw to the ever increasing sizes of our craniums as a species. One could probably correlate how IQ scores gradually rise decade after decade and our ability to cram ever more calories into a single bite of food progress at the same rate. Then, think of the fat cat businessman. I takes a lot of energy to sustain that level of entrepreneurship and innovative thinking which also feeds the belt size.
Reading is late in the game
The examples I’m thinking of were reading to the womb and the children were reading before preschool (and real books, not childrens books.) By teenage siblings were together in accelerated classes (they grow up in a blink.) I’ve observed this for a long time even back to when I was in high school. James and Susan were siblings in the same MGM class as I was and they were reading before preschool.
Then again, my parents never read to me, but I remember my first written words… flour, sugar, coffee, tea; well before I ever entered school.
Maybe what “They” know is wrong, but much of what’s described there I learned long ago just by figuring out how to study effectively.
++ to Titus.
But it’s the NYT, so perfectly understandable that it is new to them.
All of these problems were solved very neatly back in the late 70’s, early 80’s. But I’m not sure why it never caught on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO8x8eoU3L4
This study doesn’t support the notion that differences in learning ability is inate, and that the classroom must accomodate the individual to assure equality in learning. Therefore, it will be ridiculed. The only surprise is that the NYT published it, but then, they probably think they are exposing a roach to light.
One thing missing from the article is reading to your children (something parents often do in varied environments.) I’ve noted (over a decade) an apparent higher IQ of children whose parents read to them. It could be coincidence or me seeing a pattern that isn’t really there, but like Titus my observations keep getting confirmed.
I doubt it’s reading per se, ken. I think it’s just involvement. Parents who read to their kids like to spend time with them. They begin by looking at them, smiling at them, engaging their little brains trying to figure out all the nonverbal ways humans communicate. Later on, they talk to them, explaining things, asking questions and listening patiently to the babbling as if it makes sense — rewarding the child’s effort to puzzle out and master speech.
Reading is late in the game, and by that time I suspect the major part of a parent’s influence on a child’s IQ is finished, since the child has completed all of the really big intellectual tasks of life: making sense of his sensory data, developing a theory of mind, and mastering language and communication. Even learning calculus or general relativity doesn’t compare to these feats.
I read to my 2 1/2 yo granddaughter and am I ever getting bored by care bears (her favorites, currently) Unfortunately I lack the talent to read her Feynman’s lectures in a sufficiently entertaining voice.
Well, Krauss is fairly animated and entertaining…
I’m a “whole” learner, myself.
That is not necessarilly a good thing.
Ha ha, js. When my daughter was a wee mite, I had the entirety of Dr. Seuss’s Fox in Socks memorized. Not intentionally, you understand.
You could try slipping in a few errors for amusement. Occasionally when I was bored I’d do that.
Fox, socks, Knox, crocks…
No, daddy! It’s Knox, BOX.
Oh sorry. Fox, socks, Spocks, locks.
Noooo!
And so forth.
Well I think nutrition plays a big part in mental development and continued mental performance. After all we big brained apes need lots of protein and sugar to build and energize all that gray matter. In fact, it is because of the gradual improvement in food collection techniques that saw to the ever increasing sizes of our craniums as a species. One could probably correlate how IQ scores gradually rise decade after decade and our ability to cram ever more calories into a single bite of food progress at the same rate. Then, think of the fat cat businessman. I takes a lot of energy to sustain that level of entrepreneurship and innovative thinking which also feeds the belt size.
Reading is late in the game
The examples I’m thinking of were reading to the womb and the children were reading before preschool (and real books, not childrens books.) By teenage siblings were together in accelerated classes (they grow up in a blink.) I’ve observed this for a long time even back to when I was in high school. James and Susan were siblings in the same MGM class as I was and they were reading before preschool.
Then again, my parents never read to me, but I remember my first written words… flour, sugar, coffee, tea; well before I ever entered school.