View the edtech Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in edtech's December 1992 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in edtech's December 1992 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the edtech home page.
Well, given that I have already deleted my earlier message, I cannot prove that you are misquoting me, but be that as it may, what I intended to say was that "at least to my knowledge--no onee has ever found a way to measure intelligence which produces an IQ score that does not correlate positively with academic achievement." <*>you stated in a recent mail "and although we may <*>not agree on the definition of intelligence or IQ, one of the <*>interesting artifacts of this ancient effort it that no one--at least <*>to my knowledge--has ever come up with a way to measure IQ," <*>The point is, there is nothing in reality that is IQ... to say that no <*>one has come up with a way to measure it.... suggests that it is out <*>there waiting... inteligence exists only because "we" say it does. Of course, you are right, but that doesn't make the effort any the less useful, any more than it does make pointless efforts to categorize people in terms of honesty or goodness just because we cannot agree precisely on what the terms mean or on a scale to measure whatever it is that we mean. The whole brouhaha over situational ethics a few years ago illustrated this rather clearly, but to reason from that to a complete relativist is absolutely stupid, I think you will agree. But we still find it useful to talk about people being good or honest. We even try to quantify it on occasion by describing categories of dishonesty--felonies vs misdemeanors or by describing people as first offenders of three-time losers. These are most imprecise categories and correspond poorly with reality, whatever that is, but they are still useful and society would probably be the worse without them. <*>Its ok to talk about "it".. but lets not forget what we are doing <*>when we do..... its like research..... is the reality of the research created <*>by the researcher and the paradigm (system) he/she is working in? <*> No, there is no danger that I will forget with goodness or IQ or beautify are social constructs, any more than I will forget that the notion of a social construct is itself a social construct. T. Tom Rusk Vickery 265 Huntington Hall School of Education Syracuse University Syracuse, NY 13244-2340 VICKERY@SUED.SYR.EDU telephone: 315-443-3343 fax: 315-443-5732