Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

15 August 2013 A-Level results: Discussion thread - results day is here! Watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FlyHigh_er)
    I might drop it now and I do quite enjoy the subject but I'm not that good at writing under pressure. I really wanted to drop bio but now I have to think harder about that.

    I heard they put the objective test through a machine but that's good that the examiners mark them. 😅


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yeah, I'd have a talk with your economics teacher and bio teacher and see which one you think you can be most successful in. Personally, for the A2 exams I feel you get an adequate amount of time, you've got 2 hours which is certainly do able but it is a lot of writing, there's no point sugar coating it.

    Oh they may do, I'm not 100% but I'm sure they have ways of figuring out which one is your chosen answer
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kidomo)
    I expect a full set of A*s, anything less than that is reprehensible and shameful.

    I'm from Asian family. I cannot bring shame to the family.
    Ofc. I'll be disowned without anything less than a clean sweep ^_^

    (in case anyone is wondering, yes I'm being facetious)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gilgamesh)
    I think, unfortunately you are right. I do believe, however, that the word intelligence is misused here, and should be replaced with "education". People have natural intelligence, but are just put at a disadvantage to those who are better educated - which makes it seem as though that the former isn't as intelligent as the latter. Your attitude is quite alarming, also.
    Intelligence and education are intimately linked. One of the sources I linked to shows that poor children have already fallen behind before education actually starts. I think that natural intelligence is a shaky idea - there is very little evidence that we have some innate, esoteric power for reasoning and that it is fixed. Evidence actually points to intelligence being very malleable, hence upbringing is a, maybe the, vital factor in controlling intelligence.

    I'm sorry if my attitude comes off as alarming, I was just fed up of multiple people outright denying that wealth and intelligence are related, when as I said, it is a fact. People were denying a fact by presenting a few anecdotes and then acting smug about it, which pissed me off.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Being stalking this thread while I've being banned, quite nervous now, at least my supervisor has allowed me to take a day off work during results day
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PythianLegume)
    I agree that the children of pushy parents do better than their intellect might predict. However, I suspect that friend is still smarter than average, even if he isn't 'Oxford level' of smart. My point was that pushing your child to engage in education and encouraging them will make them smarter. It's purely a practice effect - if you force your child to do extra work, they will become smarter.
    True about my friend.

    However my first point is more about the difference between smart/intelligent and simply knowing a lot of stuff. It might just be that we have slightly different definitions but I'll clarify anyway.
    Imo (and I think also in some official measures) smartness/intelligent means how quickly you can grasp new concepts you're exposed to, and so is a inherent ability. (Obviously you might be able to improve that as you mature, grow up etc..) So I agree with what you say if substituting "knowing more stuff" for smarter, but not if smarter is a synonym for intelligence as I've just defined it.
    And even if you mean knowing more stuff, the extra work might not stay in the child's head for long.

    Out of curiosity as to what you meant, what exactly do you you mean when you use the word smarter?

    (Original post by Where'sPerry?)
    Pushy parenting ≠ wealth and connections. My family have always pushed me to do as well as I can so that I can be in a better position than them when I am their age. They realise they haven't always taken the best paths in their lives and they want me to do well for myself. I am extremely grateful to my parents for their attitude towards my work at school. They aren't wealthy and I don't go to private school, nor I have never had a private tutor.
    Ah you're right, sorry for my sloppiness. I got from the context of the whole of the message that I was quoting that they were referring to wealthy and middle class people who are pushy, so was talking about that.
    I'm actually in a very similar situation to you although I went to a private school on a full bursary. I think there's a slight difference between what our parents do and those who harrass their children to achieve a*s even if their best is a high B though...




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cyclohexane)
    I didn't mean to alarm you
    They just seem so much more hassle than the ISAs
    ISA grade boundaries have much higher grade boundaries because schools cheat! They are basically the same though in terms of the actual practical!
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anyap)
    So you say due to equal opportunities would you be fine if someone dictates you , that you are not aloud to invest your hard earned money in your child (no private tutors etc) would you feel it's fair? My parents spent their life earning money and they spent it on my education. Why not?! Would you not allow some children wearing designer clothes?? Or would take away iPads from more fortunate children
    I see a fundamental difference between rights and privileges: I do not feel that people should need to invest their hard-earned money in their child's education because the state education system should be strong enough to educate students of varying abilities consistently across the country. Or if not, at least have grants in place so that those who need tutors but cannot afford them can have access to them. Designer clothes are a privilege, iPads are a privilege - but I strongly believe education is a right that should be provided to all students consistently (because absolute equality is naturally impossible to achieve), irrespective of the region they live in or their economic status; because whether we wish to concede it or not, there are massive disparities between many schools. Address that issue (which is obviously easier said than done) and then fairness is achieved.

    I am not blaming parents who choose to hire private tutors etc. to make up for the shortfall in the education system provided by the government; I am saying that it's unfair to all parties involved, because a) not all parents can do that and b) they shouldn't need to in the first place.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PythianLegume)
    That's my point - that wealth does not intrinsically make you smarter, it's environmental effects. However, I disagree that this is due to their superior education - it's because of their superior upbringing. Their parents are more educated, tend to know more about eating healthily, are more likely to read with their children and discuss more advanced ideas around them.
    That seems reasonable to assume, it's probably a mixture. "Intelligence" is a solution of genetics, environment and education. Of course, intelligence is also measured in so many different ways it becomes very messy when you start pointing at who's clever and who's not - especially when you attach it to class.

    (Original post by PythianLegume)
    Of course being rich doesn't make you smart, it's a correlation. That's my whole point. But you, and another, were denying that there was even a correlation between wealth and intelligence.
    I think it's best if you leave the argument as it stands. Most arguments I think end in "you're both right". I think the only thing that can be gleaned from your conclusion is prejudice, and certainly not truth, because as I said, it's so hard to determine what the causal effects are for someone to be intelligent.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robbie242)
    Being stalking this thread while I've being banned, quite nervous now, at least my supervisor has allowed me to take a day off work during results day
    Welcome back, you be a good boy now!
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Superunknown17)
    Yeah, I'd have a talk with your economics teacher and bio teacher and see which one you think you can be most successful in. Personally, for the A2 exams I feel you get an adequate amount of time, you've got 2 hours which is certainly do able but it is a lot of writing, there's no point sugar coating it.

    Oh they may do, I'm not 100% but I'm sure they have ways of figuring out which one is your chosen answer
    Yeah, that's what I'll do, but first see which I do better in, but if I get both A's then I'll talk to my teachers.

    I hope they do because if they don't that will bring down my grade by about 8 marks


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PythianLegume)
    That's my point - that wealth does not intrinsically make you smarter, it's environmental effects. However, I disagree that this is due to their superior education - it's because of their superior upbringing. Their parents are more educated, tend to know more about eating healthily, are more likely to read with their children and discuss more advanced ideas around them.

    Of course being rich doesn't make you smart, it's a correlation. That's my whole point. But you, and another, were denying that there was even a correlation between wealth and intelligence.
    Then again there are the downsides of pushy parents such as the Kennedys, Although they were high achievers with the John F Kennedy becoming president obviously. They made Rosemary Kennedy have a lobotomy because they thought she was "retarded" having an average IQ compared to the other Kennedy's and sneaking out at night time like any normal 21 year old would who is cooped up in a convent. :beard:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lauraaaaa)
    ISA grade boundaries have much higher grade boundaries because schools cheat! They are basically the same though in terms of the actual practical!
    The ISA is so sad. You lose 4 marks, bam, goodbye A.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kettlechips)
    True about my friend.

    However my first point is more about the difference between smart/intelligent and simply knowing a lot of stuff. It might just be that we have slightly different definitions but I'll clarify anyway.
    Imo (and I think also in some official measures) smartness/intelligent means how quickly you can grasp new concepts you're exposed to, and so is a inherent ability. (Obviously you might be able to improve that as you mature, grow up etc..) So I agree with what you say if substituting "knowing more stuff" for smarter, but not if smarter is a synonym for intelligence as I've just defined it.
    And even if you mean knowing more stuff, the extra work might not stay in the child's head for long.

    Out of curiosity as to what you meant, what exactly do you you mean when you use the word smarter?
    I don't have a clear definition for smart or intelligent, but I imagine it's what most people would think - your capacity for reasoning and your 'thinking power' - your cognitive abilities.

    I think the difference in our thinking is not that I see intelligence as knowing stuff, it's that you see education as merely helping you to know stuff, whereas I think that education leads to an increase in your intelligence and cognitive abilities. As you do more work, you simply get more practice with using your brain and thinking, hence you actually get smarter, as well as just learning more.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringGenius)
    Welcome back, you be a good boy now!
    Yes sir

    I'll stay away from the society forum and religion/feminism in general until my warning points reach 0
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gilgamesh)
    I think, unfortunately you are right. I do believe, however, that the word intelligence is misused here, and should be replaced with "education". People have natural intelligence, but are just put at a disadvantage to those who are better educated - which makes it seem as though that the former isn't as intelligent as the latter. Your attitude is quite alarming, also.
    No no NO! You're not at all right here, the point being made is that richer people on average (I'm talking about doctors and the like rather than super rich) are cleverer than average, as they've all been good enough to get into, say medical school. They then pass on these genes to their children, so they tend to do better.

    It's tricky to separate this from support in upbringing, I know, but genes must be at least part of the picture.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ladynova)
    Yes but still your argument that wealthy people are intrinsically more intelligent is wrong they just have better education because they went to private school. The £££ running through their veins from birth does not supply their brain with more intelligence.
    You are confusing intelligence with academic achievement.

    Wealthy kids who actually have an average or below average intelligence are almost always going to perform better academically because they can afford private school, the best textbooks, tutors if needed, etc. However, once they leave school this will drop like a stone since as you get older it becomes increasingly more difficult to buy academic success.

    However, families who have been consistently wealthy over many generations do tend to more intelligent. They aren't intelligent because they are wealthy; rather they are wealthy because they are intelligent, and they pass on their intelligence and values to their children who proceed to also be intelligent and therefore successful and wealthy.

    They are two different causal links:
    1. Wealth tends to lead to academic achievement early in life.
    2. Intelligence tends to lead to wealth later in life.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Cant understand why people on here are arguing about rich kid, poor kid, bla bla bla. That **** dnt help your results on thursday get any better. Smh. Little Children
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gilgamesh)
    I think the only thing that can be gleaned from your conclusion is prejudice, and certainly not truth, because as I said, it's so hard to determine what the causal effects are for someone to be intelligent.
    My conclusion was that wealth has no direct effect on intelligence. I fail to see how that can only lead to prejudice. I'm saying that wealth is merely an extraneous variable.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Qwertish)
    You are confusing intelligence with academic achievement.

    Wealthy kids who actually have an average or below average intelligence are almost always going to perform better academically because they can afford private school, the best textbooks, tutors if needed, etc. However, once they leave school this will drop like a stone since as you get older it becomes increasingly more difficult to buy academic success.

    However, families who have been consistently wealthy over many generations do tend to more intelligent. They aren't intelligent because they are wealthy; rather they are wealthy because they are intelligent, and they pass on their intelligence and values to their children who proceed to also be intelligent and therefore successful and wealthy.

    They are two different causal links:
    1. Wealth tends to lead to academic achievement early in life.
    2. Intelligence tends to lead to wealth later in life.
    Then why can I think of hundreds of stupid/unacademic millionaires?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Icedstoat)
    No no NO! You're not at all right here, the point being made is that richer people on average (I'm talking about doctors and the like rather than super rich) are cleverer than average, as they've all been good enough to get into, say medical school. They then pass on these genes to their children, so they tend to do better.

    It's tricky to separate this from support in upbringing, I know, but genes must be at least part of the picture.
    See my latest post.

    What Pythian (I think) is getting at, is that the environment of a well-off household tends to help raise a child to be intelligent as opposed (I assume he thinks) to a council house with a single mum.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Help with your A-levels

    All the essentials

    The adventure begins mug

    Student life: what to expect

    What it's really like going to uni

    Rosette

    Essay expert

    Learn to write like a pro with our ultimate essay guide.

    Uni match

    Uni match

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course for you

    Study planner

    Create a study plan

    Get your head around what you need to do and when with the study planner tool.

    Study planner

    Resources by subject

    Everything from mind maps to class notes.

    Hands typing

    Degrees without fees

    Discover more about degree-level apprenticeships.

    A student doing homework

    Study tips from A* students

    Students who got top grades in their A-levels share their secrets

    Study help links and info

    Can you help? Study help unanswered threadsRules and posting guidelines

    Sponsored content:

    HEAR

    HEAR

    Find out how a Higher Education Achievement Report can help you prove your achievements.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.