Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys, I just saw this picture about intelligence and I've got to say that I really disagree with it. I just think it's trying to blame the education system ad to why people fail. Does anyone else feel this way or have a different view?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    Hi guys, I just saw this picture about intelligence and I've got to say that I really disagree with it. I just think it's trying to blame the education system ad to why people fail. Does anyone else feel this way or have a different view?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The education system is perfectly fair, anyone saying otherwise is just not as intelligent.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The only education system that would be fair to all pupils would be one where everyone, regardless of wealth, current inclination, where and to who they are born, is given exactly the same schooling.

    So for a few years you study at a comprehensive, for a few years at a grammar and a few years at a public school.

    Of course, within that there are stll variables. The superb Nobel prize winning teacher who chose to teach at a comprehensive for example. And many comprehensices are ex-grammar, Church of England or were always founded with high expectations of their pupils and teachers. But I'm not trying to make any point about comprehensives being worse than public schools or vice versa in terms of quality of teaching. It's more the perceived quality of the environment / social expectations and what effect that might have on pupils.

    I suppose that despite Tony Blair's claim that 'we're all classless now' those in power (or not) - and those at other levels of power within the midlde classes- still don't want to try to implement that. They'd rather spend money on counsellors to help children - or adults- who've needlessly experienced a far different view of life than someone born in to a more privileged situation.

    I know I sound very socialist but I'm actually just seeing the sense of being a proactive pragmatic, however unbritish it might feel (don't the British prefer to create situations that we can spend millions not solving for an endless amount of time?).

    I know that the pageantry of class is appealing, It will remain but the model I propose will be more in line with the upper middle class Victorian view of being benefactory and benevolent to all.

    Whereas the current system is a strange combination of socialism (armies of counsellors) and Thatcherism.

    It may sound unbritish but only by removing the reasons people have to complain and excuse their behaviour by the class that they were born in to can we hope to stop the antisocial things affecting the country.

    The present system has little or nothing to do with cost and everything to do with perpetuating an us and them. There's nothing wrong with an us and them when it's about 'Us- the achievers' and 'Them- the non-achievers' but when it's about 'us- born in to privilege' and 'Them- not born in to privilege' that's about as meaningful as a throw of a dice. You can still have pride that you were born in to a family of self made billionaires who have great business, personal/ social skills without feeling that necessarily gives you a right to attend a school with a noted name any more than anyone else.

    If the very creation of the universe was a throw of a dice well, humans are not necessarily meant to go along with that for their own societies.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    Hi guys, I just saw this picture about intelligence and I've got to say that I really disagree with it. I just think it's trying to blame the education system ad to why people fail. Does anyone else feel this way or have a different view?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Although I don't understand why you haven't stated reasons for why you think its wrong...

    I totally agree with Einstein (do you know his background/up-brining?). I find it strange that not much has changed in regards to this, everyone is measured with the same 'stick' regardless of aspirations, background, personality/nature/tendencies.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cremated_Spatula)
    Although I don't understand why you haven't stated reasons for why you think its wrong...

    I totally agree with Einstein (do you know his background/up-brining?). I find it strange that not much has changed in regards to this, everyone is measured with the same 'stick' regardless of aspirations, background, personality/nature/tendencies.
    Sorry I just feel that he states that everyone has the potential to be a genius and yet wants people to be tested differently. Using animal's as examples doesn't necessarily correspond to humans. I believe human's are all equally capable both mentally and physically bar handicapped people(but not all the time e.g Stephen Hawking) which is why we are all tested by the same tests.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    Sorry I just feel that he states that everyone has the potential to be a genius and yet wants people to be tested differently. Using animal's as examples doesn't necessarily correspond to humans. I believe human's are all equally capable both mentally and physically bar handicapped people(but not all the time e.g Stephen Hawking) which is why we are all tested by the same tests.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Oh I see, I think it was more of a comment on the way they disregarded him as stupid because he didn't live up to their standards. It is more abstract than it being a literal example, it is more of a fun/facetious way to illustrate his point.

    Like someone might be a 'do everything by the book' kind of person where as another might be more interested in the opposite ect.

    Everyone is different so why should we teach & judge everyone by the same methods.

    I do agree though, that not everyone has the willpower to become a 'genius'/ not everyone will actually want to live to their full intellectual potential.

    But the potential is still there, (unless there is some-kind of disability/illness) which is what matters.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It's a misguided quote, in my view. Mental abilities are tested in the education system and on tests of cognitive abilities, not physical abilities. It's just another example of overvaluing intellectual abilities. Some people are better at football than others; some people have better social skills than others; some people are more rational and logical than others; and some people are more intelligent than others, and have, due to their genetic code, a greater potential than others. We don't say that people are geniuses because they can climb trees, though, or because they're good at football. You can't apply the term 'genius' or 'intelligent' to everything, which appears to be what the quotation is implying. It also seems to be saying that we value intelligence too much and that other skills are important too, but by hijacking the term 'genius' to make this point, the quotation itself is contributing to the overvaluation of intelligence.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    And-now-for-something-completely-different, somebody who knows what he's talking about...

    (Original post by intelligence.org)

    • Culturally neutral cognitive tests like progressive matrices are very tightly correlated (0.9) with IQ. So you can estimate someone’s IQ (and hence their verbal ability, spatial rotation ability, short term memory, cognitive reaction time, etc.) pretty well using only one test like Raven’s progressive matrices.
    • It’s very difficult to raise one’s score on these cognitive tests with training. In large studies, it looks like thousands of dollars worth of training can raise your score by a small fraction of the standard deviation.
    • Additional IQ points do appear to “matter” — even above, say, IQ 145. E.g. the mean IQ of eminent scientists (IQ 160) is much higher than that of average PhDs (IQ 130). Also, in a longitudinal study of children identified as gifted at age 13, the “1 in 10,000″-level children had significantly better life outcomes than the “1 in 100″-level children, even though they generally all received “gifted child” development paths.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    So, would you all define somebody's intelligence by the grades they achieved at school? What about a 45 year old man who came out of the education with no qualifications? Is he less intelligent than somebody who is 18 and has just finished their A Levels with very high results?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    My dad got 3 qualifications and he's one of the most intelligent people I know, I think people have different forms of intelligence- his passion is music and he could answer anything about it, his job didn't require qualifications but he was seriously successful. Although I have like 15 qualifications and I'm 17 it doesn't mean I have a certain level of intelligence as I still have my whole life to gain experiences that my dad has had.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    Hi guys, I just saw this picture about intelligence and I've got to say that I really disagree with it. I just think it's trying to blame the education system ad to why people fail. Does anyone else feel this way or have a different view?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I think there's a massive amount of truth in this. Our education system is fundamentally flawed in so many ways - the basic model hasn't changed much in over a century. Anybody who denies this is living in a fantasy world. The fact of the matter is that until you leave Sixth Form, success in school is more or less about jumping through hoops. As someone who did very well in this system, I am very happy to admit that my exam results do not reveal an awful lot of information about how intelligent I am. I got full marks in English Literature without understanding the first thing about what I was writing about, I just paraphrased what other people in my class came up with and wrote it in a style that makes it sound like I know what I'm talking about. I place infinitely more merit in some of my other achievements in life than in my examination results.

    Fortunately for me, I'm very good at jumping through these hoops and playing along with the game but there are many other people who are very intelligent but still look like they're failing because the system doesn't work for them. Not only is the system at the moment completely impersonal - it's a "one model fits all" system which is completely at odds with the fact that every child is unique and has their own learning style - but it also gives the interpretation that the only intelligence that matters is a strong academic ability (increasingly restricted to STEM subjects). Vocational and creative talents - the latter which is particularly important and lacking in a lot of people - are completely and utterly ignored. Creativity is pretty much actively discouraged in our education system which, given that the great problems of the future will only be solved through creativity, innovative and cross-subject thinking, is an absolutely massive problem.

    I've noticed something which I think could partially explain the OP's viewpoint. If you do very well in a given system, you are naturally inclined to think that it's a good judger of intelligence. I've been a fierce critic of the British educational system for a long time but after I got my AS results, I went through a (fortunately brief) phase of suddenly becoming more supportive of it. People have to stop this assumption that what served them well is necessarily the best system for society as a whole. People are hugely diverse. If you start acting as if everyone should be able to conform to one system of education, you are going to do a massive number of people (and ultimately society) a huge injustice.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beth_p)
    My dad got 3 qualifications and he's one of the most intelligent people I know, I think people have different forms of intelligence- his passion is music and he could answer anything about it, his job didn't require qualifications but he was seriously successful. Although I have like 15 qualifications and I'm 17 it doesn't mean I have a certain level of intelligence as I still have my whole life to gain experiences that my dad has had.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And that is my stance on the matter. My father, who is blind and unfortunately didn't receive that much support during his time within the education system, doesn't have that many "qualifications" but the experiences he has gained through life and self-study of the subjects he is interested in (mainly politics and economics) is nothing but impressive. Despite his lack of educational accolades he is still one of the most intelligent people that I know.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Standardised testing has its place, but it shouldn't be the only determinant of intelligence. The sheer number of highly-successful entrepreneurs with failed schooling should indicate that it's not a comprehensive predictor of outcomes.

    If I had the time, I would absolutely home-school my children. I would steep them in scientific and philosophical works from an early age and hone their appreciation of the world we live in. I would give them a thorough grounding in ancient history, art history, music, anything that would open them to the beauty of civilisation. And I'd equip them with the mathematical knowledge to underpin their future studies/work life if it happens to be in a rigorous discipline. I don't care what they'd score in standardised tests, because I'd know they were more learned in what really matters.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheRecorder)
    So, would you all define somebody's intelligence by the grades they achieved at school? What about a 45 year old man who came out of the education with no qualifications? Is he less intelligent than somebody who is 18 and has just finished their A Levels with very high results?
    I think it then depends on what you make of your life. If that 45 year old then went on to start up an extremely successful business (Mark Zukerburg, Bill Gates) then he's much more intelligent than if the 18yo does nothing with he qualifications.

    Intelligence without ambition is a bird without wings - Salvador Dali

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    I think there's a massive amount of truth in this. Our education system is fundamentally flawed in so many ways - the basic model hasn't changed much in over a century. Anybody who denies this is living in a fantasy world. The fact of the matter is that until you leave Sixth Form, success in school is more or less about jumping through hoops. As someone who did very well in this system, I am very happy to admit that my exam results do not reveal an awful lot of information about how intelligent I am. I got full marks in English Literature without understanding the first thing about what I was writing about, I just paraphrased what other people in my class came up with and wrote it in a style that makes it sound like I know what I'm talking about. I place infinitely more merit in some of my other achievements in life than in my examination results.

    Fortunately for me, I'm very good at jumping through these hoops and playing along with the game but there are many other people who are very intelligent but still look like they're failing because the system doesn't work for them. Not only is the system at the moment completely impersonal - it's a "one model fits all" system which is completely at odds with the fact that every child is unique and has their own learning style - but it also gives the interpretation that the only intelligence that matters is a strong academic ability (increasingly restricted to STEM subjects). Vocational and creative talents - the latter which is particularly important and lacking in a lot of people - are completely and utterly ignored. Creativity is pretty much actively discouraged in our education system which, given that the great problems of the future will only be solved through creativity, innovative and cross-subject thinking, is an absolutely massive problem.

    I've noticed something which I think could partially explain the OP's viewpoint. If you do very well in a given system, you are naturally inclined to think that it's a good judger of intelligence. I've been a fierce critic of the British educational system for a long time but after I got my AS results, I went through a (fortunately brief) phase of suddenly becoming more supportive of it. People have to stop this assumption that what served them well is necessarily the best system for society as a whole. People are hugely diverse. If you start acting as if everyone should be able to conform to one system of education, you are going to do a massive number of people (and ultimately society) a huge injustice.
    I think I'm critical about the photo is because the dumb people I know are the people who do not try at all. Literally 0 effort is put in and they do not get the grades and then go and blame the system, blame the government, blame the teacher or the exam board. All the while they will continue to put in no effort and blame everyone else for their poor grades.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    I think it then depends on what you make of your life. If that 45 year old then went on to start up an extremely successful business (Mark Zukerburg, Bill Gates) then he's much more intelligent than if the 18yo does nothing with he qualifications.

    Intelligence without ambition is a bird without wings - Salvador Dali
    Definitely agree with you there - or rather Salvador Dali

    But just because you don't make something of your life doesn't mean you are less intelligent though. There may be limiting factors involved and I know this to be the case because I have seen this happen first hand unfortunately.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    Hi guys, I just saw this picture about intelligence and I've got to say that I really disagree with it. I just think it's trying to blame the education system ad to why people fail. Does anyone else feel this way or have a different view?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I disagree with it tbh because I don't know about other schools but my school in particular seem to focus on these type of students the ones who act as though they are hard done by but actually don't put any effort in to help themselves. Leading to, the more intelligent students to be left to work it out for themselves, whilst the ones who don't try are spoon fed their work.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    I think I'm critical about the photo is because the dumb people I know are the people who do not try at all. Literally 0 effort is put in and they do not get the grades and then go and blame the system, blame the government, blame the teacher or the exam board. All the while they will continue to put in no effort and blame everyone else for their poor grades.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm not saying that everyone is incredibly gifted, I'm not saying that all people are special snowflakes. Of course there are people who genuinely don't care and will blame everyone but themselves for their own inadequacies. But on the other hand, there are also lots of people who genuinely want to try but just keep getting pushed back by a system that was only built to allow a very specific type of person to succeed. We need to be aiming for a system that allows everyone's talents to be realised, encouraged and allowed to develop rather than sticking to the status quo using a very exclusive group of people as the basis of resisting change.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingCorneliusIII)
    I think I'm critical about the photo is because the dumb people I know are the people who do not try at all. Literally 0 effort is put in and they do not get the grades and then go and blame the system, blame the government, blame the teacher or the exam board. All the while they will continue to put in no effort and blame everyone else for their poor grades.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Then that I would say is something else entirely.
    If you don't put in any effort in anything you do, you won't do very well.
    The educational system is hugely flawed though, at all levels, though is a bigger factor in your formative younger years.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _Charlotte15)
    Leading to, the more intelligent students to be left to work it out for themselves, whilst the ones who don't try are spoon fed their work.
    So in a manner you do agree with the picture based upon another, less explicit, message the picture provides. From what you have just said there it is apparent that you do feel the system is floored because everyone within the system is different (with different motives and levels of drive). So, is someone who is spoon fed as intelligent as the person who isn't if they both achieve the same percentage in a standard test? Is the grade achieved from that test a true representation of each person's "intelligence"?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 1, 2015
Poll
Which web browser do you use?
Useful resources

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.