An A/A* student is not a ‘smart’ person Watch

Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#81
Report 1 week ago
#81
(Original post by jnkkjnkjhn)
He is clearly using averages and probability not making strict statements (just like most people who have replied to you).....
clearly not if you read the message, if i dont mention anything about averages and probability then maybe im not talking about averages and probability?
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#82
Report 1 week ago
#82
(Original post by Gent2324)
your logic is completely inconsistent, you cant just use your logic when it suits you, you indirectly said that people who get D grades are dumb so either change your original statement or accept that thats your opinion.
You're the one talking everything as an absolute, implying one foolish action determines someone's intelligence. All I'm saying is grades are an indicator of someone's intelligence but I don't think anyone is trying to saying they're an absolute.
1
reply
jnkkjnkjhn
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#83
Report 1 week ago
#83
It's impossible to get anywhere in any debate if you keep bringing up stupid outliers.
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#84
Report 1 week ago
#84
(Original post by ML8020)
As I mentioned, my argument is "An A* student has a larger probability of being smart than a D student."
General Intelligence (GI) consists of much more than Academical Intelligence (AI), but AI is a subset of GI. With all other factors being unclear, it is fair to say a higher-performing student has a larger probability of being smart than a lower-performing student at this stage. Only when more empirical evidence is presented can we make a modified deduction.
no you didnt, you said "An A* student is a ‘smart’ person (IBE)"
that doesnt say "larger probability"
ur contradicting yourself again
0
reply
WhatIsLife1
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#85
Report 1 week ago
#85
(Original post by thekidwhogames)
Well, what most people would say, it's a smart thing to work hard though..
And I don't like this example since it's fairly subjective. Perhaps, even with insane work, that B may not raise to an A*. A lot of people over-work not knowing they don't need that much work for the grade.
The ability to work hard is common sense, not intelligence. I knew plenty of people who worked insanely hard but didn’t have the natural ability to tie it together with.

I’ll clarify my point like this:

We have 2 factors in leading to the A* (I know this is oversimplified and excludes extenuating circumstances) : hard work and natural intelligence.

Hard work + natural intelligence = top grade
Hard work without natural intelligence = average grade
Natural intelligence without hard work = average grade

The first and third examples are as intelligent as one another, one merely lacks common sense.
1
reply
WhatIsLife1
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#86
Report 1 week ago
#86
I’m also going to bed, if I start at this properly I’ll be up all night lmao
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#87
Report 1 week ago
#87
(Original post by black1blade)
You're the one talking everything as an absolute, implying one foolish action determines someone's intelligence. All I'm saying is grades are an indicator of someone's intelligence but I don't think anyone is trying to saying they're an absolute.
ML8020 was trying to say they're an absolute,
saying that A* students are smarter than the rest with no maybes or buts or likely, hence why i was calling him out for making no sense.
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#88
Report 1 week ago
#88
(Original post by Gent2324)
no you didnt, you said "An A* student is a ‘smart’ person (IBE)"
that doesnt say "larger probability"
ur contradicting yourself again
You're taking the opposite, equally silly stance that grades have absolutely no correlation to intelligence which is clearly wrong. You're arguing against a stance that nobody has in this thread, that if you have higher grades you are automatically smarter in every way. You also fail to grasp the implication of the quotation marks around smart since you clearly don't understand the view everyone else is trying to communicate.
0
reply
math42
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#89
Report 1 week ago
#89
There is little point in having a discussion about such a loosely defined quality. If we're talking about IQ, it correlates with grades. Being an A* student doesn't make you smart, but it's a hell of a lot more likely that you're smart if you're an A* student.
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#90
Report 1 week ago
#90
(Original post by black1blade)
You're taking the opposite, equally silly stance that grades have absolutely no correlation to intelligence which is clearly wrong. You're arguing against a stance that nobody has in this thread, that if you have higher grades you are automatically smarter in every way. You also fail to grasp the implication of the quotation marks around smart since you clearly don't understand the view everyone else is trying to communicate.
im not, i said without replying to anyone that there is 0 correlation, thats not argueing with someone. thats the only post i made without a quote, so its everyone else argueing with me...
and yes, someone said that if you have higher grades you are automatically smarter in every way, read my post, they didnt mention only academically, they didnt mention only in that subject, they just said smarter, which is assumed to be talking about everything unless you narrow it down to a specific.

clearly this whole thread is talking about what high grades has to do with being smart, why would anyone need to prove that high grades means high academic intelligence???? the A* literally means high academic intellignce, wheres the debate in that???
what would be the point in this thread if people were trying to prove that high grades means that your clever at that subject?????
0
reply
ML8020
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#91
Report 1 week ago
#91
(Original post by Gent2324)
no you didnt, you said "An A* student is a ‘smart’ person (IBE)"
that doesnt say "larger probability"
ur contradicting yourself again
I start to wonder if you understand how IBE works.

To refute my conclusion, you could either 1) Deny the IBE style is a good method for deduction 2) Deny P3 3) Deny P4. And here you are denying my conclusion but not propositions LOL. I guess I am taking this as an ineffective rebuttal due to the lack of attack on the propositions. My audacious estimation is you haven't taken any philosophy classes.
Last edited by ML8020; 1 week ago
0
reply
K1NGZ
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#92
Report 1 week ago
#92
(Original post by MediocreSince01)
Someone who gets an A* at A-Level is clever at their subject.

Someone who is clever at their subject doesn't necessarily have to get an A*, though.
some people have the potential to do better and get A*s but settle for ok and hence A* really doesnt test Intelligence
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
mnot
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#93
Report 1 week ago
#93
(Original post by Ratchet Hoe)
I don’t believe that because you get an A (or being academically ‘smart’h means that you are ‘intelligent’. Because in order to get an A in most cases, it’s not your ability that is being assessed but the criteria that you have to follow to get that grade. In subjects such as science and maths, it’s all the case of remembering. Essay subjects have to follow a structure that must follow a point, evidence and explain it in depth. In subjects such as art it is very subjective so grading can be very awkward and may vary depending on who marks it. Essay and practical subjects do limit the ability that someone has on a certificate too. What is your view?
Its a much more complex issue, and hard to compare upbringing, attitude/motivation,school quality, resources, subject combinations etc. so distinct comparisons are almost impossible, as all of these will factor into final grades. That said i suspect there would still be a positive trend between IQ and A-level or GCSE results, just with quite a wide spread and large variance. I suspect comparing STEM subjects the correlation would be stronger than in humanity/arts subjects.
3
reply
Royal Oak
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#94
Report 1 week ago
#94
Cba to read the thread but I agree. It's not hard to learn how to pass exams.
1
reply
Retired_Messiah
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#95
Report 1 week ago
#95
You know who REALLY isn't smart? Me.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk
1
reply
Tolgarda
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#96
Report 1 week ago
#96
You're right. They are not per se. In certain subjects for a particular year, students could get a mark around 78% and still attain a top grade. However, an A* student that scores 95%+ in most subjects is indeed intelligent. If top grades at A Levels aren't enough for you, go to the Olympiads and marvel at the gold medallists there.

(Original post by Aleks<3)
I did bio, chem and history. I guess maths, fm and physics mark schemes aren't specific (never seen them), but the bio AQA one, for example, is terribly specific
'Terribly specific'? What? You mean that the mark scheme just wants the correct answer? What a shocker!
Last edited by Tolgarda; 1 week ago
0
reply
iodo345
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#97
Report 1 week ago
#97
Clearly somebody like Richard Branson is far more intelligent than his grades suggest.
0
reply
Anonymous778
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#98
Report 1 week ago
#98
M m
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
TimeGear
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#99
Report 1 week ago
#99
(Original post by ecolier)
Getiing A*s only means you are good at taking exams. Nothing more, nothing less.
Obviously! Because getting A*s and perfect scores in mathematics exams shows no mathematical ability. Only ability to do well at exams. And getting a Nobel Prize in physics only means you are good at winning prizes. Not that you're good at physics. In fact, nothing shows anything. There, that'll bring down those high-achieving students!

Spoiler:
Show
Getting A*s demonstrates proficiency in those subjects and almost always higher overall intelligence. Don't be stupid.
2
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#100
Report 1 week ago
#100
(Original post by TimeGear)
Obviously! Because getting A*s and perfect scores in mathematics exams shows no mathematical ability. Only ability to do well at exams. And getting a Nobel Prize in physics only means you are good at winning prizes. Not that you're good at physics. In fact, nothing shows anything. There, that'll bring down those high-achieving students!

Spoiler:
Show
Getting A*s demonstrates proficiency in those subjects and almost always higher overall intelligence. Don't be stupid.
Good way of putting this, fully agree.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (137)
17.79%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (73)
9.48%
No I am happy with my course choice (453)
58.83%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (107)
13.9%

Watched Threads

View All