|
0 members (),
195
guests, and
32
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 36
Junior Member
|
OP
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 36 |
Two examples of innumeracy in books for parents about gifted children:
1) "Unfortunately, highly gifted children (those in the 95th percentile) only occur in approximately 1 out of 1,000 preschoolers, and profoundly gifted children (those in the 99.9th percentile) are as rare as 1 in 10,000 preschoolers."
Huh? What part of the definition of "percentile" do you not understand?
2) "In our mushrooming populace, over 3 million Americans and approximately 70 million global citizens are highly gifted or beyond (99.9th percentile)."
The current population of the United States is 313,914,040 (according to Google, today) so the correct number of persons at the 99.9th percentile must be one order of magnitude smaller, that is about 313,914. And similarly for the world population.
Note the difference between the two popular books in their percentile definitions of "highly gifted," showing that that is not a term with a standardized meaning in scholarly research. (Note too that IQ tests never report percentile scores any higher than 99.9th percentile, as error in rank ordering at that end of the scale makes it very unlikely that even that percentile rank can be assigned reliably to test-takers.)
With friends like this, advocates of better education for gifted young people hardly need enemies.
"Students have no shortcomings, they have only peculiarities." Israel Gelfand
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 38
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 38 |
That is just appalling. Have you read Innumeracy by John Allen Paulos? Great read.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513 |
I wonder if "preschoolers" in the first example refers to preschool aged children enrolled in a preschool. It would imply that the gifted are underrepresented massively in schools if that's the case, with most HG+ preschoolers in a home setting. That's one explanation that might reconcile the discrepancy, however unlikely.
Though, I think your interpretation of innumeracy is the more likely explanation for the baffling numbers!
What is to give light must endure burning.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,297
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,297 |
Can you give titles/links on Amazon.com for the books?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 320
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 320 |
Not the OP, but Google gives me The Everything Parent's Guide to Raising a Gifted Child by Sarah Robbins for the first quote (p125) and Giftedness 101 by Linda Silverman (p87) for the second.
Amusingly enough links to the page with quoted materials in Google Books came as #2 results for both searches. The #1 result points to this thread. I have no idea what the DA uses for SEO but Google just laps it up...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 320
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 320 |
Aquinas, in my area of the US (which I think qualifies as a super ZIP) the kids who hit K and formal schooling without having gone to some form of preschool are pretty much the lowest income/parental education/parental motivation.
But then the fanciest/most expensive preschools don't do academics...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,694
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,694 |
Siasl your post sums up my experience of socio economics and preschool where I live - the wealthiest children all go, but to preschools attached to high end private schools that are private schools that don't do academics...
As for the quotes, that's appalling.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,297
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,297 |
Percentile is the proportion of a population above which a given score ranks, percentage is the proportion correct on a given assessment. While the above quote is nonsense, saying that 1 in 1000 test takers score at 95 percent or higher on a given assessment would be totally fine.
Not that I really think that this is what the author means...
Suffice it to say, slippery math like this shows up in an alarming proportion of social science and education research. It always makes my eyes cross a little, but often the author believes that the statistic is expressed correctly... even when it flies in the face of mathematical good sense. In this case, I think the author was clueless. I searched for "percentile" in the book and didn't find anything about a particular test for giftedness having a score of 95% being at the 99.9th percentile. Also, here's a quote about bell curves from page 5 of that book (available on Google Books): Three standard deviations to either side would represent 99.5 percent [of the population]. Four standard deviations ...would show a representation of the middle 99.7 percent. Err...think that's 99.99something, not 99.7.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513 |
Siasl & Mumtothree,
Interesting and unsurprising, though giftedness doesn't imply high SES, or vice-versa, though.
My post was just a cheeky jab at how obviously incorrect the stats probably are with a straw man hypothesis.
What is to give light must endure burning.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,639
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,639 |
Interesting and unsurprising, though giftedness doesn't imply high SES, or vice-versa, though. Statistically, it does. On average, intelligent people are more productive, earn more, and have smarter children.
|
|
|
|
|
