|
0 members (),
184
guests, and
12
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 2010
Posts: 3,428
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,428 |
The doi of that paper is 10.1073/pnas.1222154110 if people have access. Abstract: abstract: (sorry about formatting--no time to fix) Now, more than ever, the ability to acquire mathematical skills
ef
fi
ciently is critical for academic and professional success, yet little
is known about the behavioral and neural mechanisms that drive
some children to acquire these skills faster than others. Here we
investigate the behavioral and neural predictors of individual
differences in arithmetic skill acquisition in response to 8-wk of
one-to-one math tutoring. Twenty-four children in grade 3 (ages
8
–
9 y), a critical period for acquisition of basic mathematical skills,
underwent structural and resting-state functional MRI scans pretu-
toring. A signi
fi
cant shift in arithmetic problem-solving strategies
from counting to fact retrieval was observed with tutoring. Nota-
bly,the speedandaccuracyof arithmetic problemsolvingincreased
with tutoring, with some children improving signi
fi
cantly more
than others. Next, we examined whether pretutoring behavioral
and brain measures could predict individual differences in arithmetic
performance improvements with tutoring. No behavioral meas-
ures, including intelligence quotient, working memory, or mathe-
matical abilities, predicted performance improvements. In contrast,
pretutoring hippocampal volume predicted performance improve-
ments.Furthermore,pretutoringintrinsicfunctional connectivity of
the hippocampus with dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal
cortices and the basal ganglia also predicted performance improve-
ments. Our
fi
ndings provide evidence that individual differences in
morphometry and connectivity of brain regions associated with
learning and memory, and not regions typically involved in arith-
metic processing, are strong predictors of responsiveness to math
tutoring in children. More generally, our study suggests that quan-
titative measures of brain structure and intrinsic brain organiza-
tion can provide a more sensitive marker of skill acquisition than
behavioral measures
Last edited by ultramarina; 05/02/13 09:20 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 89
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 89 |
The doi of that paper is 10.1073/pnas.1222154110 if people have access. Abstract: abstract: (sorry about formatting--no time to fix) Now, more than ever, the ability to acquire mathematical skills
ef
fi
ciently is critical for academic and professional success, yet little
is known about the behavioral and neural mechanisms that drive
some children to acquire these skills faster than others. Here we
investigate the behavioral and neural predictors of individual
differences in arithmetic skill acquisition in response to 8-wk of
one-to-one math tutoring. Twenty-four children in grade 3 (ages
8
–
9 y), a critical period for acquisition of basic mathematical skills,
underwent structural and resting-state functional MRI scans pretu-
toring. A signi
fi
cant shift in arithmetic problem-solving strategies
from counting to fact retrieval was observed with tutoring. Nota-
bly,the speedandaccuracyof arithmetic problemsolvingincreased
with tutoring, with some children improving signi
fi
cantly more
than others. Next, we examined whether pretutoring behavioral
and brain measures could predict individual differences in arithmetic
performance improvements with tutoring. No behavioral meas-
ures, including intelligence quotient, working memory, or mathe-
matical abilities, predicted performance improvements. In contrast,
pretutoring hippocampal volume predicted performance improve-
ments.Furthermore,pretutoringintrinsicfunctional connectivity of
the hippocampus with dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal
cortices and the basal ganglia also predicted performance improve-
ments. Our
fi
ndings provide evidence that individual differences in
morphometry and connectivity of brain regions associated with
learning and memory, and not regions typically involved in arith-
metic processing, are strong predictors of responsiveness to math
tutoring in children. More generally, our study suggests that quan-
titative measures of brain structure and intrinsic brain organiza-
tion can provide a more sensitive marker of skill acquisition than
behavioral measures Thanks!
Last edited by MotherofToddler; 05/02/13 09:23 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
I'd like to know exactly what percentage of children are completely incapable of learning long division with one-on-one help. Who cares if someone learns more slowly and takes longer to master long division when that person could live to be 100 years old? It would be great if slow learners and fast learners could work at their own speeds and everyone could maximize her own potential. The skills taught in elementary school, such as reading and arithmetic, are intrinsically important. Many subjects and skills taught in later grades and in college are rarely used, and employers value credentials such as the high school diploma or bachelor's degree to signal a certain level of intelligence and discipline, not for the specific knowledge acquired. Some pre-professional majors such as engineering or nursing may be exceptions. Long division of numbers is almost never done in real life -- we use calculators. It is important primarily as preparation to do long division in algebra. Most people don't use algebra on the job or at home, either, and the people who really struggle with long division are especially unlikely to. My general point is that intensive efforts to teach certain parts of the post-elementary curriculum will have limited benefit, because weak students will soon forget what they have been taught, and because the correlation of academic achievement with positive outcomes such as high income is largely due to the correlation of IQ with those outcomes. With all due respect, MOST of the STEM fields are mastery-oriented and distinctly dependent upon mastery (80%+, I'd say) in order to learn at higher levels-- particularly in the physical sciences. Basically, the entire first three years of undergraduate education there is about learning what each tinker-toy can do, and then advanced study is about applying your knowledge creatively toward problem-solving and discovery. But you can't ever do that if you can't retain mastery of what amounts to 4-6 years' worth of material for the average, successful chemistry, mathematics, or physics student. This is, IMO, probably why most efforts aimed at improving education there at the secondary and post-secondary levels are dismal failures. By then we've trained kids that learning isn't operating on a mastery model. Only-- surprise!-- it is.No, not everyone has the raw cognitive material to be a rocket scientist, economist, or mathematician. But I still think that we're not even giving some people who COULD be remarkable even in that cohort a fair set of opportunities to try in the first place. I'm not sure what to do about that, but it does seem like a pretty darned important problem for us as a nation/society.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 948
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 948 |
No, not everyone has the raw cognitive material to be a rocket scientist, economist, or mathematician. But I still think that we're not even giving some people who COULD be remarkable even in that cohort a fair set of opportunities to try in the first place.
I'm not sure what to do about that, but it does seem like a pretty darned important problem for us as a nation/society. This exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,489
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,489 |
NYT opinion piece on recent research into achievement gap:
Because in districts like mine, where every parent is vying for their kids to be ID-ed as "GT" early on... and some 25-30% of the district IS thus labeled, it tends to water the programs down so significantly for MG+ kids that the entire system just becomes pretty broad 'tracking' for college-bound kids. The vast majority are ideally intelligent (probably NOT gifted, in other words, but close) and advantaged by any definition of the term. Most of those come from the top 25% of incomes locally, and just anecdotally, a lot of them are fairly Tiger-like households.
It also means that anyone asking to have a truly HG+ child's needs met is initially met with scorn and derision, because everyone here has had a run-in with "that" parent. The entitled helicopter parent from hell, whose special snowflake deserves only the very very bestest of everything...
I'm interested in others' thoughts here. I have even suspected that IQ testing is starting to be viewed by some educators/administrators as proof positive that parents have jumped on that bandwagon. It explains a LOT of why parents are increasingly getting pushback re: outside testing and high scores. I agree, this is why I am having such a problem with my school district. I have turned into just another pushy parent. There are ~100 kids (~20% of grade) taking honors geometry in 8th grade this year, and I know many of them are only there because they have been in tutoring for years. Very different than my child who takes the math teacher literally and will NOT ask mom & dad for help. I am not looking forward to H.S. for him because the pressure to spend all your waking hours studying to survive in the honors classes is intense. Yet, if my son isn't in classes that challenging him he does even worse. We already went through this in the pullout 6th grade class.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
I have the PNAS paper. PM me with an email address if you want it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
bluemagic, what we've found is that those "Super-HARD" and "ALL of my kid's waking hours" classes... um...
well, those benchmarks simply don't apply to HG+ kids. Seriously.
My DD is currently taking: Honors US history, Honors American Govt, German, AP Physics, some SAT-prep class that the school wanted her to take, a study-abroad elective (that has work associated with the pre-travel and post-travel parts of the term) and AP Lit. She's done in about 3 hours a day. Half of that time is on just AP Lit and AP physics, but clearly that isn't saying much.
We just don't mention that to anyone who doesn't already have a VERY good notion of how little challenge the curriculum actually presents for her.
Just figured I'd interject that here, since what MOST 'high achiever' type kids (including those who have squeaked into "GT" programs) require to earn top grades is WAY different than what HG+ people do.
DD views it as a great entertaining game to see how much free time she can generate for herself. We let her, as long as her grades are solid A's. Around this schedule, she has 20+ hours a week to just 'be a kid' and another 20 for various extracurriculars, leadership, community service, etc.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
bluemagic, what we've found is that those "Super-HARD" and "ALL of my kid's waking hours" classes... um...
well, those benchmarks simply don't apply to HG+ kids. Seriously. If you aren't sleeping through calculus, you aren't doing it right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
LOL. Somehow I doubt that most math instructors see it in quite those exact terms. 
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2 |
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000263Intelligence Volume 41, Issue 4, July–August 2013, Pages 203–211 Investigating America's elite: Cognitive ability, education, and sex differences Jonathan Wai Duke University, Talent Identification Program, 1121 West Main Street, Durham, NC 27701, United States Highlights •Whether America’s elite are drawn from the cognitive elite was investigated. •CEOs, federal judges, billionaires, Senators, and House members were examined. •Democrats had a higher education and ability than Republicans in Senate and House. •Females were underrepresented among all groups, but to varying degrees. •America’s elite are largely drawn from the intellectually gifted. Abstract Are the American elite drawn from the cognitive elite? To address this, five groups of America's elite (total N = 2254) were examined: Fortune 500 CEOs, federal judges, billionaires, Senators, and members of the House of Representatives. Within each of these groups, nearly all had attended college with the majority having attended either a highly selective undergraduate institution or graduate school of some kind. High average test scores required for admission to these institutions indicated those who rise to or are selected for these positions are highly filtered for ability. Ability and education level differences were found across various sectors in which the billionaires earned their wealth (e.g., technology vs. fashion and retail); even within billionaires and CEOs wealth was found to be connected to ability and education. Within the Senate and House, Democrats had a higher level of ability and education than Republicans. Females were underrepresented among all groups, but to a lesser degree among federal judges and Democrats and to a larger degree among Republicans and CEOs. America's elite are largely drawn from the intellectually gifted, with many in the top 1% of ability. Keywords Cognitive ability; Education; Wealth; Sex differences; Political party ***************************** Discussed by Steve Hsu at the Information Processing blog: http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-cognitive-ability-of-us-elites.htmlThe cognitive ability of US elites
Jonathan Wai sends me his latest paper, which reveals (click figure below) that ~ 40% or more of US Fortune 500 CEOs, billionaires, federal judges and Senators attended elite undergraduate or graduate institutions whose median standardized test scores are above (roughly) 99th percentile for the overall US population (i.e., SAT M+CR > 1400). Over 10% of individuals in these categories attended Harvard. (In the table: elite school = top 1% undergrad or MBA/JD from program with top 1% scores; grad school = other graduate education; college = college degree but from non-elite program, and no graduate school.) This sheds light on the "NYT opinion: No (rich) child left behind" thread. The elites will of course try to boost the careers of their children, but some of the success of their children will result from the high IQ's they inherited from their parents. *********************************** Related article by Wai, the author of the paper cited: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201206/brainiacs-and-billionairesOf Brainiacs and Billionaires Psychology Today By Jonathan Wai, published on July 03, 2012 We're obsessed with America's high earners. But in the age of big data, the biggest brains will increasingly set the country's course and become top earners in the process. Meet the other 1 Percent.
Last edited by Bostonian; 05/03/13 04:56 AM. Reason: added Pschology Today article by Wai
"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." - George Orwell
|
|
|
|
|
