General > General Technical Chat
What are your thoughts on STEM education in schools? Good, bad and ugly?
<< < (12/13) > >>
synsis:

--- Quote from: coppice on February 23, 2020, 08:33:11 pm ---I've seen many people who were convinced by people around them that they were top notch be really crushed by meeting people who truly excel. People who might be no more inherently capable, but whose practical capabilities have been better nurtured.

--- End quote ---

Are you referring to these qualities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscientiousness

This is interesting:

--- Quote ---Conscientiousness (Control) was significantly negatively correlated with abstract
reasoning (fluid intelligence), but not with verbal reasoning (crystallized intelligence). This was interpreted as
indicating that the negative relationship between intelligence and Conscientiousness is due to fluid intelligence affecting the development of Conscientiousness, in an educated and need-achieving population.

--- End quote ---
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20141223141658/http://uk.psytech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Conscientiousness-and-Intelligence-2004.pdf
coppice:

--- Quote from: synsis on February 23, 2020, 10:08:33 pm ---
--- Quote from: coppice on February 23, 2020, 08:33:11 pm ---I've seen many people who were convinced by people around them that they were top notch be really crushed by meeting people who truly excel. People who might be no more inherently capable, but whose practical capabilities have been better nurtured.

--- End quote ---

Are you referring to these qualities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscientiousness

This is interesting:

--- Quote ---Conscientiousness (Control) was significantly negatively correlated with abstract
reasoning (fluid intelligence), but not with verbal reasoning (crystallized intelligence). This was interpreted as
indicating that the negative relationship between intelligence and Conscientiousness is due to fluid intelligence affecting the development of Conscientiousness, in an educated and need-achieving population.

--- End quote ---
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20141223141658/http://uk.psytech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Conscientiousness-and-Intelligence-2004.pdf

--- End quote ---
Nope. High achievers are mostly people who score well on both the general intelligence and conscientiousness traits. However most of them don't know what they are capable of until they are pushed to compete with other intelligent and conscientious people. Its mostly competition which drives us to excellence, whether its in sports or more intellectual activities.
magic:

--- Quote from: coppice on February 23, 2020, 08:33:11 pm ---A pass for getting into a technician course is rather different from a pass to get into a top university, but A-level results are the basis for both these things.

--- End quote ---
:-+
That's why the scheme cannot possibly do anything good.

Another line to the standard testing hater's handbook: if you screw up the national test by bad luck or dumb mistake, you can go to a sub-par school or twiddle your thumbs for a year if you think you deserve better.
Mr. Scram:

--- Quote from: coppice on February 23, 2020, 10:19:42 pm ---Nope. High achievers are mostly people who score well on both the general intelligence and conscientiousness traits. However most of them don't know what they are capable of until they are pushed to compete with other intelligent and conscientious people. Its mostly competition which drives us to excellence, whether its in sports or more intellectual activities.

--- End quote ---
That's the American approach, which has its flaws. It doesn't address that some highly competent people crumble when they have to compete directly or that strengths and weaknesses can be complemented. Science isn't a game competing isn't an intrinsic part of it. Some people thrive cooperating instead of making it all about themselves.
coppice:

--- Quote from: Mr. Scram on February 24, 2020, 06:31:51 pm ---
--- Quote from: coppice on February 23, 2020, 10:19:42 pm ---Nope. High achievers are mostly people who score well on both the general intelligence and conscientiousness traits. However most of them don't know what they are capable of until they are pushed to compete with other intelligent and conscientious people. Its mostly competition which drives us to excellence, whether its in sports or more intellectual activities.

--- End quote ---
That's the American approach, which has its flaws. It doesn't address that some highly competent people crumble when they have to compete directly or that strengths and weaknesses can be complemented. Science isn't a game competing isn't an intrinsic part of it. Some people thrive cooperating instead of making it all about themselves.

--- End quote ---
This is nonsense. If you look at the story of most major scientific achievements there was a race to get to the answer ahead of someone else, to win either money or prestige. If you look at engineering, competition is an inherent part of the activity. The only engineering free of competition is when its being protected, and cosseted projects seldom end well.

Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod