Discussion:
Was Summers Right on girls and science?
(too old to reply)
Michel
2008-12-06 03:31:39 UTC
Permalink
from www.washingtonpost.com (more comments there)

Was Summers Right?

By Ruth Marcus [she is a woman...]
Wednesday, December 3, 2008; A17


Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?

As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders, "I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong."

But Summers may have been on to something, recent research suggests.
Math and science test data, he noted, show gender differences at each
end of the performance spectrum. In other words, men are
overrepresented at the very top and bottom.

This small but significant variance, he hypothesized, suggested
differences in innate aptitude -- "whatever the set of attributes are
that . . . correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or
being a chemist at Berkeley" -- that help explain the dramatic
underrepresentation of women in tenured jobs on elite science and
engineering faculties.

These remarks, of course, led to Summers's ouster as president of
Harvard. Whether they cost him the Treasury secretary job in the Obama
administration, they surely didn't help. Instead, Summers will head
the National Economic Council, avoiding a confirmation hearing that
would no doubt have dredged up the recent unpleasantness.

It's worth, though, going back to Summers's remarks to understand what
he described, in a masterpiece of understatement, as "some attempts at
provocation." He posited three factors to explain the faculty gender
gap. The most significant, he suggested, was the all-consuming nature
of the high-powered job.

In Summers's words, "the most prestigious activities in our society
expect of people who are going to rise to leadership positions in
their 40s near total commitments to their work. . . . And it is a fact
about our society that that is a level of commitment that a much
higher fraction of married men have been historically prepared to make
than of married women."

The academic life has always seemed rather relaxing to me, but
Summers's larger point is valid -- and, by the way, relevant to the
president-elect's hires so far. Gratifyingly diverse, yes, but more of
the men than women have children at home.

Summers did not discount, although he placed third, the role of overt
and subconscious socialization and discrimination. Where he got into
big trouble was the "intrinsic aptitude" part.

Here's the interesting thing, though. A group of researchers (all
women, as it happened) looked at annual math assessments required by
the No Child Left Behind law from 10 representative states that
supplied details about gender and ethnicity, a total of 7 million
students.

Their study, published in the July 25 issue of Science, found no
differences between girls and boys in average performance -- not even,
as earlier studies had found, once they entered high school. The gap
between girls and boys on math SATs, they said, could be explained by
the fact that more girls than boys go to college and therefore take
these tests.

But, echoing Summers's point, there was small yet significant variance
between the genders -- the degree to which the scores of girls or boys
differed from the average. At the very highest level, the 99.9th
percentile, the difference meant 2.15 males for every female. This
difference was large enough that, in an occupation requiring math
skills at that level, the job ranks could be expected to be filled 68
percent by men, 32 percent by women -- enough to explain, as Summers
suggested, part of the gender gap.

Studies comparing girls and boys in different countries add to the
puzzle, both underscoring gender differences and suggesting that the
influence of cultural factors may be greater than Summers thought.

In performance on a standardized math, science and reading test given
to 15- and 16-year-olds in 40 countries, girls in every country
performed far better than boys in reading. Conversely, boys in all but
three countries did better, but by not nearly as much, in math. In all
but three countries -- Britain, Thailand and Iceland -- more boys than
girls scored in the 99th percentile in math.

Yet this study, published in the May 30 issue of Science, also showed
a correlation between girls' performance on math tests and countries
where there is more "gender equality," as measured by things such as
the share of female elected officials or women's participation in the
workforce.

Summers was boneheaded to say what he said, in the way that he said it
and considering the job that he held. But he probably had a legitimate
point -- and the continuing uproar says more about the triumph of
political correctness than about Summers's supposed sexism.
Andrew Usher
2008-12-06 04:08:38 UTC
Permalink
fromwww.washingtonpost.com(more comments there)
Was Summers Right?
By Ruth Marcus [she is a woman...]
Wednesday, December 3, 2008; A17
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
Of course he was! He wouldn't have said it if it weren't true.

Andrew Usher
r***@pdq.net
2008-12-06 04:52:02 UTC
Permalink
fromwww.washingtonpost.com(more comments there)
Was Summers Right?
By Ruth Marcus [she is a woman...]
Wednesday, December 3, 2008; A17
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders, "I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong."
But Summers may have been on to something, recent research suggests.
Math and science test data, he noted, show gender differences at each
end of the performance spectrum. In other words, men are
overrepresented at the very top and bottom.
This small but significant variance, he hypothesized, suggested
differences in innate aptitude -- "whatever the set of attributes are
that . . . correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or
being a chemist at Berkeley" -- that help explain the dramatic
underrepresentation of women in tenured jobs on elite science and
engineering faculties.
These remarks, of course, led to Summers's ouster as president of
Harvard. Whether they cost him the Treasury secretary job in the Obama
administration, they surely didn't help. Instead, Summers will head
the National Economic Council, avoiding a confirmation hearing that
would no doubt have dredged up the recent unpleasantness.
It's worth, though, going back to Summers's remarks to understand what
he described, in a masterpiece of understatement, as "some attempts at
provocation." He posited three factors to explain the faculty gender
gap. The most significant, he suggested, was the all-consuming nature
of the high-powered job.
In Summers's words, "the most prestigious activities in our society
expect of people who are going to rise to leadership positions in
their 40s near total commitments to their work. . . . And it is a fact
about our society that that is a level of commitment that a much
higher fraction of married men have been historically prepared to make
than of married women."
The academic life has always seemed rather relaxing to me, but
Summers's larger point is valid -- and, by the way, relevant to the
president-elect's hires so far. Gratifyingly diverse, yes, but more of
the men than women have children at home.
Summers did not discount, although he placed third, the role of overt
and subconscious socialization and discrimination. Where he got into
big trouble was the "intrinsic aptitude" part.
Here's the interesting thing, though. A group of researchers (all
women, as it happened) looked at annual math assessments required by
the No Child Left Behind law from 10 representative states that
supplied details about gender and ethnicity, a total of 7 million
students.
Their study, published in the July 25 issue of Science, found no
differences between girls and boys in average performance -- not even,
as earlier studies had found, once they entered high school. The gap
between girls and boys on math SATs, they said, could be explained by
the fact that more girls than boys go to college and therefore take
these tests.
But, echoing Summers's point, there was small yet significant variance
between the genders -- the degree to which the scores of girls or boys
differed from the average. At the very highest level, the 99.9th
percentile, the difference meant 2.15 males for every female. This
difference was large enough that, in an occupation requiring math
skills at that level, the job ranks could be expected to be filled 68
percent by men, 32 percent by women -- enough to explain, as Summers
suggested, part of the gender gap.
Studies comparing girls and boys in different countries add to the
puzzle, both underscoring gender differences and suggesting that the
influence of cultural factors may be greater than Summers thought.
In performance on a standardized math, science and reading test given
to 15- and 16-year-olds in 40 countries, girls in every country
performed far better than boys in reading. Conversely, boys in all but
three countries did better, but by not nearly as much, in math. In all
but three countries -- Britain, Thailand and Iceland -- more boys than
girls scored in the 99th percentile in math.
Yet this study, published in the May 30 issue of Science, also showed
a correlation between girls' performance on math tests and countries
where there is more "gender equality," as measured by things such as
the share of female elected officials or women's participation in the
workforce.
Summers was boneheaded to say what he said, in the way that he said it
and considering the job that he held. But he probably had a legitimate
point -- and the continuing uproar says more about the triumph of
political correctness than about Summers's supposed sexism.
Looking at the top 1% is silly. Success in high level math/physics is
a matter of having 1 in 100,000 skill sets. In this league, what do
you think the gender ratio is?
Dustbin
2008-12-06 06:44:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michel
from www.washingtonpost.com (more comments there)
Was Summers Right?
By Ruth Marcus [she is a woman...]
Wednesday, December 3, 2008; A17
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders, "I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong."
But Summers may have been on to something, recent research suggests.
Math and science test data, he noted, show gender differences at each
end of the performance spectrum. In other words, men are
overrepresented at the very top and bottom.
Nothing new.

Brainsex; by David Jessel and Anne Moir (1989).

The problem is getting facts faced up to.

We also know that there are key difference in
brain structure that are expected to give rise
to these behavioural and performance differences.

Women have superior verbal and emotional skills
which is why they are so good at manipulating
others and eliciting reactions. Look at the last
thirty years; in spite of any rhyme or reason on
the part of men and in spite of any amount of
evidence to the contrary; feminazis have wiped
the floor with us. Their nonsense is accepted
social more no matter how absurd it may.

It is simply a matter of manipulation emotional
and verbal. It sickens me to watch it going on.
Since I read the above reference in December
1989; shortly after publication I have been
complaining about the devious machinations of
these perverts.

For a man to expect to win against a female in
the verbal arena is as daft as a woman expecting
to win against a man in the boxing arena. Men
have superior height weight and strength and
will win in the boxing arena; women have
superior verbal emotional skills and will win in
the debating arena.

While the feminazis always interpret men's
intentions as evil and therefore we on ever use
violence abusively to serve our own ends; the
feminazis like always interpret women's
behaviour (their use of their superior social
emotional and verbal skills) as innocent and
well-intentioned.

Obviously, women can use their superior
abilities for good or bad - just as men can; but
that is not the way the feminist manipulated
world sees it.

D.
--
=======================
Women have spent the last
30 years proving that men
have been right for the
last 30 centuries.
=======================
Marcus Aurelius
2008-12-07 01:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Here is an appropriate response as per a quote from Aristotle:
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Grizzlie Antagonist
2008-12-07 03:39:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
"When I am the weaker, I ask you for my freedom, because that is your
principle; but when I am the stronger, I take away your freedom, because
that is my principle." - Louis Veuillot
--
"Populus me sibilat, at mihi plaudo." ("The people hiss at me, but I am well
satisfied with myself") - Horace, Book 1, Satire 1
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-12 05:56:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately  I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Great point.

I began researching the gender gap in terms of standard deviations,
and while it's not yet complete, the rest of what follows might shock
even this forum

TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519). But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444). And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.

SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
SAT scores also show that two thirds of the students who score over
600 are boys and one third are girls.

Even though boys outperformed girls this much in SAT scores, almost
two thirds of college admissions today are girls and only one third
boys. Almost two thirds of those who take the GRE are White girls,
and only one third boys. The gender gap in standard deviations is two
to three times larger than in SAT and it’s growing. In 1997 the
gender/race gap between Asian men and Black women was 2.16 standard
deviations, but it increased to 2.48 only 5 years later, in 2002.
Even the gender gaps between Asian boys and girls increased, from 0.63
to 0.69.

NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.

While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
rst0wxyz
2008-12-12 06:11:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately  I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Great point.
I began researching the gender gap in terms of standard deviations,
and while it's not yet complete, the rest of what follows might shock
even this forum
TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
SAT scores also show that two thirds of the students who score over
600 are boys and one third are girls.
Even though boys outperformed girls this much in SAT scores, almost
two thirds of college admissions today are girls and only one third
boys.  Almost two thirds of those who take the GRE are White girls,
and only one third boys.  The gender gap in standard deviations is two
to three times larger than in SAT and it’s growing.  In 1997 the
gender/race gap between Asian men and Black women was 2.16 standard
deviations, but it increased to 2.48 only 5 years later, in 2002.
Even the gender gaps between Asian boys and girls increased, from 0.63
to 0.69.
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
Wow!!! another RAT with his IQ charts and differences between boys and
girls, black vs white,...
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-12 06:20:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately  I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Great point.
I began researching the gender gap in terms of standard deviations,
and while it's not yet complete, the rest of what follows might shock
even this forum
TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almosttwo standard deviationslower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score anothertwo standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
SAT scores also show that two thirds of the students who score over
600 are boys and one third are girls.
Even though boys outperformed girls this much in SAT scores, almost
two thirds of college admissions today are girls and only one third
boys.  Almost two thirds of those who take the GRE are White girls,
and only one third boys.  The gender gap in standard deviations is two
to three times larger than in SAT and it’s growing.  In 1997 the
gender/race gap between Asian men and Black women was 2.16 standard
deviations, but it increased to 2.48 only 5 years later, in 2002.
Even the gender gaps between Asian boys and girls increased, from 0.63
to 0.69.
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
Wow!!! another RAT with his IQ charts and differences between boys and
girls, black vs white,...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Durn, that was the wrong article. Following is the complete one:

TIMSS shows that 12th graders, whose scores are very different from
8th graders in both directions (up for most countries, VERY much down
for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than
Swiss boys (589 vs. 519). But Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations
higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444). And Swiss girls scored another
standard deviation higher than American girls (444 vs. 393), for a
total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American girls
and Norwegian boys.

SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT Math
are boys and only one third girls.

Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".

NAEP also confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight
that Blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites,
and that Blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American Blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.

While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it
possible that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other
standardized tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which
illustrates no gender and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is
the way the standard deviation was changed in the reporting of the
data. The most optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation
was changed shows that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38
to 28 points was actually an increase in the standard deviation from
5.4 to 9.3. Is that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as
reflected in the 135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades
and our scoring dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in
the dumbing down of Blacks even more?

That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data have managed to remove it from our public consciousness
and from all political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, but it’s also
not impossible that the total number of standard deviations of
separation between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is
a total of 14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
LauLuna
2008-12-12 15:11:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately  I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Great point.
I began researching the gender gap in terms of standard deviations,
and while it's not yet complete, the rest of what follows might shock
even this forum
TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almosttwo standard deviationslower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score anothertwo standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
SAT scores also show that two thirds of the students who score over
600 are boys and one third are girls.
Even though boys outperformed girls this much in SAT scores, almost
two thirds of college admissions today are girls and only one third
boys.  Almost two thirds of those who take the GRE are White girls,
and only one third boys.  The gender gap in standard deviations is two
to three times larger than in SAT and it’s growing.  In 1997 the
gender/race gap between Asian men and Black women was 2.16 standard
deviations, but it increased to 2.48 only 5 years later, in 2002.
Even the gender gaps between Asian boys and girls increased, from 0.63
to 0.69.
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
Wow!!! another RAT with his IQ charts and differences between boys and
girls, black vs white,...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
TIMSS shows that 12th graders, whose scores are very different from
8th graders in both directions (up for most countries, VERY much down
for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than
Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations
higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444).  And Swiss girls scored another
standard deviation higher than American girls (444 vs. 393), for a
total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American girls
and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT Math
are boys and only one third girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough.  Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds.  Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP also confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight
that Blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites,
and that Blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American Blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise.  Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades?  No.  Is it
possible that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other
standardized tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which
illustrates no gender and lower race gaps?  No.  What did happen is
the way the standard deviation was changed in the reporting of the
data.  The most optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation
was changed shows that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38
to 28 points was actually an increase in the standard deviation from
5.4 to 9.3.  Is that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as
reflected in the 135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades
and our scoring dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in
the dumbing down of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data have managed to remove it from our public consciousness
and from all political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, but it’s also
not impossible that the total number of standard deviations of
separation between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is
a total of 14 to 18.5 standard deviations.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Could you, please, give your sources?

Thanks
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-12 22:56:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by LauLuna
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately  I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Great point.
I began researching thegendergapin terms ofstandarddeviations,
and while it's not yet complete, the rest of what follows might shock
even this forum
TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standarddeviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5standarddeviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almosttwostandarddeviationslower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score anothertwostandarddeviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
SAT scores also show that two thirds of the students who score over
600 are boys and one third are girls.
Even though boys outperformed girls this much in SAT scores, almost
two thirds of college admissions today are girls and only one third
boys.  Almost two thirds of those who take the GRE are White girls,
and only one third boys.  Thegendergapinstandarddeviations is two
to three times larger than in SAT and it’s growing.  In 1997 the
gender/racegapbetween Asian men and Black women was 2.16standard
deviations, but it increased to 2.48 only 5 years later, in 2002.
Even thegendergaps between Asian boys and girls increased, from 0.63
to 0.69.
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9standarddeviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standarddeviation.
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5standarddeviations.
Wow!!! another RAT with his IQ charts and differences between boys and
girls, black vs white,...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
TIMSS shows that 12th graders, whose scores are very different from
8th graders in both directions (up for most countries, VERY much down
for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than
Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss boys scored 2standarddeviations
higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444).  And Swiss girls scored another
standarddeviationhigher than American girls (444 vs. 393), for a
total of 5standarddeviations of separation between American girls
and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost twostandarddeviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another twostandarddeviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT Math
are boys and only one third girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough.  Not only does it show that thestandarddeviationfor
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that thegender
gapfor Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of astandarddeviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds.  Even the smallerstandarddeviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP also confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight
that Blacks score another 5-9standarddeviations lower than Whites,
and that Blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American Blacks, another half of a
standarddeviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that thegendergapin NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gapdecreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise.  Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race andgendergaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades?  No.  Is it
possible that, given such hugegenderand race gaps in other
standardized tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which
illustrates nogenderand lower race gaps?  No.  What did happen is
the way thestandarddeviationwas changed in the reporting of the
data.  The most optimistic assessment of how thisstandarddeviation
was changed shows that this supposed decrease in the racegapfrom 38
to 28 points was actually an increase in thestandarddeviationfrom
5.4 to 9.3.  Is that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as
reflected in the 135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades
and our scoring dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in
the dumbing down of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data have managed to remove it from our public consciousness
and from all political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, but it’s also
not impossible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of
separation between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is
a total of 14 to 18.5standarddeviations.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Could you, please, give your sources?
Thanks- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yes. But in the interim, this update just in!!!
Post by LauLuna
With bated breath, the world awaited for close to a year for the
release of the latest benchmarkTIMSSstudy from 2007 which involved
more than 60 participant countries and 425,000 students from round the
globe. At that sample size,TIMSS2007 is the largest study of student
math and science achievement in the world. And the results were
finally just released couple days ago.
You can read the details below, but as usual, average scores way way
*underestimate* real differences between countries. So let
RichAsianKid post just one additional bit of data here to clarify what
(1) First, math achievement
Loading Image...
Wow! some Asian country countries have kids where upwards of 40% have
reached the advanced level - while many countries only have single
digits, sometimes 1 or 2 %, and many countries have zero percent. No
much of a right-end of the bell curve is there? Now, what does
advanced level mean in math (You can read it on your own and save me
some typing....)
Loading Image...
(2) Now we go to science achievement
Loading Image...
Here the results are slightly closer, but still grossly
disproportionate. And what does "advanced" mean in science?
Loading Image...
(3) And finally, don't forget this. The so-called g-factor, i.e.
intelligence, correlates at over 0.90 level with the previousTIMSS
results (1995, 1999, 2003) at the national level, as shown.
Loading Image...
Yup.
Yet the latest proof that human groups do not achieve equally.
* * * Featured Article * * *
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081210171906.htm
Asian Students Top Latest Global Math, Science Study
ScienceDaily (Dec. 11, 2008) — Students from Asian countries were top
performers in math and science at both the fourth and eighth grade
levels, according to the most recent reports of the Trends in
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), released by the
study's directors Michael O. Martin and Ina V.S. Mullis of Boston
College.
In mathematics, at the fourth grade level, Hong Kong SAR and Singapore
were the top performing countries, followed by Chinese Taipei and
Japan. Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, England, Latvia, and the
Netherlands also performed very well. In mathematics achievement at
the eighth grade, Chinese Taipei, Korea, and Singapore were followed
by Hong Kong SAR and Japan. There was a substantial gap in average
mathematics achievement between the five Asian countries and the next
group of four similarly performing countries, including Hungary,
England, the Russian Federation, and the United States.
In science, students from Singapore and Chinese Taipei were top
performers at both grade levels. In science achievement at the fourth
grade, Singapore was the top performing country, followed by Chinese
Taipei and Hong Kong SAR. Japan, the Russian Federation, Latvia,
England, the United States, Hungary, Italy, and Kazakhstan also
performed very well. At the eighth grade in science, Singapore and
Chinese Taipei again had the highest average achievement, followed by
Japan and Korea. England, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Hong
Kong SAR, and the Russian Federation also performed well. Countries
and scores are listed below.
TIMSSis one of the world's most influential global assessments of
student achievement in math and science. With more than 60
participants and 425,000 students assessed,TIMSS2007 also is the
largest study of student math and science achievement in the world.
Each country sampled approximately 4,000 students in 150 schools.
TheTIMSS2007 report also provides data at the fourth and eighth
grades for those countries that also participated inTIMSS1995, 1999
and 2003.
"One of the great strengths ofTIMSSis the ability to monitor
progress in educational improvement over time," saidTIMSSDirectors
Michael O. Martin and Ina V.S. Mullis of Boston College. "Such trend
information is crucial in helping policy makers understand the impact
of decisions about investment in education, curricular reform, and
initiatives to improve instruction."
As with previousTIMSSreports,TIMSS2007 data provide invaluable
international benchmarks that can be used to help define world-class
performance in mathematics and science at the middle or lower-
secondary school level. Beyond comparisons in mathematics and science
test scores, they said, the reports provide a wealth of information on
educational policies and practices around the world, as well as on
gender performance, home environment, curriculum and instructional
approaches and teacher preparation in math and science.
AboutTIMSS
TIMSS, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, is
the largest assessment of international student achievement in the
world and was the first to provide data about trends in math and
science achievement over time.
TIMSSis a project of the International Association for the Evaluation
of Educational Achievement (IEA) headquartered in Amsterdam, and is
directed by theTIMSS& PIRLS International Study Center at Boston
College in collaboration with a worldwide network of organizations and
representatives from the participating countries.
TIMSS2007 is the fourth in a continuing cycle of international
mathematics and science assessments conducted every four years.TIMSS
assesses achievement in countries around the world and collects a rich
array of information about the educational contexts for learning
mathematics and science.
TheTIMSS2007 report involved more than 60 participants: it contains
science results for 37 countries and 7 benchmarking participants at
the fourth grade and for 50 countries and 7 benchmarking participants
at the eighth grade. Each country sampled approximately 4,000 students
in 150 schools. Trend data are provided at the fourth and eighth
grades for those countries that also participated in 1995, 1999, and
2003.
To inform educational policy in the participating countries,TIMSS
also routinely collects extensive background information that
addresses concerns about the quantity, quality and content of
instruction.TIMSS2007 offers detailed information about mathematics
and science curriculum coverage and implementation, as well as teacher
preparation, resource availability and the use of technology.
TIMSS2007 Participants
Participating countries: Algeria, Armenia, Australia, Austria,
Bahrain, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Chinese Taipei,
Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador,
England, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, Hungary, Indonesia, Iran,
Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Republic of Kuwait,
Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Mongolia, Morocco,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Palestinian National
Authority, Qatar, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Scotland,
Serbia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Sweden, Syrian Arab
Republic, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United States, Yemen.
Benchmarking entities include the provinces of Alberta, British
Columbia, Ontario and Quebec in Canada; Dubai (United Arab Emirates);
Basque Country in Spain, and Massachusetts and Minnesota in the United
States.
The fullTIMSS2007 reports are available on-line attimss.bc.eduTIMSS2007 Data Exhibits Summarizing Principal Achievement Results
(Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study)
Mathematics Achievement at the 4th Grade
Country Average Scale Score (TIMSSScale Average 500)
1. Hong Kong SAR 607
2. Singapore 599
3. Chinese Taipei 576
4. Japan 568
5. Kazakhstan 549
6. Russian Federation 544
7. England 541
8. Latvia 537
9. Netherlands 535
10. Lithuania 530
11. United States 529
12. Germany 525
13. Denmark 523
14. Australia 516
15. Hungary 510
16. Italy 507
17. Austria 505
18. Sweden 503
19. Slovenia 502
20. Armenia 500
21. Slovak Republic 496
22. Scotland 494
23. New Zealand 492
24. Czech Republic 486
25. Norway 473
26. Ukraine 469
27. Georgia 438
28. Iran, Islamic Rep. of 402
29. Algeria 378
30. Colombia 355
31. Morocco 341
32. El Salvador 330
33. Tunisia 327
34. Kuwait 316
35. Qatar 296
36. Yemen 224
37. Benchmarking Participants
38. Massachusetts, US 572
39. Minnesota, US 554
40. Quebec, Canada 519
41. Ontario, Canada 512
42. Alberta, Canada 505
43. British Columbia, Canada 505
44. Dubai, UAE 444
Science Achievement at the 4th Grade
Country Average Scale Score (TIMSSScale Average 500)
1. Singapore 587
2. Chinese Taipei 557
3. Hong Kong SAR 554
4. Japan 548
5. Russian Federation 546
6. Latvia 542
7. England 542
8. United States 539
9. Hungary 536
10. Italy 535
11. Kazakhstan 533
12. Germany 528
13. Australia 527
14. Slovak Republic 526
15. Austria 526
16. Sweden 525
17. Netherlands 523
18. Slovenia 518
19. Denmark 517
20. Czech Republic 515
21. Lithuania 514
22. New Zealand 504
23. Scotland 500
24. Armenia 484
25. Norway 477
26. Ukraine 474
27. Iran, Islamic Rep. of 436
28. Georgia 418
29. Colombia 400
30. El Salvador 390
31. Algeria 354
32. Kuwait 348
33. Tunisia 318
34. Morocco 297
35. Qatar 294
36. Yemen 197
Benchmarking Participants
1. Massachusetts, US 571
2. Minnesota, US 551
3. Alberta, Canada 543
4. British Columbia, Canada 537
5. Ontario, Canada 536
6. Quebec, Canada 517
7. Dubai, UAE 460
Mathematics Achievement at the 8th Grade
Country Average Scale Score (TIMSSScale Average 500)
1. Chinese Taipei 598
2. Korea, Rep. of 597
3. Singapore 593
4. Hong Kong SAR 572
5. Japan 570
6. Hungary 517
7. England 513
8. Russian Federation 512
9. United States 508
10. Lithuania 506
11. Czech Republic 504
12. Slovenia 501
13. Armenia 499
14. Australia 496
15. Sweden 491
16. Malta 488
17. Scotland 487
18. Serbia 486
19. Italy 480
20. Malaysia 474
21. Norway 469
22. Cyprus 465
23. Bulgaria 464
24. Israel 463
25. Ukraine 462
26. Romania 461
27. Bosnia and Herzegovina 456
28. Lebanon 449
29. Thailand 441
30. Turkey 432
31. Jordan 427
32. Tunisia 420
33. Georgia 410
34. Iran, Islamic Rep. of 403
35. Bahrain 398
36. Indonesia 397
37. Syrian Arab Republic 395
38. Egypt 391
39. Algeria 387
40. Colombia 380
41. Oman 372
42. Palestinian Nat'l Auth. 367
43. Botswana 364
44. Kuwait 354
45. El Salvador 340
46. Saudi Arabia 329
47. Ghana 309
48. Qatar 307
49. Morocco 381
Benchmarking Participants
1. Massachusetts, US 547
2. Minnesota, US 532
3. Quebec, Canada 528
4. Ontario, Canada 517
5. British Columbia, Canada 509
6. Basque Country, Spain 499
7. Dubai, UAE 461
Science Achievement at the 8th Grade
Country Average Scale Score (TIMSSScale Average 500)
1. Singapore 567
2. Chinese Taipei 561
3. Japan 554
4. Korea, Rep. of 553
5. England 542
6. Hungary 539
7. Czech Republic 539
8. Slovenia 538
9. Hong Kong SAR 530
10. Russian Federation 530
11. United States 520
12. Lithuania 519
13. Australia 515
14. Sweden 511
15. Scotland 496
16. Italy 495
17. Armenia 488
18. Norway 487
19. Ukraine 485
20. Jordan 482
21. Malaysia 471
22. Thailand 471
23. Serbia 470
24. Bulgaria 470
25. Israel 468
26. Bahrain 467
27. Bosnia and Herzegovina 466
28. Romania 462
29. Iran, Islamic Rep. of 459
30. Malta 457
31. Turkey 454
32. Syrian Arab Republic 452
33. Cyprus 452
34. Tunisia 445
35. Indonesia 427
36. Oman 423
37. Georgia 421
38. Kuwait 418
39. Colombia 417
40. Lebanon 414
41. Egypt 408
42. Algeria 408
43. Palestinian Nat'l Auth. 404
44. Saudi Arabia 403
45. El Salvador 387
46. Botswana 355
47. Qatar 319
48. Ghana 303
49. Morocco 402
Benchmarking Participants
1. Massachusetts, US 556
2. Minnesota, US 539
3. Ontario, Canada 526
4. British Columbia, Canada 526
5. Quebec, Canada 507
6. Basque Country, Spain 498
7. Dubai, UAE 489
There are a few very important data points missing from this otherwise
excellent study:

1) 12th grade scores. In 1995, the study did include 12th grade
scores which demonstrated a number of things: they are very different
from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most countries,
VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519). But Swiss boys
scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444).
And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than American
girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys. Needless to say,
this doesn't even include Asians nations who clearly KICKED OUR BUTTS
at the 8th grade level.

2) While the gender gap at the 8th grade level is only a tenth of a
standard deviation, it grows to 1 to 2 standard deviations by the 12th
grade in every country who took it. Who knows what happens in Korea
and Japan--it could be 3 or 4 standard deviations if their previous
performance continues on to 12th grade.

3) Professor Lynn estimates that the IQ of Kenya is 71 and of Qatar
is 78. With Qatar having a score of 319, Kenya would be lucky if
their score, had they taken TIMSS, wouldn't have been NEGATIVE. And
we have ZERO proof that affirmative-action-student-obama and
affirmative-action-employee-obama scored any higher than his next door
neighbor, whose documented IQ, which is concealed in the same place
obama's birth certificate, is 64.

4) I don't know why we didn't just elect Koko the Gorilla as
"president". With her IQ of 90, oh so magnanimous American White men
should be real proud to kill three birds with one stone: 1) she's a
female, 2) she's an even more "discriiminated against minority" than
obama, 3) she doesn't speak jive or ebonics.
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-14 21:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by LauLuna
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Marcus Aurelius
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."
Aristotle
If women and feminists insisted on the establishment of "republican"
principles, equal (not preferential) rights concomitant with equal
responsibilities, then the fundamental basis of their arguments would
have validity.
Rather, they utelize insult and intimidation to obtain preferential
rights and few responsibilities.
At some point, women will have all of the rights and men will have all
of the responsibilities.
From what I've read, at the moderately  I.Q. of 130, men outnumber
women at the ratio of 20 to 1.
This ratio increases as I.Q. increases.
What women and feminists want, as Aristotle clearly stated, is not
equality but inequallity.
Great point.
I began researching the gender gap in terms of standard deviations,
and while it's not yet complete, the rest of what follows might shock
even this forum
TIMSSshows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almosttwo standard deviationslower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score anothertwo standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
SAT scores also show that two thirds of the students who score over
600 are boys and one third are girls.
Even though boys outperformed girls this much in SAT scores, almost
two thirds of college admissions today are girls and only one third
boys.  Almost two thirds of those who take the GRE are White girls,
and only one third boys.  The gender gap in standard deviations is two
to three times larger than in SAT and it’s growing.  In 1997 the
gender/race gap between Asian men and Black women was 2.16 standard
deviations, but it increased to 2.48 only 5 years later, in 2002.
Even the gender gaps between Asian boys and girls increased, from 0.63
to 0.69.
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
Wow!!! another RAT with his IQ charts and differences between boys and
girls, black vs white,...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
TIMSSshows that 12th graders, whose scores are very different from
8th graders in both directions (up for most countries, VERY much down
for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than
Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations
higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444).  And Swiss girls scored another
standard deviation higher than American girls (444 vs. 393), for a
total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American girls
and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT Math
are boys and only one third girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough.  Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds.  Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP also confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight
that Blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites,
and that Blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American Blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise.  Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades?  No.  Is it
possible that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other
standardized tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which
illustrates no gender and lower race gaps?  No.  What did happen is
the way the standard deviation was changed in the reporting of the
data.  The most optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation
was changed shows that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38
to 28 points was actually an increase in the standard deviation from
5.4 to 9.3.  Is that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as
reflected in the 135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades
and our scoring dead last in 17 of 34TIMSSsubjects have resulted in
the dumbing down of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data have managed to remove it from our public consciousness
and from all political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, but it’s also
not impossible that the total number of standard deviations of
separation between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is
a total of 14 to 18.5 standard deviations.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Could you, please, give your sources?
Thanks- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If you need more links than the following, please let me know, as
there are many different types of test scores referenced here:

http://eaja.net/TIMSS.aspx
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-12 11:14:44 UTC
Permalink
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it’s not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
Ah. The non-standard deviant returns!!

Hello nincompoop.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
David R Tribble
2008-12-12 17:50:09 UTC
Permalink
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it's not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
The entire human population is not large enough to have 18
standard deviations.
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-12 23:07:23 UTC
Permalink
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it's not
impossible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5standarddeviations.
The entire human population is not large enough to have 18standarddeviations.
Correct.

These standard deviations are from different tests with different
testing methodologies and different standard deviations themselves,
some of which are highly suspect. For example, the NAEP estimates
their standard deviation at the 12th grade level to be between 26 to
36, but their scores (which are based on very secretive data, as
compared to the openness of TIMSS) suggest it could be much smaller
than that. Since they won't share their methodology for arriving at
this large a standard deviation, this latest round of TIMSS is well
worth reviewing closely. The reason for posting the cumulative
standard deviations like this is to open up the discussion about just
how NAEP concludes there is no gender gap at the 12th grade level when
all other tests, SAT, GRE, ACT, TIMSS, and IAEP, show that it's LARGE--
as big as two or three standard deviations in some countries.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-13 11:11:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by David R Tribble
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it's not
impossible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.
The entire human population is not large enough to have 18
standard deviations.
The non-standard deviant doesn't have a clue about statistics. It
would fail all those tests it goes on and on about.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-14 19:55:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by David R Tribble
While not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative, it's not
impossible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5standarddeviations.
The entire human population is not large enough to have 18
standarddeviations.
The non-standarddeviant doesn't have a clue about statistics.  It
would fail all those tests it goes on and on about.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
The problem with these statistics isn't TIMSS or GRE or SAT or ACT,
but NAEP which claims on its website that the gender gap is
"statistically insignificant".

Why don't you, oh great White statistical expert, explain to us morons
how, when correlated with IQ, the gender gap according to SAT math
scores (12th graders) is
9 IQ points, according to ACT Math scores (12th graders) is 8 IQ
points, per GRE quantitative scores (college graduates) is 12 IQ
points, per TIMSS physics (12th graders)
is 11 IQ points, and per PISA math (13 year olds) is 4 IQ points. Thus
the gender gap of 3 points for 12th graders in NAEP math in 2004
represents an IQ gap of 8 to
12 IQ points, for an average of 10 IQ points, can be "statistically
insignificant".

IF the correlation between 2004 NAEP math scores and IQ were linear
(which of course it’s not), THEN the White/Black race gap of 28 points
would represent an IQ gap of 93 IQ points.

NAEP reports that the gender gap in 1978 was 7 points and the White/
Black race gap was 38 points. Again, IF the correlation between IQ
and these scores were linear,
THEN the 7 point gender gap would represent a 10 IQ point gap, and the
White/Black race gap would have been only 54 IQ points.

Explain to us where YOU think the disconnect is--and quit your
feminist style whining.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-14 21:59:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The problem with these statistics
The problem with these statistics is that of the nincompoop who
cluelessly misuses them.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
isn't TIMSS or GRE or SAT or ACT,
but NAEP which claims on its website that the gender gap is
"statistically insignificant".
which means something technically in a statistics discussion,
something you apparently don't understand in the least.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Why don't you, oh great White
We are all mongrels, except you, which are a nincompoop.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
IF the correlation between 2004 NAEP math scores and IQ were linear
(which of course it’s not)
Therefore no "then" has any relevance to reality.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
NAEP reports that the gender gap in 1978 was 7 points and the White/
Black race gap was 38 points. Again, IF the correlation between IQ
and these scores were linear,
Since it isn't, the "then" has no relevance to reality.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Explain to us where YOU think the disconnect is
The disconnect is that when you start from false assumptions, you get
nonsense as a result.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
and quit your feminist style whining.
I plan no change in posting style, nincompoop.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-12 06:09:29 UTC
Permalink
fromwww.washingtonpost.com(more comments there)
Was Summers Right?
By Ruth Marcus [she is a woman...]
Wednesday, December 3, 2008; A17
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders, "I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong."
But Summers may have been on to something, recent research suggests.
Math and science test data, he noted, showgenderdifferences at each
end of the performance spectrum. In other words, men are
overrepresented at the very top and bottom.
This small but significant variance, he hypothesized, suggested
differences in innate aptitude -- "whatever the set of attributes are
that . . . correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or
being a chemist at Berkeley" -- that help explain the dramatic
underrepresentation of women in tenured jobs on elite science and
engineering faculties.
These remarks, of course, led to Summers's ouster as president of
Harvard. Whether they cost him the Treasury secretary job in the Obama
administration, they surely didn't help. Instead, Summers will head
the National Economic Council, avoiding a confirmation hearing that
would no doubt have dredged up the recent unpleasantness.
It's worth, though, going back to Summers's remarks to understand what
he described, in a masterpiece of understatement, as "some attempts at
provocation." He posited three factors to explain the facultygendergap. The most significant, he suggested, was the all-consuming nature
of the high-powered job.
In Summers's words, "the most prestigious activities in our society
expect of people who are going to rise to leadership positions in
their 40s near total commitments to their work. . . . And it is a fact
about our society that that is a level of commitment that a much
higher fraction of married men have been historically prepared to make
than of married women."
The academic life has always seemed rather relaxing to me, but
Summers's larger point is valid -- and, by the way, relevant to the
president-elect's hires so far. Gratifyingly diverse, yes, but more of
the men than women have children at home.
Summers did not discount, although he placed third, the role of overt
and subconscious socialization and discrimination. Where he got into
big trouble was the "intrinsic aptitude" part.
Here's the interesting thing, though. A group of researchers (all
women, as it happened) looked at annual math assessments required by
the No Child Left Behind law from 10 representative states that
supplied details aboutgenderand ethnicity, a total of 7 million
students.
Their study, published in the July 25 issue of Science, found no
differences between girls and boys in average performance -- not even,
as earlier studies had found, once they entered high school. Thegap
between girls and boys on math SATs, they said, could be explained by
the fact that more girls than boys go to college and therefore take
these tests.
But, echoing Summers's point, there was small yet significant variance
between the genders -- the degree to which the scores of girls or boys
differed from the average. At the very highest level, the 99.9th
percentile, the difference meant 2.15 males for every female. This
difference was large enough that, in an occupation requiring math
skills at that level, the job ranks could be expected to be filled 68
percent by men, 32 percent by women -- enough to explain, as Summers
suggested, part of thegendergap.
Studies comparing girls and boys in different countries add to the
puzzle, both underscoringgenderdifferences and suggesting that the
influence of cultural factors may be greater than Summers thought.
In performance on a standardized math, science and reading test given
to 15- and 16-year-olds in 40 countries, girls in every country
performed far better than boys in reading. Conversely, boys in all but
three countries did better, but by not nearly as much, in math. In all
but three countries -- Britain, Thailand and Iceland -- more boys than
girls scored in the 99th percentile in math.
Yet this study, published in the May 30 issue of Science, also showed
a correlation between girls' performance on math tests and countries
where there is more "genderequality," as measured by things such as
the share of female elected officials or women's participation in the
workforce.
Summers was boneheaded to say what he said, in the way that he said it
and considering the job that he held. But he probably had a legitimate
point -- and the continuing uproar says more about the triumph of
political correctness than about Summers's supposed sexism.
It seems that many websites misunderstood what Summers said in the
following paragraph:




<<<The second thing that I think one has to recognize is present is
what I would call the combination of, and here, I'm focusing on
something that would seek to answer the question of why is the pattern
different in science and engineering, and why is the representation
even lower and more problematic in science and engineering than it is
in other fields. And here, you can get a fair distance, it seems to
me, looking at a relatively simple hypothesis. It does appear that on
many, many different human attributes-height, weight, propensity for
criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability-
there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in
means-which can be debated-there is a difference in the standard
deviation, and variability of a male and a female population. >>>



The fact that the standard deviation for boys is larger than that for
girls on just about every test is not as important as the fact that on
all these tests, at least at the 12th grade level, show the gender
difference within all the various races are as much as two standard
deviations, and usually not lower than two thirds of a standard
deviation.
z***@netscape.net
2008-12-12 09:43:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
fromwww.washingtonpost.com(morecomments there)
Was Summers Right?
By Ruth Marcus [she is a woman...]
Wednesday, December 3, 2008; A17
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders, "I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong."
But Summers may have been on to something, recent research suggests.
Math and science test data, he noted, showgenderdifferences at each
end of the performance spectrum. In other words, men are
overrepresented at the very top and bottom.
This small but significant variance, he hypothesized, suggested
differences in innate aptitude -- "whatever the set of attributes are
that . . . correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or
being a chemist at Berkeley" -- that help explain the dramatic
underrepresentation of women in tenured jobs on elite science and
engineeringfaculties.
These remarks, of course, led to Summers's ouster as president of
Harvard. Whether they cost him the Treasury secretary job in the Obama
administration, they surely didn't help. Instead, Summers will head
the National Economic Council, avoiding a confirmation hearing that
would no doubt have dredged up the recent unpleasantness.
It's worth, though, going back to Summers's remarks to understand what
he described, in a masterpiece of understatement, as "some attempts at
provocation." He posited three factors to explain the facultygendergap. The most significant, he suggested, was the all-consuming nature
of the high-powered job.
In Summers's words, "the most prestigious activities in our society
expect of people who are going to rise to leadership positions in
their 40s near total commitments to their work. . . . And it is a fact
about our society that that is a level of commitment that a much
higher fraction of married men have been historically prepared to make
than of married women."
The academic life has always seemed rather relaxing to me, but
Summers's larger point is valid -- and, by the way, relevant to the
president-elect's hires so far. Gratifyingly diverse, yes, but more of
the men than women have children at home.
Summers did not discount, although he placed third, the role of overt
and subconscious socialization and discrimination. Where he got into
big trouble was the "intrinsic aptitude" part.
Here's the interesting thing, though. A group of researchers (all
women, as it happened) looked at annual math assessments required by
the No Child Left Behind law from 10 representative states that
supplied details aboutgenderand ethnicity, a total of 7 million
students.
Their study, published in the July 25 issue of Science, found no
differences between girls and boys in average performance -- not even,
as earlier studies had found, once they entered high school. Thegap
between girls and boys on math SATs, they said, could be explained by
the fact that more girls than boys go to college and therefore take
these tests.
But, echoing Summers's point, there was small yet significant variance
between the genders -- the degree to which the scores of girls or boys
differed from the average. At the very highest level, the 99.9th
percentile, the difference meant 2.15 males for every female. This
difference was large enough that, in an occupation requiring math
skills at that level, the job ranks could be expected to be filled 68
percent by men, 32 percent by women -- enough to explain, as Summers
suggested, part of thegendergap.
Studies comparing girls and boys in different countries add to the
puzzle, both underscoringgenderdifferences and suggesting that the
influence of cultural factors may be greater than Summers thought.
In performance on a standardized math, science and reading test given
to 15- and 16-year-olds in 40 countries, girls in every country
performed far better than boys in reading. Conversely, boys in all but
three countries did better, but by not nearly as much, in math. In all
but three countries -- Britain, Thailand and Iceland -- more boys than
girls scored in the 99th percentile in math.
Yet this study, published in the May 30 issue of Science, also showed
a correlation between girls' performance on math tests and countries
where there is more "genderequality," as measured by things such as
the share of female elected officials or women's participation in the
workforce.
Summers was boneheaded to say what he said, in the way that he said it
and considering the job that he held. But he probably had a legitimate
point -- and the continuing uproar says more about the triumph of
political correctness than about Summers's supposed sexism.
It seems that many websites misunderstood what Summers said in the
<<<The second thing that I think one has to recognize is present is
what I would call the combination of, and here, I'm focusing on
something that would seek to answer the question of why is the pattern
different in science andengineering, and why is the representation
even lower and more problematic in science andengineeringthan it is
in other fields.
It fairly simple to explain why it's different in engineering.
Since real engineering have already proven repeatedly for the last
50 years, that if you want to get ANYTHING accomplished in
engieering
you have to persistently and consistently fend off the twitch
words:

"Digital, Energy, Entropy, and Robot".

Hence real engineers today work on Pulsed Lasers rather than
Digital.

And they work on Multi-Sychronous Systems, rather than with loonies
like
Economists and Global Energy.

Amd they on GPS, rather than anywhere within an infinite number od
universes
of cranks like mathematicians and entropy.

And they work on off-road vehicles, rather than with cretins like
Washington and Robots.







And here, you can get a fair distance, it seems to
Post by jacob1srae1ite
me, looking at a relatively simple hypothesis. It does appear that on
many, many different human attributes-height, weight, propensity for
criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability-
there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in
means-which can be debated-there is a difference in the standard
deviation, and variability of a male and a female population. >>>
The fact that the standard deviation for boys is larger than that for
girls on just about every test is not as important as the fact that on
all these tests, at least at the 12th grade level, show the gender
difference within all the various races are as much as two standard
deviations, and usually not lower than two thirds of a standard
deviation.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
rst0wxyz
2008-12-12 15:46:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It seems that many websites misunderstood what Summers said in the
<<<The second thing that I think one has to recognize is present is
what I would call the combination of, and here, I'm focusing on
something that would seek to answer the question of why is the pattern
different in science andengineering, and why is the representation
even lower and more problematic in science andengineeringthan it is
in other fields.
   It fairly simple to explain why it's different in engineering.
   Since real engineering have already proven repeatedly for the last
   50 years, that if you want to get ANYTHING accomplished in
engieering
   you have to persistently and consistently fend off the twitch
   "Digital, Energy, Entropy, and Robot".
    Hence real engineers today work on Pulsed Lasers rather than
Digital.
In February, 2009, another screw tightens the world for digital as the
U.S. completely changes to HDTV,

Analogs are going the same way as the vaccuum tubes.
   And they work on Multi-Sychronous Systems, rather than with loonies
like
   Economists and Global Energy.
   Amd they on GPS, rather than anywhere within an infinite number od
universes
   of cranks like mathematicians and entropy.
   And they work on off-road vehicles, rather than with cretins like
Washington and Robots.
And here, you can get a fair distance, it seems to
Post by jacob1srae1ite
me, looking at a relatively simple hypothesis. It does appear that on
many, many different human attributes-height, weight, propensity for
criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability-
there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in
means-which can be debated-there is a difference in the standard
deviation, and variability of a male and a female population. >>>
The fact that the standard deviation for boys is larger than that for
girls on just about every test is not as important as the fact that on
all these tests, at least at the 12th grade level, show the gender
difference within all the various races are as much as two standard
deviations, and usually not lower than two thirds of a standard
deviation.
z***@netscape.net
2008-12-12 20:09:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It seems that many websites misunderstood what Summers said in the
<<<The second thing that I think one has to recognize is present is
what I would call the combination of, and here, I'm focusing on
something that would seek to answer the question of why is the pattern
different in science andengineering, and why is the representation
even lower and more problematic in science andengineeringthan it is
in other fields.
   It fairly simple to explain why it's different in engineering.
   Since real engineering have already proven repeatedly for the last
   50 years, that if you want to get ANYTHING accomplished in
engieering
   you have to persistently and consistently fend off the twitch
   "Digital, Energy, Entropy, and Robot".
    Hence real engineers today work on Pulsed Lasers rather than
Digital.
In February, 2009, another screw tightens the world for digital as the
U.S. completely changes to HDTV,
If what the idiot US changes to in enterntanment really mattered to
engineering,
more engineers would probably work with idiot HDTV, Rather than
with optical computers,
CD+rw, DVD-rom, DVD-ram, Pv Cells, GPS, Robotics, Post McDonald's
Holograms,
ELibraries, EBooks, EPublishing, On-Line Publishing, Post Ford
Batteries, and Pulsed Lasers,
Post by rst0wxyz
Analogs are going the same way as the vaccuum tubes.
   And they work on Multi-Sychronous Systems, rather than with loonies
like
   Economists and Global Energy.
   Amd they on GPS, rather than anywhere within an infinite number od
universes
   of cranks like mathematicians and entropy.
   And they work on off-road vehicles, rather than with cretins like
Washington and Robots.
And here, you can get a fair distance, it seems to
Post by jacob1srae1ite
me, looking at a relatively simple hypothesis. It does appear that on
many, many different human attributes-height, weight, propensity for
criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability-
there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in
means-which can be debated-there is a difference in the standard
deviation, and variability of a male and a female population. >>>
The fact that the standard deviation for boys is larger than that for
girls on just about every test is not as important as the fact that on
all these tests, at least at the 12th grade level, show the gender
difference within all the various races are as much as two standard
deviations, and usually not lower than two thirds of a standard
deviation.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
rst0wxyz
2008-12-12 20:17:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by rst0wxyz
In February, 2009, another screw tightens the world for digital as the
U.S. completely changes to HDTV,
   If what the idiot US changes to in enterntanment really mattered to
engineering,
   more engineers would probably work with idiot HDTV, Rather than
with optical computers,
Optical computers? Where? where? where?
   CD+rw, DVD-rom, DVD-ram, Pv Cells, GPS, Robotics, Post McDonald's
Holograms,
   ELibraries, EBooks, EPublishing,  On-Line Publishing, Post Ford
Batteries, and Pulsed Lasers,
What you wrote above are mostly digital. You should be ashamed of
yourself.
Post by rst0wxyz
Analogs are going the same way as the vaccuum tubes.
z***@netscape.net
2008-12-12 21:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by rst0wxyz
In February, 2009, another screw tightens the world for digital as the
U.S. completely changes to HDTV,
   If what the idiot US changes to in enterntanment really mattered to
engineering,
   more engineers would probably work with idiot HDTV, Rather than
with optical computers,
Optical computers? Where? where? where?
   CD+rw, DVD-rom, DVD-ram, Pv Cells, GPS, Robotics, Post McDonald's
Holograms,
   ELibraries, EBooks, EPublishing,  On-Line Publishing, Post Ford
Batteries, and Pulsed Lasers,
What you wrote above are mostly digital.  You should be ashamed of
yourself.
Well, mostly!!! But mostly doesn't matter that much.
Since REAL engineers use Holograms mostly because we can always
tell
idiots like AT&T, Physicists, and Mathematicians,
that it doesn't matter what hell *virtual photons* ARE,
*Holograms* AREN'T Digital..
Post by rst0wxyz
Post by rst0wxyz
Analogs are going the same way as the vaccuum tubes.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Bluuuue Rajah
2008-12-12 22:57:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard. He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science. Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.

In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right. He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.

In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-14 20:10:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation? Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations? Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?

Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?

And that Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?

And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?

Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP. All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.

Even SAT math confirms this gender gap. Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?

Do you know what the ratio really IS?

Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Masculist
2008-12-14 20:40:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo! Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.

Smitty
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-14 21:32:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
grasp the gender gap:

GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519). But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444). And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.

SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.

Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".

NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.

While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way the standard
deviation was changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation was changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in the standard deviation from 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?

That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.

Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative. It's not
possible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations. This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknown standard deviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.



GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05 Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)


Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development

Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...


...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3 standard deviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8 standard
deviations.

Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also speculated that this lack of change
reflected less practice. On the other hand, Thomas and French (1985)
and Nelson, Thomas, Nelson, and Abraham (1986) concluded that biology
must be at least partially responsible for the gender gap. The latter
reported that three anthropometric measures (joint diameters, shoulder/
hip ratio, sum of skinfolds) and only one environmental measure
(playing with other children) accounted for 41% of the variance in the
distance 5-year-olds could throw.

These studies occurred in the U.S., a country that encourages male
skillfulness in throwing through its cultural emphasis on sports like
baseball, football, and softball. Newell's (1986) constraints theory
(that levels of motor development emerge from the intersection of
environment, person, and task) suggested that changing the cultural
environment might affect the throwing movements children display.
Different cultures form different constraints on gender. Indeed, the
term "gender" represents biological sex overlaid with cultural
expectations about appropriate behavior for that sex. Adopting the
Newell model in the present study, we asked whether the gender gap
would occur in a culture in which throwing was not particularly
encouraged. In such a culture, we speculated that boys would practice
the throw less than boys in the U.S. and, therefore, not be as
developmentally ahead of girls.

To examine our cultural hypothesis, we replicated the Pulito Runion et
al. (2003) throwing study in Germany, where the most popular sport is
Fussball (soccer; Flippo, 1996). Over 1.5 million 7-14-year-olds
participate in this sport (Hedderich, 2005). The only throwing sport
some German children play is team handball, but, in contrast to
Fussball, only 200,000 7-14-year-olds participate (Hedderich, 2005).
For these reasons, we hypothesized that German teens would report less
throwing practice than U.S. teens, but, like U.S. teens, they would
consider ball throwing appropriate for both genders. Second, we
hypothesized that the gender gap in ball velocities would be smaller
in Germany than in the U.S., causing a significant gender by country
interaction. We also hypothesized that the German teens would show
gender differences in fewer movement components of the throw than U.S.
teens.

Method

Participants

Pulito Runion et al. (2003) collected throwing data in May 1999 on 50
U.S. teenagers (Mage = 13.3 years). The participants had been randomly
selected from junior high school physical education classes in Bowling
Green, OH. In 2002, we randomly selected 52 German teens from physical
education classes in a junior high school in Heldenbergen, a suburb of
Frankfurt am Main, Germany. On average, the 28 German boys (M age =
13.8 years) were 6 months older than the U.S. boys (M age = 13.3
years) while the 24 girls (M age = 14.0 years) were 8 months older
than the U.S. girls (M age = 13.3 years). The size of the German
sample provided sufficient power (1-[beta] =...







GENDER GAP IN CHESS: 100 TO 1
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT—Only 1% of the world's chess grandmasters are women. This
underrepresentation is unlikely to be caused by discrimination,
because chess ratings objectively reflect competitive results. Using
data on the ratings of more than 250,000 tournament players over 13
years, we investigated several potential explanations for the male
domination of elite chess. We found that (a) the ratings of men are
higher on average than those of women, but no more variable; (b)
matched boys and girls improve and drop out at equal rates, but boys
begin chess competition in greater numbers and at higher performance
levels than girls; and (c) in locales where at least 50% of the new
young players are girls, their initial ratings are not lower than
those of boys. We conclude that the greater number of men at the
highest levels in chess can be explained by the greater number of boys
who enter chess at the lowest levels.

GENDER GAP IN FAMILY INCOME: 5 to 1
A US Census Bureau population survey reports that men earn 85% of
family incomes and women only 15%.

GENDER GAP IN ARRESTS: ONE STANDARD DEVIATION
We evaluate two alternative explanations for the converging gender gap
in arrest—changes in women's behavior versus changes in mechanisms of
social control. Using the offense of drunk driving and three
methodologically diverse data sets, we explore trends in the DUI
gender gap. We probe for change across various age groups and across
measures tapping DUI prevalence and chronicity. Augmented Dickey-
Fuller time-series techniques are used to assess changes in the gender
gap and levels of drunk driving from 1980 to 2004. Analyses show women
of all ages making arrest gains on men—a converging gender gap. In
contrast, self-report and traffic data indicate little or no
systematic change in the DUI gender gap. Findings support the
conclusion that mechanisms of social control have shifted to target
female offending patterns disproportionately. Little support exists
for the contention that increased strain and liberalized gender roles
have altered the gender gap or female drunk-driving patterns.

GENDER GAP IN PATENTS: 14 TO 1
Even after four decades of affirmative action and rampant feminism,
how can it be explained that men STILL get 14 TIMES as many patents as
women?

"Of the scientists in our sample, 11.5% are listed as inventors on
one or more patents. However, the full sample proportion masks a large
gender difference: of the 903 women in the sample, 5.65% held patents
as of the last year of the data. By contrast, 13% of the 3,324 male
scientists in the data are listed on patents. Moreover, the 431 male
patenters have amassed a total of 1,286 patents in our dataset. This
compares to 92 patents produced by the 51 women patenters."

GENDER GAP IN ACADEMY MATHEMATICIANS: 20 TO 1
Excerpted from the following article is this statement about members
of Academy mathematicians scoring 4.68 standard deviations higher than
the national average for American males. Could it be that more than
half of Norway's population scores above this level?

"The pool of competitors is roughly the number of Americans between
the ages of 25 and 85, approximately 190,000,000. Setting N =
190,000,000 (the precise value is not important3) and the number of
slots NS = 143, the competitor to slot ratio, N /NS , is 1.329
million. With this value in (3), we find that the most probable number
of women in the group of 143 Academy mathematicians is 7.1. (I choose
not to round to the nearest integer.) At this time there are precisely
7 women in the mathematics sections of the Academy. (The agreement is
almost embarrassing.) The 95% confidence interval4 is [2,12]. The
minimum mathematical ability among the 143 Academy members is 4.68 SD
greater than the male population mean. This is indeed an elite bunch!"



GENDER GAP IN BUSINESS INCOME: 2 STANDARD DEVIATIONS


Adding women to the ownership of a man owned business reduces its
potential receipts by $323,300 or 55.5%.
Adding men to the ownership of a woman owned business increases its
potential receipts by $108,100 or 71.5%.
Completely removing women from ownership increases potential receipts
by $431,400 to four fold greater than a woman owned business with no
men owners present.

GENDER GAP IN COMPUTER SCIENCE: 5 TO 1
A Globe review shows that the proportion of women among bachelor's
degree recipients in computer science peaked at 37 percent in 1985 and
then went on the decline. Women have comprised about 28 percent of
computer science bachelor's degree recipients in the last few years,
and in the elite confines of research universities, only 17 percent of
graduates are women. (The percentage of women among PhD recipients has
grown, but still languishes at around 20 percent.)

GENDER GAP IN INCOMES--EGALITARIAN MEN EARN $10,000 LESS
"One of the most remarkable changes in the U.S. labor market during
the 1980s has been the sharp reduction in the pay gap between men and
women. In 1979, the ratio of the average hourly wage of women to that
of men was 68.6 percent. By 1991, it had increased to 78.5 percent."

This ignores the other "most remarkable changes" in that timeframe,
which was the two thirds plunge in household incomes in the US while
other industrialized nations' (as well as former third world nations')
household incomes skyrocketed, as well as factors like the following:

"The authors then turned to the connection between attitudes and
salaries. Those subjects that had traditional attitudes towards
workplace gender and were a standard deviation off the mean showed
substantial salary disparities, with men earning over $11,000 more
than their female peers. In contrast, those that were a standard
deviation more egalitarian in their attitudes had a pay gap just over
$1,000. Only about $1,500 of that came from higher earnings by
egalitarian females; the rest is accounted for by a precipitous drop
in the earnings of egalitarian males.

"Part of that difference arises from career choice; traditionalist men
mostly outearned women in fields where there were fewer women
employed. The difference was also largest in jobs on the lower-end of
the income scale, suggesting that traditional gender roles are
stronger influences in blue-collar fields. Seniority also had a big
impact on disparities: over the 25-year study period, pay went up 120
percent for women, but nearly 320 percent for men."





After thirty years of relative constancy, the gender pay gap in the
United States narrowed substantially in the 1980s. For example,
published tabulations from the Census Bureau on the median annual
earnings of year-round, full-time workers indicate that the female-to-
male ratio rose from 59.7 to 68.7 percent between 1979 and 1989—a gain
of 9.0 percentage points. However, the rate of convergence slowed
markedly in the following decade, with a further increase to 72.2
percent by 1999—an increase of only 3.5 percentage points. In this
paper, we shed light on several possible sources of slowing
convergence in the 1990s using data from the Michigan Panel Study of
Income Dynamics (PSID), the only nationally representative data base
that contains information on workers’ actual labor market experience.
Labor market experience has been shown to be an extremely important
factor in explaining the gender pay gap (Mincer and Polachek 1974) and
its trends (e.g., Blau and Kahn 1997; O'Neill and Polachek 1993). We
focus on a number of hypotheses that might help to explain the slower
progress of women in the 1990s.



GENDER GAP IN DIVING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS











DIFFERENCE IN LENGTH OF MALE & FEMALE CHROMOSOME
3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS

As early as 1928, it was known in our literature that there is a three
standard deviation difference between the lengths of the male and
female chromosomes.


GENDER GAP IN POLITICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
http://www.gallup.com/poll/pollInsights/#GG
r***@pdq.net
2008-12-14 21:56:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way the standard
deviation was changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation was changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in the standard deviation from 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not
possible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.  This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknown standard deviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.
GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05  Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)
Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development
Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...
...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3 standard deviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8 standard
deviations.
Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also speculated that this lack of change
reflected less practice. On the other hand, Thomas and French (1985)
and Nelson, Thomas, Nelson, and Abraham (1986) concluded that biology
must be at least partially responsible for the gender gap. The latter
reported that three anthropometric measures (joint diameters, shoulder/
hip ratio, sum of skinfolds) and only one environmental measure
(playing with other children) accounted for 41% of the variance in the
distance 5-year-olds could throw.
These studies occurred in the U.S., a country that encourages male
skillfulness in throwing through its cultural emphasis on sports like
baseball, football, and softball. Newell's (1986) constraints theory
(that levels of motor development emerge from the intersection of
environment, person, and task) suggested that changing the cultural
environment might affect the throwing movements children display.
Different cultures form different constraints on gender. Indeed, the
term "gender" represents biological sex overlaid with cultural
expectations about appropriate ...
read more »
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-15 08:29:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@pdq.net
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
TIMSSshows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way the standard
deviation was changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation was changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in the standard deviation from 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34TIMSSsubjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not
possible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.  This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknown standard deviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.
GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05  Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)
Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development
Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...
...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3 standard deviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8 standard
deviations.
Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also speculated that this lack of change
reflected less practice. On the other hand, Thomas and French (1985)
and Nelson, Thomas, Nelson, and Abraham (1986) concluded that biology
must be at least partially responsible for the gender gap. The latter
reported that three anthropometric measures (joint diameters, shoulder/
hip ratio, sum of skinfolds) and only one environmental measure
(playing with other children) accounted for 41% of the variance in the
distance 5-year-olds could throw.
These studies occurred in the U.S., a country that encourages male
skillfulness in throwing through its cultural emphasis on sports like
baseball, football, and softball. Newell's (1986) constraints theory
(that levels of motor development emerge from the intersection of
environment, person, and task) suggested that changing the cultural
environment might affect the throwing movements children display.
Different cultures form different constraints on gender. Indeed, the
term "gender" represents biological sex overlaid with cultural
expectations about appropriate ...
read more »
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
Isn't TIMSS set up so that the median score across all the nations who
took it is 500 and the standard deviation is 100?

Within countries like Norway and Taiwan, isn't the standard deviation
only 40? Wouldn't this mean that two thirds of Norwegian 12th grade
boys (whose average was 589) score between 569 and 609, only 2.3%
score less than 549, 0.13% score less than 529, and 0.003% score less
than 509?

Isn''t the score for our 12th grade boys of 446 quite a bit more than
four standard deviations lower than that from a Norwegian's
perspective? How would you assess this gap in scores from Norway's
perspective in terms of standard deviations?

With our 12th grade girls scoring 393, another 53 points lower than
our boys, what do you believe that would add to your above estimate
(as measured in standard deviations)?

IF the standard deviation within the US is, say, 80 (that's a pure
guess, perhaps it's even larger), THEN isn't the gender gap between
American girls and Norwegian boys from OUR perspective 2.45 standard
deviations, but much larger from their perspective?

It's not impossible, is it? Would you consider only 4.6 million
Norwegians, relative to 305 million Americans, to be "an extremely few
example[ ]"?
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-15 09:03:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@pdq.net
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standarddeviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost twostandarddeviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREEstandard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5standarddeviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about thestandard
deviationfor boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3STANDARDDEVIATIONS
TIMSSshows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standarddeviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5standarddeviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost twostandarddeviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another twostandarddeviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that thestandarddeviationfor
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of astandarddeviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smallerstandarddeviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9standarddeviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standarddeviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way thestandard
deviationwas changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how thisstandarddeviationwas changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in thestandarddeviationfrom 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34TIMSSsubjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not
possible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5standarddeviations.  This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknownstandarddeviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.
GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3STANDARDDEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05  Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)
Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development
Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...
...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3standarddeviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8standard
deviations.
Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also speculated that this lack of change
reflected less practice. On the other hand, Thomas and French (1985)
and Nelson, Thomas, Nelson, and Abraham (1986) concluded that biology
must be at least partially responsible for the gender gap. The latter
reported that three anthropometric measures (joint diameters, shoulder/
hip ratio, sum of skinfolds) and only one environmental measure
(playing with other children) accounted for 41% of the variance in the
distance 5-year-olds could throw.
These studies occurred in the U.S., a country that encourages male
skillfulness in throwing through its cultural emphasis on sports like
baseball, football, and softball. Newell's (1986) constraints theory
(that levels of motor development emerge from the intersection of
environment, person, and task) suggested that changing the cultural
environment might affect the throwing movements children display.
Different cultures form different constraints on gender. Indeed, the
term "gender" represents biological sex overlaid with cultural
expectations about appropriate ...
read more »
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standarddeviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
Isn'tTIMSSset up so that the median score across all the nations who
took it is 500 and thestandarddeviationis 100?
Within countries like Norway and Taiwan, isn't thestandarddeviation
only 40?  Wouldn't this mean that two thirds of Norwegian 12th grade
boys (whose average was 589) score between 569 and 609, only 2.3%
score less than 549, 0.13% score less than 529, and 0.003% score less
than 509?
Isn''t the score for our 12th grade boys of 446 quite a bit more than
fourstandarddeviations lower than that from a Norwegian's
perspective?  How would you assess this gap in scores from Norway's
perspective in terms ofstandarddeviations?
With our 12th grade girls scoring 393, another 53 points lower than
our boys, what do you believe that would add to your above estimate
(as measured instandarddeviations)?
IF thestandarddeviationwithin the US is, say, 80 (that's a pure
guess, perhaps it's even larger), THEN isn't the gender gap between
American girls and Norwegian boys from OUR perspective 2.45standard
deviations, but much larger from their perspective?
It's not impossible, is it?  Would you consider only 4.6 million
Norwegians, relative to 305 million Americans, to be "an extremely few
example[ ]"?
oops, my error. I just located the standard deviation for American
girls in TIMSS:

http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap01.pdf.ti_7958.pdf

It's not 80, it's only 53. So wouldn't the 196 point gender gap
between American girls and Norwegian boys be 3.7 standard deviations?
The "elite group" from the Academy of mathematicians referred to in
the following article might be elite from our perspective, but from
Norway's perspective, they wouldn't be the brightest candles in the
box, would they?


<<<"The pool of competitors is roughly the number of Americans between
the ages of 25 and 85, approximately 190,000,000. Setting N =
190,000,000 (the precise value is not important3) and the number of
slots NS = 143, the competitor to slot ratio, N /NS , is 1.329
million. With this value in (3), we find that the most probable number
of women in the group of 143 Academy mathematicians is 7.1. (I choose
not to round to the nearest integer.) At this time there are precisely
7 women in the mathematics sections of the Academy. (The agreement is
almost embarrassing.) The 95% confidence interval4 is [2,12]. The
minimum mathematical ability among the 143 Academy members is 4.68 SD
greater than the male population mean. This is indeed an elite
bunch!">>>
jacobisrael
2008-12-15 10:52:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standarddeviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost twostandarddeviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREEstandard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5standarddeviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about thestandard
deviationfor boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3STANDARDDEVIATIONS
TIMSSshows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standarddeviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5standarddeviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost twostandarddeviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another twostandarddeviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that thestandarddeviationfor
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of astandarddeviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smallerstandarddeviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9standarddeviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standarddeviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way thestandard
deviationwas changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how thisstandarddeviationwas changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in thestandarddeviationfrom 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34TIMSSsubjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not
possible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5standarddeviations.  This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknownstandarddeviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.
GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3STANDARDDEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05  Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)
Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development
Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...
...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3standarddeviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8standard
deviations.
Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also
...
read more »- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
With 153 million females in the US, a TIMSS score of 393, and a
standard deviation of 53, this is how many American females score
above each standard deviation level:

above 446 = 24,274,253
above 499 = 3,480,773
above 552 = 206,535
above 605 = 4,850
above 658 = 46
above 711 = 0
above 764 = 0


Conversely, with 2,322,229 men in Norway, a TIMSS score of 589, and a
standard deviation of 40, this is how many Norwegian men score above
each standard deviation level:

above 509 = 1,898,012
above 549 = 1,529,578
above 589 = 1,161,114
above 629 = 368,434
above 669 = 52,831
above 709 = 3,135
above 749 = 74
above 789 = 1


So even though there are 66 times as many American women as there are
Norwegian men, 7.4 times as many men score over 549 as there are women
who score over 552, there are 1,149 TIMES as many men who score over
669 as there are women who score over 659, and INFINITELY as many men
as women who score over 711.

How much MORE should the 3,135 Norwegian men earn who scored higher
than ALL the American women? INFINITELY more. How many more men than
women at this level SHOULD be in the labor force? INFINITELY more.
Should the 206,535 women who scored 552 earn less than the 1,161,114
Norwegian men who scored over 589?

OF COURSE.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-15 20:32:15 UTC
Permalink
jacobisrael <***@gmail.com> wrote:
[answering itself, like a bad little nincompoop, pulling more random
numbers out of its strange orifice]
Post by jacobisrael
With 153 million females in the US, a TIMSS score of 393,
153 million females did not take TIMSS. The number was closer to
5000, and a huge chunk of the country was not represented by the
sample.
Post by jacobisrael
and a standard deviation of 53,
except that it wasn't.
Post by jacobisrael
Conversely, with 2,322,229 men in Norway,
even fewer of whom took TIMSS.
Post by jacobisrael
How much MORE should the 3,135 Norwegian men earn who scored higher
than ALL the American women?
You have no real evidence that even one Norwegian man scored more than
all the American women. Just statistical noise spewed out of your
strange orifice.

As far was what people earn, that is usually determined by their
employers, NONE of which has a clue what any of their employees scored
on TIMSS, since individual results are not released.

<How many more men than women at this level SHOULD be in the labor force?

Anyone who wants to work is in the labor force, nincompoop.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-16 19:09:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob LeChevalier
[answering itself, like a bad little nincompoop, pulling more random
numbers out of its strange orifice]
With 153 million females in the US, aTIMSSscore of 393,
153 million females did not takeTIMSS.  The number was closer to
5000, and a huge chunk of the country was not represented by the
sample.
and a standard deviation of 53,
except that it wasn't.
Conversely, with 2,322,229 men in Norway,
even fewer of whom tookTIMSS.
How much MORE should the 3,135 Norwegian men earn who scored higher
than ALL the American women?
You have no real evidence that even one Norwegian man scored more than
all the American women.  Just statistical noise spewed out of your
strange orifice.
As far was what people earn, that is usually determined by their
employers, NONE of which has a clue what any of their employees scored
onTIMSS, since individual results are not released.
<How many more men than women at this level SHOULD be in the labor force?
Anyone who wants to work is in the labor force, nincompoop.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
If you understood the concept of TIMSS, you would know that this is a
statistical subset which represents the entire country. And it's an
extremely accurate representation, including standard deviations and
standard errors.

On Exhibit B.4, if you don't believe the standard deviation for
American girls was 53, then exactly what DO you believe it was?:


http://eaja.net/Documents/98049.pdf has another copy of the 12th grade
scores in case you "lost" your other one, or you're referring to the
wrong table.

AS a statistical subset, in terms of percentages, what it shows is
that only 0.14% of the men scored lower than 462, whereas 99.86% of
the women scored lower than 484. None of the women scored higher than
537, whereas 98% of the men scored higher than 506, 85% of the men
scored higher than 550, and 0.14% of them scored higher than 726
(which is 4.6 standard deviations higher than the top 0.14% of
American women).

IF this is NOT what it shows, then please tell us what it DOES show!@!
@!@!@!@!@
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-16 22:35:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bob LeChevalier
Post by jacobisrael
How much MORE should the 3,135 Norwegian men earn who scored higher
than ALL the American women?
You have no real evidence that even one Norwegian man scored more than
all the American women.  Just statistical noise spewed out of your
strange orifice.
As far was what people earn, that is usually determined by their
employers, NONE of which has a clue what any of their employees scored
onTIMSS, since individual results are not released.
<How many more men than women at this level SHOULD be in the labor force?
Anyone who wants to work is in the labor force, nincompoop.
If you understood the concept of TIMSS,
Much better than you do, I am sure.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
you would know that this is a statistical subset which represents the entire country.
Not in the least. Indeed, it doesn't even properly reflect the group
that it is supposed to represent, which is why it has been much
criticized (and also is one reason why they gave up on final year
testing)
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And it's an extremely accurate representation,
No
Post by jacob1srae1ite
including standard deviations and standard errors.
Including statistical measures does not make it "extremely accurate"
Post by jacob1srae1ite
On Exhibit B.4, if you don't believe the standard deviation for
I provided a cite, with URL and page number:
<You don't identify which particular test and age group. In 2007,
<Taiwan Math grade 8 had a standard deviation of 106.
<http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001.pdf
<Table A-7 page A-24. The US on the same test had a standard deviation
<of 77.
<Looking at where you are going, the text and table demonstrate that
<when comparing two groups, you must compare each against the average
<and standard deviation of the combined group. So the US and Taiwan 8th
<grade math in 2007 had a difference in average scores of 90 and a
<pooled standard deviation of 93, and they were thus slightly over 1
<standard deviation apart, with Taiwan's average approximately a half a
<standard deviation above the pooled mean and the US average
<approximately a half a standard deviation below the pooled mean.
<
<>Wouldn't this mean that two thirds of Norwegian 12th grade
<>boys (whose average was 589)
<
<No idea what strange orifice you are pulling these numbers from.
<
<Since 12th grade goes back to 1995, you are back in ancient history.
<In 1995
<http://timss.bc.edu/timss1995i/TIMSSPDF/C_apndx.pdf
<Norway 12th graders in math had an average score of 536 with a
<standard deviation of 88. The males had an average of 564 with a
<standard deviation of 89.
<US 12th graders in math had an average score of 471 with a standard
<deviation of 89. Males had an average of 479 with a standard
<deviation of 93, females had an average of 462 with a standard
<deviation of 85
<Taiwan is not listed in the table.
<
<
<I will note that in 2007, in 8th grade math, the US had an average
<score of 508, Norway 469 Taiwan 576. In 4th grade, the US had an
<average score of 529, Norway 473, Taiwan 598.
----------------
Post by jacob1srae1ite
http://eaja.net/Documents/98049.pdf has another copy of the 12th grade
scores in case you "lost" your other one, or you're referring to the
wrong table.
There is no Exhibit B.4 in that document that I can see.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
AS a statistical subset, in terms of percentages, what it shows is
that only 0.14% of the men scored lower than 462, whereas 99.86% of
the women scored lower than 484.
According to Table A2.3 in your cited document, in general math, 50%
of all Americans scored below 454. Per Table A2.5, in advanced math
50% of all Americans scored below 437. This would be impossible if
almost none of the men scored below 462.

Tables A5.3 and A5.8 show that the US had the second smallest gender
gap in the world in general math (11 points), and below the world
average gap in advanced math (31 points)

I rather think you are confused about the tests, or maybe you are just
pulling random numbers out of your strange orifice.

And you still have no clue how to look at statistics after ten years
of my correcting you.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
None of the women scored higher than
537, whereas 98% of the men scored higher than 506, 85% of the men
scored higher than 550, and 0.14% of them scored higher than 726
(which is 4.6 standard deviations higher than the top 0.14% of
American women).
You have no clue what you are talking about, nincompoop.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
@!@!@!@!@
Nothing relevant to what you are trying to claim.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-15 21:15:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standarddeviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost twostandarddeviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREEstandard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5standarddeviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about thestandard
deviationfor boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3STANDARDDEVIATIONS
TIMSSshows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standarddeviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2standarddeviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored anotherstandarddeviationhigher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5standarddeviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost twostandarddeviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another twostandarddeviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that thestandarddeviationfor
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of astandarddeviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smallerstandarddeviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9standarddeviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standarddeviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way thestandard
deviationwas changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how thisstandarddeviationwas changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in thestandarddeviationfrom 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34TIMSSsubjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not
possible that the total number ofstandarddeviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5standarddeviations.  This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknownstandarddeviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.
GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3STANDARDDEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05  Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)
Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development
Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...
...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3standarddeviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8standard
deviations.
Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also
...
read more »- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
With 153 million females in the US, aTIMSSscore of 393, and a
standard deviation of 53, this is how many American females score
above 446 = 24,274,253
above 499 =   3,480,773
above 552 =      206,535
above 605 =          4,850
above 658 =              46
above 711 =                0
above 764 =                0
Conversely, with 2,322,229 men in Norway, aTIMSSscore of 589, and a
standard deviation of 40, this is how many Norwegian men score above
above 509 = 1,898,012
above 549 = 1,529,578
above 589 = 1,161,114
above 629 =     368,434
above 669 =       52,831
above 709 =         3,135
above 749 =              74
above 789 =                1
So even though there are 66 times as many American women as there are
Norwegian men, 7.4 times as many men score over 549 as there are women
who score over 552, there are 1,149 TIMES as many men who score over
669 as there are women who score over 659, and INFINITELY as many men
as women who score over 711.
How much MORE should the 3,135 Norwegian men earn who scored higher
than ALL the American women?  INFINITELY more.  How many more men than
women at this level SHOULD be in the labor force?  INFINITELY more.
Should the 206,535 women who scored 552 earn less than the 1,161,114
Norwegian men who scored over 589?
OF COURSE.
There are 34 different TIMSS topics at the 12th grade level and
numerous ways to calculate the gender gap in standard deviations. The
following data is from Table B.4 of that above PDF file:

American women:

below 405= 76,500,000
above 405= 76,500,000
above 431 = 24,274,253
above 458 = 3,480,773
above 484 = 214,200
above 511 = 4,850
above 537 = 46
above 550 = 0
above 594 = 0
above 638 = 0
above 682 = 0
above 726 = 0
above 770 = 0
above 814= 0

Conversely, with 2,322,229 men in Norway, a TIMSS score of 589, and a
standard deviation of 88 reported by TIMSS rather than the 40 used by
Norway internally, this is how many Norwegian men score above
each standard deviation level:

below 418 = 74 (four standard deviations below the mean)
below 462 = 3,251 (three SD below the mean)
below 506 = 52,837 (two SD below the mean)
above 506 = 1,898,012
above 550 = 1,529,578
above 594 = 1,161,114
above 638 = 368,434
above 682 = 52,831
above 726 = 3,135
above 770 = 74
above 814 = 1


In this scenario, even though again there are 66 times as many
American women as Norwegian men, there are 391 TIMES as many men who
score over 506 as there are women who score over 511, there are 33,252
TIMES as many men who score over 550 as there are women who score over
537, more than 1,529,578 men who score higher than ALL the women (a
ratio of INFINITY), 52,387 men who score 5.2 female standard
deviations higher than the average American girl, 74 who score 6.9
standard deviations higher, and one who scores 7.7 standard deviations
higher.

Conversely, there are 3,480,980 American women who score 8.7 standard
deviations lower than that top Norwegian man (Hillary being one of
them), 24,274,253 who score 8.2 standard deviations lower, and
76,500,000 who score 7.7 standard deviations lower.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-15 11:48:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
oops, my error. I just located the standard deviation for American
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap01.pdf.ti_7958.pdf
It's not 80, it's only 53.
More nauseam from your strange orifice. From Exhibit B-2 of that
document, the US female mean was 426 and the standard deviation was
98. The US male mean was 457 with a standard deviation of 96. The
combined mean of both genders was 442 with a standard deviation of 98.
The women thus scored about .16 standard deviation below the pooled
mean, and the men about .16 standard deviation above that mean. But
since the sampling error on the national mean was 5.9 points and the
sampling error on the mens and womens scores was 7.1 points and 7.8
points respectively the differences between the national mean and the
gender means are just slightly greater than the combined sampling
errors (about 13-14 points).
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So wouldn't the 196 point gender gap
between American girls and Norwegian boys be 3.7 standard deviations?
No.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-15 11:37:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by r***@pdq.net
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
Isn't TIMSS set up so that the median score across all the nations who
took it is 500 and the standard deviation is 100?
Within countries like Norway and Taiwan, isn't the standard deviation
only 40?
You don't identify which particular test and age group. In 2007,
Taiwan Math grade 8 had a standard deviation of 106.
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001.pdf
Table A-7 page A-24. The US on the same test had a standard deviation
of 77.
Looking at where you are going, the text and table demonstrate that
when comparing two groups, you must compare each against the average
and standard deviation of the combined group. So the US and Taiwan 8th
grade math in 2007 had a difference in average scores of 90 and a
pooled standard deviation of 93, and they were thus slightly over 1
standard deviation apart, with Taiwan's average approximately a half a
standard deviation above the pooled mean and the US average
approximately a half a standard deviation below the pooled mean.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Wouldn't this mean that two thirds of Norwegian 12th grade
boys (whose average was 589)
No idea what strange orifice you are pulling these numbers from.

Since 12th grade goes back to 1995, you are back in ancient history.
In 1995
http://timss.bc.edu/timss1995i/TIMSSPDF/C_apndx.pdf
Norway 12th graders in math had an average score of 536 with a
standard deviation of 88. The males had an average of 564 with a
standard deviation of 89.
US 12th graders in math had an average score of 471 with a standard
deviation of 89. Males had an average of 479 with a standard
deviation of 93, females had an average of 462 with a standard
deviation of 85
Taiwan is not listed in the table.


I will note that in 2007, in 8th grade math, the US had an average
score of 508, Norway 469 Taiwan 576. In 4th grade, the US had an
average score of 529, Norway 473, Taiwan 598.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Isn''t the score for our 12th grade boys of 446 quite a bit more than
four standard deviations lower than that from a Norwegian's
perspective?
No. Because the scores of a group that is not in the statistical
sample cannot be measured using the standard deviation of that
statistical sample. You have to measure using the pooled data of both
groups.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
How would you assess this gap in scores from Norway's
perspective in terms of standard deviations?
You wouldn't, unless you were a nincompoop spewing nauseam from its
strange orifices.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It's not impossible, is it? Would you consider only 4.6 million
Norwegians, relative to 305 million Americans, to be "an extremely few
example[ ]"?
In 1995, Norway had around 3500 students take the TIMSS test, and the
sample represented only 84% of the kids of the intended age. The US
had around 11000 take the test, but they represented only 63% of the
kids of the intended age (and in the US, almost 25% of the kids in the
intended sample were absent on the day of the test - the schools had
no way to make any student take a test that does not count, and a good
chunk stayed home).

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
Masculist
2008-12-15 19:47:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@pdq.net
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
Aha! I thought the same thing. In IQ there's only three or four
standard deviations from the norm and the same should be true in other
measurements.

Smitty
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-16 19:42:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@pdq.net
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by Bluuuue Rajah
Post by Michel
As the mother of two girls, I hope not. In fact, Summers himself said
in his infamous comments about intrinsic differences between the
genders,
[snip]
Post by Michel
Was Larry Summers right about women and science, after all?
It depends on what people think they heard.  He's typically, but
incorrectly, paraphrased as having said that girls are "genetically"
less capable of doing science.  Because people are clueless about
deterministic effects of environmental conditioning, they wrongly think
that genetics are the only intrinsic humans factors that exist.
In fact, it's commonly accepted that girls are environmentally
conditioned to be worse at math and science than boys, but if you
consider environmental conditioning to be intrinsic, then Summers was
right.  He got caught in the feminist political machine, and it ground
him to hamburger, because non-enraged non-feminists haven't yet found
(and may never find) a way to counter their rage-driven arguments.
In short, you can't win an argument when your opponent sucker punches
you.
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?  Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?  Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
Do you know what the ratio really IS?
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it and EVERY reason this was the design from the get-go.
Bravo!  Finally a voice of reason in the gender gap debate.
Smitty- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here are a few more ditties to fill in the gaps for those who don't
GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
TIMSSshows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very
different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most
countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2
standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519).  But Swiss
boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs.
444).  And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of
separation between American girls and Norwegian boys.
SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score
almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states.
And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations
lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard
deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls.
They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math
are boys and only one third are girls.
Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a
representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken
mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus
represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena
closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for
males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of
those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender
gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation,
hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media
expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other"
races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as
"statistically insignificant".
NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that
blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and
that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ
points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a
standard deviation.
While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP
math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race
gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three
decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you
otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to
alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have
existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible
that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized
tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender
and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way the standard
deviation was changed in the reporting of the data. The most
optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation was changed shows
that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was
actually an increase in the standard deviation from 5.4 to 9.3. Is
that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the
135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring
dead last in 17 of 34TIMSSsubjects have resulted in the dumbing down
of Blacks even more?
That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated
this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data)
have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all
political debate.
Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative.  It's not
possible that the total number of standard deviations of separation
between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of
14 to 18.5 standard deviations.  This comparison of different types of
tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in
some cases unknown standard deviations is for illustrative purposes.
The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know
what they know.
GENDER GAP IN THROWING: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
Publication: Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Publication Date: 01-DEC-05  Format: Online
Delivery: Immediate Online Access
Full Article Title: Does the throwing "gender gap" occur in Germany?
(Research Note--Growth and Motor Development)
Article Excerpt
Key words: ball velocity, culture, developmental levels, motor
development
Boys and girls in the U.S. consistently demonstrate large
developmental differences in the overarm throw for force. Thomas and
French (1985) applied a meta-analysis to 16 throwing studies and found
that these as as...
...gender differences started early 3 years of age. The differences
grew to 2-3 standard deviations by the teen years. Regardless of
whether the dependent variable was the distance thrown, ball velocity,
or the developmental level of the movements used, boys were
developmentally more advanced than girls. Recently, Pulito Runion,
Roberton, and Langendorfer (2003) replicated these findings in 13-year-
olds. The gender difference in ball velocity was 1.8 standard
deviations.
Reasons for this "gender gap" are unclear. Williams, Haywood, and
Painter (1996) found no gender differences in ball velocities when
they asked 7-12-year-olds to throw with their nondominant arm. They
conjectured that boys practiced throwing more than girls, which made
them superior on their dominant side. Nelson, Thomas, and Nelson
(1991) found little longitudinal change over 3 years in girls'
throwing patterns. They also speculated that this lack of change
reflected less practice. On the other hand, Thomas and French (1985)
and Nelson, Thomas, Nelson, and Abraham (1986) concluded that biology
must be at least partially responsible for the gender gap. The latter
reported that three anthropometric measures (joint diameters, shoulder/
hip ratio, sum of skinfolds) and only one environmental measure
(playing with other children) accounted for 41% of the variance in the
distance 5-year-olds could throw.
These studies occurred in the U.S., a country that encourages male
skillfulness in throwing through its cultural emphasis on sports like
baseball, football, and softball. Newell's (1986) constraints theory
(that levels of motor development emerge from the intersection of
environment, person, and task) suggested that changing the cultural
environment might affect the throwing movements children display.
Different cultures form different constraints on gender. Indeed, the
term "gender" represents biological sex overlaid with cultural
expectations about appropriate ...
read more »
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
<<<You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning
of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.>>>



TIMSS made it very easy for us to make those comparisons, though.

Within the statistical subset of TIMSS of American 12th grade girls,
this is an accurate statement. But when comparing it to the
statistical subset of Norwegian boys, there are a lot of 12th graders
in Norway who score, literally, 3.6 standard deviations higher from
the perspective of the 53 point standard deviation for American girls,
because this is how much higher the average Norwegian boys' score was
than the average American girls' score.

Furthermore, since so many forum members seem to be bothered about
what a statistical subset is, let's look at it in terms of
percentages. 2.3% of Norwegian boys scored 5.2 standard deviations
higher than the average score for American girls.

Since we know this is representative of the academic skills of the
entire populations of both the US and Norway, we know that 52,900
Norwegian men score higher than that, whereas NO American woman scores
higher than 587.

The pattern was similar in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Russia,
Switzerland, etc. Germany's low score and high standard deviation
relative to its neighbors can be explained by the 9% of the students
in Germany to took the test being Turks. Once their scores are
separated out, Germans themselves score higher than their neighbors,
as expected.

Nevertheless, 2.3% of German boys scored higher than 728, which is 6.1
standard deviations higher than American girls.

And 2.3% of Russian boys scored higher than 678, which is 5.2 standard
deviations higher than American girls.

2.3% of Swedish boys scored higher than 683, also 5.2 standard
deviations higher than American girls.

2.3% of Danish boys scored higher than 629, which is 4.2 standard
deviations higher than American girls.

Even 2.3% of French boys scored higher than 545, which is 2.6 standard
deviations higher than American girls.

So it's not quite correct to say "there can be only an extremely few
examples of anything performing better than 3 S.D. above average"
without ignoring the HUGE populations of European men who score much
higher than only 3 S.D.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-16 22:45:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by r***@pdq.net
You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning of
"standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.
<<<You would be more effective if you understood the actual meaning
of "standard deviation". The sources quoted are non-sensical. By
definition, there can be only an extremely few examples of anything
performing better than 3 S.D. above average.>>>
TIMSS made it very easy for us to make those comparisons, though.
If you don't understand the meaning of the terms being used, you
cannot make any comparisons.

In point of fact, making statistical comparisons between two
independent data sets requires some fairly advanced mathematics, as
you would know if you read the technical appendices that go into
mathematical depth for a dozen or more pages
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Within the statistical subset of TIMSS of American 12th grade girls,
this is an accurate statement. But when comparing it to the
statistical subset of Norwegian boys, there are a lot of 12th graders
in Norway who score, literally, 3.6 standard deviations higher from
the perspective of the 53 point standard deviation for American girls,
Except that what you are calling "perspective" is a figment of your
mathematically ignorance. It is simply mathematically meaningless to
use standard deviation to refer to any data outside of the sample set.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Furthermore, since so many forum members seem to be bothered about
what a statistical subset is, let's look at it in terms of
percentages. 2.3% of Norwegian boys scored 5.2 standard deviations
higher than the average score for American girls.
Your claim is nonsense. You cannot talk about one statistical group
in terms of the standard deviation of a different statistical group.
You have to combine the two groups, and get a combined standard
deviation, and that is not trivial mathematics.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Since we know this is representative of the academic skills of the
entire populations of both the US and Norway,
No it isn't, and indeed it doesn't pretend to be.

[remaining silly numbers pulled out of the nincompoop's strange
orifice deleted]

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
Pink Pig
2008-12-17 06:35:29 UTC
Permalink
Sorry, I had no particular message in mind when I decided to reply to
this thread. Exactly what does any of this have to do with Summers?
All he said (and he was roundly castigated for it by the media) was
that the question was worth investigating. Does that per se make him
an ogre? Are we to believe that the only valid research is that which
arrives at preapproved conclusions? Do the critics also subscribe to
the Ptolemaic view of the universe, which IIRC was also considered
sacrosanct at one time?
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-19 20:06:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pink Pig
Sorry, I had no particular message in mind when I decided to reply to
this thread. Exactly what does any of this have to do with Summers?
All he said (and he was roundly castigated for it by the media) was
that the question was worth investigating. Does that per se make him
an ogre? Are we to believe that the only valid research is that which
arrives at preapproved conclusions? Do the critics also subscribe to
the Ptolemaic view of the universe, which IIRC was also considered
sacrosanct at one time?
Exactly.

Well said.

Not only did Summers actually understate the so-called "gender gap",
but most of those who came to his defense understated it equally as
bad.

OR they made some noise about evolution, and how girls have been
"discriminated" against to try to justify their HONEST [or as close
to honest as they could get them] opinions.

I've even seen curves that show boys and girls with the same average,
but with a wider standard deviation for boys, as if though Summers
doesn't understand this gap better than that The DIFFERENCE between
the average scores is the significant point, and the difference is
anywhere freom .5 to 2.8 standard deviations.

This is about like (no, it's exactly like) saying that you know one
girl who's taller than many of the boys, therefore girls are just as
tall as boys.

In regard to height, the standard deviation for both sexes is the
same, 2.8 inches.

But the GAP between the mean scores is, yet again, two standard
deviations (1.893 to be exact).

There's no way to announce that a gender gap of 1.893 standard
deviations is not significant. It has a HUGE impact on our world that
simply cannot be ignored, not even in a theoretical sense.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-19 20:58:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The DIFFERENCE between
the average scores is the significant point, and the difference is
anywhere freom .5 to 2.8 standard deviations.
That is a nonsensical statement. Differences between averages of
independent samples cannot be meaningfully stated in terms of standard
deviations.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is about like (no, it's exactly like) saying that you know one
girl who's taller than many of the boys, therefore girls are just as
tall as boys.
No, it is not like it at all.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
In regard to height, the standard deviation for both sexes is the
same, 2.8 inches.
So?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
But the GAP between the mean scores is, yet again, two standard
deviations (1.893 to be exact).
That is a nonsensical statement.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
There's no way to announce that a gender gap of 1.893 standard
deviations is not significant.
There is no way to announce a gender gap of XYZ standard deviations
that is anything but nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It has a HUGE impact on our world
No it doesn't.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
that simply cannot be ignored, not even in a theoretical sense.
Since everyone except you IS ignoring it, because it is a bunch of
statistical nonsense, your assertion that it "cannot" be ignored is
contrary to fact.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-22 21:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The DIFFERENCE between
the average scores is the significant point, and the difference is
anywhere freom .5 to 2.8 standard deviations.
That is a nonsensical statement.  Differences between averages of
independent samples cannot be meaningfully stated in terms of standard
deviations.  
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is about like (no, it's exactly like) saying that you know one
girl who's taller than many of the boys, therefore girls are just as
tall as boys.
No, it is not like it at all.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
In regard to height, the standard deviation for both sexes is the
same, 2.8 inches.
So?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
But the GAP between the mean scores is, yet again, two standard
deviations (1.893 to be exact).
That is a nonsensical statement.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
There's no way to announce that a gender gap of 1.893 standard
deviations is not significant.
There is no way to announce a gender gap of XYZ standard deviations
that is anything but nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It has a HUGE impact on our world
No it doesn't.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
that simply cannot be ignored, not even in a theoretical sense.
Since everyone except you IS ignoring it, because it is a bunch of
statistical nonsense, your assertion that it "cannot" be ignored is
contrary to fact.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
<begin quote>

FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 121: December 22 2008
Web version: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2008/121.html

The 2007 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS) report has been released, and the results are decidedly
mixed. While average United States math scores have risen from 1995
levels, average science scores have stagnated. Moreover, the US
continues to lag behind a number of European and Asian nations.

Last year's TIMSS test was the fourth since 1995 as developed by the
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA). Comprised of national research institutions and
government research agencies from around the world, IEA designs
TIMSS assessments for fourth and eighth graders. In the US, the
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in the Institute of
Education Sciences at the Department of Education oversees TIMSS
assessments.

In 2007, 10,350 fourth graders at 257 schools, and 9,723 eighth
graders at 239 schools completed the TIMSS assessments. The average
fourth grade math score (529) was above the TIMSS scale average
(500) and higher than the 1995 fourth grade math average (518).

Similar to what FYI has reported in previous years
(http://aip.org/fyi/2004/159.html), the average fourth grade science
score (539) remains higher than the TIMSS scale average (500), but
shows little growth in terms of previous years. In fact, the fourth
grade science score average in 1995 was three points higher at 542.

The eighth grade math average (508) is both higher than the TIMSS
scale average (500) and the 1995 math average (492). US eighth
graders averaged (520) higher than their predecessors in 1995 (513)
in science, but as FYI first reported in 2000
(http://aip.org/fyi/2000/fyi00.145.htm) eighth graders continue to
perform comparatively below fourth graders.

In the 2007 round of TIMSS testing, 35 other nations participated at
the fourth grade math and science level, and 47 other nations
participated in both subjects at the eighth grade level.

Average fourth and eighth grade US math scores rank among the top
third of nations participating. Nations with an average fourth
grade math score significantly higher than the US were Hong Kong
(607), Singapore (599), Chinese Taipei (576), Japan (568),
Kazakhstan (549), Russian Federation (544), England (541), and
Latvia (537). Nations not measurably different than the US average
included the Netherlands (535), and Germany (525).

Nations with a significantly higher average eighth grade math score
were Chinese Taipei (598), Republic of Korea (597), Singapore (593),
Hong Kong (572), and Japan (570). Those nations not measurably
different than the US included England (513), and the Russian
Federation (512).

Average fourth and eighth grade US science scores rank among the top
quarter of nations participating. Nations with a significantly
higher average fourth grade science score were Singapore (587),
Chinese Taipei (557), Hong Kong (554), and Japan (548). Nations
with an average fourth grade science score similar to the US
included the Russian Federation (546), England (542), and Italy
(535)

Nations with average eighth grade science scores significantly
higher than the US were Singapore (567), Chinese Taipei (561), Japan
(554), Republic of Korea (553), England (542), Hungary (539), Czech
Republic (539), Slovenia (538), and the Russian Federation (530).
Not measurably different than the US included Hong Kong (530), and
Australia (515).

TIMSS assessments will next be administered in 2011.

###############
Rob Boisseau
Media and Government Relations Division
The American Institute of Physics
***@aip.org http://www.aip.org/gov
(301) 209-3094
##END##########

<end quote>



It's what happens between 8th and 12th grade which is the most
important revelation of TIMSS, so it's unfortunate that 12th graders
were omitted from this study. Thus, we must refer back to the 1995
study which DID include 12th graders and which DID show that, because
media, educators, bureaucrats, politicians, and other powers that be
studiously ignore the sad state of our high schools, as evidenced by
SAT, TIMSS, NAEP, etc., and instead focus only on 8th grade
performance, less than 7% of Americans are aware of just how low we
scored in TIMSS at the 12th grade level. Comparing 8th grade scores
understates the problem because 45 countries who participated in this
study of more than half a million students around the world proved
that the last four years of a student's education is the most
important part, and 8th grade scores obviously miss that part. Of 45
countries whose 12th graders participated in TIMSS Math, the boys in
35 of those countries scored higher than the 8th grade math score, and
those in 7 countries scored lower. In the US, 12th grade boys scored
56 points lower and 12th grade girls scored 104 points lower. Where
Swiss 8th graders scored 46 points higher than ours in math, their
12th grade boys scored 102 points higher than our boys and 133 points
higher than our girls.

How "shocked" they all would pretend to be if they realized that our
12th grade girls scored DEAD LAST in physics, 130 points lower than
girls in Norway and almost 200 points lower than boys in Norway,
simply because the scores of American girls from the 8th to 12th grade
dropped even faster than our boys, whose scores dropped even more than
that for most girls. Conversely, relative to their 8th grade scores,
12th grade boys in Cyprus scored 89 points higher, in Norway scored 84
points higher, and in Sweden scored 66 points higher.
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-22 22:40:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The DIFFERENCE between
the average scores is the significant point, and the difference is
anywhere freom .5 to 2.8 standard deviations.
That is a nonsensical statement.  Differences between averages of
independent samples cannot be meaningfully stated in terms of standard
deviations.  
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is about like (no, it's exactly like) saying that you know one
girl who's taller than many of the boys, therefore girls are just as
tall as boys.
No, it is not like it at all.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
In regard to height, the standard deviation for both sexes is the
same, 2.8 inches.
So?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
But the GAP between the mean scores is, yet again, two standard
deviations (1.893 to be exact).
That is a nonsensical statement.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
There's no way to announce that a gender gap of 1.893 standard
deviations is not significant.
There is no way to announce a gender gap of XYZ standard deviations
that is anything but nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It has a HUGE impact on our world
No it doesn't.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
that simply cannot be ignored, not even in a theoretical sense.
Since everyone except you IS ignoring it, because it is a bunch of
statistical nonsense, your assertion that it "cannot" be ignored is
contrary to fact.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
<begin quote>
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 121: December 22 2008
Web version:http://www.aip.org/fyi/2008/121.html
The 2007 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS) report has been released, and the results are decidedly
mixed.  While average United States math scores have risen from 1995
levels, average science scores have stagnated.  Moreover, the US
continues to lag behind a number of European and Asian nations.
Last year'sTIMSStest was the fourth since 1995 as developed by the
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA).  Comprised of national research institutions and
government research agencies from around the world, IEA designsTIMSSassessments for fourth and eighth graders.  In the US, the
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in the Institute of
Education Sciences at the Department of Education overseesTIMSS
assessments.
In 2007, 10,350 fourth graders at 257 schools, and 9,723 eighth
graders at 239 schools completed theTIMSSassessments.  The average
fourth grade math score (529) was above theTIMSSscale average
(500) and higher than the 1995 fourth grade math average (518).
Similar to what FYI has reported in previous years
(http://aip.org/fyi/2004/159.html), the average fourth grade science
score (539) remains higher than theTIMSSscale average (500), but
shows little growth in terms of previous years.  In fact, the fourth
grade science score average in 1995 was three points higher at 542.
The eighth grade math average (508) is both higher than theTIMSS
scale average (500) and the 1995 math average (492).  US eighth
graders averaged (520) higher than their predecessors in 1995 (513)
in science, but as FYI first reported in 2000
(http://aip.org/fyi/2000/fyi00.145.htm) eighth graders continue to
perform comparatively below fourth graders.
In the 2007 round ofTIMSStesting, 35 other nations participated at
the fourth grade math and science level, and 47 other nations
participated in both subjects at the eighth grade level.
Average fourth and eighth grade US math scores rank among the top
third of nations participating.  Nations with an average fourth
grade math score significantly higher than the US were Hong Kong
(607), Singapore (599), Chinese Taipei (576), Japan (568),
Kazakhstan (549), Russian Federation (544), England (541), and
Latvia (537).  Nations not measurably different than the US average
included the Netherlands (535), and Germany (525).
Nations with a significantly higher average eighth grade math score
were Chinese Taipei (598), Republic of Korea (597), Singapore (593),
Hong Kong (572), and Japan (570).  Those nations not measurably
different than the US included England (513), and the Russian
Federation (512).
Average fourth and eighth grade US science scores rank among the top
quarter of nations participating.  Nations with a significantly
higher average fourth grade science score were Singapore (587),
Chinese Taipei (557), Hong Kong (554), and Japan (548).  Nations
with an average fourth grade science score similar to the US
included the Russian Federation (546), England (542), and Italy
(535)
Nations with average eighth grade science scores significantly
higher than the US were Singapore (567), Chinese Taipei (561), Japan
(554), Republic of Korea (553), England (542), Hungary (539), Czech
Republic (539), Slovenia (538), and the Russian Federation (530).
Not measurably different than the US included Hong Kong (530), and
Australia (515).
TIMSSassessments will next be administered in 2011.
###############
Rob Boisseau
Media and Government Relations Division
The American Institute of Physics
(301) 209-3094
##END##########
<end quote>
It's what happens between 8th and 12th grade which is the most
important revelation ofTIMSS, so it's unfortunate that 12th graders
were omitted from this study.  Thus, we must refer back to the 1995
study which DID include 12th graders and which DID show that, because
media, educators, bureaucrats, politicians, and other powers that be
studiously ignore the sad state of our high schools, as evidenced by
SAT,TIMSS, NAEP, etc., and instead focus only on 8th grade
performance, less than 7% of Americans are aware of just how low we
scored inTIMSSat the 12th grade level.  Comparing 8th grade scores
understates the problem because  45 countries who participated in this
study of more than half a million students around the world proved
that the last four years of a student's education is the most
important part, and 8th grade scores obviously miss that part. Of 45
countries whose 12th graders participated inTIMSSMath, the boys in
35 of those countries scored higher than the 8th grade math score, and
those in 7 countries scored lower.  In the US, 12th grade boys scored
56 points lower and 12th grade girls scored 104 points lower.  Where
Swiss 8th graders scored 46 points higher than ours in math, their
12th grade boys scored 102 points higher than our boys and 133 points
higher than our girls.
How "shocked" they all would pretend to be if they realized that our
12th grade girls scored DEAD LAST in physics, 130 points lower than
girls in Norway and almost 200 points lower than boys in Norway,
simply because the scores of American girls from the 8th to 12th grade
dropped even faster than our boys, whose scores dropped even more than
that for most girls. Conversely, relative to their 8th grade scores,
12th grade boys in Cyprus scored 89 points higher, in Norway scored 84
points higher, and in Sweden scored 66 points higher.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated in TIMSS physics. The average score for the 5,150
students in Botswana who took the test was 443, seven of whom scored
over 505, and none of whom scored over 549. The average score for the
8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244, thirteen of
whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514. So also in
Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239, seven
of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.
Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was
579, eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored
lower than 423. At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana.
The average IQ of Kenya is 71 IQ points, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72 IQ points. Out
of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that? Only 11 have an IQ higher than 96 IQ
points, and NONE have an IQ higher than 101 IQ points.
Obama’s not even a Kenyan. He’s a mixed breed and most mixed breeds
of most species are of lower quality and intelligence than the pure
breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
California voters consider affirmative action to be CHEATING, which is
why we outlawed it with Proposition 209 which actually amended the
state constitution. Obama is clearly left over from those days.

Why not require him to take the normal IQ test which any dog catcher
in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?

You can bet that this would settle the matter once and forever
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-23 00:12:39 UTC
Permalink
Obama’s not even a Kenyan. He’s a mixed breed and most mixed breeds
of most species are of lower quality and intelligence than the pure
breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
Let us all know when you get a law degree from Harvard and get elected
to a prestigious honorary position like Obama did - 20 years ago. Let
us know when you are smart enough to run perhaps the most effective
election campaign in history.
Why not require him to take the normal IQ test which any dog catcher
in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?
No dog catcher has to take an IQ test. Indeed, I doubt if much of
anyone these days "has to" take an IQ test.
You can bet that this would settle the matter once and forever
toto and I have waited for about 10 years for you to post your SAT
scores, showing that you are smarter than a board. Your posts
indicate that you aren't.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
Andre Lieven
2009-01-01 23:11:24 UTC
Permalink
On the question that is the title of this thread:

Yes.

November 12, 2008
Lawrence Summers: Hates Women Even More Than We Thought

(Wait for it... Andre)

Posted by Anthony Paletta

Lawrence Summers will never escape his past. In 2007, when he was
disinvited from a meeting of the University of California Board of
Regents
due to faculty protest, opponents identified him as a "speaker who
has
come to symbolize gender and racial prejudice in academia.." You
won't believe what they're saying now that he might return to the
Treasury Department in the Obama administration.

Veronica Arreaola, at the Women's Media Center, wonders:

Could the man who sold America on change seriously be considering
appointing a man who suggested that Malia, Sasha and all of our
daughters have a genetic disposition from not being able to math?
Sadly yes.
Mark Ames, writing in The Nation, objects, unsurprisingly, to the
Summers nomination for a variety of economic reasons, yet
identifies his "sexist declarations" as "part of a disturbing
pattern."

Harsh words, yet, among the range of accusations about Summers'
judgment on matters of gender and economy, that's pretty tame
compared to the accusations a newly-formed women's rights group,
The New Agenda, have been leveling against him. Amy Siskind, a
co-founder of the group, has alleged that, in effect, Summers' raging
and uncontrollable misogyny helped to pave the way to the financial
crisis. From the Boston Globe:

Summers's bias against women even played a role in the financial
crisis because as President Clinton's Treasury secretary, he
rejected a warning from Brooksley E. Born, then the chairwoman
of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, that regulation of
financial derivatives was needed.
"It was Larry Summers who called her up and screamed at her,"
said Siskind, who argued that the financial meltdown might have
been averted if Summers had listened to Born.

And yet Summers simply screamed at her because he is a "known
misogynist." If that sounds ridiculous, just read Siskind's full
argument, on the New Agenda blog.

Summers is no stranger to misrepresentation and absurd
accusations; flip and inaccurate summaries of his 2005 remarks are
legion again, now that his name is in the news. His mild inquiries
about the role of biology in the numbers of females in mathematic
and scientific fields, prefaced as "some attempts at provocation"
have routinely been reported as ex cathedra proclamations on female
feebleness and male superiority. Take Reuters' description, last
week,
of his remarks as a "suggestion in 2005 that men had more innate
ability in science and engineering than men." No, that's not true.
That's a potential answer to an element of the very broad question he
raised, but one he made clear he did not embrace given available
evidence. This is not difficult to report accurately, and yet so few
make the minimal effort required to get it right. Instead, we're
graced
now with exponentially more risible accusations that Summers'
failure to take the advice of a female colleague is proof of a hatred
for
women so great as to endanger the economy. This is farcical. And
yet Summers' troubles with women appear as the first citation
under the Boston Globe's description of his "baggage." Ridiculous.

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2008/11/lawrence_summers_hates_women_e.html

Andre

jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-24 03:20:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The DIFFERENCE between
the average scores is the significant point, and the difference is
anywhere freom .5 to 2.8 standard deviations.
That is a nonsensical statement.  Differences between averages of
independent samples cannot be meaningfully stated in terms of standard
deviations.  
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is about like (no, it's exactly like) saying that you know one
girl who's taller than many of the boys, therefore girls are just as
tall as boys.
No, it is not like it at all.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
In regard to height, the standard deviation for both sexes is the
same, 2.8 inches.
So?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
But the GAP between the mean scores is, yet again, two standard
deviations (1.893 to be exact).
That is a nonsensical statement.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
There's no way to announce that a gender gap of 1.893 standard
deviations is not significant.
There is no way to announce a gender gap of XYZ standard deviations
that is anything but nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It has a HUGE impact on our world
No it doesn't.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
that simply cannot be ignored, not even in a theoretical sense.
Since everyone except you IS ignoring it, because it is a bunch of
statistical nonsense, your assertion that it "cannot" be ignored is
contrary to fact.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
<begin quote>
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 121: December 22 2008
Web version:http://www.aip.org/fyi/2008/121.html
The 2007 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS) report has been released, and the results are decidedly
mixed.  While average United States math scores have risen from 1995
levels, average science scores have stagnated.  Moreover, the US
continues to lag behind a number of European and Asian nations.
Last year'sTIMSStest was the fourth since 1995 as developed by the
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA).  Comprised of national research institutions and
government research agencies from around the world, IEA designsTIMSSassessments for fourth and eighth graders.  In the US, the
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in the Institute of
Education Sciences at the Department of Education overseesTIMSS
assessments.
In 2007, 10,350 fourth graders at 257 schools, and 9,723 eighth
graders at 239 schools completed theTIMSSassessments.  The average
fourth grade math score (529) was above theTIMSSscale average
(500) and higher than the 1995 fourth grade math average (518).
Similar to what FYI has reported in previous years
(http://aip.org/fyi/2004/159.html), the average fourth grade science
score (539) remains higher than theTIMSSscale average (500), but
shows little growth in terms of previous years.  In fact, the fourth
grade science score average in 1995 was three points higher at 542.
The eighth grade math average (508) is both higher than theTIMSS
scale average (500) and the 1995 math average (492).  US eighth
graders averaged (520) higher than their predecessors in 1995 (513)
in science, but as FYI first reported in 2000
(http://aip.org/fyi/2000/fyi00.145.htm) eighth graders continue to
perform comparatively below fourth graders.
In the 2007 round ofTIMSStesting, 35 other nations participated at
the fourth grade math and science level, and 47 other nations
participated in both subjects at the eighth grade level.
Average fourth and eighth grade US math scores rank among the top
third of nations participating.  Nations with an average fourth
grade math score significantly higher than the US were Hong Kong
(607), Singapore (599), Chinese Taipei (576), Japan (568),
Kazakhstan (549), Russian Federation (544), England (541), and
Latvia (537).  Nations not measurably different than the US average
included the Netherlands (535), and Germany (525).
Nations with a significantly higher average eighth grade math score
were Chinese Taipei (598), Republic of Korea (597), Singapore (593),
Hong Kong (572), and Japan (570).  Those nations not measurably
different than the US included England (513), and the Russian
Federation (512).
Average fourth and eighth grade US science scores rank among the top
quarter of nations participating.  Nations with a significantly
higher average fourth grade science score were Singapore (587),
Chinese Taipei (557), Hong Kong (554), and Japan (548).  Nations
with an average fourth grade science score similar to the US
included the Russian Federation (546), England (542), and Italy
(535)
Nations with average eighth grade science scores significantly
higher than the US were Singapore (567), Chinese Taipei (561), Japan
(554), Republic of Korea (553), England (542), Hungary (539), Czech
Republic (539), Slovenia (538), and the Russian Federation (530).
Not measurably different than the US included Hong Kong (530), and
Australia (515).
TIMSSassessments will next be administered in 2011.
###############
Rob Boisseau
Media and Government Relations Division
The American Institute of Physics
(301) 209-3094
##END##########
<end quote>
It's what happens between 8th and 12th grade which is the most
important revelation ofTIMSS, so it's unfortunate that 12th graders
were omitted from this study.  Thus, we must refer back to the 1995
study which DID include 12th graders and which DID show that, because
media, educators, bureaucrats, politicians, and other powers that be
studiously ignore the sad state of our high schools, as evidenced by
SAT,TIMSS, NAEP, etc., and instead focus only on 8th grade
performance, less than 7% of Americans are aware of just how low we
scored inTIMSSat the 12th grade level.  Comparing 8th grade scores
understates the problem because  45 countries who participated in this
study of more than half a million students around the world proved
that the last four years of a student's education is the most
important part, and 8th grade scores obviously miss that part. Of 45
countries whose 12th graders participated inTIMSSMath, the boys in
35 of those countries scored higher than the 8th grade math score, and
those in 7 countries scored lower.  In the US, 12th grade boys scored
56 points lower and 12th grade girls scored 104 points lower.  Where
Swiss 8th graders scored 46 points higher than ours in math, their
12th grade boys scored 102 points higher than our boys and 133 points
higher than our girls.
How "shocked" they all would pretend to be if they realized that our
12th grade girls scored DEAD LAST in physics, 130 points lower than
girls in Norway and almost 200 points lower than boys in Norway,
simply because the scores of American girls from the 8th to 12th grade
dropped even faster than our boys, whose scores dropped even more than
that for most girls. Conversely, relative to their 8th grade scores,
12th grade boys in Cyprus scored 89 points higher, in Norway scored 84
points higher, and in Sweden scored 66 points higher.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated inTIMSSphysics.  The average score for the 5,150
students in Botswana who took the test was 443, seven of whom scored
over 505, and none of whom scored over 549.  The average score for the
8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244, thirteen of
whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514.  So also in
Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239, seven
of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.
Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was
579, eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored
lower than 423.  At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana.
The average IQ of Kenya is 71 IQ points, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72 IQ points.  Out
of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that?  Only 11 have an IQ higher than 96 IQ
points, and NONE have an IQ higher than 101 IQ points.
Obama’s not even a Kenyan.  He’s a mixed breed and most mixed breeds
of most species are of lower quality and intelligence than the pure
breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
California voters consider affirmative action to be CHEATING, which is
why we outlawed it with Proposition 209 which actually amended the
state constitution.  Obama is clearly left over from those days.
Why not require him to take the normal IQ test which any dog catcher
in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?
You can bet that this would settle the matter once and forever- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
update:

REPLY

FACTS

In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated in TIMSS physics. The average score for the 5,150
students in Botswana who took the test was 443, seven of whom scored
over 505, and none of whom scored over 549. The average score for the
8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244, thirteen of
whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514. So also in
Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239, seven
of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.

Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was
579, eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored
lower than 423. At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana. No student in Singapore scored 4 standard
deviations higher than their mean, or 735, much less 5 standard
deviations higher, at 774.


So needless to say, no student in Botswana, South Africa, nor Ghana
ever scored four standard deviations higher, or 549, 514, or 489,
respectively, either, much less five standard deviations higher, or
593, 581, or 551 respectively. Such scores are in the range of the
average for Taipei and Korea, whose IQs are in the range of 105 IQ
points. It simply boggles the imagination for us to be expected to
believe that Obama was the ONE Kenyan in the entire world who scored
not just one but TWO standard deviations higher than a place where NO
Ghanan, Botswanan, or South African has ever ventured. To claim that
his IQ is 132 IQ points, yet another three standard deviations higher
than the impossible, is the height of absurdity. It would make Obama
more valuable as a Wringly Brothers’ Circus freak than a six legged
elephant. Yet that’s exactly the claim that his presidential campaign
made and you should be embarrassed to the hilt to see so many of your
fellow countrymen fall for this circus act.

The average IQ of Kenya is 71 IQ points, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72 IQ points. Out
of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that? Only 11 do, at an IQ of only 96 IQ
points, four standard deviations higher than their mean, and NONE have
an IQ higher than 101 IQ points, five standard deviations higher than
the mean. Obama’s not even a Kenyan. He’s a mixed breed and most
mixed breeds of most species are of lower quality and intelligence
than the pure breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?

California voters consider affirmative action to be CHEATING, which is
why we outlawed it with Proposition 209 which actually amended the
state constitution for the express purpose of KILLING it. Obama is
clearly left over from those days.

Why not simply require him to take the normal IQ test which any dog
catcher in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?

You can bet that this would settle the matter once and for all.



Correction, Tues. Dec. 23, 2008: 7% of the population of Botswana are
Whites who score similar to their brethren back in England at 545,
meaning that the 93% who’re blacks scored 358. Only seven black
students from Botswana scored over 456 and none of them scored over
514. Therefore, none of the lowest scoring eight students in
Singapore who scored lower than 462 are likely to have scored lower
than the seven top scoring black students from Botswana, meaning there
was no overlap of test scores between Singapore and Botswana.










Who Runs it?

Senators: Barack Obama & Dick Durbin
Representative: Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Illinois Governor: Rod Blogojevich (arrested)
Illinois House leader: Mike Madigan
Illinois Attorney General: Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike)
Chicago Mayor: Richard M. Daley (son of Mayor Richard
J. Daley)

The leadership in Illinois:

All Democrats.


The combat zone in Chicago:
Body count in the last six months:

292 killed (murdered) in Chicago
221 killed in Iraq

State pension fund:

$44 Billion in debt, worst in the country.

Cook County ( Chicago ) sales tax:

10.25% highest in country. (Look it up).

Chicago school system:

Rated one of the worst in the country.

Of course, they're all blaming each other.

They can't blame Republicans because there aren't any.

This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois .
And he's going to '"fix" Washington politics for us?

Good luck and may YAHWEH help us.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-24 03:45:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
FACTS
In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated in TIMSS physics.
OK.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 5,150 students in Botswana who took the test was 443,
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 505, and none of whom scored over 549.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
thirteen of whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So also in Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was 579
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored lower than 423. At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana. No student in Singapore scored 4 standard
deviations higher than their mean, or 735, much less 5 standard
deviations higher, at 774.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So needless to say, no student in Botswana, South Africa, nor Ghana
ever scored four standard deviations higher, or 549, 514, or 489,
respectively, either, much less five standard deviations higher, or
593, 581, or 551 respectively.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Such scores are in the range of the
average for Taipei and Korea, whose IQs are in the range of 105 IQ
points
IQ has nothing to do with it.

Whether the kids are taught physics in school has much to do with it.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It simply boggles the imagination
Showing how poor your imagination is.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for us to be expected to
believe that Obama was the ONE Kenyan in the entire world who scored
not just one but TWO standard deviations higher than a place where NO
Ghanan, Botswanan, or South African has ever ventured.
1) Obama did not take the 2003 TIMSS.

2) If he had taken a TIMSS test in the 8th grade, he would have been
part of US statistics and not Kenyan statistics.

3) Your use of standard deviations is statistical nonsense pulled out
of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
To claim that his IQ is 132 IQ points
Who has done so?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
yet another three standard deviations higher
than the impossible, is the height of absurdity.
All of your posts are the height of absurdity.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average IQ of Kenya is 71 IQ points, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72 IQ points.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Out of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that? Only 11 do, at an IQ of only 96 IQ
points, four standard deviations higher than their mean, and NONE have
an IQ higher than 101 IQ points, five standard deviations higher than
the mean.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama’s not even a Kenyan.
Of course not. He is a natural born American citizen.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
He’s a mixed breed and most
mixed breeds of most species are of lower quality and intelligence
Nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
than the pure breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
Because you are too stupid to have a jockey sit on you?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama is clearly left over from those days.
You have no clue.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Why not simply require him to take the normal IQ test
There is no normal IQ test
Post by jacob1srae1ite
which any dog
catcher in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?
Provide a cite for ANY dog catcher opening that requires that an
applicant take an IQ test.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
You can bet that this would settle the matter once and for all.
What matter? That you are a subhuman racist nincompoop that pulls
obnoxious slime from your strange orifice is already well established.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Correction, Tues. Dec. 23, 2008: 7% of the population of Botswana are
Whites who score similar to their brethren back in England at 545,
meaning that the 93% who’re blacks scored 358.
Please provide evidence as to the actual racial makeup and scores of
those who took the test in Botswana. Otherwise you are just pulling
silly numbers out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Only seven black students from Botswana scored over 456 and none of them scored over
514. Therefore, none of the lowest scoring eight students in
Singapore who scored lower than 462 are likely to have scored lower
than the seven top scoring black students from Botswana, meaning there
was no overlap of test scores between Singapore and Botswana.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois .
And he's going to '"fix" Washington politics for us?
He'll do a lot better than YOU would. Wait and see.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Good luck and may YAHWEH help us.
Yahweh may help us, but you are bound only for Satan.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
israeliteknight
2008-12-30 17:29:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob LeChevalier
Post by jacob1srae1ite
FACTS
In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated in TIMSS physics.
OK.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 5,150 students in Botswana who took the test was 443,
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 505, and none of whom scored over 549.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
thirteen of whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So also in Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was 579
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored lower than 423.  At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana.  No student in Singapore scored 4 standard
deviations higher than their mean, or 735, much less 5 standard
deviations higher, at 774.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So needless to say, no student in Botswana, South Africa, nor Ghana
ever scored four standard deviations higher, or 549, 514, or 489,
respectively, either, much less five standard deviations higher, or
593, 581, or 551 respectively.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Such scores are in the range of the
average for Taipei and Korea, whose IQs are in the range of 105 IQ
points
IQ has nothing to do with it.
Whether the kids are taught physics in school has much to do with it.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It simply boggles the imagination
Showing how poor your imagination is.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for us to be expected to
believe that Obama was the ONE Kenyan in the entire world who scored
not just one but TWO standard deviations higher than a place where NO
Ghanan, Botswanan, or South African has ever ventured.
1) Obama did not take the 2003 TIMSS.  
2) If he had taken a TIMSS test in the 8th grade, he would have been
part of US statistics and not Kenyan statistics.
3) Your use of standard deviations is statistical nonsense pulled out
of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
To claim that his IQ is 132 IQ points
Who has done so?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
yet another three standard deviations higher
than the impossible, is the height of absurdity.
All of your posts are the height of absurdity.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average IQ of Kenya is 71 IQ points, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72 IQ points.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Out of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that?  Only 11 do, at an IQ of only 96 IQ
points, four standard deviations higher than their mean, and NONE have
an IQ higher than 101 IQ points, five standard deviations higher than
the mean.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama’s not even a Kenyan.
Of course not.  He is a natural born American citizen.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
He’s a mixed breed and most
mixed breeds of most species are of lower quality and intelligence
Nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
than the pure breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
Because you are too stupid to have a jockey sit on you?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama is clearly left over from those days.
You have no clue.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Why not simply require him to take the normal IQ test
There is no normal IQ test
Post by jacob1srae1ite
which any dog
catcher in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?
Provide a cite for ANY dog catcher opening that requires that an
applicant take an IQ test.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
You can bet that this would settle the matter once and for all.
What matter?  That you are a subhuman racist nincompoop that pulls
obnoxious slime from your strange orifice is already well established.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Correction, Tues. Dec. 23, 2008: 7% of the population of Botswana are
Whites who score similar to their brethren back in England at 545,
meaning that the 93% who’re blacks scored 358.
Please provide evidence as to the actual racial makeup and scores of
those who took the test in Botswana.  Otherwise you are just pulling
silly numbers out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Only seven black students from Botswana scored over 456 and none of them scored over
514.  Therefore, none of the lowest scoring eight students in
Singapore who scored lower than 462 are likely to have scored lower
than the seven top scoring black students from Botswana, meaning there
was no overlap of test scores between Singapore and Botswana.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois .
And he's going to '"fix" Washington politics for us?
He'll do a lot better than YOU would.  Wait and see.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Good luck and may YAHWEH help us.
Yahweh may help us, but you are bound only for Satan.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
Here's finally someone who agrees with you, largebabble:


cgfunmathguy
I've tried to stay out of this one as DvF has done an admirable job of
presenting the points I wanted to make. However, please allow me to
add my two cents' worth. First, you are comparing different systems
that do different things. You are comparisons are being made between
countries where there are NATIONAL curricula, those where there are
STATE curricula, and at least one where it is a hodgepodge of STATE
and LOCAL curricula. So, we are comparing apples to oranges to pears.



The entire PURPOSE of an international study IS to compare different
education systems to each other, which is exactly what TIMSS does.
Just like the entire PURPOSE of a national study like NAEP is to make
state to state comparisons to see what works and what fails. It’s not
BAD to make international and national comparisons, it’s GOOD.



cgfunmathguy
Also, we need to address the differences in systemic student handling.
In the US, we send the vast majority of our students to high school;
other countries reverse this entirely. Thus, the 12th-grade cohorts
aren't even comparable between countries, even though they are
presented as such by the media (among many others). While the 4th-
grade cohorts may be similar, there is even some question about the
comparing 8th-grade cohorts by some. For the two reasons above, I
don't believe TIMSS is as valid an indicator of differences between
national systems as its exhorters proclaim.



This is patently false. Fortunately, it’s PROVABLY false. Our OWN
data from NCES claims that 74% of American 18 year olds graduate from
high school, compared to more than 90% in most industrialized nations:



http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001034.pdf



The reason nobody has ever posted a cite which disputes that is that
there is no cite, AND TIMSS disputes it in a different direction,
claiming that they found that only 63% of American students are in
their “TCI”, compared to 82% in Switzerland, 84% in Norway, 75% in
Germany, 88% in Slovenia, etc.



http://timss.bc.edu/timss1995i/TIMSSPDF/SRAppA.pdf



They found that 1,245,594 American children of high school graduation
age, 67% of that population, weren’t even IN high school, and thus
were never included in our already LOW TIMSS scores. If the worst
students were the ones who weren’t in high school, can you even
IMAGINE how low our scores would have been had they been INCLUDED? If
this is the reason you don’t “believe TIMSS is as valid an indicator
of differences between national systems as its exhorters proclaim”,
you need to use your new-found knowledge to go back and rethink your
position.



cgfunmathguy
Finally, a word about why DvF keeps trying to get you to understand
why comparing cohorts is important. Many states have been adjusting/
rewriting their regulations (Pennsylvania), their state-mandated tests
(Ohio), and their state-mandated curricula (Georgia) for the past
decade or more. In mathematics, the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics (NCTM) issued its first set of standards on K-12
mathematics in 1989. This was the first step in the reform process,
and several states began the process of reforming state curricula in
the early 1990s. Others waited longer. However, the process is not an
instantaneous one. As an example, Georgia instituted the Georgia
Performance Standards (GPS) in 2003 or 2004. The standards still
aren't fully implemented throughout the schools yet, and they won't be
for two more years. So, yes, cohort matters, and we need to deal with
the data that way. The only fair comparisons about gains and losses in
the report's 12th-grade cohort would be to take the 2007 report's 12th-
graders and compare that gap (assuming all the other confounding
variables didn't exist) to the gap found in the 2003 report's 8th-
graders and to the gap found in 1999 report's 4th-graders. This
assumes that the tests across that EIGHT-YEAR SPREAD are equivalent.



None of which is relevant. The entire POINT of TIMSS is to make
international comparisons, not state to state comparisons. Your idea
that something in our education system was the “first step in the
reform process” is the same thing educators have been mimicking for
years, and none of it ever worked. Furthermore, all American parents
I know believe that every single one of these so-called “reforms” only
brought us back quicker to the stone age and improved nothing.



TIMSS also proves how SAT scores have been politicized, feminized,
manipulated, and watered down to the point they’re no longer credible.





cgfunmathguy
“For another view of it, let's look at your classroom. In a large
lecture class, grades tend to be distributed "normally". This being
the case, "curving" (with its true meaning) would assign Cs to the 68%
of the students whose scores are within 1 SD of the mean. So, let's
assume that the mean on Test 1 was 75 with a standard deviation of 8.
So, any student with a score between 67 and 83, inclusive, should get
a C. However, Susie with her 81 and Johnny with his 69 both got Cs! Is
the difference significant? We don't know until we run tests on the
scores. Even though the difference is 12 points (which is 1.5 SD), it
is likely that this difference is NOT "statistically significant" at
any appreciable level. To constantly quote raw numbers with no test
results is worthless and misleading. Even those with an agenda don't
do this because they know they will be accused of trying to bamboozle
the people reading the report.”



You complain about referring to different cohorts, then launch into a
comparison between a large lecture room and an international study of
hundreds of thousands of students.

You CANNOT compare these and make any sense out of it. You literally
can’t adjust for guesses on multiple choice questions in the “large”
lecture hall, but you CAN when there are hundreds of thousands of
students taking the SAME test in their own languages. Do you know
what TIMSS is? Before you invite anyone to “take a statistics class”
again, you ought to invite yourself to examine their methodology. You
are as wrong about this as you are about “In the US, we send the vast
majority of our students to high school”.
jacob1srae1ite
2009-01-01 17:03:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by israeliteknight
Post by Bob LeChevalier
Post by jacob1srae1ite
FACTS
In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated inTIMSSphysics.
OK.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 5,150 students in Botswana who took the test was 443,
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 505, and none of whom scored over 549.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
thirteen of whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So also in Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was 579
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored lower than 423.  At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana.  No student in Singapore scored 4 standard
deviations higher than their mean, or 735, much less 5 standard
deviations higher, at 774.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So needless to say, no student in Botswana, South Africa, nor Ghana
ever scored four standard deviations higher, or 549, 514, or 489,
respectively, either, much less five standard deviations higher, or
593, 581, or 551 respectively.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Such scores are in the range of the
average for Taipei and Korea, whose IQs are in the range of 105IQ
points
IQhas nothing to do with it.
Whether the kids are taught physics in school has much to do with it.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It simply boggles the imagination
Showing how poor your imagination is.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for us to be expected to
believe that Obama was the ONE Kenyan in the entire world who scored
not just one but TWO standard deviations higher than a place where NO
Ghanan, Botswanan, or South African has ever ventured.
1) Obama did not take the 2003TIMSS.  
2) If he had taken aTIMSStest in the 8th grade, he would have been
part of US statistics and not Kenyan statistics.
3) Your use of standard deviations is statistical nonsense pulled out
of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
To claim that hisIQis 132IQpoints
Who has done so?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
yet another three standard deviations higher
than the impossible, is the height of absurdity.
All of your posts are the height of absurdity.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The averageIQof Kenya is 71IQpoints, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72IQpoints.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Out of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that?  Only 11 do, at anIQof only 96IQ
points, four standard deviations higher than their mean, and NONE have
anIQhigher than 101IQpoints, five standard deviations higher than
the mean.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama’s not even a Kenyan.
Of course not.  He is a natural born American citizen.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
He’s a mixed breed and most
mixed breeds of most species are of lower quality and intelligence
Nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
than the pure breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
Because you are too stupid to have a jockey sit on you?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama is clearly left over from those days.
You have no clue.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Why not simply require him to take the normalIQtest
There is no normalIQtest
Post by jacob1srae1ite
which any dog
catcher in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?
Provide a cite for ANY dog catcher opening that requires that an
applicant take anIQtest.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
You can bet that this would settle the matter once and for all.
What matter?  That you are a subhuman racist nincompoop that pulls
obnoxious slime from your strange orifice is already well established.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Correction, Tues. Dec. 23, 2008: 7% of the population of Botswana are
Whites who score similar to their brethren back in England at 545,
meaning that the 93% who’re blacks scored 358.
Please provide evidence as to the actual racial makeup and scores of
those who took the test in Botswana.  Otherwise you are just pulling
silly numbers out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Only seven black students from Botswana scored over 456 and none of them scored over
514.  Therefore, none of the lowest scoring eight students in
Singapore who scored lower than 462 are likely to have scored lower
than the seven top scoring black students from Botswana, meaning there
was no overlap of test scores between Singapore and Botswana.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois .
And he's going to '"fix" Washington politics for us?
He'll do a lot better than YOU would.  Wait and see.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Good luck and may YAHWEH help us.
Yahweh may help us, but you are bound only for Satan.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
cgfunmathguy
I've tried to stay out of this one as DvF has done an admirable job of
presenting the points I wanted to make. However, please allow me to
add my two cents' worth. First, you are comparing different systems
that do different things. You are comparisons are being made between
countries where there are NATIONAL curricula, those where there are
STATE curricula, and at least one where it is a hodgepodge of STATE
and LOCAL curricula. So, we are comparing apples to oranges to pears.
The entire PURPOSE of an international study IS to compare different
education systems to each other, which is exactly whatTIMSSdoes.
Just like the entire PURPOSE of a national study like NAEP is to make
state to state comparisons to see what works and what fails. It’s not
BAD to make international and national comparisons, it’s GOOD.
cgfunmathguy
Also, we need to address the differences in systemic student handling.
In the US, we send the vast majority of our students to high school;
other countries reverse this entirely. Thus, the 12th-grade cohorts
aren't even comparable between countries, even though they are
presented as such by the media (among many others). While the 4th-
grade cohorts may be similar, there is even some question about the
comparing 8th-grade cohorts by some. For the two reasons above, I
don't believeTIMSSis as valid an indicator of differences between
national systems as its exhorters proclaim.
This is patently false.  Fortunately, it’s PROVABLY false.  Our OWN
data from NCES claims that 74% of American 18 year olds graduate from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001034.pdf
The reason nobody has ever posted a cite which disputes that is that
there is no cite, ANDTIMSSdisputes it in a different direction,
claiming that they found that only 63% of American students are in
their “TCI”, compared to 82% in Switzerland, 84% in Norway, 75% in
Germany, 88% in Slovenia, etc.
http://timss.bc.edu/timss1995i/TIMSSPDF/SRAppA.pdf
They found that 1,245,594 American children of high school graduation
age, 67% of that population, weren’t even IN high school, and thus
were never included in our already LOWTIMSSscores.  If the worst
students were the ones who weren’t in high school, can you even
IMAGINE how low our scores would have been had they been INCLUDED?  If
this is the reason you don’t “believeTIMSSis as valid an indicator
of differences between national systems as its exhorters proclaim”,
you need to use your new-found knowledge to go back and rethink your
position.
cgfunmathguy
Finally, a word about why DvF keeps trying to get you to understand
why comparing cohorts is important. Many states have been adjusting/
rewriting their regulations (Pennsylvania), their state-mandated tests
(Ohio), and their state-mandated curricula (Georgia) for the past
decade or more. In mathematics, the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics (NCTM) issued its first set of standards on K-12
mathematics in 1989. This was the first step in the reform process,
and several states began the process of reforming state curricula in
the early 1990s. Others waited longer. However, the process is not an
instantaneous one. As an example, Georgia instituted the Georgia
Performance Standards (GPS) in 2003 or 2004. The standards still
aren't fully implemented throughout the schools yet, and they won't be
for two more years. So, yes, cohort matters, and we need to deal with
the data that way. The only fair comparisons about gains and losses in
the report's 12th-grade cohort would be to take the 2007 report's 12th-
graders and compare that gap (assuming all the other confounding
variables didn't exist) to the gap found in the 2003 report's 8th-
graders and to the gap found in 1999 report's 4th-graders. This
assumes that the tests across that EIGHT-YEAR SPREAD are equivalent.
None of which is relevant.  The entire POINT ofTIMSSis to make
international comparisons, not state to state comparisons.  Your idea
that something in our education system was the “first step in the
reform process” is the same thing educators have been mimicking for
years, and none of it ever worked.  Furthermore, all American parents
I know believe that every single one of these so-called “reforms” only
brought us back quicker to the stone age and improved nothing.
TIMSSalso proves how SAT scores have been politicized, feminized,
manipulated, and watered down to the point they’re no longer credible.
cgfunmathguy
“For another view of it, let's look at your classroom. In a large
lecture class, grades tend to be distributed "normally". This being
the case, "curving" (with its true meaning) would assign Cs to the 68%
of the students whose scores are within 1 SD of the mean. So, let's
assume that the mean on Test 1 was 75 with a standard deviation of 8.
So, any student with a score between 67 and 83, inclusive, should get
a C. However, Susie with her 81 and Johnny with his 69 both got Cs! Is
the difference significant? We don't know until we run tests on the
scores. Even though the difference is 12 points (which is 1.5 SD), it
is likely that this difference is NOT "statistically significant" at
any appreciable level. To constantly quote raw numbers with no test
results is worthless and misleading. Even those with an agenda don't
do this because they know they will be accused of trying to bamboozle
the people reading the report.”
You complain about referring to different cohorts, then launch into a
comparison between a large lecture room and an international study of
hundreds of thousands of students.
You CANNOT compare these and make any sense out of it. You literally
can’t adjust for guesses on multiple choice questions in the “large”
lecture hall, but you CAN when there are hundreds of thousands of
students taking the SAME test in their own languages.  Do you know
whatTIMSSis?  Before you invite anyone to “take a statistics class”
again, you ought to invite yourself to examine their methodology.  You
are as wrong about this as you are about “In the US, we send the vast
majority of our students to high school”.
Update, Wednesday, December 31, 2008: we should add that for anyone in
Ghana to score 676, an IQ of about 110 IQ points, he would have to
score seven standard deviations (7 S.D.) higher than the average score
for Ghana of 239, which is a mathematical impossibility. This is a
range where only 137 students from Singapore and 12 students from the
US scored.

Many of Obama's specious claims might be considered "matters of
opinion", but this is a CERTIFIABLE LIE which can EASILY be proven and
verified.
jacob1srae1ite
2009-01-01 18:27:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by israeliteknight
Post by Bob LeChevalier
Post by jacob1srae1ite
FACTS
In 2003, 3 African nations, Ghana, s. Africa, and Botswana
participated inTIMSSphysics.
OK.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 5,150 students in Botswana who took the test was 443,
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 505, and none of whom scored over 549.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The average score for the 8,952 students in South Africa who took the test was 244
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
thirteen of whom scored over 447, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So also in Ghana, where the average score for their 5,100 students was 239
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
seven of whom scored over 427, and none of whom scored over 514.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Conversely, the average score for the 6,018 students in Singapore was 579
OK
Post by jacob1srae1ite
eight of whom scored lower than 462, and none of whom scored lower than 423.  At best we can say that eight students in Singapore
MAY have scored lower than SEVERAL of the thirteen highest scoring
students in South Africa and SEVERAL of the seven highest scoring
students in Ghana.  No student in Singapore scored 4 standard
deviations higher than their mean, or 735, much less 5 standard
deviations higher, at 774.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
So needless to say, no student in Botswana, South Africa, nor Ghana
ever scored four standard deviations higher, or 549, 514, or 489,
respectively, either, much less five standard deviations higher, or
593, 581, or 551 respectively.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Such scores are in the range of the
average for Taipei and Korea, whose IQs are in the range of 105IQ
points
IQhas nothing to do with it.
Whether the kids are taught physics in school has much to do with it.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It simply boggles the imagination
Showing how poor your imagination is.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for us to be expected to
believe that Obama was the ONE Kenyan in the entire world who scored
not just one but TWO standard deviations higher than a place where NO
Ghanan, Botswanan, or South African has ever ventured.
1) Obama did not take the 2003TIMSS.  
2) If he had taken aTIMSStest in the 8th grade, he would have been
part of US statistics and not Kenyan statistics.
3) Your use of standard deviations is statistical nonsense pulled out
of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
To claim that hisIQis 132IQpoints
Who has done so?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
yet another three standard deviations higher
than the impossible, is the height of absurdity.
All of your posts are the height of absurdity.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The averageIQof Kenya is 71IQpoints, the same as for Ghana, and 1
point lower than both Botswana and South Africa, at 72IQpoints.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Out of 38 million Kenyans, do you know how many score more than 5 standard
deviations higher than that?  Only 11 do, at anIQof only 96IQ
points, four standard deviations higher than their mean, and NONE have
anIQhigher than 101IQpoints, five standard deviations higher than
the mean.
Statistical nonsense pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama’s not even a Kenyan.
Of course not.  He is a natural born American citizen.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
He’s a mixed breed and most
mixed breeds of most species are of lower quality and intelligence
Nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
than the pure breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?
Because you are too stupid to have a jockey sit on you?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Obama is clearly left over from those days.
You have no clue.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Why not simply require him to take the normalIQtest
There is no normalIQtest
Post by jacob1srae1ite
which any dog
catcher in the country has to take in order to qualify for his job?
Provide a cite for ANY dog catcher opening that requires that an
applicant take anIQtest.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
You can bet that this would settle the matter once and for all.
What matter?  That you are a subhuman racist nincompoop that pulls
obnoxious slime from your strange orifice is already well established.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Correction, Tues. Dec. 23, 2008: 7% of the population of Botswana are
Whites who score similar to their brethren back in England at 545,
meaning that the 93% who’re blacks scored 358.
Please provide evidence as to the actual racial makeup and scores of
those who took the test in Botswana.  Otherwise you are just pulling
silly numbers out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Only seven black students from Botswana scored over 456 and none of them scored over
514.  Therefore, none of the lowest scoring eight students in
Singapore who scored lower than 462 are likely to have scored lower
than the seven top scoring black students from Botswana, meaning there
was no overlap of test scores between Singapore and Botswana.
Numbers pulled out of your strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois .
And he's going to '"fix" Washington politics for us?
He'll do a lot better than YOU would.  Wait and see.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Good luck and may YAHWEH help us.
Yahweh may help us, but you are bound only for Satan.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
cgfunmathguy
I've tried to stay out of this one as DvF has done an admirable job of
presenting the points I wanted to make. However, please allow me to
add my two cents' worth. First, you are comparing different systems
that do different things. You are comparisons are being made between
countries where there are NATIONAL curricula, those where there are
STATE curricula, and at least one where it is a hodgepodge of STATE
and LOCAL curricula. So, we are comparing apples to oranges to pears.
The entire PURPOSE of an international study IS to compare different
education systems to each other, which is exactly whatTIMSSdoes.
Just like the entire PURPOSE of a national study like NAEP is to make
state to state comparisons to see what works and what fails. It’s not
BAD to make international and national comparisons, it’s GOOD.
cgfunmathguy
Also, we need to address the differences in systemic student handling.
In the US, we send the vast majority of our students to high school;
other countries reverse this entirely. Thus, the 12th-grade cohorts
aren't even comparable between countries, even though they are
presented as such by the media (among many others). While the 4th-
grade cohorts may be similar, there is even some question about the
comparing 8th-grade cohorts by some. For the two reasons above, I
don't believeTIMSSis as valid an indicator of differences between
national systems as its exhorters proclaim.
This is patently false.  Fortunately, it’s PROVABLY false.  Our OWN
data from NCES claims that 74% of American 18 year olds graduate from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001034.pdf
The reason nobody has ever posted a cite which disputes that is that
there is no cite, ANDTIMSSdisputes it in a different direction,
claiming that they found that only 63% of American students are in
their “TCI”, compared to 82% in Switzerland, 84% in Norway, 75% in
Germany, 88% in Slovenia, etc.
http://timss.bc.edu/timss1995i/TIMSSPDF/SRAppA.pdf
They found that 1,245,594 American children of high school graduation
age, 67% of that population, weren’t even IN high school, and thus
were never included in our already LOWTIMSSscores.  If the worst
students were the ones who weren’t in high school, can you even
IMAGINE how low our scores would have been had they been INCLUDED?  If
this is the reason you don’t “believeTIMSSis as valid an indicator
of differences between national systems as its exhorters proclaim”,
you need to use your new-found knowledge to go back and rethink your
position.
cgfunmathguy
Finally, a word about why DvF keeps trying to get you to understand
why comparing cohorts is important. Many states have been adjusting/
rewriting their regulations (Pennsylvania), their state-mandated tests
(Ohio), and their state-mandated curricula (Georgia) for the past
decade or more. In mathematics, the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics (NCTM) issued its first set of standards on K-12
mathematics in 1989. This was the first step in the reform process,
and several states began the process of reforming state curricula in
the early 1990s. Others waited longer. However, the process is not an
instantaneous one. As an example, Georgia instituted the Georgia
Performance Standards (GPS) in 2003 or 2004. The standards still
aren't fully implemented throughout the schools yet, and they won't be
for two more years. So, yes, cohort matters, and we need to deal with
the data that way. The only fair comparisons about gains and losses in
the report's 12th-grade cohort would be to take the 2007 report's 12th-
graders and compare that gap (assuming all the other confounding
variables didn't exist) to the gap found in the 2003 report's 8th-
graders and to the gap found in 1999 report's 4th-graders. This
assumes that the tests across that EIGHT-YEAR SPREAD are equivalent.
None of which is relevant.  The entire POINT ofTIMSSis to make
international comparisons, not state to state comparisons.  Your idea
that something in our education system was the “first step in the
reform process” is the same thing educators have been mimicking for
years, and none of it ever worked.  Furthermore, all American parents
I know believe that every single one of these so-called “reforms” only
brought us back quicker to the stone age and improved nothing.
TIMSSalso proves how SAT scores have been politicized, feminized,
manipulated, and watered down to the point they’re no longer credible.
cgfunmathguy
“For another view of it, let's look at your classroom. In a large
lecture class, grades tend to be distributed "normally". This being
the case, "curving" (with its true meaning) would assign Cs to the 68%
of the students whose scores are within 1 SD of the mean. So, let's
assume that the mean on Test 1 was 75 with a standard deviation of 8.
So, any student with a score between 67 and 83, inclusive, should get
a C. However, Susie with her 81 and Johnny with his 69 both got Cs! Is
the difference significant? We don't know until we run tests on the
scores. Even though the difference is 12 points (which is 1.5 SD), it
is likely that this difference is NOT "statistically significant" at
any appreciable level. To constantly quote raw numbers with no test
results is worthless and misleading. Even those with an agenda don't
do this because they know they will be accused of trying to bamboozle
the people reading the report.”
You complain about referring to different cohorts, then launch into a
comparison between a large lecture room and an international study of
hundreds of thousands of students.
You CANNOT compare these and make any sense out of it. You literally
can’t adjust for guesses on multiple choice questions in the “large”
lecture hall, but you CAN when there are hundreds of thousands of
students taking the SAME test in their own languages.  Do you know
whatTIMSSis?  Before you invite anyone to “take a statistics class”
again, you ought to invite yourself to examine their methodology.  You
are as wrong about this as you are about “In the US, we send the vast
majority of our students to high school”.
WITHIN the US, this is how TIMSS scores break down by race:

Loading Image...

Obama is an affirmative action hiree whose IQ is not even CLOSE to 100
IQ points.
jacob1srae1ite
2008-12-22 21:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
The DIFFERENCE between
the average scores is the significant point, and the difference is
anywhere freom .5 to 2.8 standard deviations.
That is a nonsensical statement.  Differences between averages of
independent samples cannot be meaningfully stated in terms of standard
deviations.  
Post by jacob1srae1ite
This is about like (no, it's exactly like) saying that you know one
girl who's taller than many of the boys, therefore girls are just as
tall as boys.
No, it is not like it at all.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
In regard to height, the standard deviation for both sexes is the
same, 2.8 inches.
So?
Post by jacob1srae1ite
But the GAP between the mean scores is, yet again, two standard
deviations (1.893 to be exact).
That is a nonsensical statement.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
There's no way to announce that a gender gap of 1.893 standard
deviations is not significant.
There is no way to announce a gender gap of XYZ standard deviations
that is anything but nonsense.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
It has a HUGE impact on our world
No it doesn't.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
that simply cannot be ignored, not even in a theoretical sense.
Since everyone except you IS ignoring it, because it is a bunch of
statistical nonsense, your assertion that it "cannot" be ignored is
contrary to fact.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
<begin quote>


[T]hese are the facts concerning Obama's LSAT score while attending
Law School at Harvard University. We do not know his actual LSAT
score; however, after much research, we found that the average LSAT
score for all Harvard students is 171. The percentile rank for an LSAT
score of 171 at Harvard is 98.8 %.

MENSA will accept LSAT scores as a means of qualifying for MENSA
membership. (MENSA also accepts up to 200 various IQ tests and other
tests of cognitive function as well.) The LSAT score required for
MENSA membership is equal to a percentile of 95% or higher. Thus,
basing Obama's estimated LSAT score of 171 ranks him in the top 98.8%
(percent/percentile) range which is clearly above the lowest
acceptable LSAT percentage rank of 95%, which clearly affirms that
Obama has a qualifying intelligence quotient that would allow him
acceptance into MENSA.

Since MENSA accepts various IQ Tests as well as other cognitive tests
to qualify for MENSA membership it is safe to estimate that Obama's IQ
Score could range anywhere from a low IQ score of 130 based on the
Stanford Binet IQ Test, Revision 5, to a high IQ score of 148 based on
the Cattell IQ Test.

What the IQ guy failed to account for is the fact that Harvard
University practices affirmative action. PBS Frontline reports: "The
gap in SAT scores persists even at the highest levels of achievement.
A study of the 1989 applicants to five highly-selective universities
found that white candidates' average combined SAT score was 186 points
higher than the corresponding SAT average for African American
applicants."

Furthermore, the New York Times reports that "At the best schools, by
contrast, efforts to diversify the student body translate into a 400-
point bonus for minority students on the SAT tests."

That 98.8 ranking based on the average Harvard LSAT translates to
about a 135 IQ and a combined SAT score of 1290. That's pretty good,
if not spectacular. However, due to affirmative action, one must
reduce that score by at least 186 points. (Also, I suspect the NYT
article is talking about the new SAT, which isn't valid for the
purposes of this comparison.) Thus, giving Obama the benefit of the
doubt drops his score to 1104, which is approximately equivalent to an
IQ of 116. That's not bad, but it is significantly less intelligent
than Hillary's 140 IQ, as well as being lower than George W. Bush's
125 IQ (1206 SAT).

Before one points to the fact that Obama ranked highly in his class,
it's important to keep in mind that Bill Bradley was a Princeton
Rhodes Scholar despite his 485 Verbal SAT and mediocre 103 IQ.
Academic success, like every other kind of success, is just as much
about hard work and determination as it is about intellectual
firepower, but Barack Obama's supporters obviously shouldn't be
attempting to make their case for him on the basis of what is, based
on the available information, probably an IQ of 116, only one standard
deviation above the norm. Of course, this estimate is based on
averages which don't necessarily apply to a single individual; Obama
could lay the matter to rest by simply permitting his scores to be
released to the public.

If his intelligence is so incredibly important, as some of his more
visibly insane supporters insist, then surely the senator should
inform us precisely how intelligent he is. Because he demonstrates his
ignorance and a less-than-impressive intelligence nearly every time he
opens his mouth despite his handlers attempts to retroactively fix his
statements: "The fact that we have reached a point where the Federal
Reserve felt it had to take this unprecedented step with the American
Insurance Group is the final verdict on the failed economic philosophy
of the last eight years."

First, AIG didn't fail because of the economic philosophy of the last
eight years. The Fed began goosing the markets under Clinton. Second,
that "unprecedented step" was taken with the American International
Group.






<end quote>



The average IQ of Kenya is 71 IQ points. Out of 38 million Kenyans,
do you know how many score more than 5 standard deviations higher than
that? Only 11 have an IQ higher than 96 IQ points.

Obama’s not even a Kenyan. He’s a mixed breed and most mixed breeds
of most species are of lower quality and intelligence than the pure
breeds (otherwise why don’t mules race in horse races)?



California voters consider affirmative action to be CHEATING, which is
why we outlawed it with Proposition 209. Obama is left over from
those days.



Why not require him to take a normal IQ test which dog catchers around
here have to take? That would settle the matter forever.
Bob LeChevalier
2008-12-14 22:10:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And that Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Because that is silly noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
which you don't
Post by jacob1srae1ite
about the GAP. All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
A statement that you clearly do not understand.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
No.

But it is also a reason why we expect to see a higher ratio of boys to
girls at the lower end, equal to the ratio at the high end.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap. Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
No.

The ratio of college admissions is almost solely based on the
percentages of each gender that WANT to go to college, since virtually
everyone who WANTS to go to college in this country, DOES go.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it
You wouldn't know statistical evidence if it kicked you in the balls.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
S***@yahoo.com
2008-12-15 10:35:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob LeChevalier
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Because that is silly noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
which you don't
Post by jacob1srae1ite
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
A statement that you clearly do not understand.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
No.
But it is also a reason why we expect to see a higher ratio of boys to
girls at the lower end, equal to the ratio at the high end.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
No.
The ratio of college admissions is almost solely based on the
percentages of each gender that WANT to go to college, since virtually
everyone who WANTS to go to college in this country, DOES go.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it
You wouldn't know statistical evidence if it kicked you in the balls.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
Female humans are not intellectually or physically equal with human
males for genetic reasons. Female humans are over prvileged under the
law. Both of these things are genetically based.

My evidence is of course, Fuck You, Sophister Liars.
Masculist
2008-12-15 19:59:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by S***@yahoo.com
Post by Bob LeChevalier
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Is it ok to note that the income gender gap AROUND THE WORLD is a
standard deviation?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Or that the economics gender gap [understanding
of economics] is almost two standard deviations?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Or that the throwing
gender gap [read: like throwing a baseball] is THREE standard
deviations?
No, because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Then why is it not ok to note that Norwegian boys scored 2 standard
deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519)?
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And that  Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss
girls (519 vs. 444)?
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
And that Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than
American girls (444 vs. 393),
Because that is noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your strange
orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American
girls and Norwegian boys?
Because that is silly noisome nonsense that you pulled out of your
strange orifice.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Not even what Summers said gets even close to what ALL the
standardized test scores [including NAEP once you understand their
methodology]
which you don't
Post by jacob1srae1ite
about the GAP.  All people ever quote is the part about the standard
deviation for boys being larger than that for girls,
A statement that you clearly do not understand.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
and thus this is the ONLY reason we'd expect to see a higher ratio of
boys to girls at the higher end.
No.
But it is also a reason why we expect to see a higher ratio of boys to
girls at the lower end, equal to the ratio at the high end.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Even SAT math confirms this gender gap.  Two thirds of those who score
higher than 600 are boys and only one third are girls, so we'd EXPECT
to see a ratio of 2 boys to every one girl in college admissions,
right?
No.
The ratio of college admissions is almost solely based on the
percentages of each gender that WANT to go to college, since virtually
everyone who WANTS to go to college in this country, DOES go.
Post by jacob1srae1ite
Read: even if it's "it's commonly accepted that girls are
environmentally conditioned to be worse", I see ZERO statistical
evidence of it
You wouldn't know statistical evidence if it kicked you in the balls.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
Female humans are not intellectually or physically equal with human
males for genetic reasons. Female humans are over prvileged under the
law. Both of these things are genetically based.
My evidence is of course, Fuck You, Sophister Liars.
<smile> That's tellin them Sean.

Smitty
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...