It's funny how often class content can overlap. When reading this chapter, I thought of Alex's class and how we discussed "junk science" (such as polling and quizzes that result in junk information) and "inventing variables." Junk science makes it a lot harder to find good, clean data (something that always frustrates me when I have to do research).
I agree with Postman's comments that everything these days "has" to be quantified in some manner. Grades, intelligence, beauty, credit score. However, as we discussed in Alex's class, do we really know what we're measuring? Does that thing even exist? Can you reduce some concept into one variable? When it comes to quantitative research, I suppose there is no other way, but then can you really trust the results?
Are SAT/ACT/IQ tests really accurate measures of intelligence? I've always thought probably not. Some people are great test takers. Some people are awful test takers. Some people do wonderfully in life and score low on tests. Maybe society keeps perfecting the tests, but they still aren't that great, in my opinion. I hope college admissions never do away with entrance essays.
In fact, I found this interesting article on ProQuest (but had a difficult time finding ones about IQ test unreliability). The article, titled "IQ-test mistake means boy wastes two years in special ed: Angry father suing for $200,000" shows the danger of solely relying on such measures when it comes to important decisions such as education.
Another article from 2009 talks about the widening racial gap in ACT test scores. Does that mean african american students are less intelligent than white students? I don't think so. There are so many different types of intelligence. Problem solving skills. Book smarts. Street smarts. People smarts.
On language, I think it is an easy way to categorize things. I'm sure pre-language people still divided things into categories but perhaps had a harder way to communicate it. I haven't done a lot of other reading on language other than Chomsky, although I haven't read his work for a couple years.
I don't know how you quantity something such as beauty, either. I think beauty measures can improve with a great personality to match. Beauty also is in the eye of the beholder and based on culture. Although symmetry, smooth skin, etc. pretty much seem to be universal, there also is evidence that the ideal hip to waist ratio is not the same in all countries (this article showed it wasn't a significant predictor of attractiveness in Britain).
Looking forward to class tomorrow!
No comments:
Post a Comment