Your name or email adress:
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up


    Results 1 to 4 of 4
    1. #1
      Empress Yetzion's Avatar
      Empress Yetzion is offline I am Ama / Militia

      Join Date
      Sep 2008
      Location
      London NW10
      Posts
      162
      Thumbs Up/Down
      Received: 0/0
      Given: 0/0
      Rep Power
      74

      Blackicon Mad Black people 'less intelligent' KKKraka scientist claims


      0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
      what a F*** moron
      ----------------------------------


      From Times Online - October 17, 2007
      by Helen Nugent

      One of the world’s most respected scientists is embroiled in an extraordinary row after claiming that black people are less intelligent than white people.

      James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, has provoked outrage with his comments, made ahead of his arrival in Britain today.

      More fierce criticism of the eminent scientist is expected as he embarks on a number of engagements to promote a new book ‘Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science’. Among his first commitments is a speech to a London audience at the Science Museum on Friday. The event is sold out.

      Dr Watson, who runs one of America’s leading scientific research institutions, made the controversial remarks in an interview in The Sunday Times.

      The 79-year-old geneticist said he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really.". He said he hoped that everyone was equal, but countered that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”.

      He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because “there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the lower level”. He writes that “there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so”.

      He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.

      The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission is studying Dr Watson’s remarks “in full”. ( Damn Right!!!)

      Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said today: “It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments.

      “I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson’s personal prejudices. These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exist at the highest professional levels.”

      Dr Watson was hailed as achieving one of the greatest single scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s, forming part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA

      He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.

      He has served for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory on Long Island, considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics.

      Dr Watson is no stranger to controversy. He has been reported in the past saying that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. (baby boys wouldnt need tests of that sort if these savages would stop sodomizing them )

      In addition, he has suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, proposing a theory that black people have higher libidos.

      He also claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: “People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great.”

      Commenting on Dr Watson’s current views about race, Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University, said: “This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain.

      He added: “If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically.”

      A spokeswoman for the Science Museum said it was looking into “things” concerning the security of the event on Friday.

      She said: “This kind of thing always generates debate.”
      Keep the Temple/Body clean and the MIND will follow…celebrate Positive Afrikan identity!
      I am Ama: The Child of the Most Ancient - Yetzion 2012
      http://www.genesisradio.co.uk


    2. #2
      Walk Wit Me's Avatar
      Walk Wit Me is offline Warrior

      Join Date
      Jul 2006
      Location
      Philly
      Posts
      743
      Thumbs Up/Down
      Received: 0/0
      Given: 0/0
      Rep Power
      123

      0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by Empress_Yetzion_2012 View Post
      what a F*** moron
      ----------------------------------


      From Times Online - October 17, 2007
      by Helen Nugent

      One of the world’s most respected scientists is embroiled in an extraordinary row after claiming that black people are less intelligent than white people.

      James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, has provoked outrage with his comments, made ahead of his arrival in Britain today.

      More fierce criticism of the eminent scientist is expected as he embarks on a number of engagements to promote a new book ‘Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science’. Among his first commitments is a speech to a London audience at the Science Museum on Friday. The event is sold out.

      Dr Watson, who runs one of America’s leading scientific research institutions, made the controversial remarks in an interview in The Sunday Times.

      The 79-year-old geneticist said he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really.". He said he hoped that everyone was equal, but countered that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”.

      He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because “there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the lower level”. He writes that “there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so”.

      He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.

      The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission is studying Dr Watson’s remarks “in full”. ( Damn Right!!!)

      Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said today: “It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments.

      “I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson’s personal prejudices. These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exist at the highest professional levels.”

      Dr Watson was hailed as achieving one of the greatest single scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s, forming part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA

      He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.

      He has served for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory on Long Island, considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics.

      Dr Watson is no stranger to controversy. He has been reported in the past saying that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. (baby boys wouldnt need tests of that sort if these savages would stop sodomizing them )

      In addition, he has suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, proposing a theory that black people have higher libidos.

      He also claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: “People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great.”

      Commenting on Dr Watson’s current views about race, Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University, said: “This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain.

      He added: “If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically.”

      A spokeswoman for the Science Museum said it was looking into “things” concerning the security of the event on Friday.

      She said: “This kind of thing always generates debate.”

      Genetics have nothing to do with people of color scoring less on standardized test. The real reasons can be attributed to a combination of cultural bias (within the test) and the influence of "anti-intellectualism" in the black community, but that's another story. (The kid with a nice jump shot is more popular amongst his peers than the Kid with Straight A's on his report card, we have to change that and its really our fault)...most think its more important to keep it "real" and be "cool" than to get an education. They're not stupid just brainwashed by music and television

    3. #3
      Blacksupremacist is offline Premium Member

      Join Date
      Mar 2009
      Location
      Chicago
      Posts
      8
      Thumbs Up/Down
      Received: 0/0
      Given: 0/0
      Rep Power
      0

      0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
      I'd hate to bump an old thread but I feel the need to address this race and IQ issue.

      The presented information above strongly suggests that African born blacks residing in western countries, as a group may possess IQs that are between 5 points and a full standard deviation (15 IQ points) above that of whites living in these countries (see, Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Richardson, 2002; Cross, 1994; Williams, 2005) – This is especially true for those living in the United States and in the UK. One may also expect to find, according to much of the corroborative literature that relates IQ with education, approximately twice the number of African born immigrants with IQs in the 115 range, than among the general white American population (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Williams, 2005), and “more” than twice the number of African immigrants in the 125 IQ range (Gottfredson, 1998; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000).

      By Bernie Douglas (April 10, 2008)

      What are IQ Tests?

      IQ is a culturally and ideologically rooted construct; an index intended to predict success, or outcomes that are valued as success by some people, in western societies. The items on these tests are largely measures of achievement at various levels of competency (Sternberg et al, 1998a, 1999, 2003a) and are devised impressionistically by psychologists to simply mimic the psycholinguistic structures of schooling and middle class clerical/administrative occupations (Richardson, 2000, 2002). Alfred Binet, the inventor of the first intelligence test devised this instrument more than 100 years ago to screen “children” for educational difficulties, and made clear its conceptual foundations (See Richardson, 2002). His interest was in the educational development of children, and argued that his test could not be used for children over the age of seventeen. He also believed that scores on his test could be radically improved through learning and instruction. Stern (1914) would devise what is known today as the concept of “I.Q.,” which simply stands for “Intelligence Quotient.” Stern’s quotient system was, too, like Binet’s test, devised for use exclusively with children; having no application for adults.

      IQ tests are, and were originally designed to be nothing more than devices for generating numbers that are useful in assessing academic aptitude with in a given culture; and were meant for use mainly with children. IQ tests sample some elements of intelligent behavior and these elements are associated with academic performance (Capron et al, 1999). Traditional IQ tests do not measure the many forms of intelligence that are beyond more academically specific skills, such as music, creativity, art, interpersonal and intrapersonal abilities (Braaten and Norman, 2006; Gardner, 2000). The processes associated with schooling influence performance on IQ tests through a combination of direct instruction and indirect inculcation of modes of thinking, and the values associated with standardized testing (Ceci and Williams 1997; Ceci, 1991; Richardson, 2000, 2002). Tests have a narrow focus on skills and tasks which are acquired and rehearsed in the process of formal or informal schooling (Ceci and Williams, 1997; Ceci, 1991).

      IQ and similar tests are also unable to measure one’s potential, are not independent from what is measured by achievement tests, and are not powerful predictors of low reading performance (Siegel, 1989, 1992; Bradshaw, 2001). Test results in one child can vary according to mood, motivation, and fatigue, while the tests themselves show prominent rehearsal/learning effects, generally assume a degree of literacy, and are largely framed to suit Western cultural requirements (Ceci & Williams, 1997; Ceci, 1991; O’Brien, 2001; Richardson 2000, 2002; Sternberg, 2004). For these reasons many believe that the use of IQ tests should be abandoned (Siegel, 1989, 1992; Vellutino et al, 2000, Bradshaw, 2001; Schonemann, 1997c). In addition, no tests except dynamic tests (see Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2002a) that require learning at the time of the test, directly measure ability to learn. Traditional IQ tests focus on measuring past learning, of the kind acquired through the processes of formal schooling and cultural exchange. While these things are heavily influenced by accessibility, motivation and available opportunities to learn (see Fagan and Holland, 2002, 2007).

      Heritability: What you may not know…

      There is currently no serious evidence that has demonstrated IQ tests to measure either an inborn property or what is commonly understood to mean “intelligence” (Hirsch 1970, 1997, 2004; Schonemann, 1997c, 2005; Schonemann and Schonemann, 1994; Kempthorne 1978, 1997; Capron et al, 1999; Vetta, 2002; Wahlsten, 1981, 1990; Capron and Vetta, 2001). “Intelligence” is a highly subjective and culturally confound concept which remains largely undefined (see Schonemann, 1997c; Sternberg, 2007; Cole et al, 1971; Guttman, 1992); while the twin and adoption studies commonly used to report heritability estimates in relationship to IQ tests have been shown, ‘repeatedly’, to be highly suspicious in nature. The biometrical school of scientists who fit models to IQ data traces their history to R. Fisher (1918), but their genetic models have been shown to have virtually no predictive value (Vetta, 2002; Vetta, 1976; Capron and Vetta, 2001; Capron et al, 1999; Schonemann, 1997c). For example, statistical models used in twin studies and inferences from them relating to IQ tests lack statistical validity, and are thus of dubious value (Capron et al., 1999; Kempthorne, 1997; Schonemann, 1997c; Schonemann and Schonemann, 1994).

      Wahlsten (1981) argues that errors are so wide spread in the heritability literature that the critical reader has good reason to doubt every article published on the topic in relationship to IQ. He goes further stating that it is necessary to check the arithmetic, algebra and original references before seriously considering any conclusions. For example, the most widely used heritability method, now, is based on a paper by Jinks and Fulker (1970). However, this method contains an algebraic error that renders its application in most instances, completely worthless (Capron et al, 1999; Schonemann, 1997c, 1990). Schonemann (1997c) shows that conventional heritability estimates often produce absurdly high values for variables that cannot possibly be genetic. He found that if one applies the traditional heritability arithmetic to the twin data collected by Loehlin and Nichols (1976), that the answer to the question “Did you take a bubble bath last year” is 90% genetic (Schonemann, 1997c)! Kempthorne (1978, 1997) argues that the concept of heritability is important for plant and animal breeding because it is possible to design and carry out experiments to estimate variance components, but that data on humans is observational, and individuals are not randomly assigned to environments, and should therefore be ignored.

      A psychologist administering an IQ test to different kinships (e.g. twins) is not manipulating either the genetic or environmental factors, as is done in animal experiments (Capron et al, 1999), and thus their estimates tend to be little more than speculation in absence of proof. In fact, many highly authoritative statistical and biometrical experts argue that the true heritability of IQ is probably closer to zero (see: Schonemann, 1997c, 1990; Schonemann and Schonemann, 1994; Capron et al, 1999; Vetta, 2002; Wahlsten, 1981, 1990; Vetta and Coureau, 2003; Taylor, 1980; Hirsch 1970, 1997, 2004; Kempthorne 1978, 1997)! Indeed, literacy and “acculturation” have been shown to predict IQ score differences between groups and individuals better than any other variables (Boone, 2007; Manly et al, 1998; Fagan and Holland, 2002, 2007; Ryan et al, 2005).

      Why the Racial Controversy?

      While one will find many flaws and inconsistencies inherent to the concept of IQ, this has not managed to stop many hard nosed advocates from continuing to promote the test’s practical merits for predicting academic success and occupational status within western market based societies – This is in spite of the fact that the test’s predictive value even in these areas has also been roundly challenged (Schonemann, 1997c, 2005; Siegel, 1989; Bradshaw, 2001; Sternberg, 2001; Frank, 1983). Some of the more ardent IQ advocates have even gone so far as to argue that the possible reason many blacks and other minorities do not achieve in the areas of academic attainment and occupational status is not because of any historical racism or societal factors against them, but instead because of factors that relate to low IQ scores. Simply ignoring historical events (e.g. slavery and Jim Crow) economic and educational biases (Pattillo,1999; Diamond and Spillane 2004; Roscigno, 1998), the affects of culture and cultural differences (Valsiner, 2000; Cole et al. 1971; Serpell R., 1979; Ogbu and Simons, 1998), the questionable methodology and theory involved in IQ tests (Schonemann, 1997c, 2005; Guttman, 1955, 1992; Hirsch, 1970, 2004), poor test validity and predictive value (Schonemann, 1997c, Bradshaw, 2001; Sternberg, 1997), test bias (Manly, 1998; Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997; Kwate, 2001; Baldwin and Bell, 1985; Borsboom, 2006) and overwhelming criticism leveled against heritability estimates (Capron et al, 1999; Schonemann, 1994, 1997c; Hirsh, 1970, 2004 ; Kempthorn; 1978, 1997; Lidz and Blatt, 1983; Joseph, 2004, 2006; Vetta, 1976, 2002), these advocates generally proceed with their arguments, unaltered.

      For example, in 1994 authors Herrnstein and Murray in their controversial book “The Bell Curve” argued that a dysgenic trend exists in western societies that foresee the establishment of a “cognitive elite.” Although their work was subject to wide and often scathing criticism, the authors managed to generate a substantial amount of media attention, which helped to perpetuate negative ethnic stereotypes in the formal literature and in public discourse for a number of years. Many IQ advocates argue that a general index of cognitive ability is the single best predictor of virtually all criteria considered necessary for success in life in the Western part of the developed world (Schmidt, Ones & Hunter, 1992), and maintain that the average undergraduate, “those who graduate from college or university”, must possess an IQ that is, on average, no lower than 115 (Ostrowsky, 1999; Gottfredson, 1998), while individuals who are able to obtain a graduate level degree must on average, possess an IQ in the range of 125 (Gottfredson, 1998). This often serves the implied purpose of suggesting that blacks and other minorities do not go on to, or graduate from institutions of higher learning - and ultimately move on to professional careers and economic success – not because of matters relating to personal interest, financial ability, or the quality of schooling received in the past, but instead because of factors relating to IQ scores (e.g. Jensen, 1980; Gottfredson, 1998). These arguments also tend to base themselves within the framework of “nature vs. nurture.” In this case, does more school develop high IQ, or does a high IQ equal more school and greater socio-economic success (Jensen, 1980; Gottfredson, 1998)? Others point out simply that the correlation between IQ scores and school performance is one deliberately built into tests, and that processes associated with schooling directly influence tests performance (Richardson, 2002).
      African Blacks significantly Exceed Whites in Educational Attainment and Occupational Status:

      African-born blacks comprise about 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000), and are “considerably” more educated than other immigrants. The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria). While less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (CIA World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003).
      In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (see also Nisbett, 2002; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998; Nisbett, 2002).

      Most data suggests that between 43.8 and 49.3 percent of “all” African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; U.S. Census, 2000). This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., substantially greater than the percentage of European immigrants, nearly “double” that of native-born white Americans, nearly four times the rate of native-born African Americans, and more than “8 times” that of some Hispanic groups (Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000; U.S. Census, 2000). Black immigrants from Africa have also been shown to have rates of college graduation that are “more” than double that of the U.S. born population, in general (Williams, 2005). For example, in 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a “graduate degree”, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites (a difference of “more than” double) and 3.8 percent of adult blacks in the United States, respectively (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). This shows that America has an equally large achievement gap between white Americans and African born immigrants as between native born white and black Americans

      In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George's, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. However, minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites (Blacks in Britain from the West Indies had lower academic credentials than did whites). In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles. Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for university admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994; Also see, Dustmann and Theodoropoulos, 2006). Dustmann and Theodoropoulos (2006) provided the first thorough investigation of educational attainment and economic behavior of ethnic minority immigrants and their children in Britain. This study investigated how British born minorities performed in terms of education, employment and wages when compared to their parent’s generation, as well as to comparable groups of white natives, using 27 years of “LFS data” (Labour Force Survey). For both generations Black Africans topped the list in both years of schooling/educational qualifications and wages/employment, followed by Indian and Chinese immigrants. In terms of educational attainment levels, their results showed a strong educational background for Britain’s ethnic minority immigrant population, in general, with second generation ethnic minorities on average doing better than their parents, and “substantially better” than their white peers for most socio-economic indicators.

      Again, when comparing immigrants in the United States one quickly finds that the racialist models adopted by many Psychologists do not always predict outcomes in the way one might expect. For example, it has been shown that black immigrants born from Zimbabwe (96.7 percent), Botswana (95.5 percent) have high school graduation rates that far exceed all white immigrant and native born groups. While the average Nigerian immigrant (58.6 percent) living in the United States is “eight times” more likely to have obtained a bachelors degree than the average Portuguese born (7.3 percent) (Dixon D, 2006; Dixon D, 2005)! The African born in the United States are concentrated in management or professional and sales or office-related occupations. Of the employed population age 16 and older in the civilian labor force, the African born are much more likely than the foreign born in general to work in management and professional occupations as well as sales and office occupations (i.e. clerical/administrative). Additionally, the African born are less likely to work in service, production, transportation, material moving, construction, and maintenance occupations than the foreign born in general (Dixon D, 2006). In the UK a study by Li and Heath, from Birmingham University and Oxford University (respectively), found that Africans are more likely to be in professional and managerial jobs than white British men, with a large proportion, about 40%, holding these positions (Li and Heath, 2006; Cassidy, 2006).

      Black African Educational Attainment and their Implications for IQ:

      The information presented above suggests that African born blacks residing in western countries as a group possess IQs that are between 5 points and a full standard deviation (15 IQ points) above that of whites living in these countries (see, Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Richardson, 2002; Cross, 1994; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002). So that the median IQ for African blacks residing in the west should be about 110, if one accepts the research suggesting direct casual relationships between academic attainment and IQ (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999)! This is especially true for those living in the United States and in the UK. One may also expect to find, according to much of the “corroborative” literature that relates IQ with education, approximately twice the number of African born immigrants with IQs in the 115 range, than among the general white American population (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002); and more than twice the number of African immigrants in the 125 IQ range (see Gottfredson, 1998; Nisbett, 2002; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). For example, in the United States, African born blacks and their offspring have been reported as exceeding American born whites in several of the most cognitive socio-economic indicators - particularly the areas of educational attainment and occupational status - in ways that are virtually identical to the gaps observed between native born white and black Americans, in the same indicators (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; Le, 2007; Le, 2007; US Census Bureau, Census 2000. "5% Public Use Microdata Sample.").

      Some advantages to using academic attainment comparisons for the analysis of major group differences in IQ in Western industrialized nations are that they provide very big numbers, with sample sizes often in the hundreds of thousands, that are genuinely random; and consequently specific ethnicities can be compared with statistical confidence. The differences in overall educational attainment observed between African born blacks in the United States and native born white Americans are quite spectacular! Indeed, if one chooses to adopt the racial hereditarian thinking of Jensen (1980), Herrnstein and Murray (1994) or Gottfredson (1998), these disparities become suggestive of underlying intelligence differences between the two populations; with these differences in “strong favor” of African born blacks! Though higher cognitive indices are said by some to be predictive of more educational achievements and more education predictive of higher intellectual outcomes (e.g., Brody, 1997; Ceci & Williams, 1997), so that there are reciprocal relationships. Most who study African immigrants attribute their inclination toward academic attainment to be the result of positive cultural factors (Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).

      In the United States today, most claims regarding differences between ethnic ‘populations’ in relationship to IQ test performance are based on statistically derived data that relate to scholastic aptitude tests (e.g. Flynn, 2006). With this in mind, and acknowledging the superior educational attainment of African blacks in the United States (and elsewhere) it can thus be argued, because of their “substantially” superior educational attainment levels, that they must also surmount far more (in number) and more difficult scholastic aptitude tests, which in turn would require higher level IQs (see Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999). As whites on average do not, or are unable to attain the same levels of academic achievement within these (their own!) academic institutional frameworks they must also, by the racialist thinking employed by some, possess significantly lower cogitative indices on the group level (e.g. Jensen, 1998; Gottfredson, 1986, 1998). In fact, attainment differences of these ‘grand’ magnitudes would suggest that American whites, in particular, are at a significant intellectual handicap when matched against immigrants of black African, East Indian, and East Asian descent. Incidentally, most American whites themselves are the children or grandchildren of “self-selected,” voluntary immigrants from Europe (Ogbu and Simons, 1998), and thus these trends can not be said to result from immigrant selectivity.

      African born blacks residing in Western countries tend also to be concentrated in higher level professional occupations, which are considered (by some) to be more intellectually demanding; requiring greater cognitive ability (Jensen, 1980; Gottfredson, 1986; Herrnstein and Murray, 1994), than the average occupations of either American or British born whites (Nisbett, 2002; Dixon, 2006; Li and Heath, 2006; Dustmann and Theodoropoulos, 2006). According to IQ advocates and social Darwinists, alike, these occupational differences should also be suggestive of higher levels of intelligence among black African immigrants than among whites (e.g. Gottfredson, 1986; Jensen 1980). Cole (1990), argues that the relevance of school-based skills, such as those found on IQ and scholastic aptitude tests, will grow as the outside-of-school contexts becomes more like that of school, itself. Demand for these kind of school based skills are found most frequently among the kind of clerical/administrative occupations (Richardson, 2002) that African born blacks residing in western countries are overrepresented (Nisbett, 2002; Dixon, 2006). In fact, as virtually all IQ tests in popular use today are designed specifically for the purposes of predicting academic success and occupational status, it could thus be argued that the west’s hereditarian “Cognitive Elite” (discussed in “The Bell Curve”) might be best described as black men and women from Africa.

      Something else to note, according to the New York Times (Roberts, 2005), for the first time in history more blacks are coming to the United States from Africa than during the entire span of the transatlantic slave trade: “Immigration figures show that since 1990 more Africans have arrived voluntarily than the total who disembarked in chains before the United States outlawed international slave trafficking in 1807. “ For example, research shows that around 15% of Ghana’s 20million citizens live aboard (Owusu-Ankomah 2006). Similar trends can be observed among other African states. In other words: black African achievement can not simply be dismissed as that of a “small group” of elites entirely unrepresentative of the greater continent. Moreover, the academic attainment and occupational achievements of black Africans are not only documented in the United States, but also the UK (Li and Heath, 2006; Dustmann, Theodoropoulos, 2006) and Canada (Guppy and Davies, 1998; Boyd, 2002; The Canadian Encyclopedia, 2008).

      Culture, Race and Intelligence Testing:

      It is taken for granted by many in the West that children who do well on standardized tests are intelligent. However, different cultures have their on views of what intelligence is (Sternberg, 2007; Cole, 1990; Cole et al. 1971; Greenfield, 1997). In this respect, children that are considered intelligent may vary from one culture to another, along with the acts that constitute intelligent behavior (Sternberg, 2007). It has been said, for example, that the comparison of IQ scores of different nationalities or cultural groups is, at best, a hazardous enterprise and at worst, a nonsensical and mischievous waste of time (Mackintosh, 1998). Cronbach (1949/1970, p. 182) states that IQ tests require experience common to U.S. culture, and are of dubious value for comparing different cultural groups. Reduced exposure to middle-class cultural tools can also have negative affects on one’s IQ score, so that culture is a major mediator of one’s test performance (Richardson, 2000; see also Manly et al, 1998).

      Rarely do researchers attempt to provide examples where the disadvantaged or culturally distinct groups actually do better on standardized measures than do members of the more culturally dominant group, who arbitrarily impose these measures. In addition, few researchers will apply standardized measures that are either preferred or devised in favor of those who must operate within more informal sectors and/or economically disadvantaged circles to members of the more dominant or mainstream group, in order to provide balance. It has been shown, for example, that tests which are highly novel in one culture or subculture may be quite familiar in the next (Valsiner, 2000), so that unschooled subjects will fail at classification tasks characteristic of school learning contexts and succeed with classification relevant to their everyday practical experiences (Cole, 1990; Cole et al. 1971). That is, even if components of information processing are the same, the experiential novelty to which they are applied may be different (Valsiner, 2000). Thus, the structure of thought depends upon the structure of the dominant types of activity in different cultures, so that people will be good at doing the things that are important to them, and that they have opportunities to do often.

      Examples of this “experiential novelty” effect are observed in a study by Serpell (1979), in which Zambian and English children were asked to reproduce patterns using either three different alternatives: wire models, clay models, or pencil and paper. The Zambian children in this study excelled in the wire medium with which they were most familiar, exceeding the English children in that task; while the English children were best with pencil and paper. Both groups were found to performed equally well with clay. Thus, children performed better with materials that were more familiar to them, from their own environments. A Carraher et al (1985) study also demonstrated examples of “experiential novelty” effect, this time in a group of Brazilian children. The study found that the same children who were able to do the mathematics needed to run their street businesses were little able to do “the same” mathematics when presented in a more formal (grade schooling) context.

      Cole et al (1971) studied a tribe in Africa called the “Kpelle” in which culture was shown to have a rather humorous effect on interpretations of intelligence. In this study adult participants were asked to sort items into categories. However, rather than producing the kind of taxonomic categories (e.g. "fruit" for apple) typically done in the west, the Kpelle participants sorted items into functional groups (e.g. "eat" for apple). After trying and “failing” to teach them to categorize items taxonomically, the Kpelle were asked as a last resort how a “stupid” person would do the task. At that point, according to the researchers, without any hesitation, the Kpelle sorted items into taxonomic categories (Cole et al., 1971)! Demonstrating that not only where they able to do the presented tasks, but in their own culture, what was considered intelligent by western views was believed to be “stupid.”

      Education, Literacy, Standardized Tests and Culture --When Blacks Exceed Whites
      [COLOR="rgb(65, 105, 225)"]
      Crawford-Nutt (1976) found that African black students enrolled in westernized schools scored higher on progressive matrix tests than did American white students. T[/COLOR]he study was meant to examine perceptual/cultural differences between groups, and demonstrated that one’s performance on western standardized tests correspond more closely with the quality and style of schooling that one receives more so than other factors. It has been argued, for example, that the forms of recognition and reasoning found on Progressive Matrixes tests are exercised and maintained within a western style educational environment (Ceci & Williams, 1997; Ceci, 1991; Richardson, 2000, 2002), thus it is of little surprise that a quality western style education should produce results such as these. Buj (1981) showed Ghanaian adults in another study to score higher on the same supposedly ‘culture fair’ intelligence test, than did Irish adults; scores were 80 (Ghanaian) and 78 (Irish), respectively. Shuttleworth-Edwards et al (2004) conducted a study with black South Africans between the ages of 19–30, which showed highly significant effects for both level and quality of education within groups whose first language was an indigenous black African language. For example, black African first language groups (as well as white English speaking groups) with advantaged education were comparable with the US standardization in IQ test scores (e.g. WAIS-III).

      Other programs have shown dramatic improvement in test scores for socially disadvantaged adolescents as a result of short-term cognitive training, so that "…three months later their performance was indistinguishable from that of middle class students” (Feuerstein & Kozulin, 1995, p. 74). For example, a number of studies have shown that Ethiopian immigrant students (who come from extraordinarily poor rural circumstances) tested in Israel by different IQ tests had, in pre-intervention tests, demonstrated lower test scores than the Israeli norm. However, after a short but intensive teaching process, the Ethiopian immigrant children performed at about the same level as the Israeli norm (Tzuriel & Kaufman, 1999; Kozulin, 1998).

      Bond (1924) early last century pointed out that[COLOR="rgb(65, 105, 225)"] the average IQ scores of African Americans from several northern states were higher than those for whites from many southern states (Bond, 1924a, p. 63). He argued that African Americans who migrated to the North must have left their "duller and less accomplished White fellows in the South." Indeed, at that time upward of 85% of African Americans resided in the South, as most still do, to do this day. Bond also believed that IQ test scores reflected social and educational training. Inline with this belief, Jenkins's (1936) reported the results of IQ tests given to Black and White children in Illinois, and found that the proportion of students with scores over 130 was the same among Black and White children when environmental influences were comparable. A study involving Caribbean children would essentially replicate these findings. For example, this study found that when raised in the same enriched institutional environments as white children; black children demonstrated superior IQ test scores. The IQ’s of the children in this particular orphanage were: Blacks 108, Mixed 106, and Whites 103 ([/COLOR]Tizard et al, 1972).

      Studies also show that upward of 99% of group IQ score differences between healthy black and white Americans are eliminated after controlling for simple cultural factors.
      Manly et al (1998) found that after cultural factors such as linguistic behavior (e.g. black vs. standard English) are taken into account between healthy black and white Americans, that IQ score differences between these populations disappear; becoming insignificant in all but only one area (a reading section)! It is argued that because those who construct standardized tests come from a narrow social group, it follows that test items will contain information and structures that match the background knowledge of some people more than others (Richardson, 2000). This may explain why “acculturation” is found to predict IQ score differences better than virtually any other variable, aside from literacy levels (which is essentially another mediator of culture). Other studies have shown similar results, after controlling for cultural factors. Fagan and Holland (2002) found that where exposure to specific information was required; whites knew more about the meanings of different sayings than did Blacks, due to exposure. But, when comprehension was based on generally available information, Whites and Blacks did not differ (Fagan and Holland, 2002; see also, Fagan and Holland, 2007). This study also found that when Blacks and Whites are matched as to the comprehension of sayings requiring specific knowledge that Blacks were superior to Whites on intelligence tests (ibid).

      Teng and Manly (2005) argue that tests developed for members of the majority culture are often inappropriate for ethnic minorities, especially those who speak a different language, have little or no formal education, and grow up in vastly different circumstances (see also, Williams, 1972; Boone et al, 2007). These researchers argue that variables that directly affect test performance, such as education and acculturation instead of race or ethnicity, should be considered as explanatory variables for test performance (Teng and Manly, 2005). Boone et al (2007) obtained findings that further supported this line, as not ethnic differences, but the effects of acculturation directly and significantly influenced IQ test performance. The authors cautioned that normative data derived on Caucasian samples may not be appropriate for use with other ethnic groups (Boone et al, 2007). Ryan et al (2005) found that discrepancy in reading and education level was associated with worse psychological test performance (e.g. IQ and other tests), while racial/ethnic minority status was not.

      In the United States, when matched for IQ with Whites, American Blacks have been shown to demonstrate superior “Working Memory” (Nijenhuis et al., 2004). This is an interesting finding, as African Americans are typically taught by less qualified teachers (e.g. non-certified teachers and teachers with limited experience) than their white counterparts, and are provided with less challenging school work (Hallinan 1994; Diamond et al., 2004; Uhlenberg and Brown 2004). In Chicago, for example, the vast majority of schools placed on academic probation as part of the district accountability efforts were majority African-American and low-income (Diamond and Spillane 2004). Thus, it is somewhat surprising that African Americans should outperform white Americans on any portion of a paper and pencil test designed to mimic the structures of western style schooling (Richardson, 2000, 2002).


      Educational inequality in the U.S. is a pervasive part of the social system, and is primarily a consequence of housing. Since the majority of states determine school funding based on property taxes, schools in wealthier neighborhoods receive more funding per student. As home values in white neighborhoods are higher than minority neighborhoods, local schools receive more funding via property taxes (Kelly, 1995). In addition, there has been a history of social policy which has limited African American’s access to avenues of wealth accumulation (e.g. purchasing suburban homes); so that black families also have far fewer assets than their white counterparts who earn the same incomes (Oliver and Shapiro, 1995). Parents with greater assets are free to use for things like tutors, purchase educational materials (e.g. computers), and to pay for private schools and more expensive colleges.

      Serpell et al. (2006) took 162 low-income African American and white fourth graders and assigned them, randomly, to ethnically homogeneous groups of three to work on a motion acceleration task, using computer simulation or physical tools; or to a control group that did not participate in the learning activities. It was shown that both African American and White students performed equally well on the test of initial learning, with both groups scoring significantly higher than the control group. However, this study also found that African American’s transfer outcomes were superior to those of their White counterparts (Serpell et al., 2006). The study demonstrated, empirically, that not only do African American children learn as well as white children, but that they may also exceed white children in their ability to transfer learned abilities to real tasks; further highlighting the need for better education for this group.

    4. #4
      Langalibalele's Avatar
      Langalibalele is offline Honorable Ancestor

      Join Date
      Nov 2005
      Location
      Little Haiti, Pittsburgh aka Amerikaz Black Colony
      Posts
      669
      Blog Entries
      7
      Thumbs Up/Down
      Received: 0/0
      Given: 0/0
      Rep Power
      177

      0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
      Wait until the Revolution, y'all. They won't even be around to spout they racist crap.
      Build a World Wide Palenque:
      Communities of Resistance!

      Mbantunyankompong and Kilombo Republic


    Thread Information

    Users Browsing this Thread

    There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Similar Threads

    1. Wise Intelligent Speaks About Black Love
      By Ephraim in forum Open Forum
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: 01-06-2012, 01:13 PM
    2. Intelligent People
      By TTDC Bot in forum Revolutionary Daily Thoughts
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: 11-09-2011, 01:00 AM
    3. Replies: 3
      Last Post: 09-09-2011, 09:54 AM
    4. Black farmers deserve a second chance on claims
      By WombanAuset in forum Open Forum
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: 02-07-2006, 04:19 PM
    5. Lawsuit Claims Black Girl Forced to...
      By Nesayem in forum Afrikan World News
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: 01-05-2006, 01:16 AM

    Thread Participants: 3

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •  


    About

      Assata Shakur Speaks is an Forum Devoted To Assata Shakur And All Political Prisoners Around The World.
      Assata Shakur Speaks Is An Oasis Of Pan African Information Geared Towards The Liberation Of Afrikan People.

    Follow Us On

    Twitter Facebook youtube Flickr DavianArt Dribbble RSS Feed



    BACK TO TOP