Educability-and-Group-Differences-1973-by-Arthur-Robert-Jensen

Recommendations

Info

Teacher Expectancy 263 To date there have been nine attempts all together to replicate the Rosenthal and Jacobson (RJ) Pygmalion effect. Elashoff and Snow (1971, pp. 158-9) in their review of these studies concluded . . . it can be seen that of nine studies (other than RJ) attempting to demonstrate teacher expectancy effects on IQ, none has succeeded. Of twelve expectancy studies including pupil achievement measures as criteria, six have succeeded. Of seven studies including measures of observable pupil behavior, three have succeeded. And of seventeen studies including measures of observable teacher behavior, fourteen have succeeded. Thus it seems that teacher expectancy effects are most likely to influence proximal variables (those ‘closest’ in a psychological sense to the source of effect, e.g., teacher behavior) and progressively less likely to influence distal variables (or variables psychologically remote from the source of expectations). IQ, the most remote of pupil variables, is unlikely to be affected. These results are consistent with a Brunswikian view of teacher-learner interaction. . . . They suggest that teacher expectancies may be important and are certainly deserving of study, but they fail utterly to support Pygmalion's celebrated effect on IQ. NOTES 1. Unfortunately, this study did not include IQs that were deflated. Teachers’ judgments of the degree of accuracy of their pupils’ IQs may not be symmetrical for inflated and deflated values; that is to say, teachers may be more (or less) sensitive to an overestimate of their pupils’ intelligence than to an underestimate. Teachers are capable of making fairly accurate judgments of their pupils’ intelligence based on their classroom performance. The writer recently asked teachers in eight elementary school classes (grades 4, 5, 6) to rate their own impression, near the end of the school year, of each pupil’s intelligence. Each pupil was rated on a 5-point scale. None had been given any psychometric tests prior to the teachers’ assessments. The teacher ratings had the following correlations: Lorge-Thorndike Verbal IQ, 0-66; Lorge-Thorndike Non-verbal IQ, 0-58; Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices, 0-49; Rote Memory Test, 0-44. The teacher’s rating had a loading of 0-79
264 Educability and Group Differences on the first principal component in a principal components analysis of the intercorrelations among these tests and other measures. 2. There is one peculiarity to be noted in this study and about which the authors make no comment. The mean IQs of all groups are unusually high (overall mean = 112-15). While the IQ difference between low and middle SES groups was by far the largest effect in the experiment, the SES IQ difference was still smaller than is generally found. The mean post-test IQs of low and middle SES groups were 106-86 and 117-18, respectively. Nothing is said about the racial composition of the samples, but a mean IQ of 106-86 is certainly well above that generally found for either white or Negro samples classed as ‘low SES’. This atypical peculiarity of the data in an otherwise impeccable study may limit its generalizability to more typical populations.
Page 1 and 2:
Educability & Group Differences Art
Page 3 and 4:
THE AUTHOR Since 1957 Dr. Arthur R.
Page 5 and 6:
Ediicability and Group ^
Page 7 and 8:
To the memory of Sir Cyril Burt e d
Page 9 and 10:
List o f Tables 3.1 Correlations am
Page 11 and 12:
17.3 Theoretical regression lines b
Page 13 and 14:
2 Educability and Group Differences
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
10 Educability and Group Difference
Page 23 and 24:
1 4 16 24 16 ^ I 1 2 1 2 6 6 2 1610
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Subpopulation differences in educab
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
2 Current technical misconceptions
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
j Intelligence and educability Educ
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Table 3.1 Correlations (decimals om
Page 93 and 94:
Table 3.3 Correlations (decimals om
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
100 Educability and Group Differenc
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
7 Race differences in intelligence
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
8 Multiple and partial correlation
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224: 212 Educability and Group Differenc
Page 255 and 256: 244 Educabilty and Group Difference
Page 271 and 272: 14 Teacher expectancy Credence in t
Page 273: 262 Educability and Group Differenc
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
ig Physical environment and mental
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
20 Recapitulation The study of abil
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Appendix on Heritability Heritabili
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
References a in s w o r t h , m . d
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
398 Author Index Davis, A., 300 Dea
Page 411 and 412:
400 Author Index Nichols, R. C., 10
Page 413 and 414:
Author Index 401 Warren, B. L., 120
Page 415 and 416:
cultural deprivation, 258 culture-b
Page 417 and 418:
Making Xs Test of speed and persist
Page 419 and 420:
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale,
show all

Educability-and-Group-Differences-1973-by-Arthur-Robert-Jensen

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?