06.02.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Culture-biased Tests 297<br />

l<strong>and</strong> in the city cost more than l<strong>and</strong> in the country’ ‘Why are<br />

laws necessary’) (Shuey, 1966, p. 407; Plotkin, 1971, p. 6). Negroes<br />

actually score lowest on the Block Design subtest, a non-verbal<br />

test requiring the subject to copy patterns of increasing complexity<br />

with a set of sixteen colored one-inch blocks. This is probably<br />

the least culture-loaded subtest of the WAIS. This is not a result<br />

peculiar to the Wechsler tests. In general, Negroes obtain higher<br />

scores on tests which <strong>by</strong> any reasonable criteria appear to be more<br />

culture-loaded than on items that are less culture-loaded.<br />

This has been demonstrated most dramatically in a study <strong>by</strong><br />

McGurk (1953a, 1953b, 1967). He compared the performance of<br />

Negro <strong>and</strong> white 18-year-old high school students on highly<br />

culture-loaded as compared with minimally culture-loaded intelligence<br />

test items. For this purpose, to quote McGurk (1967,<br />

p. 374), ‘A special test was constructed, half the questions of which<br />

were rated as depending heavily on cultural background (the<br />

culture questions) while the other half were rated as depending<br />

little on cultural background (the non-cultural questions). Each<br />

set of questions yielded a score - either a culture score or a nonculture<br />

score.’ McGurk found that the ‘Negroes performed better<br />

(relative to the whites) on the culturally loaded questions’ (p. 378).<br />

This comparison was based on Negro <strong>and</strong> white groups selected<br />

in such a manner that ‘Negroes <strong>and</strong> whites were paired so that the<br />

members of each pair - one Negro <strong>and</strong> one white - were identical<br />

or equivalent for fourteen socio-economic factors’ (p. 379).<br />

How can we underst<strong>and</strong> such seemingly paradoxical results,<br />

which are the rule <strong>and</strong> not the exception In order to find the<br />

answer, I have carried out item analyses of many kinds of intelligence<br />

tests, seeking those which discriminate the most <strong>and</strong> the<br />

least between Negro <strong>and</strong> white subjects, as well as between white<br />

lower <strong>and</strong> middle SES subjects. When one brings together large<br />

numbers of test items solely on the basis of whether they discriminate<br />

minimally or maximally between Negro <strong>and</strong> white (or low<br />

<strong>and</strong> middle SES) samples, the answer to the paradoxical findings<br />

becomes apparent. All intelligence tests are intentionally devised<br />

so that the items vary in difficulty, usually beginning with the<br />

easiest items <strong>and</strong> increasing gradually to the most difficult items.<br />

Item difficulty is objectively defined simply in terms of the percentage<br />

of the normative population that fails to give the correct<br />

answer to the item.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!