Language Diversity in the Classroom - ymerleksi - home

72 Language Diversity in the ClassroomWhen it was found that some groups more materially disadvantagedthan American blacks outperformed them on non-verbal intelligencetests, Jensen and others claimed this to be a demonstration of theweakness of an environmentalist position. A specific instance wasrecorded by Hans Eysenck: he observed that the test performance ofInuit children was superior to that of black youngsters, even though theformer apparently live under much harsher environmental conditionsthan the latter; indeed, some Inuit test scores were at or above the normsestablished for white children. Eysenck (1975: 110) summarized thematter as follows:if social and sensory deprivation, or other environmental deprivationfactors, are postulated to account for IQ deficits in white workingclassor coloured populations, then the logic of the explanationrequires absolutely that a severely deprived group, such as theEskimos [sic], should show evidence of IQ deficit; the fact is that theydo not.In fact, however, all that is demonstrated is the complexity of environmentalfactors, the difficulty in adequately assessing them, and thedanger in simply equating material poverty with educational and socialdisadvantage; see Taylor and Skanes (1977) for a thoughtful response toEysenck’s assertions. To equate observable and rather gross indices ofmaterial deprivation with intellectual disadvantage, when such variablesmay not in fact be directly relevant, does not make for a strong case.There may exist all sorts of differences in all sorts of groups, such thatsome will score better than others on any given test, and such differencesmay or may not be related to poverty of physical environment. It is atleast a reasonable assumption, however, that score differences may berelated to more specific, less visible variables that exist and operate in thesocial environment. (In fairness to Jensen, Eysenck and their epigones, itshould be acknowledged that the environmentalist position that theyattacked did often base its arguments largely upon material deprivation;this emphasis, however, was a weakness of the environmentalist stanceon disadvantage, not of the explanatory value of the environment per se;see below.)Attempts have been made to control for environment by matchingsocioeconomic-status levels across the groups that are to be compared(black and white schoolchildren, for instance), but these cannot be veryuseful in contexts in which such matching does not really implyenvironmental equality. In societies where racial prejudice exists, forexample, it is obvious that gross similarities in socioeconomic status may