Really important point here: Yes, SAT scores are correlated with SES, but *so is everything else.*
Featuring a quote from this paper by @bendomingue and colleagues: science.org/doi/10.1126/sc…
Wonder which universities/programs are going to be the first to change course on #GRExit ...
Sometime during the pandemic, @tuckerdrob and I drafted an op/ed about dropping standardized testing, but life got in the way and we never pitched it anywhere. If you're an editor who would be interested in us dusting it off, DM me
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In this review, @Graham_Coop & @molly_przew allege that "it is hard not to interpret the book as saying that most of these GWAS effects are natural causes residing inside the brain, thereby nudging the reader towards genetic determinism". Let's take a look at what the book says!
@Graham_Coop@molly_przew The entirety of Chapter 5 is about the counterfactual definitions of causation, *and the boundaries of that definition*, including statements such as:
There's this, on the dangers of genetic determinism for sapping political will to address social inequality:
Are there modern / recent philosophers who argue that (1) no you don't have free will but (2) yes you are morally responsible anyway?
not Dennett, not a compatabilist
is there a modern Calvin, a hardcore determinist who believes you couldn't have done otherwise, and also a retributivist who believes you are morally responsible and deserve to be punished
(thank you for your patience as I struggle to make sense of the landscape)
I really enjoyed this conversation with @laurahercher. Starting at about 22 min in, we talk about PGS effect sizes, their (lack of) portability, and why I think we should still be taking them seriously
@laurahercher featuring a shout-out to @familyunequal who posted this graph about the correlation between educational attainment and income (r2 = 16%)
speaking of this graph, wonder what folks think about this as an approach to illustrating PGS associations? @ent3c, I know you loathe decile plots, but what if in addition to the average phenotype by PGS decile, one also showed the cloud of individual points?
In all seriousness, I think that — for all their flaws — public research universities are among the most amazing accomplishments of American society, and being able to spend my life working in one is a true privilege
I have taught literally thousands of undergraduates, and have mentored hundreds of RAs, and the portrayal of students as coddled or brittle or afraid of ideas just does not match my experience …
Do my students push back when they think I got something wrong? Definitely yes. And I’m defensive and then I think about it and I almost always learn something. And my teaching and scholarship are better for it
Much skepticism re: end of NYC G&T focuses on perceived harms to children who would have otherwise tested into G&T — but also worth considering effects of mixed-ability groupings on children who would have otherwise not had the G&T kids in their classroom …
Example from higher-ed context: grouping with higher-scoring students actually hurt the academic performance of lower-scoring students: povertyactionlab.org/es/node/2019
outside of the US: “grouping children based on learning levels rather than age or grade” … “ consistently improves learning outcomes when implemented well and has led to some of the largest learning gains among rigorously evaluated education programs” povertyactionlab.org/case-study/tea…
my only take on Bad Art Friend: everyone has *at least* one Bad Science Friend but you are better off not thinking too hard about it
any editor of a journal will tell you: the people you are recommending as reviewers because you think they will be friendly and like your work? many times the harshest reviewers
being a working scientist means loose ties that might be friendly enough but are not intimate, combined with all of us getting ideas from each other and being collegial to people whose work/persona we think are weak/meh/cringe …