IQ is one of those unspeakable realities in education and yet it explains so much

“The single strongest personality predictor [of conspiracy thinking] is narcissism. Narcissists are particularly prone to conspiracy theories because they have a strong need for uniqueness, are prone to paranoia, and can also be remarkably gullible.” stevestewartwilliams.com/p/1…

I love a paper that says exactly what it means

It's an interesting phenomenon, that the biggest proponents of IQ are the ones who, if measured, wouldn't have a high one. Like wanting to be considered smart through cultural distinction rather than actually being smart. In any case, IQ is nonsense.

The smartest people in history and have high IQ's

I have analysed Sweller et al (1982) in so much detail, and it would be so complex to *write* a clear blog on it, that I’m considering doing a vidcast, narrating my thoughts while going through the paper....

Interesting session. Going on from an earlier 'knowledge rich' tweet that attracted some attention, there is little I disagree with on this slide from Oates (note the skills 😉). The session does have several causal claims on achievement I would question. youtu.be/SYubbDXWEyA?si=_6El…

What's a theological opinion that will have you like this?

And that whilst 'summarisation' deemed 'low utility' by Dunlosky. But as you say, it being one university, means this tells us almost nothing. It's only 'indicative' for confirmation bias. 😎

I'm referring to the body of work generated by education academia and transmitted to its students. I think it's true that there will be some specific instances of people who, working within that environment, learn from the legitimate scholarship in adjacent fields and work to transmit it to their students, but not in a way that negates the importance of harsh critique of that environment itself. If someone wants to learn pedagogy, "ask education school professors" or "go to education school" are often unproductive or even counterproductive routes.

Asked 'Study' mode in OpenAI what pedagogy it used, for example 'Learning Styles'. Interesting answer.... looks as though it's pretty solid... the Universal Teacher may be on its way....

Education's biggest secret that lies in plain sight is this: the culture of many schools, and the outcomes of their students, is dominated by the social strata and economic circumstances of the cohort's families. Put simply, children from circumstances of poverty, neglect, abuse, lack etc are disproportionately exposed to risk factors that reduce and frustrate their opportunities to flourish at school and in life. This isn't (or shouldn't be) a controversial thing to say. 🧵 Of course this is probability not destiny: kids with every advantage can do badly. Children with nothing sometimes win everything. But when it comes to games of chance, the house usually wins. Why do most kids grade so well in an independent school? It's not because of the teaching, which is very, very similar to state ed teaching. It's largely because of the social, cultural and educational capital inherited and absorbed from the home environment. Why do kids do so well in a grammar school? Because they are largely captured from the most able and academic cohort of children. Guess what happens when you put them all in one place? They do rather well. FANCY THAT.