There’s an essay in the New York Times written by a mother whose identical twin daughters both saw their E.L.A scores sink by “approximately 40 points” between the fourth and sixth grades.
The essay, unfortunately, is completely devoid of any information to tell you what in god’s name she’s talking about. What does 40 points mean? 40 points on a test graded on a scale from 1 to 50 means something extremely different than 40 points on a test graded on a scale from 1 to 10,000.
Only after doing a lot of Googling did I finally figure out that in 2005, the NY English Language Arts scores for the eighth grade had a mean of 698.2 and a standard deviation of 32.41. So a drop of 40 points would exceed a standard deviation, and that’s a pretty large drop indeed.
Probably, everything happening here can be explained by HBD principles. First of all, because identical twins have identical genetic potential, when they are raised in the same environment they will get very similar test scores. In fact, even identical twins reared apart get very similar test scores.
The second thing going on is that tests given to younger children are much more susceptible to coaching because they cover a much narrower range of cognitive abilities. We see this with the Head Start program, which increases test scores for the young children who are in the program, but their scores eventually sink back to their genetic potential as they get older and the tests cover a broader range of cognitive abilities. Head Start only coached them to do well on the tests, it didn't make them smarter.
The evidence from the article is that her daughters were encouraged to read a heck of a lot, and that boosted their fourth-grade scores far above their genetic potential, but probably the sixth-grade test placed a much greater emphasis on reading comprehension and analysis and was more highly g-loaded, so the author’s daughter’s test scores regressed toward their genetic g.
Standardized school tests almost never give you the standard deviation or percentile, probably because they don't want complaints by parents. It's pretty annoying.
Posted by: John | October 21, 2012 at 09:02 PM
"The second thing going on is that tests given to younger children are much more susceptible to coaching because they cover a much narrower range of cognitive abilities. We see this with the Head Start program, which increases test scores for the young children who are in the program, but their scores eventually sink back to their genetic potential as they get older and the tests cover a broader range of cognitive abilities"
How does this show young kids are more coachable? The scores could have sunk because the extra coaching stopped, not because the kids got too old to coach.
Posted by: The Legendary Linda | October 21, 2012 at 10:57 PM
off topic....but this is fascinating!
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/15/florida-ill-advised-plan-to-measure-students-by-race-riles-education-experts/
Posted by: hbd actually being put into progress | October 22, 2012 at 12:28 AM
Or maybe they just had an anomalously bad when they took the test in grade 6.
Posted by: Drole Prole | October 22, 2012 at 04:29 AM
HS, it is well known and accepted in the world of psychology that the heritability of IQ increases with age. Put another way, the percentage of your IQ which is the result of genetics increases with age.
Posted by: sabril | October 22, 2012 at 05:26 AM
Good points. Though, based on the mother's intelligence, as evinced by her writing skills in the Times essay, i'm confident that the twins are fairly intelligent. The parents shouldn't worry.
Posted by: Daniel | October 22, 2012 at 05:28 AM
Wouldn't the fact that the identical twins having reared apart and still achieving similar test scores prove that its more nature than nurture? Hence IQ is largely inherited with minimal environmental influence?
"Identical twins have identical genetic potential, when they are raised in the same environment they will get very similar test scores."
"In fact, even identical twins reared apart get very similar test scores."
These two statements are contradictory. It seems that identical twins having identical genetic potential will achieve similar aptitude regardless of environmental influence if being together or apart doesn't change the results.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303552104577436333754014866.html
This study of 137 pairs of star-crossed twins prove that IQ is largely inherited.
[HS: Yes, IQ is mostly genetic, but tests given to younger children are more susceptible to score-improvement because of better prepration and familiarity with the types of questions.]
Posted by: Lexus Liberal | October 22, 2012 at 08:38 AM
OT: Heart attacks during marathons.
Marathons are notorious for causing cardiac problems as they put such great physical strain on the body.
Now scientists have pinpointed who is most at risk from having a heart attack and when during the race they are most likely to fall ill.
A study presented at the American Academy of Family Physicians found that men are significantly more at risk of cardiac arrest, particularly those aged 49.
And the last three miles of the race are by far the most dangerous.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2221318/Thinking-running-marathon-Men-aged-49-likely-suffer-heart-attack-race.html#ixzz2A26IQcgi
Posted by: JP | October 22, 2012 at 09:08 AM
How strongly does this test correlate with IQ?
[HS: Reading comprehension tests have a very high correlation with g.]
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | October 22, 2012 at 09:45 AM
These twin girls most likely are Jewish.
Posted by: Peter | October 22, 2012 at 10:17 AM
I fail to see a direct relationship between the contents of the article's content and human biodiversity. Genetic potential between individuals or between individuals and a group is not biodiversity. Like evolution and speciation, biodiversity must encompass comparisons between populations.
Also drops in a standard deviation are unusual for children as old as this on tests with high internal reliability, such as IQ tests. It is possible this test has only moderate or low internal reliability.
Posted by: Skitter | October 22, 2012 at 11:15 AM
OT: Shocker - MSM is actually totally cool with a "pay gap" as long as its victims can be labeled "nerds."
http://twitter.com/ezraklein/status/260396751037546496
Posted by: Fiddlesticks | October 22, 2012 at 11:37 AM
GPAs and the like drop a lot in middle school. 6th grade is part of middle school in some places and the cultural shock can be big. Maybe these twins are more interested in attractive boys than studying? Also middle schools cover bigger areas than elementary schools so bad peer influences enter a kid's life.
Posted by: Conquistador | October 22, 2012 at 01:03 PM
@Skitter-
HBD is still at the stage of trying to convince people that individual variation exists. Groups will come later.
Posted by: James | October 22, 2012 at 07:50 PM
Shocker: 1) Writer is a middle-school teacher and 2) She believes her middle-school daughters' teachers have nothing to do with the lower test scores.
Posted by: Sheila Tone | October 24, 2012 at 01:39 AM