What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
All-time Low Fares for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up. Nifty all-airline calendar identifies absolute cheapest dates to fly.
290 Comments
- JeffR132, on 12/02/2008, -6/+146This does not explain causation, it's simply a correlation. There's so many possible causes of this. Maybe it's cause you're poor, maybe it has other factors.
You could be poor because your parents are 'dumb' and couldn't get a decent education. Or you could be dumb cause you were too poor to get a good education. Or maybe poor kids don't grow up in a supportive environment. Or maybe you're dumb cause you're too poor to eat healthy.
Too bad we can't do large-scale social experiments to find an actual cause - theberlindoctor, on 12/02/2008, -2/+84This just one of the many many studies that have been conducted that happen to be extremely controversial and elicit extremely negative responses from the public. While the procedures and processes of the study must be scrutinized (as all studies should be) its important to note that the result is only more knowledge. How we choose to react to and use that knowledge is the point that should be the focus of our outrage (or praise), not the study itself.
Its important not to be afraid of science, only how we choose to use it. - dantw, on 12/03/2008, -1/+56it argues that nurture is more important than nature in frontal lobe development -- that's the overarching conclusion I get from this. far more significant than the notion of rich vs poor.
poor kids typically = less educated parents, smaller vocabularies, less attention paid to them at a young age, more time parked in front of a tv, less travel, fewer broadening experiences.... it all adds up.
it has nothing to do with some kind of social darwinism at work. it's not 'kids are poor because they are dumb.' more like 'kids are dumb because their parents can't afford to give them all the benefits and experiences rich kids have.'
good story, thanks for digging it.
dt - hblask, on 12/02/2008, -2/+50What JeffR132 said. The way to settle this is to include adopted kids -- children of poor parents who were adopted into rich families. As reported, all four of the above options are still on the table. And you could add the possibility of poor pre-natal eating habits among poor parents.
- punchinelli, on 12/03/2008, -1/+41My wife teaches in a school that is "Title 1" which in her county means "flak jacket status." Every single kid but one in her class gets free lunch and comes from a poor family.
From what I've seen and the stories I've been told by her all of this is 100% the ***** parents' fault. They don't sign the kids' homework, don't show up for teacher conferences, they get arrested for dealing crystal meth, and send their kids to school without jackets during the winter. Fostering a culture of intelligence and eagerness to learn? ***** that, they are doing good if they remember to cook supper and make sure their kids even go to school. I don't know the connection between poor families and the parents being pieces of *****, but it sure looks as if there is one. - binchaud, on 12/02/2008, -10/+48Children in schools from poor neighborhoods dumber than children in good private schools?
In other news, the sky is blue & there are fish in the ocean. - estate, on 12/03/2008, -3/+32Could someone please explain Paris Hilton to me then?
- steven0451, on 12/02/2008, -10/+38How is this news? Rich kids get better education because they can pay for it, am I missing something?
- GeeksSpeakFont, on 12/02/2008, -2/+30there will definitely be some sociological repercussions!
- Dumbledorito, on 12/03/2008, -1/+25My wife taught in inner-city public schools, in the early childhood "head start" program. The reasons for poor brain development among the kids she taught were legion, though few were genetic. A lot of these kids had, of course, horrid parents. This often resulted in:
1. Malnutrition (junk food served at every "meal," Doritos and Coke were often staples) which is one of the worst things to happen during early brain development.
2. Exposure to excessive amounts of smoke from either cigarettes and marijuana. Two teachers that did a home visit (which the parents swiss-cheesed short-term memory had deleted from the ol' day planner) came back with contact highs.
3. No stimulation from books. Just TV and/or video games, and of those forms of media, it's the stuff the parents wanted to watch, which was often vastly inappropriate (I'm not slamming violent video games or movies, but pointing out it was practically all the social education they received at home).
4. Little education from parents. Kids were sent to school not knowing basic colors, numbers, or (in one extreme case) their own given name.
There was one trend she saw that was biologicial: there are learning disabilities that are inherited and don't "breed out," but instead become dominant traits. LD/BD (learning disabled/behavior disabled) status doesn't crimp your ability to reproduce, so very often whole families would have the same inability to retain information or comprehend things like reading without LOTS of help. - dibbkd, on 12/03/2008, -2/+24It's probably that the rich kids are rich because they have smart parents with good jobs. The smart parents are smart enough to raise smart kids.
- greekgod8591, on 12/03/2008, -0/+21Did anybody else catch the fact that this entire study had a sample size of only 26 people? Such a small study group makes the results essentially meaningless. For all I know there could in fact be a correlation but with a sample size of 26 people you are drawing some awfully wide and general conclusions. Besides the fact I don't suppose many of you to be neuroscientists.
- GramarNazi, on 12/03/2008, -3/+20Intellect, at least in part, can be genetic, and, in most cases, intellect breeds better jobs and thus a kid who is smart's previous generation (the parents) most likely have more money. It's a self-fulfilling cycle. No need for people to scream prejudice.
- joshwehatetech, on 12/03/2008, -3/+20In most schools NCLB is probably helping low-income children since they would be predominantly those who are not meeting and have all the attention thrown at them. NCLB hurts those who are exceeding, not the other way around.
- d66kid, on 12/03/2008, -1/+17I am from a rich family and very dumb.
- duggtodeath, on 12/02/2008, -13/+29But of course. Our government doesn't spend a dime to help the low-income students. No Child Left Behind my ass!
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -1/+16Whoever gets out, wins a scholarship
- alexnb185, on 12/03/2008, -4/+19I would be classified as rich. I try harder than ***** anyone I know because my parents expect it. I know it is the same for a lot of kids. There are kids with lower income who break the mold, but in general, this article is correct. My belief is that it is 100% due to parents and who you are brought up around. If your family is full of successful people, chances are you will be too, because they are the ones who influence you all your life. School has little to do with that. You can take classes with the smartest and best teachers, it is all about if you want to learn. The poor kid's parents generally don't pressure them enough to learn as rich kids parents do, because the rich kids can observe that if they want a life like their parents have given them, they need to do well in school.
- InfinitySnatch, on 12/03/2008, -0/+13It has a lot to do with the environment and stress that low income children are subjected to during their early formative years.
- IndigoMoss, on 12/03/2008, -0/+13Exactly. It's the classic "nature vs nurture" developmental psychology argument.
- tabledesk, on 12/03/2008, -1/+13Large-scale social experiments will be the platform I run on in 2012.
- NathanielJ, on 12/03/2008, -2/+12Rich kids know that there shouldn't be a hyphen in your sentence.
- teemingvoid, on 12/03/2008, -0/+10I dunno. if our past treatment of low income families indicates anything, it seems like the kids from low income families and their later offspring are going to be stuck in a vicious cycle due to the insufficient attention and brain stimulation that they get from their parents at an early age. Those parents also have obligations to put food on the table and clothes on their families' backs, so what alternative course of action do they have? They need real help before we'll see a difference in that widening economic/intelligence gap.
- ShyGuy91284, on 12/03/2008, -0/+10And in other news, most poor kids could probably beat the ***** outta most rich kids. When you have a steady high-paying job, you can baby your kids and help make them smarter. When you are working multiple jobs to make ends meet, you probably don't see your kids as often, and they learn to provide for themselves in the short term instead of prepare for a long-term future.
- PopcornDave, on 12/03/2008, -1/+10I'd venture to guess it's that the "rich kids" are stimulated more by their surroundings, be that at home or travelling, while the "poor kids" don't have the same stimuli. But then again I'm not conducting the research so YMMV.
- MacroDaemon, on 12/03/2008, -0/+9This test measured brain activity, not test prowess.
As such, is shows that the brains of those who are poor have a tendency to work differently. It seems to be caused by socioeconomic reasons, but it's different than performing badly on an intelligence questionnaire. - NathanielJ, on 12/03/2008, -1/+9...as opposed to all those studies done by poor, inner-city Universities?
- durruticolumn, on 09/18/2009, -0/+8
Ever read "Proust Was A Neuroscientist?" Bottom line, our brains are wired to increase in capability, like muscles, given the proper stimuli.
I worry that, as a teacher, you've automatically decided that certain students aren't worth your time. - wazzledoozle2, on 12/03/2008, -0/+8The lack of brain development in poor children doesn't mean they have less capable brains, it means they have less developed brains due to their socio-economic status.
More funding for public education wont fix this though, as that's only a part of the problem. These kids spend 7 hours at school, then they go home where they can get all the TV, mcdonalds, and videogames they can cram into the rest of their day. It's easy to be apathetic when that's all you know. - dannyboy3020, on 12/03/2008, -0/+8Yeah, exactly. I hope the general population won't blindly interpret this as simply saying that poor kids are dumb and rich kids are smart, as the headline suggests.
- TikiGawd, on 12/03/2008, -0/+8Whoever wins a scholarship gets out.
- fyngyrz, on 12/03/2008, -2/+9Correlation is not causation. Could be something as simple as lower income kids spend more time in front of the TV. Could be poorer nutrition. Could be bad schooling. Could be religion. Could be a lot of things together. It certainly isn't income; all of those things can be handled well on a low income. No TV, nutritious meals, proper use of a library, shielding kids from religion... it is sociological, not economic.
- Enterres, on 12/03/2008, -0/+7Isn't it sad when a poor smart kid doesn't achieve her potential, however?
- foxthesly, on 12/03/2008, -2/+9Why do you assume that book smarts means a definitive lack in street smarts?
- quaxon, on 12/03/2008, -0/+7Exactly, i was poor growing up and had many poor friends. My parents made sure school was the most important thing in my life and i had to do well or id be grounded from everything. I noticed a lot of my friends parents didnt really give a *****, they let their kids do pretty much anything and there was never really any consequences for doing badly in school or getting detentions etc. At the time i was jealous of them and hated my parents but now i thank them for it.
Another great way to prove this point is to do the study on kids in India or China, many of which live in much worse conditions that the poverty we see in America, yet many more go on to higher education. - lolwaffle, on 12/03/2008, -0/+7Being a poor kid, getting our food from church food banks and what not, I didn't learn how to write a check until I was 22, by a fellow soldier in the military at that. Didn't own a car, so I learned with big army trucks years after everyone else my age. Needless to say, college loans were off the table with my grandma's social security income, and I wouldn't have even known where to start, nor would she. Without transportation, I wouldn't have even been able to go to the community college. I wish High School taught real life skills, like how to do your taxes, and how to drive. Sure, they have drivers ed, but it's after school, and you therefore need a ride home, which was not available to me. Other after school activities were also off the table, like sports, since the rec bus is hit or miss. A lot of stuff should be the parent's responsibility, but we aren't all that lucky. I was pretty much set up to continue the poor trend. It took me almost until my mid 20's until I started feeling like a grown up with a clue, none of which was provided by family or public education.
- Cerebron, on 12/03/2008, -1/+8Desire to learn is absolutely key. The poorest slob in the world can learn if he wants to.
Our American uneducated poor have lots of education available, they just don't value it. - Cerebron, on 12/03/2008, -0/+6Really rich kids don't give a damn about hyphens.
- diemunkiesdie, on 12/03/2008, -0/+6She's a secret genius. Shes probably made more in this year then I will make in my lifetime. She knows how to work the media and earn money. She understands things we don't!
- inactive, on 12/03/2008, -1/+7You mean Paris Hilton?
- lead2thehead, on 12/03/2008, -5/+11Berkeley, huh? So in other words, this study was done by the rich kids?
- InfinitySnatch, on 12/03/2008, -0/+6Battle Royale
- diemunkiesdie, on 12/03/2008, -0/+6In the article they stated that (this is not verbatim) it did seem to be a "nurture" and not a "nature" problem and that the problem was reversible!
- cawpin, on 12/02/2008, -4/+10Drop them off in the middle of LA or Chicago (the ***** parts) with no money. Whoever gets out first wins a scholarship.
- IndigoMoss, on 12/03/2008, -1/+7And the mammals in that ocean are a metaphor for the poor kids who are smart?
- thezackisback89, on 12/03/2008, -0/+6My girlfriend comes from a low income family is ranked number 2 in her class. Her parents - though not the wealthiest people in town - have a really strong work ethic, and my girlfriend definitely has that. She's not just book smart, but people smart, too - and I credit that all to her parents upbringing. I think there's a lot of merit to what you say, because when I look at the brainiest, smartest, wisest people I know, they all come from backgrounds with successful and/or driven parents.
- wo0dy, on 12/03/2008, -2/+8no child left behind only lowered the standards...
- Cerebron, on 12/03/2008, -1/+7Not genetic. Let's not start a Gattaca situation.
- inactive, on 12/03/2008, -0/+6Poor environment,Poor mind .
This is Nurture ,This is not news. - wildmonkeys77, on 12/03/2008, -4/+10"The problem is not enough government involvement"
Typical -
Show 51 - 100 of 296 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is