<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Jun 30 2008, 10:38 PM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Jun 30 2008, 10:38 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->So GS to close the IQ gap among the SC/ST and the rest in India the teaching methods have to change? Is that a good takeaway?[right][snapback]83584[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->To set the record straight, #185 was <b><i>not what I meant in the remotest</i></b>.
With teaching methods I didn't mean the sort of high-handed western supplementary 'teaching' methods that try to devalue you even as they patronisingly claim they want to 'educate' you.
I was talking about something entirely different: Hindu teaching styles. For instance, the way entirely new concepts are explained (not just terms, but also the sort of concepts in, say, Samskritam that have no corresponding idea in other languages) using analogies that kids were familiar with from their own everyday life or surroundings. Even when the analogies were distant, it provides a point of origin to relate to the new idea and thus reduces cognitive overload. My dad when he tried to teach me things would employ some of my Grandfather's ways. I learnt better because of it. And if I can learn things, that means any Hindu/Dharmic can.
Even when you read Adi Shankaracharya's shlokas: the way he explains Hindu concepts about Moksha, he uses analogies. Much of Hindu literature explaining the soul and defining complex ideas are done in very novel ways that make people like me understand things better. Even the "not that/not limited to" negations for defining what the Gods are/what they are beyond, or the questioning "who was there before, what existed if anything" in the Vedas are all ways to explain ideas starting from the beginning where I am and allowing me to approach where their thoughts have reached.
Christobritish education would explain concepts in their useless dry way (same employed even today!): term = definition. And that's supposedly teaching <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> I'm surprised more people don't fail thoroughly.
Another trivial example is that unlike in Dickensian/christoterrorist 'education' where they knock your hand away when they see you counting, my Granddad never in the least discouraged this. My dad said it was because he knew that some children needed a way to visualise the numbers external to their mind, at least initially. (Certainly, not everyone sees numbers magically floating about in their heads.) Often he found them not really counting at all anymore but just holding up the fingers for support.
In christoterrorist schools in India they beat you up for that - the nuns beat you up for anything really. In NL, using one's hands to aid in arithmentic (I saw lots of kids doing that in primary school) was considered a sign of regression and to be curtailed, but the kids did gradually worse in maths when they were forcibly stopped.
<b>ADDED:</b>
On the topic of Autism. Even a US talk-show episode I caught - it was Oprah <i>I think</i> - they interviewed an Indian woman whose autistic son had become a success (he wrote poetry) only because the mother had developed a way to get him to do each small thing. She kept prodding him to do things: take the pen, take the pen, write, write. There are different levels of autism to be sure, but never underestimate Indian mums. Their kids are their lives. This mum was invited to talk on several conferences on autism because of the successful way she was able to communicate with her son and get him to communicate back. And she's not any grand researcher who developed some sterile clinical method for autistic kids. She's a mum who helped her child to become what they both knew he could be.
Hindu teachers are also like parents. They actually care. They don't think their students are a statistic and they don't give up on them because of a statistic.
About the following that I wrote in an earlier post:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It is why Hindu teachers like my Grandfather was able to make all his students succeed. The effort of the student is at least equally important, but all his students had the willingness, motivation and effort. Not everyone immediately scored the top marks when they went to college even though they all passed; but because christobritish bigotry destroyed a lot of Hindu schools, many of the students were at that stage 1st generation students again when it came to some subjects. Subsequent generations, having gained some background in these same topics, therefore did do better. And this trend can only continue to improve in the future.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Many students across the board initially had trouble when they went to official school. School didn't really 'teach' them. It merely told them what it expected them to know/have learnt by the end of each time frame = christoBritish "education" that was prevalent in Dickensian times too. The Hindu students (along with my Grandfather teaching them) succeeded in spite of christowestern education, never because of it.
My uncle had to have special tutoring by my Grandfather in mathematics (along with several other children), since the teachers at 'school' couldn't get him to 'study' maths. But my dad and his other siblings have always said the same uncle is actually a mathematical genius: he eats sleeps and drinks maths. My dad said that even as a boy his brother was always quick solving the sort of equations the average person would take too long over to do by hand.
That same uncle has been a maths tutor in his free time since a young age, he still is. He has an incredible success rate teaching Hindu kids who find maths difficult to incomprehensible (and more especially, the way it is 'taught' in christowestern centres of 'education' in India). He works with village children, because he still lives in a village (though it has grown near town-size now).
Or an even more basic example: I refused to learn a word of English when I was put into LKG in India. It was a convent school. The nuns beat us all when we spoke in Tamizh (yeah, brave christoterrorists beat intimidating heathen kindergarten children speaking in Hindu Bharatiya language; they beat one kid senseless once - they panicked only after they had gone that far, and the panicking was only about their own skin).
They would only speak to us in the English language. I developed a great hatred for it because of them. My parents couldn't get me to learn anything to do with it. I wouldn't do any homework/practise writing or saying "ABC" and would throw a tantrum each day in order to avoid going to school. My mum got so sick of it that she would often let me just stay at home rather than go through my daily hysterics. She wondered why I was one way, while my sister (who had been able to get into an over-full Hindu school) was so diligent. (By that time, we were living a very long trainride away from my paternal Grandparents who could have fixed it all.)
Fortunately we moved. I got a totally new school, a new language medium. No Tamizh children to talk to though, forced to learn alien language just to make close friends. It was only after I started going to a normal school that I would learn the Roman alphabet without breaking the chalk or throwing the pencil. My parents never had it so good <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I did learn English eventually, but only much later. And none of it had anything whatsoever to do with the terrorist penguins of convent torture facility, I mean "school".
So I suspect that there may be a dormant/subconscious psychological factor why some African-American students may be more like me in this respect. I think internally they just hate the fraud, the way I did - it is unsympathetic, condescending, all while pretending to care. It likes to devise elaborate 'teaching methods' peppered with little traps just in order to catch heathen (even when converted) populations and then complain "look, they couldn't even do that right". The system is just waiting for the kids to fail. They have their "average IQ" pegged to a stereotype in the mass-conscious, their future paved out for them: angry rap star or Condoleeza Traitor Rice. The subject population is not even allowed to think outside the square they live in. This creates a mental barrier to learning in them which may hamper anyone.
When Einstein was a kid studying in Germany, his christoterrorist maths teacher said he would <i>never</i> do well in maths and was always putting him down. (Christonazi adult versus bright Jewish kid.) But Einstein came to excel in his field of maths: Physics. So it was merely lousy bigoted teacher and christo 'teaching' methods that wouldn't work with him. What can you expect from christo nazi schooling where addition and multiplication was in terms of the Japhetic/oryan christian Germans and subtraction was always taught using Jewish people: "2 christian germans x 2 christian japhetic germans is 4 germans, while 4 Jews take away 4 Jews leaves 0 Jews." <= Christian terrorist math. Very famous in history classes.
Do I believe all these number games cooked up by pro-eugenics Lynn and guesstimates based off of that? Or even what it's measuring (especially since the history of the invention of IQ bears out how it was created specifically to classify people in a racist hierarchical order).
Hmmm. Let's see, this question is just too much for my poor low darkie IQ. Put it another way:
- Christogermans were constantly trying to show Jewish people were not that intelligent. (Though the christos mystifyingly had to argue that the Jews were on the other hand intelligent enough to be blamed for being the cause of subversions like communism, cinema morals, and the rest.) Christonazi germany also tried to prove the Slavic people were incompetent and unintelligent. Really, the Russians/E Europeans not as clever as W Europe? Really?
- IQ in US is mainly about trying to show African Americans and other 'ethnic' minorities as being unintelligent. It's just a PC version of the lauded KKK movie "Birth of a Nation". The unspoken continuation of the typically christo/WASPy "1 drop rule"; just another way to attack them.
- As I see here, Indians are now another favourite target: "India has a low IQ" and lots of - again, demonstrably - cooked up figures to prove we're too incompetent to do anything, so that it can once again be said the "Japethic/oryan invisibles must have done it all".
Underestimation and devaluing of other people has gone all this time, except Indians only think the underestimation of their own kind is the "grand fraud" and are totally blind when the same fraud is/was perpetrated on others. I'm not saying everyone is equally capable of everything. What I'm saying is, they've been lying - often, and about different peoples - and they've been caught lying. And they have the motive too (racism) which is very transparent - from IQ test development to the Lynns of today conducting their tests and getting cited in books like the Bell Curve.
Is this really a game we have to play along with? And must we really believe the numbers about other people when we know those about ourselves don't even hold? Can anyone give me reasons why I must trust these biased people's numbers on other populations when we can see the bias they excercise in our own case? (When you know someone is lying about you to others, would you believe similar things they say about other people? I generally tend to assume that a liar is a liar.)
When they take small and unrepresentative samples of Dharmics of the subcontinent, and then include Turkish people's data amongst ours, and then change the figures for Indians when they do have data but it's not to their liking (all these examples on the racists' "statistical methods" were posted earlier in this thread), why must I believe a single thing they say. It's pseudo-stats. Pseudo-maths. Pseudo-science. And I never did like pseudo-science.
With teaching methods I didn't mean the sort of high-handed western supplementary 'teaching' methods that try to devalue you even as they patronisingly claim they want to 'educate' you.
I was talking about something entirely different: Hindu teaching styles. For instance, the way entirely new concepts are explained (not just terms, but also the sort of concepts in, say, Samskritam that have no corresponding idea in other languages) using analogies that kids were familiar with from their own everyday life or surroundings. Even when the analogies were distant, it provides a point of origin to relate to the new idea and thus reduces cognitive overload. My dad when he tried to teach me things would employ some of my Grandfather's ways. I learnt better because of it. And if I can learn things, that means any Hindu/Dharmic can.
Even when you read Adi Shankaracharya's shlokas: the way he explains Hindu concepts about Moksha, he uses analogies. Much of Hindu literature explaining the soul and defining complex ideas are done in very novel ways that make people like me understand things better. Even the "not that/not limited to" negations for defining what the Gods are/what they are beyond, or the questioning "who was there before, what existed if anything" in the Vedas are all ways to explain ideas starting from the beginning where I am and allowing me to approach where their thoughts have reached.
Christobritish education would explain concepts in their useless dry way (same employed even today!): term = definition. And that's supposedly teaching <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> I'm surprised more people don't fail thoroughly.
Another trivial example is that unlike in Dickensian/christoterrorist 'education' where they knock your hand away when they see you counting, my Granddad never in the least discouraged this. My dad said it was because he knew that some children needed a way to visualise the numbers external to their mind, at least initially. (Certainly, not everyone sees numbers magically floating about in their heads.) Often he found them not really counting at all anymore but just holding up the fingers for support.
In christoterrorist schools in India they beat you up for that - the nuns beat you up for anything really. In NL, using one's hands to aid in arithmentic (I saw lots of kids doing that in primary school) was considered a sign of regression and to be curtailed, but the kids did gradually worse in maths when they were forcibly stopped.
<b>ADDED:</b>
On the topic of Autism. Even a US talk-show episode I caught - it was Oprah <i>I think</i> - they interviewed an Indian woman whose autistic son had become a success (he wrote poetry) only because the mother had developed a way to get him to do each small thing. She kept prodding him to do things: take the pen, take the pen, write, write. There are different levels of autism to be sure, but never underestimate Indian mums. Their kids are their lives. This mum was invited to talk on several conferences on autism because of the successful way she was able to communicate with her son and get him to communicate back. And she's not any grand researcher who developed some sterile clinical method for autistic kids. She's a mum who helped her child to become what they both knew he could be.
Hindu teachers are also like parents. They actually care. They don't think their students are a statistic and they don't give up on them because of a statistic.
About the following that I wrote in an earlier post:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It is why Hindu teachers like my Grandfather was able to make all his students succeed. The effort of the student is at least equally important, but all his students had the willingness, motivation and effort. Not everyone immediately scored the top marks when they went to college even though they all passed; but because christobritish bigotry destroyed a lot of Hindu schools, many of the students were at that stage 1st generation students again when it came to some subjects. Subsequent generations, having gained some background in these same topics, therefore did do better. And this trend can only continue to improve in the future.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Many students across the board initially had trouble when they went to official school. School didn't really 'teach' them. It merely told them what it expected them to know/have learnt by the end of each time frame = christoBritish "education" that was prevalent in Dickensian times too. The Hindu students (along with my Grandfather teaching them) succeeded in spite of christowestern education, never because of it.
My uncle had to have special tutoring by my Grandfather in mathematics (along with several other children), since the teachers at 'school' couldn't get him to 'study' maths. But my dad and his other siblings have always said the same uncle is actually a mathematical genius: he eats sleeps and drinks maths. My dad said that even as a boy his brother was always quick solving the sort of equations the average person would take too long over to do by hand.
That same uncle has been a maths tutor in his free time since a young age, he still is. He has an incredible success rate teaching Hindu kids who find maths difficult to incomprehensible (and more especially, the way it is 'taught' in christowestern centres of 'education' in India). He works with village children, because he still lives in a village (though it has grown near town-size now).
Or an even more basic example: I refused to learn a word of English when I was put into LKG in India. It was a convent school. The nuns beat us all when we spoke in Tamizh (yeah, brave christoterrorists beat intimidating heathen kindergarten children speaking in Hindu Bharatiya language; they beat one kid senseless once - they panicked only after they had gone that far, and the panicking was only about their own skin).
They would only speak to us in the English language. I developed a great hatred for it because of them. My parents couldn't get me to learn anything to do with it. I wouldn't do any homework/practise writing or saying "ABC" and would throw a tantrum each day in order to avoid going to school. My mum got so sick of it that she would often let me just stay at home rather than go through my daily hysterics. She wondered why I was one way, while my sister (who had been able to get into an over-full Hindu school) was so diligent. (By that time, we were living a very long trainride away from my paternal Grandparents who could have fixed it all.)
Fortunately we moved. I got a totally new school, a new language medium. No Tamizh children to talk to though, forced to learn alien language just to make close friends. It was only after I started going to a normal school that I would learn the Roman alphabet without breaking the chalk or throwing the pencil. My parents never had it so good <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> I did learn English eventually, but only much later. And none of it had anything whatsoever to do with the terrorist penguins of convent torture facility, I mean "school".
So I suspect that there may be a dormant/subconscious psychological factor why some African-American students may be more like me in this respect. I think internally they just hate the fraud, the way I did - it is unsympathetic, condescending, all while pretending to care. It likes to devise elaborate 'teaching methods' peppered with little traps just in order to catch heathen (even when converted) populations and then complain "look, they couldn't even do that right". The system is just waiting for the kids to fail. They have their "average IQ" pegged to a stereotype in the mass-conscious, their future paved out for them: angry rap star or Condoleeza Traitor Rice. The subject population is not even allowed to think outside the square they live in. This creates a mental barrier to learning in them which may hamper anyone.
When Einstein was a kid studying in Germany, his christoterrorist maths teacher said he would <i>never</i> do well in maths and was always putting him down. (Christonazi adult versus bright Jewish kid.) But Einstein came to excel in his field of maths: Physics. So it was merely lousy bigoted teacher and christo 'teaching' methods that wouldn't work with him. What can you expect from christo nazi schooling where addition and multiplication was in terms of the Japhetic/oryan christian Germans and subtraction was always taught using Jewish people: "2 christian germans x 2 christian japhetic germans is 4 germans, while 4 Jews take away 4 Jews leaves 0 Jews." <= Christian terrorist math. Very famous in history classes.
Do I believe all these number games cooked up by pro-eugenics Lynn and guesstimates based off of that? Or even what it's measuring (especially since the history of the invention of IQ bears out how it was created specifically to classify people in a racist hierarchical order).
Hmmm. Let's see, this question is just too much for my poor low darkie IQ. Put it another way:
- Christogermans were constantly trying to show Jewish people were not that intelligent. (Though the christos mystifyingly had to argue that the Jews were on the other hand intelligent enough to be blamed for being the cause of subversions like communism, cinema morals, and the rest.) Christonazi germany also tried to prove the Slavic people were incompetent and unintelligent. Really, the Russians/E Europeans not as clever as W Europe? Really?
- IQ in US is mainly about trying to show African Americans and other 'ethnic' minorities as being unintelligent. It's just a PC version of the lauded KKK movie "Birth of a Nation". The unspoken continuation of the typically christo/WASPy "1 drop rule"; just another way to attack them.
- As I see here, Indians are now another favourite target: "India has a low IQ" and lots of - again, demonstrably - cooked up figures to prove we're too incompetent to do anything, so that it can once again be said the "Japethic/oryan invisibles must have done it all".
Underestimation and devaluing of other people has gone all this time, except Indians only think the underestimation of their own kind is the "grand fraud" and are totally blind when the same fraud is/was perpetrated on others. I'm not saying everyone is equally capable of everything. What I'm saying is, they've been lying - often, and about different peoples - and they've been caught lying. And they have the motive too (racism) which is very transparent - from IQ test development to the Lynns of today conducting their tests and getting cited in books like the Bell Curve.
Is this really a game we have to play along with? And must we really believe the numbers about other people when we know those about ourselves don't even hold? Can anyone give me reasons why I must trust these biased people's numbers on other populations when we can see the bias they excercise in our own case? (When you know someone is lying about you to others, would you believe similar things they say about other people? I generally tend to assume that a liar is a liar.)
When they take small and unrepresentative samples of Dharmics of the subcontinent, and then include Turkish people's data amongst ours, and then change the figures for Indians when they do have data but it's not to their liking (all these examples on the racists' "statistical methods" were posted earlier in this thread), why must I believe a single thing they say. It's pseudo-stats. Pseudo-maths. Pseudo-science. And I never did like pseudo-science.