God Fearing Atheist

World,

Its pretty well known that the observed BW difference in IQ cannot be the result of any test bias (see Jensen, 1980 and Reynolds and Brown, 1984).

This is especially true these days, with very sophisticated tests like RSM.

-GFA

Happy Wonderer

From one of your own sources on another thread (sorry for lack of detail, in a hurry to get back to work), Raven's can be taught. South African students scores improved to be equivalent to Israeli kid's when they were given a special educational program beforehand.

Therefore, even Raven's is not immune to cultural and environmental influence.


hw

oneofshibumi

I believe everyone's opinion falls somewhere on the the continuum between single cause, context free types of arguments and multiple cause, context specific arguments.

1. Single Cause, Context Free
A. Genetic Inferiority= Certain groups fail to do well because they are genetically inferior (single cause) not because of any factors in the environment (context free).
B. Cultural Deficit= Certain cultural groups fail to do well because their culture is seen as deficient (single cause) not because of any factors in the environment (context free).
C. Cultural Mismatch= Certain cultures fail to achieve because their culture is different from mainstream culture (single cause) not because of any factors in the environment (context free).

2. Multiple Cause, Context Specific
Contextual interaction�Certain groups fail to achieve because of the complex interaction of many factors including background experiences, social factors, and school setting (multiple cause and context specific).



There are two types of Ethnic Minorities:

1. The first type are called, IMMIGRANT MINORITIES = Examples Chinese, Cubans, Japanese

Their Values and behaviors=
*not highly influenced by majority group attitudes and values
*measure success by homeland standards
*believe they can go back home and use skills and degrees
*can alternate behavior characterized by primary cultural differences

Immigrant minorities exhibit the following cultural values, called PRIMARY
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
*differences existed before cultures came into contact
*differences are specific, easily identifiable matters of content such as language, food, customs, and dress
*minority groups members don�t suffer emotionally as they work to overcome differences�they�re motivated to learn the things that will help them to succeed�they can alternate�they develop a folk theory for success that places a high value on education





2. Second group are called, INVOLUNTARY MINORITIES= African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Southeast Asians

Values and behaviors
*highly influenced by majority group attitudes and values
*measure success by mainstream culture standards
*can�t go back home or export skills and degrees
*can�t alternate behavior
*characterized by secondary cultural differences

Types of Cultural differences
SECONDARY CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
*differences came into existence after cultures came into contact
*differences are more a matter of style than content�different ways of walking, talking, and dressing
*minority group members have created the differences to distinguish themselves from the mainstream and will not attempt to cross self-imposed cultural boundaries
*minority group members who try to overcome differences may suffer both emotionally and physically�group members may exert negative peer pressure against crossing boundaries�it is not possible for members to alternate�they develop a folk theory for success that puts a low value on education


Ogbu (1991), an anthropologist from Nigeria, has examined how differences in the backgrounds and experiences of minority groups in various countries have affected their school performance. In the United States he has studied the discrepancies in the school achievement of Hispanics, Native Americans, and African Americans when compared with other minority groups from countries like Japan, Cuba, and China. Ogbu classified these minorities into two groups: immigrant minorities and involuntary minorities.
Immigrant and involuntary minorities now constitute the numerical majority in many school systems. (We should remember here Wink�s [2000] objection to the label minority. However, for the sake of this discussion, we will retain Ogbu�s terms.) Both groups frequently experience discriminatory treatment at the hands of the dominant group. Ogbu notes, however, that the response of the two minority groups to this negative treatment is quite different, and as a result, immigrant minorities tend to succeed in schools, while members of involuntary minority groups often fail. An important difference between these two groups is their attitude toward mainstream institutions, such as schools, and their perceptions of the benefits of education. These attitudes and perceptions form a part of the societal context that influences the school context.
When Ogbu reviewed the performance of different minority groups in school, certain patterns emerged. For example, he found that Chinese and Cubans, who generally meet the criteria for immigrant minorities, have usually done quite well compared with involuntary minorities, such as African Americans and Native Americans. However, it is important to note before further developing the differences between these two types of minorities that a number of factors determine whether a particular individual falls into the immigrant or involuntary minority category. In fact, often students will fall under the category of immigrant minority in some areas and involuntary minority in other areas.


IMMIGRANT MINORITIES: Ogbu�s (1991) defines immigrant minorities as those who come from another country and retain their homeland as their reference point. Chinese, Cubans, and Japanese are examples of immigrant minorities. Immigrants are not highly influenced by majority-group treatment even when they are given low-status jobs, because they measure success by the standards of their homeland. AS Ogbu writes, �The immigrants appear to intercept the economic, political, and social barriers against them as passage of time, hard work, or more education.� Often they plan to return to their home, and they believe that they can return with new skills and degrees that will allow them to succeed there. They see themselves as outsiders in a new society and expect poor treatment and low status. They accept this treatment because they are still better off than they would be in their homeland, and the skills they are gaining will help them succeed later in their homeland.

PRIMARY CULTURAL DIFFERENCES: Ogbu identifies two kinds of cultural differences: primary and secondary. Immigrant minorities are characterized by primary cultural differences. These differences, such as language, food, and attire, are specific and easily recognizable. They existed before the dominant and immigrant groups came into contract.
Primary differences do not usually constitute barriers to students� educational success, because immigrants are able to alternate their behavior between the home culture and the mainstream school culture. For example, they may speak one language at home, but they recognize the importance of speaking English at school. They may give low status to women in the home culture but still accept and respect female teachers at school. Alternation between two worlds is not threatening to immigrant minorities. They want to gain as much as possible from schools and the majority society generally, and they also want to retain their primary culture. They see no contradiction in pursuing both these goals simultaneously.
The perception in immigrant minority communities is that success comes from education. Students who come to school with this attitude generally do well. Immigrant minorities are able to acculturate, to take the best from the new culture without having to give up their own cultural identity or practices.

INVOLUNTARY MINORITIES: Ogbu contrasts immigrant minorities with involuntary minorities. Examples of involuntary minorities are African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, and others who were born in the United States or arrived too young to identify with their heritage culture. They are often at least second- or third-generation Americans who have little connection with their ancestral homeland and lack a deep understanding of traditional cultural practices. Although immigrants have, to some degree, chosen to come to a country, members of involuntary minorities have not. Immigrants may see their status as temporary, but involuntary minorities have become incorporated into a society quite permanently. The history of the relationships between involuntary minorities and mainstream society is often one of exploitation.
The major difference between immigrant and involuntary minorities lies in the ways they respond to discriminatory treatment and the folk theories for getting ahead that they develop. Immigrants are not highly influenced by majority-group treatment because they can alternate their behavior between home and school or workplace. In contrast, involuntary minorities are highly influenced by majority-group treatment. They strongly resent discriminatory practices such as tracking, exclusion from some social activities, and job ceilings. They resent the fact that they do not have what they see others as having. As a result, involuntary minorities develop a social identity in opposition to the dominant group. For example, members of involuntary minorities may adopt certain ways of talking or dressing to identify themselves with their cultural group in opposition to the majority culture. Many aspects might also drive certain kings of cars that they have decorated or changed to give their group a specific identity.

SECONDARY CULTURAL DIFFERENCES: These differences between mainstream cultural groups and involuntary minorities are what Ogbu calls secondary cultural differences. They form after the two groups come into contact. In fact, according to Ogbu (1991), secondary cultural differences develop in opposition to the majority culture. As a result, members of involuntary minorities cannot alternate behaviors and be a �homeboy� at home but a �schoolboy� at school. They do not picture themselves exporting their skills and knowledge to some homeland, because this is their home. In addition, there may be considerable peer pressure for involuntary minorities to conform to group norms. �The secondary cultural system, on the whole, constitutes a new cultural frame of reference.�
Attempts by school personnel to correct or change aspects of this cultural identity may be perceived as attacks on the minority group by the dominant group rather than as efforts to help group members succeed. They �distrust members of the dominant group and the societal institutions controlled by the latter.� As a result, involuntary minorities develop a folk theory for success that places little value on education.

Ogbu, J. 1991. �Immigrant and Involuntary Minorities in Comparative Perspective.� Minority Status and Schooling: A Comparative Study of Immigrants and Involuntary Minorities, ed. M. Gibson and J. Ogbu, 3-33. New York: Garland.

Wink, J. 1993. �Labels Often Reflect Educator�s Beliefs and Practices.� BEOutreach 4: 228-29.
Wink, J. 2000. Critical Pedagogy: Notes from the Real World. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman.