In Major League Baseball, the median ranked player (according to fantasy baseball rankings) made $3.25 million dollars last year (Leury Garcia). The player at the top 22nd percentile (Shin-Soo Choo) made $21 million and the player at the bottom 22nd percentile (Sam Gaviglio) did not receive a contract offer in 2019. The average adult male is 5’10” tall. An adult male at the top 22nd percentile is over 6’1” tall and the bottom 22nd percentile 5’7” tall.
Why do I tell you this? I’m trying to instill that a difference of 0.8 standard deviations is a significant difference. What if I could tell you that researchers found something that could increase a 3-year old’s IQ by 0.8 standard deviations or 12 IQ points? You’ve probably already guessed what it is.
In, “Stimulation Seeking and Intelligence: A Prospective Longitudinal Study,” Raines, Reynolds, Venables, and Mednick (link below) tested both the intelligence and curiosity of nearly 2,000 three-year-olds. They used a modified test appropriate for the age group using block stacking and visual tasks instead of reading and math problems like a typical IQ test. Then, they waited 5 years and tested the students again.
You’ve probably already figured out what they found. They found that 3-year olds showing high levels of curiosity (“high stimulation-seeking”) had IQs 12 points higher than their low curiosity counterparts and did better in school and had higher reading levels as well when they were 8 years old. Twelve IQ points puts those kids at the top 22nd percentile in intelligence if they began exactly average.
The effect size was between 0.5 and 0.77 which is significantly high. In Visible Learning, John Hattie considered anything above 0.4 to be significant. Researchers consider 0.5 to be medium and 0.8 to be high. An effect size of 0.8 means that 79% of the high curiosity group scored higher on IQ tests than the mean of the low curiosity group. If there was no relationship, one would expect a 50% rate.
This change of 12 points is important. An IQ of 100 is considered average and 115 is considered mildly gifted. In Curiosity Research Part 1, we found that another study found that infants whose curiosity was stoked outperformed their peers in school up to 15 years later. Since researchers have estimated that 50% of intelligence is inherited, that leaves another 50% that is fluid and impressionable. Curiosity Factor #1 and Curiosity Factor #2 each laid out some simple, no-cost tweaks that can ignite curiosity and igniting curiosity can have a lasting impact on a student’s intelligence.
Keep coming back to the blog for more of these research-based tips to ignite curiosity. Post your ideas in the comments section below how you’ve used these tips in your classroom.
https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/psp-824663.pdf
Why do I tell you this? I’m trying to instill that a difference of 0.8 standard deviations is a significant difference. What if I could tell you that researchers found something that could increase a 3-year old’s IQ by 0.8 standard deviations or 12 IQ points? You’ve probably already guessed what it is.
In, “Stimulation Seeking and Intelligence: A Prospective Longitudinal Study,” Raines, Reynolds, Venables, and Mednick (link below) tested both the intelligence and curiosity of nearly 2,000 three-year-olds. They used a modified test appropriate for the age group using block stacking and visual tasks instead of reading and math problems like a typical IQ test. Then, they waited 5 years and tested the students again.
You’ve probably already figured out what they found. They found that 3-year olds showing high levels of curiosity (“high stimulation-seeking”) had IQs 12 points higher than their low curiosity counterparts and did better in school and had higher reading levels as well when they were 8 years old. Twelve IQ points puts those kids at the top 22nd percentile in intelligence if they began exactly average.
The effect size was between 0.5 and 0.77 which is significantly high. In Visible Learning, John Hattie considered anything above 0.4 to be significant. Researchers consider 0.5 to be medium and 0.8 to be high. An effect size of 0.8 means that 79% of the high curiosity group scored higher on IQ tests than the mean of the low curiosity group. If there was no relationship, one would expect a 50% rate.
This change of 12 points is important. An IQ of 100 is considered average and 115 is considered mildly gifted. In Curiosity Research Part 1, we found that another study found that infants whose curiosity was stoked outperformed their peers in school up to 15 years later. Since researchers have estimated that 50% of intelligence is inherited, that leaves another 50% that is fluid and impressionable. Curiosity Factor #1 and Curiosity Factor #2 each laid out some simple, no-cost tweaks that can ignite curiosity and igniting curiosity can have a lasting impact on a student’s intelligence.
Keep coming back to the blog for more of these research-based tips to ignite curiosity. Post your ideas in the comments section below how you’ve used these tips in your classroom.
https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/psp-824663.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment