And that is contemptible in any case, but as a Harvard doctoral thesis it undermines what an institute of higher learning is about.

a thesis.

That he (if he, and I don't know if he did but it seems not unlikely) hoped for a certain conclusion from his research and did indeed arrive at that conclusion is grounds to apply extra scrutiny to his work, but not to dismiss it if the methodology is indeed sound.

I think that attacking Richwine because you don't like his forest (conclusion) is not legitimate unless you can also demonstrate that his trees (methods) are flawed.

do you need to examine my methodology?

did he submit one?

I've seen a quote (I'm sure you can find it on DU) from someone senior claiming that the faculty wouldn't have signed off on his research without checking the methodology closely.

Whether they're telling the truth I don't know for sure, but they'd be fools not to.

So you're willing to believe there's a methodology that can prove moving from one country to another is only done by stupid people?

Or is it only people who speak Spanish as a first language who are born stupid?

Or only people who speak Spanish AND move to another country?

Harvard has a LOT of explaining to do.

WTF is that and what idiots allowed that in a doctoral thesis?

also an education deformer.

How such a blatantly racist paper could be approved at, of all places, Harvard. I'm amazed that a student of Harvard could be so naïve and stupid as Richwine demonstrated.

I certainly hope so, although I don't know for sure.

It's a good goddamn question.

As the daughter of illegal immigrants, this douchebag gets my goat, but I don't know how Harvard can claim that his methods are flawed when he puts his own spin on them. That's the trouble with cherry-picking, as we learned from the lead up to the Iraq War. He can produce his conclusions from his own experts, their experiments, their studies and wrap it up in a neat bow to present it as scholarship. You can argue that it's a form of free speech, even though it's a slippery slope toward greater forms of racial and ethnic slighting that might eventually lead to a whole lot worse.

But, a part of me is perverse. I kind of like the shitstorm he's brought on himself that has the Heritage Foundation and conservatives on the defensive.

Sure would like to see the data that backs his assertions.

Last edited Sun May 19, 2013, 08:53 PM - Edit history (1)

what a 100% Latina can do, if given the chance to set the record straight.

Who knows? Maybe Sonia will run for President.

It frees people up to study things that others don't/won't like (and who would try to prevent them from conducting it). The issue is NOT the content.

The issue is what methodology did he use. Was it flawed? Was he graded accordingly?

As much as the content disgusts me, I support academic freedom more. If it was crap (which I assume it is), the issue is why was it not treated as such?

There is a significant and consistent variation in IQ results between populations; the average IQ score for Hispanics in the US is about ten points lower than for non-Hispanic whites (the Hispanic average is at the ninetieth percentile of non-Hispanic white scores). There is considerable literature on the subject; the data are inarguable. One can disagree with the conclusions Richwine chose to draw from those data (for instance the idea that these differences are genetic and not the result of cultural, environmental, and socioeconomic differences between groups), but that doesn't change the fact that this gap in IQ between broadly defined "racial groups" does exist. See here, here, [link:books.google.co.uk/books?id=1iKgwo2q_54C&pg=PA273|here], and here, for a start; also here for an American Psychological Association report.

non-Hispanic whites. I'd bet donuts to a dollar that non-Hispanic whites would score lower, on average, on an IQ test developed and written by Hispanics.........

ETA: All of which means (now that I've re-read your post) exactly what you just said................

But my understanding is that this overall trend also applies to many other testing formats as well, things like SAT's. And that its fairly well documented to be due to cultural differences.

(sorry for the source, I wouldn't ordinarily link to The American Conservative, but the author makes plausible points, to wit, that the observed differences in IQ are more a result of socioeconomic factors and affluence):

In order for a measurement of IQ to be somewhat relevant, the criteria has to correspond to survival. Richwine may want to believe he has conducted a scientific research study, but his so-called research brings on shades of William Shockley.

Jason Richwine is a racist.

The IQ tests are racially biased.

...but they do reflect differences in the quality of the educational systems available to students, which ARE heavily impacted by race. The tests themselves don't actually favor any particular race, but they do highlight glaring differences in the way we educate our kids, and to the impact of poorer nutritional options in minority communities (food quality has a huge impact on cognitive development).

They're a reflection of the society we live in.

He's certainly created a stir from the Latino community. So much for Latino outreach!

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/community/2013/05/10/heritage-foundation-analyst-resigns-over-writings-saying-latinos-have-lower-iq/
http://nbclatino.com/2013/05/13/jason-richwine-on-hispanic-iq-comments-i-dont-apologize-for-any-of-the-things-that-i-said/
http://hispanicrage.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/jason-richwine-is-wrong-about-mexican-americans/

Arthur Hays Sulzberger

Did the conclusions match the evidence?

I am going to say no because the conclusions are straight out of a discrimination handbook.
That may be the bigger scandal that some folks granted a degree for this garbage and their career should be over at Harvard

but for a thesis, only the research counts.....

critique is that because those peers are critiqued by the very same standards as to process and logic.

how (rhetorical) you tread around such an issue: I know someone who didn't get her Master's degree, because her school/ committee disagreed with one of her conclusions: The most recent decline of American Labor dates from the more wealthy and powerful unions' slavish reactions to Nixon (and "winning" the Vietnam War) and Joe McCarthy, and George Meany a great Commie-hater, to curry favor with Nixon - Labor's own Pinko Purge (which resulted in poorer unions, where women and people like Cesar Chavez and all, were abandoned and, perhaps to some extent, even attacked and intimidated about the Farm Workers' and Migrant Labors' rights. Thus, defining an essential trait, if any, of the economic-political schism in American Labor that we see today.)

I remember wondering why those of us who were against the War on Vietnam weren't heard.

Context: http://books.google.com/books/about/Stayin_alive.html?id=h9acQrZmpmAC

Thanks, kpete.

Go Harvard!

seriously. Find the Methods section in this manuscript -

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/140239668?access_key=key-plj3hup2dcblwl5jlys

ETA-
I'm just going to be honest here, I've read through as much as I can put up with, and no way can I see this partially fulfilling the requirements for a Ph.D. I am not talking about the conclusions, I am talking about the organization and lack of sound methodology. This is not doctoral level work in my experience. I would never let a student send that to committee members because I would be embarrassed. Again, not the conclusions the slap shod work.

Unless you've read the thesis, you have no idea what it reveals other than data which is already known.

I haven't read the man's report, probably won't, but I find myself
wondering (as does Mr. Rankin) if it is wise to dismiss a rigorously researched idea (if indeed this was) simply because we viscerally disagree with the premise of said idea.