Thailand Ranks Low In Educational Performance And High In Social Problems

[Pakboong]

What do you do with a population of 66 million when 33 million of those have an IQ below 91? Do you try to achieve actual potential, given that it is generally accepted that one cannot exceed potential? Knowing the weakest link theory along with other commonly accepted rules of nature it is generally accepted that you keep the population at or near their maximum productive level by any method at your disposal. It is often forgotten that change only requires effort while improvement requires both effort and wisdom. If you have a population of which half have IQs under 91, how much improvement is actually possible?

Read the OP again, it's a quarter not a half..... and that is standard for most countries in the world. IQ is not the problem.

Take a look at IQ and the wealth of nations. It suggests that IQ is the problem. The average IQ of Thailand is listed at 91. You factor out 14 million Chinese and imagine what kind of number you'll get.

I had meals out today on two occasions and in both, the slowest dog was slowing down the sled to a crawl. One was a decent restaurant and the other a typical family owned place. These people do not even know that the sled can never go faster than the slowest dog.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_by_country

[stepenwolf1958]

I am sure in MoE in Thailand is possible to find competent people with a lot of love and understanding for importance of education.

There was one lady in education, name Kassama. As i've heard she is retired when new Govt took the power.

I think people like she is might help and help is definetely needed now.

Work in 2 sectors is needed and same time.

Khunying (Dr) Kassama Varavarn retired on age grounds in, I think, 2009. She was an outstanding educator. I don't know what she's doing now.

The problem is not a shortage of competent people available for systemic education management, but the structural and cultural conditions necessary for them to make a difference.

Yes, that's the one. Thank you.

This government should not let her retire, or they should keep her as adviser or consultant as most experienced expert in that field. She is an energetic person, as i have heard about her work and her so hard tries in education. She is rare kind of "bird" and she could be invaluable exactly in THIS situation.

That what the Government did(did not use her experience) is just one of many mistakes.

The government must mobilize all available human resources in education, among Thais and to seek for some new sources of human resources among foreign teachers.

Democrats, once in history of Thailand, saved the country by forming the team of experts and mobilize them to improve the situation in society.

That was what me personally was expected from Democrats, knowing in time of campaign they might be the solution, a good one, for society.

Unfortunately i saw i was wrong in my hope that will be. All became even worse.

[Thaddeus]

What do you do with a population of 66 million when 33 million of those have an IQ below 91? Do you try to achieve actual potential, given that it is generally accepted that one cannot exceed potential? Knowing the weakest link theory along with other commonly accepted rules of nature it is generally accepted that you keep the population at or near their maximum productive level by any method at your disposal. It is often forgotten that change only requires effort while improvement requires both effort and wisdom. If you have a population of which half have IQs under 91, how much improvement is actually possible?

Read the OP again, it's a quarter not a half..... and that is standard for most countries in the world. IQ is not the problem.

Take a look at IQ and the wealth of nations. It suggests that IQ is the problem. The average IQ of Thailand is listed at 91. You factor out 14 million Chinese and imagine what kind of number you'll get.

Yes but, a low average IQ is a symptom, not a cause..... please do some more research and then get back to me.

[Pakboong]

What do you do with a population of 66 million when 33 million of those have an IQ below 91? Do you try to achieve actual potential, given that it is generally accepted that one cannot exceed potential? Knowing the weakest link theory along with other commonly accepted rules of nature it is generally accepted that you keep the population at or near their maximum productive level by any method at your disposal. It is often forgotten that change only requires effort while improvement requires both effort and wisdom. If you have a population of which half have IQs under 91, how much improvement is actually possible?

Read the OP again, it's a quarter not a half..... and that is standard for most countries in the world. IQ is not the problem.

Take a look at IQ and the wealth of nations. It suggests that IQ is the problem. The average IQ of Thailand is listed at 91. You factor out 14 million Chinese and imagine what kind of number you'll get.

Yes but, a low average IQ is a symptom, not a cause..... please do some more research and then get back to me.

No additional research necessary. Just chech the number again in 20 years and see if is still 91. In the 37 years experience I have with this country 91 is elevated by Chinese immigrants and as high as it is likely to get.

[Thaddeus]

No additional research necessary. Just chech the number again in 20 years and see if is still 91. In the 37 years experience I have with this country 91 is elevated by Chinese immigrants and as high as it is likely to get.

Worldwide average IQ scores are not governed by race or DNA, they are a product of environment. The lowest scores on the planet are black Africans, is it because they are black, no, is it because they are African, no not really, is it because they live in an African environment, yes.

So you could postulate that the national Thai average score is not raised by the Chinese immigrants, rather the Chinese immigrants are getting dumbed down by living in a Thai environment.

Obviously, living here for 37 years must have had an effect.

[Xangsamhua]

No additional research necessary. Just chech the number again in 20 years and see if is still 91. In the 37 years experience I have with this country 91 is elevated by Chinese immigrants and as high as it is likely to get.

Worldwide average IQ scores are not governed by race or DNA, they are a product of environment. The lowest scores on the planet are black Africans, is it because they are black, no, is it because they are African, no not really, is it because they live in an African environment, yes.

So you could postulate that the national Thai average score is not raised by the Chinese immigrants, rather the Chinese immigrants are getting dumbed down by living in a Thai environment.

Obviously, living here for 37 years must have had an effect.

If I may add to the discussion, an extract from a short piece I wrote for "Metro Life" a few years ago (January 2007) following Health Ministry handwringing in the media over Thai kids' IQs:

The question of what is being measured, and how, is discussed in an article on the net found at http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/IQ/1950-2050/ . The article discusses research plotting average IQ scores across the world (based on actual results and calculated estimates) from 1950-2050. It finds that

1. Mean population IQ scores correlate more strongly with economic development as measured by gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and long term economic growth than any other single factor, and

2. If population IQ and wealth remain constant, the average IQ of the world should fall over time.

So, if Thai children's IQ is falling, this is consistent with a general decline around the world. However, as Thailand's GDP per capita increases, average IQ should increase correspondingly. I'm not suggesting that the data or the assumptions are faultless, but they are interesting, and readers can refer to the article for themselves.

At present, wealthy countries such as Australia (average IQ 100), Finland (100), Japan (99), the UK (99), Belgium (98) and the US (97) are scoring well, but poorer countries are scoring very poorly. The global average for 2000 was 89.20 and is expected to decline to 87.81 by 2025. In 2000, Thailand's score was 96.03, considerably higher than the 87 cited by the Health Ministry. Whose figures does one believe?

Another weakness in the measurement of intelligence by IQ test scores is that it is generally acknowledged that scores of IQ test takers improve as they take more tests. Hence, populations in which IQ tests are frequent get higher scores over time (about 3 points per decade, though it may have flattened out in advanced countries). Calculating backwards, therefore, from a current mean of 100 one would arrive at an average IQ in our grandparents' time of about 80, which today would indicate limited intellectual capacity. However, we know that in most cases our grandparents are far from intellectually weak. If the finding that scores on tests have improved is applied to the intellectual output of a century ago, one would expect that, at that time, very few works of art, architecture or literature would have been produced and almost no scientific breakthroughs. But we know that is not the case.

Though no expert, it seems to me that IQ (General Ability) tests given to a sufficient sample of any population provide a bell curve of scores for that population for that time. The average should always be 100 and about 50% of the population should score between 90 and 110. A range of scores in which 50% occur within, say, 80 - 100 would indicate that the tests are invalid for the population they've been given to.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Xangsamhua

[ronz28]

Infectious diseases in children may permanently limit one's IQ. More effort in eliminating or reducing infectious diseases in Thailand through vaccines, etc. should raise the average national IQ in Thailand. That is one of the things the Bill Gates foundation is trying to do in Africa in providing mosquito nets, children's vaccinations and better medical care to the impoverished children. You can teach your heart out to a child that has had his or her brain damaged by an infectious disease but the damage will limit learning that might otherwise be possible.