You will recall that his opponents had left young Woodley (him of the Edwardian frock coat and the gold pince nez glasses) in a dazed condition after four rounds of gruelling counter argument.
http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/is-young-woodley-down-for-count.html
I now hear from his training camp that the young challenger is about to enter the ring again, claiming he will be able to give “a big response”. Is this the bravado of youth, or has he found the new punches with which to vanquish his fearsome opponents? I will be wagering a whole five guineas on Woodley. By the way, the young challenger has a new slogan he is likely to chant at the weighing in ceremony: “The Victorians were still cleverer than us”.
More news exclusively from this blog, as soon as the reply paper gets the final finishing touches.
Woodley (& Armstrong) can do no wrong in my eyes - I'm sure they can outdo geneticist gerald crabtree, who had the secret knowledge of old that the ancients were smarter than we (all of them? or their mean was higher? SD different?)
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Fragile_Intellect
but were the ancients so smart they knew we of the future would be less smart than they? where are all the means & standard deviations? despite having the apple & orange problem with the victorian data, there has to be a way to equate difficulty levels on a few of the items by matching some variables (SES? i don't know - i ain't writin' it!) & ensuring the samples are a little more comparable. maybe weight subjects differently (like the WJ-III: not enough low SES folks showin' up for the norming? count 'em each as 1.2 people. works for me!)
All further tweets on this matter should be tagged #teamWoodley. With luck we can get it trending.
ReplyDeleteOn a related note, how far back in time do continental data on Piagetian test performance go?