The 70 & 30 Rule

[quote]50_Caliber wrote:
70% of statistics are made up…[/quote]

and the other 30% are lies

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
"The study published in the journal Economics and Human Biology showed that tall people reported more enjoyment of life and less pain and sadness. Taller men also said they worry less though they are more likely to experience stress and anger than people of average height, said researchers led by Angus Deaton from Princeton University in New Jersey.

The findings support a hypothesis put forth in 2008 that tall people are more likely than shorter people to have reached their full cognitive potential, the researchers said. Poor nutrition and childhood diseases may stunt growth and limit mental development in some cases, they said.

�¢??There is good evidence that cognitive and physical function develop together,�¢?? the researchers said. �¢??It is this lack of full cognitive development that accounts for lower levels of education, and lower earnings in adulthood which, in turn, are almost entirely responsible for lower levels of life evaluation, and poorer emotional outcomes.�¢??

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=aErF0kWDAMVw

The top 30% of men are about what we’d consider ‘tall’.

Score 1 for lanky!

Although, I don’t get how tall people can worry less but still experience more stress. Aren’t the two (pretty much) one and the same?[/quote]

Funny, they didn’t say taller people had greater cognitive potential. I think the real problem here is there are more shorter people so it brings down our average.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
"The study published in the journal Economics and Human Biology showed that tall people reported more enjoyment of life and less pain and sadness. Taller men also said they worry less though they are more likely to experience stress and anger than people of average height, said researchers led by Angus Deaton from Princeton University in New Jersey.

The findings support a hypothesis put forth in 2008 that tall people are more likely than shorter people to have reached their full cognitive potential, the researchers said. Poor nutrition and childhood diseases may stunt growth and limit mental development in some cases, they said.

â??There is good evidence that cognitive and physical function develop together,â?? the researchers said. â??It is this lack of full cognitive development that accounts for lower levels of education, and lower earnings in adulthood which, in turn, are almost entirely responsible for lower levels of life evaluation, and poorer emotional outcomes.â??

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=aErF0kWDAMVw

The top 30% of men are about what we’d consider ‘tall’.

[/quote]

Hmm. You’re tall, and yet you’re probably one of the biggest crybabies on these forums.

lol

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
After teaching for many (too many?) years, I’ve come up with this general rule, and want to know what others think of it, under the anonimity of the Web:

About 70% of people will lack a certain characteristic, while 30% will have it, or vice versa. For ex, 70% of people are so stupid as to be almost dysfunctional while the other 30% are capable and intelligent. About 70% of the people you meet are absolutely insane while 30% are basically rational. About 70% of any group (like Congress) will be criminals, while 30% will be honest. About 70% of women are sluts, and 70% of men have the morals of an alley cat.

It seems odd that 50/50 would NOT be the rule.

Thoughts, anyone?[/quote]

Are you basing this rule on what you have seen from the students you have taught? If so, what grade level? I ask because in HS my friend and I didn’t really seem to care much about grades, we did w/e b/c we knew we would get passed. Once he got out of college he made straight A’s, is in pharmacy school now, and also still making straight A’s. I graduated w/ a degree, am working on a masters, and plan on phd after that. So if it’s teaching HS or below, I would say basing that theory off your students is a little flawed.