<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Made Up Mind</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/09/29/a-made-up-mind/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/09/29/a-made-up-mind/</link>
	<description>Closing the Achievement Gap: Teaching Content</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:59:33 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan Willingham</title>
		<link>http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/09/29/a-made-up-mind/comment-page-1/#comment-4587</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Willingham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:14:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/?p=1071#comment-4587</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m puzzled as to why newspapers continue to cover Murray. . . maybe it&#039;s fun to read a provocateur?
It&#039;s not as though there isn&#039;t a mountain of data on this question, and it&#039;s pretty clear that an extreme position like Murray&#039;s is impossible to support. Ten years ago most psychologists would have said that the other extreme--genetics counts for very little--would be equally impossible to support, but there is starting to be a groundswell, led by Bill Dickens at Brookings that this position may be much closer to correct than people thought.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m puzzled as to why newspapers continue to cover Murray. . . maybe it&#8217;s fun to read a provocateur?<br />
It&#8217;s not as though there isn&#8217;t a mountain of data on this question, and it&#8217;s pretty clear that an extreme position like Murray&#8217;s is impossible to support. Ten years ago most psychologists would have said that the other extreme&#8211;genetics counts for very little&#8211;would be equally impossible to support, but there is starting to be a groundswell, led by Bill Dickens at Brookings that this position may be much closer to correct than people thought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morgan</title>
		<link>http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/09/29/a-made-up-mind/comment-page-1/#comment-4584</link>
		<dc:creator>Morgan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/?p=1071#comment-4584</guid>
		<description>Jason Kottke picked up an interesting excerpt from an interview with Murray in the NY Times.  
http://www.kottke.org/08/09/interview-with-charles-murray

For all of his work on innate intellectual ability, he can squirm out of his own criteria for it when it suits him politically.  It made me lose any (very limited) respect I had for him.  Any respect I did have for his work was rooted in the fact that if nothing else he was consistent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jason Kottke picked up an interesting excerpt from an interview with Murray in the NY Times.<br />
<a href="http://www.kottke.org/08/09/interview-with-charles-murray" rel="nofollow">http://www.kottke.org/08/09/interview-with-charles-murray</a></p>
<p>For all of his work on innate intellectual ability, he can squirm out of his own criteria for it when it suits him politically.  It made me lose any (very limited) respect I had for him.  Any respect I did have for his work was rooted in the fact that if nothing else he was consistent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
