DOCSLIB.ORG

Mainstream Science on Intelligence: an Editorial with 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mainstream Science on Intelligence: an Editorial with 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography EDITORIAL Mainstream Science on Intelligence: An Editorial With 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography LINDA S. GOTTFREDSON University of Delaware The following statement was first published in the Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1994. Mainstream Science on Intelligence Since the publication of “The Bell Curve,” it reflects a broader and deeper capability for many commentators have offered opinions comprehending our surroundings-“catch- about human intelligence that misstate cur- ing on,” “ making sense” of things, or “figur- rent scientific evidence. Some conclusions ing out” what to do. dismissed in the media as discredited are ac- 2. Intelligence, so defined, can be mea- tually firmly supported. sured, and intelligence tests measure it well. This statement outlines conclusions re- They are among the most accurate (in techni- garded as mainstream among researchers on cal terms, reliable and valid) of all psycho- intelligence, in particular, on the nature, ori- logical tests and assessments. They do not gins, and practical consequences of individu- measure creativity, character, personality, or al and group differences in intelligence. Its other important differences among individu- aim is to promote more reasoned discussion als, nor are they intended to. of the vexing phenomenon that the research 3. While there are different types of intel- has revealed in recent decades. The follow- ligence tests, they all measure the same intel- ing conclusions are fully described in the ligence. Some use words or numbers and major textbooks, professional journals and require specific cultural knowledge (like vo- encyclopedias in intelligence. cabulary). Other do not, and instead use shapes or designs and require knowledge of The Meaning and Measurement of only simple, universal concepts (many/few, Intelligence open/closed, up/down). 4. The spread of people along the IQ con- 1. Intelligence is a very general mental ca- tinuum, from low to high, can be. represented pability that, among other things, involves well by the bell curve (in statistical jargon, the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, the “normal curve”). Most people cluster think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, around the average (IQ 100). Few are either learn quickly and learn from experience. It is very bright or very dull: About 3% of Ameri- not merely book learning, a narrow aca- cans score above IQ 130 (often considered demic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, the threshold for “giftedness”), with about Reprinted with permission of The Wall Street Journal copyright 1994, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. INTELLIGENCE U(I) 13-23 Copyright 0 1997 Ablex Publishing Corporation ISSN: 0160-2896 All rights of reproduction in any form reserved 13 14 GOTTFREDSON the same percentage below IQ 70 (IQ 70-75 soning and decision-making. Conversely, often being considered the threshold for a low IQ is often a disadvantage, especially in mental retardation). disorganized environments. Of course, a high 5. Intelligence tests are not culturally bi- IQ no more guarantees success than a low IQ ased against American blacks or other na- guarantees failure in life. There are many ex- tive-born, English-speaking peoples in the ceptions, but the odds for success in our soci- U.S. Rather, IQ scores predict equally accu- ety greatly favor individuals with higher IQs. rately for all such Americans, regardless of 11. The practical advantages of having a race and social class. Individuals who do not higher IQ increase as life settings become understand English well can be given either a more complex (novel, ambiguous, changing, nonverbal test or one in their native language. unpredictable, or multifaceted). For exam- 6. The brain processes underlying intel- ple, a high IQ is generally necessary to per- ligence are still little understood. Current re- form well in highly complex or fluid jobs search looks, for example, at speed of neural (the professions, management); it is a con- transmission, glucose (energy) uptake, and siderable advantage in moderately complex electrical activity of the brain. jobs (crafts, clerical and police work); but it provides less advantage in settings that re- Group Differences quire only routine decision making or simple 7. Members of all racial-ethnic groups can problem solving (unskilled work). be found at every IQ level. The bell curves 12. Differences in intelligence certainly of different groups overlap considerably, but are not the only factor affecting performance groups often differ in where their members in education, training, and highly complex tend to cluster along the IQ line. The bell jobs (no one claims they are), but intel- curves for some groups (Jews and East ligence is often the most important. When Asians) are centered somewhat higher than individuals have already been selected for for whites in general. Other groups (blacks high (or low) intelligence and so do not differ and Hispanics) are centered somewhat lower as much in IQ, as in graduate school (or spe- than non-Hispanic whites. cial education), other influences on perfor- 8. The bell curve for whites is centered mance loom larger in comparison. roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for 13. Certain personality traits, special tal- American blacks roughly around 85; and ents, aptitudes, physical capabilities, experi- those for different subgroups of Hispanics ence, and the like are important (sometimes roughly midway between those for whites essential) for successful performance in many and blacks. The evidence is less definitive jobs, but they have narrower (or unknown) for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell applicability or “transferability” across tasks curves for Jews and Asians are centered. and settings compared with general intel- ligence. Some scholars choose to refer to these Practical Importance other human traits as other “intelligences.” 9. IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human Source and Stability of Within- trait, to many important educational, occu- Group Differences pational, economic, and social outcomes. Its relation to the welfare and performance of 14. Individuals differ in intelligence due to individuals is very strong in some arenas in differences in both their environments and life (education, military training), moderate genetic heritage. Heritability estimates range but robust in others (social competence), and from 0.4 to 0.8 (on a scale from 0 to l), most modest but consistent in others (law-abiding- thereby indicating that genetics plays a big- ness). Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of ger role than does environment in creating great practical and social importance. IQ differences among individuals. (Herita- 10. A high IQ is an advantage in life be- bility is the squared correlation of phenotype cause virtually all activities require some rea- with genotype.) If all environments were to MAINSTREAM SCIENCE ON INTELLIGENCE 15 become equal for everyone, heritability would al surveys continue to show, black 17-year- rise to 100% because all remaining differences olds perform, on the average, more like in IQ would necessarily be genetic in origin. white 13-year-olds in reading, math, and sci- 15. Members of the same family also tend ence, with Hispanics in between. to differ substantially in intelligence (by an 2 1. The reasons that blacks differ among average of about 12 IQ points) for both ge- themselves in intelligence appear to be ba- netic and environmental reasons. They differ sically the same as those for why whites (or genetically because biological brothers and Asians or Hispanics) differ among them- sisters share exactly half their genes with selves. Both environment and genetic hered- each parent and, on the average, only half ity are involved. with each other. They also differ in IQ be- 22. There is no definitive answer to why cause they experience different environments IQ bell curves differ across racial-ethnic within the same family. groups. The reasons for these IQ differences 16. That IQ may be highly heritable does between groups may be markedly different not mean that it is not affected by the envi- from the reasons for why individuals differ ronment. Individuals are not born with fixed, among themselves within any particular unchangeable levels of intelligence (no one group (whites or blacks or Asians). In fact, it claims they are). IQs do gradually stabilize is wrong to assume, as many do, that the rea- during childhood, however, and generally son why some individuals in a population have change little thereafter. high IQs but others have low IQs must be the 17. Although the environment is important same reason why some populations contain in creating IQ differences, we do not know yet more such high (or low) IQ individuals than how to manipulate it to raise low IQs perma- others. Most experts believe that environ- nently. Whether recent attempts show promise ment is important in pushing the bell curves is still a matter of considerable scientific debate. apart, but that genetics could be involved too. IS. Genetically caused differences are not 23. Racial-ethnic differences are somewhat necessarily irremediable (consider diabetes, smaller but still substantial for individuals poor vision, and phenylketonuria), nor are from the same socioeconomic backgrounds. environmentally caused ones necessarily re- To illustrate, black students from prosperous mediable (consider injuries, poisons, severe families tend to score higher in IQ than blacks neglect, and some diseases). Both may
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Creationist and the Sociobiologist: Two Stories About Illiberal Education
    The Creationist and the Sociobiologist: Two Stories About Illiberal Education ILLIBERAL EDUCATION. By Dinesh D'Souza.t Reviewed by Phillip E. Johnsont There is a mad reductionism at work [in the universities]. God is not a proper topic for discussion, but "lesbian politics" is.... In the famous "marketplace of ideas," where all ideas are equal and where there must be no "value judgments" and therefore no values, certain ideas are simply excluded, and woe to those who espouse them.1 In a liberal culture, it is a great rhetorical advantage to appear in a dispute as the champion of free speech against the forces of repression. The left has held this advantage for a long time. The student revolt of the 1960s opened with a "Free Speech Movement," and the bumper sticker that directs us to "Question Authority" implies that the left's politics is a matter of raising questions rather than imposing answers. Recently, however, academic traditionalists like Dinesh D'Souza have seized the moral high ground by describing a left-imposed atmosphere of "political correctness" in the universities that leads to "illiberal educa- tion." In effect, they have captured the bumper sticker and turned its message around. The "PC left" under attack is post-Marxist, and its philosophy is post-Modernist. A brief pause for definitions is necessary. In post- Marxism, racial minorities, feminists, and gays have assumed the mantle of the proletariat; the oppressor class is heterosexist white males rather than the bourgeoisie; and the struggle is for control of the terms of dis- course rather than the means of production.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracking Exceptional Human Capital Over Two Decades David Lubinski,1 Camilla P
    PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Tracking Exceptional Human Capital Over Two Decades David Lubinski,1 Camilla P. Benbow,1 Rose Mary Webb,2 and April Bleske-Rechek3 1Vanderbilt University, 2Appalachian State University, and 3University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire ABSTRACT—Talent-search participants (286 males, 94 adult lives (Benbow, Lubinski, Shea, & Eftekhari-Sanjani, females) scoring in the top 0.01% on cognitive-ability 2000; Lubinski & Benbow, 1994, 2000). A 20-year follow-up of measures were identified before age 13 and tracked over SMPY’s ablest cohort has just been completed. Before age 13, 20 years. Their creative, occupational, and life accom- these participants scored within the top 0.01% for their age on plishments are compared with those of graduate students either SAT mathematical reasoning ability (SAT-M 700) or (299 males, 287 females) enrolled in top-ranked U.S. SAT verbal reasoning ability (SAT-V 630; Lubinski, Webb, mathematics, engineering, and physical science programs Morelock, & Benbow, 2001). They were identified in talent in 1992 and tracked over 10 years. By their mid-30s, the searches conducted in the early 1980s and, with a Web-based two groups achieved comparable and exceptional success survey, were followed up in 2003 and 2004 at the mean age of (e.g., securing top tenure-track positions) and reported 33.6 years (286 men, 94 women; response rate > 80%). high and commensurate career and life satisfaction. Col- The achievements of these talent-search (TS) participants lege entrance exams administered to intellectually preco- were compared with those of a cohort of first- and second-year cious youth uncover extraordinary potential for careers graduate students identified by SMPY at approximately age 24 requiring creativity and scientific and technological in- through their enrollment in 1992 at top U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Precocity: What Have We Learned Since Terman?
    Article Gifted Child Quarterly 0(0) 1–26 Intellectual Precocity: What Have ! 2020 National Association for Gifted Children We Learned Since Terman? Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/0016986220925447 journals.sagepub.com/home/gcq David Lubinski1 and Camilla P. Benbow1 Abstract Over the past 50 years, eight robust generalizations about intellectual precocity have emerged, been empirically docu- mented, and replicated through longitudinal research. Within the top 1% of general and specific abilities (mathematical, spatial, and verbal) over one third of the range of individual differences are to be found, and they are meaningful. These individual differences in ability level and in pattern of specific abilities, which are uncovered by the use of above-level assessments, structure consequential quantitative and qualitative differences in educational, occupational, and creative out- comes. There is no threshold effect for abilities in predicting future accomplishments; and the concept of multipotentiality evaporates when assessments cover the full range of all three primary abilities. Beyond abilities, educational/occupational interests add value in identifying optimal learning environments for precocious youth and, with the addition of conative variables, for modeling subsequent life span development. While overall professional outcomes of exceptionally precocious youth are as exceptional as their abilities, educational interventions of sufficient dosage enhance the probability of them leading exceptionally
    [Show full text]
  • Here Stanley Taught
    NEWS FEATURE How to raise a genius A long-running study of exceptional children reveals what it takes to produce the scientists who will lead the twenty-first century. BY TOM CLYNES 152 | NATURE | VOL 537 | 8 SEPTEMBER 2016 ǟ ƐƎƏƖ !,(++- 4 +(2'#12 (,(3#"Ʀ /13 .$ /1(-%#1 341#ƥ ++ 1(%'32 1#2#15#"ƥ ǟ ƐƎƏƖ !,(++- 4 +(2'#12 (,(3#"Ʀ /13 .$ /1(-%#1 341#ƥ ++ 1(%'32 1#2#15#"ƥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ ɥ FEATURE NEWS n a summer day in 1968, professor Julian Stanley met and academics, our Fortune 500 CEOs and federal judges, senators and a brilliant but bored 12-year-old named Joseph Bates. billionaires,” he says. The Baltimore student was so far ahead of his class- Such results contradict long-established ideas suggesting that expert mates in mathematics that his parents had arranged performance is built mainly through practice — that anyone can get for him to take a computer-science course at Johns to the top with enough focused effort of the right kind. SMPY, by con- Hopkins University, where Stanley taught. Even that trast, suggests that early cognitive ability has more effect on achievement wasn’t enough. Having leapfrogged ahead of the adults in the class, than either deliberate practice or environmental factors such as socio- Othe child kept himself busy by teaching the FORTRAN programming economic status. The research emphasizes the importance of nurturing language to graduate students. precocious children, at a time when the prevailing focus in the United Unsure of what to do with Bates, his computer instructor introduced States and other countries is on improving the performance of strug- him to Stanley, a researcher well known for his work in psycho metrics gling students (see ‘Nurturing a talented child’).
    [Show full text]
  • Download April 2001
    Vol. 30 No. 4 April 2001 GOD’S TWO GREAT WITNESSES by John D. Morris, Ph.D. There are two great witnesses to God’s fallible proofs” (Acts 1:3), which the almighty power, and two great testimo- skeptic must explain away. nies He has provided for us to employ in As you have noticed, the Institute for pointing people to Him, to the Scriptures, Creation Research does not shirk from and to the rightness of the Christian faith. proclaiming both testimonies. This in- Without a doubt these are the two great- volves extolling the truth of Scripture and est acts of God. His creation of all things never hesitating to tell forth the author- and His bodily resurrection from the ity over our lives of the One who cre- grave demand our eternal awe and ated and bought us. proclamation to all. Consider the Thus, the ICR mandate and following two examples of their mission leads us into a wide use. variety of encounters. Obvi- In Acts 17:16–34, as Paul ously we speak to unbeliev- was declaring “the Unknown ers, both skeptic and seeker, God” to the pagans of Athens, demonstrating that the Chris- he began by establishing tian faith is a reasonable God’s credentials as Creator faith. We also speak to and authority over creation churches and Christian orga- (vv. 24–29). But He is not just nizations, insisting that the the Creator of life, He reigns foundational doctrine of cre- sovereignly even over death, of- ation no longer be minimized. fering eternal life to those who re- And we talk to Christians with a pent (vv.
    [Show full text]
  • The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth at Maturity Insights Into Elements of Genius Harrison J
    Part V Trajectories The Wiley Handbook of Genius, First Edition. Edited by Dean Keith Simonton. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 19 The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth at Maturity Insights into Elements of Genius Harrison J. Kell and David Lubinski Genius, by definition, is rare. It is arguably the rarest phenomenon in the human con- dition. In Murray’s (2003) compelling analysis, Human Accomplishment, he suggests that genius is indicative of individuals who generate products that transform humanity. When leaders in the field examine the creative contributions generated by geniuses, their response is frequently “How could a human being have done that?” If we set the bar high enough, limiting discussions of genius to luminaries such as Shakespeare and Dante, Einstein and Newton, or Aristotle and Plato, a list of around 100 individuals for all time is likely to eventuate. Therefore, one may reasonably ask, as Dean Simonton does in the preface to this volume, “Can such a rare phenomenon be studied scientifically?” To study a group of 100 individuals scientifically who were born across a range of 2,000 years is mindboggling. If standards are lowered, how- ever, to, say, Murray’s (2003) list of the top 20 contributors to 20 major disciplines (e.g., medicine, music, physics), this facilitates matters. Yet even with this more liberal approach, the scientific study of genius is still exceedingly difficult – it would leave us with about 400 individuals stretched over approximately 2,800 years, suggesting a single genius arises, on average, only once every seven years! This still understates the problem, however, as the emergence of genius is not evenly distributed over time; certain historical periods abound in the production of genius while others lie fallow (Murray, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth After 35 Years Uncovering Antecedents for the Development of Math-Science Expertise David Lubinski and Camilla Persson Benbow
    PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Special Section: Doing Psychological Science Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth After 35 Years Uncovering Antecedents for the Development of Math-Science Expertise David Lubinski and Camilla Persson Benbow Vanderbilt University ABSTRACT—This review provides an account of the Study (e.g., administration, law, medicine, and the social sci- of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) after 35 ences). By their mid-30s, the men and women appeared to years of longitudinal research. Findings from recent be happy with their life choices and viewed themselves as 20-year follow-ups from three cohorts, plus 5- or 10-year equally successful (and objective measures support these findings from all five SMPY cohorts (totaling more than subjective impressions). Given the ever-increasing im- 5,000 participants), are presented. SMPY has devoted portance of quantitative and scientific reasoning skills in particular attention to uncovering personal antecedents modern cultures, when mathematically gifted individuals necessary for the development of exceptional math-science choose to pursue careers outside engineering and the careers and to developing educational interventions to physical sciences, it should be seen as a contribution to facilitate learning among intellectually precocious youth. society, not a loss of talent. Along with mathematical gifts, high levels of spatial ability, investigative interests, and theoretical values form a par- ticularly promising aptitude complex indicative of poten- Society is becoming more knowledge based, technological, and tial for developing scientific expertise and of sustained international (Friedman, 2005); the physical and social systems commitment to scientific pursuits. Special educational within which people operate are increasingly complex and dy- opportunities, however, can markedly enhance the devel- namic, and economies are built upon ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reality of Human Differences by Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele. Boulder Colorado: Westview Press, 2004
    Evolutionary Psychology human-nature.com/ep – 2005. 3: 255-262 ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ Book Review Race and IQ Again A review of Race: the Reality of Human Differences by Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele. Boulder Colorado: Westview Press, 2004. Mark Nathan Cohen, SUNY University Distinguished Professor of Anthropology, Department of Anthropology, SUNY Plattsburgh, NY 12901, USA. Email: [email protected]. The ugly but apparently immortal snake of “scientific” racism--“proof” of Black intellectual inferiority--has reared its head again. The most recent entry is Race: the Reality of Human Differences by Vincent Sarich, Emeritus Professor of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, and Frank Miele, senior editor with Skeptic magazine. The essence of the book is that despite much recent discussion to the contrary, races (the traditional three) are real and distinguished by cognition and morality as well as by physical differences. As usual the Black “race” finishes last. The authors begin by critiquing some pronouncements that have been made by people who oppose the idea of race. They follow with a discussion of the history and anthropology of “race” as a concept. Attempting to bolster the underpinnings of their own arguments they point out that awareness if color differences is as old as civilized art and that imputing inferiority to blacks has a long and history. They argue that “racism” is not a new concept developed from European colonization. (I agree.) But perception of color differences is obvious and by itself unimportant. And what people thought in the past about race is no more relevant to what science knows today than what they thought about the shape of the earth.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Raise a Genius: Lessons from a 45-Year Study of Super-Smart Children
    1 ﻋ ر ﺑ ﻲ How to raise a genius: lessons from a 45-year study of super-smart children A long-running investigation of exceptional children reveals what it takes to produce the scientists who will lead the twenty-first century. • Tom Clynes 07 September 2016 NATURE, 537 Issue 7619 On a summer day in 1968, professor Julian Stanley met a brilliant but bored 12-year-old named Joseph Bates. The Baltimore student was so far ahead of his classmates in mathematics that his parents had arranged for him to take a computer-science course at Johns Hopkins University, where Stanley taught. Even that wasn't enough. Having leapfrogged ahead of the adults in the class, the child kept himself busy by teaching the FORTRAN programming language to graduate students. Unsure of what to do with Bates, his computer instructor introduced him to Stanley, a researcher well known for his work in psychometrics — the study of cognitive performance. To discover more about the young prodigy's talent, Stanley gave Bates a battery of tests that included the SAT college-admissions exam, normally taken by university-bound 16- to 18-year-olds in the United States. Early child development: Body of knowledge Bates's score was well above the threshold for admission to Johns Hopkins, and prompted Stanley to search for a local high school that would let the child take advanced mathematics and science classes. When that plan failed, Stanley convinced a dean at Johns Hopkins to let Bates, then 13, enrol as an undergraduate. Stanley would affectionately refer to Bates as “student zero” of his Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY), which would transform how gifted children are identified and supported by the US education system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth: the First Three Decadesof a Planned 50-Year Study of Intellectual Talent*
    10 The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth: The First Three Decadesof a Planned 50-Year Study of Intellectual Talent* David Lubinski Camilla Persson Benbow Our increasingly technological society requires many well-trained scientists. Yet decreasing numbersof college students are choosing engineering, mathematics, and physical science majors (National Science Board, 1982; Office of Technology Assessment, 1988; Tur- ner & Bowen, 1990). For example, between 1966 and 1988, the numberof college freshmen majoring in mathematics and science decreased by 50% (Green, 1989). This trend has generated concern among several leaders in the physical sciences, a concern that is amplified by the marked underrepresentation of women in engineer- ing and physical sciences, especially at advanced educationallevels and among faculty in math/science departments. Many educational and vocational psychologists have embraced these concerns. Some have been moved to ask: Within our student population, are there measurable psychological attributes that are predictive of individ- uals who will maintain a commitment to and achieve career ex- cellence in math/science disciplines (and are these attributes gender-differentiating)? Whatever psychologists do to address the mounting concern over our future technological capabilities, ad- dressing both components of the aforementioned question (i.e., maintaining a commitment and achieving excellence) is critical. After all, simply enhancing the numberof individuals who ulti- “Address correspondence to either Camilla P. Benbow or David Lubinski, Co- Directors of the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY), Departmentof Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames, [A 50011-3180. Support wasprovided by a grant from the National Science Foundation (MDR 8855625). 255 256 LUBINSKI & BENBOW mately earn advanced degrees in engineering or the physical sci- ences would be counterproductive if these individuals ultimately found themselveseither occupationally unfulfilled or unable to work competently in engineering and physical science careers.
    [Show full text]
  • Softly, Softly Gillborn, David
    University of Birmingham Softly, softly Gillborn, David DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2016.1139189 License: None: All rights reserved Document Version Peer reviewed version Citation for published version (Harvard): Gillborn, D 2016, 'Softly, softly: genetics, intelligence and the hidden racism of the new geneism', Journal of Education Policy, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 365-388. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2016.1139189 Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Gillborn, David. "Softly, softly: genetics, intelligence and the hidden racism of the new geneism." Journal of Education Policy (2016): 1-24. on 1st Feb 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02680939.2016.1139189 General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain. Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Jonathan M. (Jon) Marks
    JONATHAN M. (JON) MARKS 1 September 2018 Office: Home: Department of Anthropology University of North Carolina at Charlotte 6842 Charette Ct Charlotte, NC 28223-0001 Charlotte, NC 28215 Phone (704) 687-5097 Phone (704) 537-7903 Fax: (704) 687-1678 E-mail: [email protected] Home page – http://webpages.uncc.edu/~jmarks RESEARCH INTERESTS: Human evolution; critical, historical, and social studies of human genetics, genomics, evolution, and variation; anthropology of science; general biological anthropology; general anthropology. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Ph. D., Anthropology. The University of Arizona, Tucson (1984). M. A., Anthropology. The University of Arizona, Tucson (1979). M. S., Genetics. The University of Arizona, Tucson (1977). B. A., Natural Sciences. The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (1975). ACADEMIC POSITIONS: Assistant/Associate/Full Professor, UNC-Charlotte (2000-present) [Visiting Affiliate Faculty, UCB/UCSF Medical Anthropology Program (1999-2000)] Visiting Associate Professor, Dept. of Anthropology, University of California at Berkeley (1997-2000) [Assistant Professor (joint), Dept. of Biology, Yale University (1988-1992)] Assistant/Associate Professor, Dept. of Anthropology, Yale University (1987-1997) Post-Doctoral Research Associate, Dept. of Genetics, UC-Davis, Laboratory of Dr. Che-Kun James Shen (1984-1987) Instructor, Pima Community College, Fall, 1983. Instructor, Dept. of Anthropology, University of Arizona, summers 1980-82. PROFESSIONAL SERVICE: Editorial Board, Anthropological Theory (2014- ). Nominations Committee, American Anthropological Association (2011-2014). Editorial Board, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, UK (2010-2013). Executive Program Committee, American Anthropological Association (2009, 2011). Editorial Board, Yearbook of Physical Anthropology (2008-2013). Long-Range Planning Committee, American Anthropological Association (2004-2006). Editorial Board, Histories of Anthropology Annual (2004- ). President, General Anthropology Division, AAA (2000-2002).
    [Show full text]