Anyone else watch this show? I can't see how the questions are
ordered. They're supposed to be in order of difficulty, but I find
personally a pretty random distribution with some of the supposedly
hard ones really easy and vice versa. Anyone else noticed something
similar?
Incidentally, for questions of the kind posed on the show, it's
possible to train to improve your score. These are very similar the IQ
test questions and the more you do, the better you get at them over
the course of time.
Incidentally, for questions of the kind posed on the show, it's
possible to train to improve your score. These are very similar the IQ
test questions and the more you do, the better you get at them over
the course of time.
On 14/04/2024 18:18, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Incidentally, for questions of the kind posed on the show, it's
possible to train to improve your score. These are very similar the IQ
test questions and the more you do, the better you get at them over
the course of time.
+1
It seems for some questions part of the trick is just recognising the
type of question which must be common place in IQ tests or perhaps in puzzle books etc.
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost
our number by ten points or so. ...
Anyone else watch this show? I can't see how the questions are
ordered. They're supposed to be in order of difficulty, but I find
personally a pretty random distribution with some of the supposedly
hard ones really easy and vice versa. Anyone else noticed something
similar?
Incidentally, for questions of the kind posed on the show, it's
possible to train to improve your score. These are very similar the IQ
test questions and the more you do, the better you get at them over
the course of time.
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:cases, but either not needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost
our number by ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to make a difference for those who were marginal
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost our number by
ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
On 14/04/2024 18:18, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Anyone else watch this show? I can't see how the questions are
ordered. They're supposed to be in order of difficulty, but I find
personally a pretty random distribution with some of the supposedly
hard ones really easy and vice versa. Anyone else noticed something
similar?
Incidentally, for questions of the kind posed on the show, it's
possible to train to improve your score. These are very similar the IQ
test questions and the more you do, the better you get at them over
the course of time.
+1
The questions seem to have got easier as each series progresses. That's
not my brain being trained. Anyone who does crosswords can normally
spot an anagram or word puzzles eg clodogver (dog in clover).
The 50k to 80k questions seem to be the easiest.
I've only ever answered the 100,000 question once.
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost
our number by ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:09:53 +0100, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost our number by
ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
And that still happens in some parts of the country.
On 15/04/2024 12:03, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:09:53 +0100, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost our number by
ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
And that still happens in some parts of the country.
We still have the 11_ here.
I do wonder whether it is actually a good thing for all, as, perhaps in competition with the Grammars, the whole school system regularly
outperforms other areas of the country.
On 15/04/2024 12:12, SteveW wrote:
On 15/04/2024 12:03, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:09:53 +0100, Colin Bignell wrote:We still have the 11_ here.
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost our number by >>>>> ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
And that still happens in some parts of the country.
I do wonder whether it is actually a good thing for all, as, perhaps
in competition with the Grammars, the whole school system regularly >>outperforms other areas of the country.
When the state abandoned the Grammar School system, those took 20% and >universities took around 5% of the population. With the current target
being to get 50% into higher educations, I am not sure there is much
point in segregating the top 20% any more.
In message <iMCcnfSvk9rqT4H7nZ2dnZeNn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Colin
Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> writes
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost
our number by ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
When I was in the lower 6th at school, a few of us did the Statistics
O-Level (good old GCE in those days), over one year, rather than two. We spent the first half of the year doing it as normal lessons, then spent
the rest of the year working our way through the schools library of past
exam papers. Everyone passed with either an A or a B.
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost
our number by ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to
make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
In message <7P-cnVr7gM79wYD7nZ2dnZeNn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Colin
Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> writes
On 15/04/2024 12:12, SteveW wrote:
On 15/04/2024 12:03, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:09:53 +0100, Colin Bignell wrote:We still have the 11_ here.
On 15/04/2024 06:52, Paul wrote:
...
From our little study, of the effectiveness of "practicing",
we estimated from our test results that we could boost our number by >>>>>> ten points or so. ...
In the days of the 11+, which was essentially an IQ test aimed at
channelling the top 20% into Grammar School, the estimate for the
improvement from studying old exams was nearer five points. Enough to >>>>> make a difference for those who were marginal cases, but either not
needed or not worth the effort for most pupils.
And that still happens in some parts of the country.
I do wonder whether it is actually a good thing for all, as, perhaps
in competition with the Grammars, the whole school system regularly
outperforms other areas of the country.
When the state abandoned the Grammar School system, those took 20% and
universities took around 5% of the population. With the current target
being to get 50% into higher educations, I am not sure there is much
point in segregating the top 20% any more.
My County Grammar proudly displayed the names of those 6th. formers
passing the entrance exams for Oxford/Cambridge.
Usually in the very low single figures. Perhaps a reflection of current standards in education considering the annual intake of around 100 11+
first formers in the mid 1950's.
In message <uvirgd$700j$1@dont-email.me>, wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com>
writes
On 14/04/2024 18:18, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Anyone else watch this show? I can't see how the questions are
ordered. They're supposed to be in order of difficulty, but I find
personally a pretty random distribution with some of the supposedly
hard ones really easy and vice versa. Anyone else noticed something
similar?
Incidentally, for questions of the kind posed on the show, it's
possible to train to improve your score. These are very similar the IQ
test questions and the more you do, the better you get at them over
the course of time.
+1
The questions seem to have got easier as each series progresses.
That's not my brain being trained. Anyone who does crosswords can
normally spot an anagram or word puzzles eg clodogver (dog in clover).
The £50k to £80k questions seem to be the easiest.
I've only ever answered the £100,000 question once.
Don't know about *mind training* but I find answers to crosswords can
come unexpectedly when re-visited after several days. Has the mind been
busy or simply using a fresh set of parameters.
Sad to say, I also cheat! The Chambers Crossword Dictionary is a huge
help with clear instructions on spotting compositors *mis-direction* and lists of alternative words with similar meanings.
Sad to say, I also cheat! The Chambers Crossword Dictionary is a huge
help with clear instructions on spotting compositors *mis-direction* and lists of alternative words with similar meanings.
Roget's Thesaurus
wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:Full confession mode.. I also use an ancient *Franklin Spellmaster*!
Another obvious way is to use the dictionaries in your computer with
Sad to say, I also cheat! The Chambers Crossword Dictionary is a huge
help with clear instructions on spotting compositors *mis-direction* and >> > lists of alternative words with similar meanings.
Roget's Thesaurus
'grep' (if you're Linux/Unix), e.g. if you're looking for a five
letter word that starts 'bli' :-
chris$ grep '^bli..$' /usr/share/dict/british-english
blimp
blind
bling
blink
blips
bliss
blitz
chris$
The matching letters don't have to be adjacent as in the above example,
it's just one I did recently!
It's even better with longer words, the ^ and $ in the search fix
the ends so you're only looking for words of a specific length.
In message <ovr1fk-eb741.ln1@esprimo.zbmc.eu>, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> writes
wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:Full confession mode.. I also use an ancient *Franklin Spellmaster*!
Another obvious way is to use the dictionaries in your computer with
Sad to say, I also cheat! The Chambers Crossword Dictionary is a huge*mis-direction* and
help with clear instructions on spotting compositors
lists of alternative words with similar meanings.
Roget's Thesaurus
'grep' (if you're Linux/Unix), e.g. if you're looking for a five
letter word that starts 'bli' :-
chris$ grep '^bli..$' /usr/share/dict/british-english
blimp
blind
bling
blink
blips
bliss
blitz
chris$
The matching letters don't have to be adjacent as in the above example,
it's just one I did recently!
It's even better with longer words, the ^ and $ in the search fix
the ends so you're only looking for words of a specific length.
Fits the breakfast table much more readily than my PC.
Saves a lot of pain with an anagram feature (words list).
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 365 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 04:58:47 |
| Calls: | 7,795 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 12,920 |
| Messages: | 5,749,022 |