Are IQ tests sacrosanct? Or do you think there is only one kind of intelligence? What about creativity? Or intuitive or emotional intelligence? ~ The Influencer: Speed Must Have a Limit
I can’t pinpoint the recent conversation that made me think about IQ (intelligence quotient) tests. However, it must have been with my husband, because he subsequently sent me a video that filled in the blanks for me from a historical perspective. I have to say it changed my mind about those standardized tests, and not in a good way. Click on the link if you’d like to view that video for the full scoop.
A little personal history on testing
Long ago and far away I recall taking Metropolitan Achievement tests every year in elementary school. I had no idea why we were taking them, but I loved them. Freshly trimmed pencils, a quiet room, and a long stretch of time with no obligation to interact with anyone. It was just me and the puzzle that lay before me.
Yes, I recognize it wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea, and some of you might think me a nerd. That’s ok. Anyway, I was good at those little puzzles, but we never took an IQ test. None that I recall, so I have no idea what mine is. I don’t think I care. While I frequently write pieces on the need to know ourselves, as mentioned in the 2-2-2023 post, this is different. More on that down the way.
Based on what I know now, I suspect that testing provided direction to the school’s administration for class placement more than anything else. Our town was small at ~8,000 souls, and farmland surrounded its limits. None of us were sophisticated, though there were varying degrees of interest in academics. And obvious socio-economic disparities.
The reason I am mentioning this is to emphasize that our community’s priorities would not have been the same as, say, a city of 1,000,000. While my mother was teaching me to cook, a mother in a metropolitan area may have been taking her 12-year-old to ballet lessons. We don’t all learn the same thing at the same time.
The IQ score was calculated by dividing the test taker’s mental age by their chronological age, then multiplying this number by 100.
For example, a child with a mental age of 12 and a chronological age of 10 would have an IQ of 120: (12÷10) x 100 = 120.
And a little background on IQ testing
While some of this is in the video below, not all of you will watch it. Here we go.
Several sources had essentially the same story, so I just picked one. The Very Well Mind website credits Sir Francis Galton with developing the first mental ability testing methods. Galton was a 19th-century scientist and some of his ideas were not accepted for over a hundred years. One theory suggested a correlation between intelligence and speed. That is, he thought you could watch a person perform sensorimotor tasks* and, based on the speed of response, determine mental capacity. One practical example of this is how fast a driver reacts to a vehicle (dead ahead) slowing down.
Galton also had a theory that you could assess intelligence by head size and shape. To his credit, he was the one who disproved his own idea through studying the data. He also spent years working on eugenics, thinking that perhaps the human race would be better if highly intelligent men and women reserved themselves for like kind and quality, if you will. Does that harken to Animal Farm or Brave New World?
Since Galton had high visibility, the psychologist Alfred Binet was familiar with his work and was intrigued by the idea of measuring intelligence. Coincidentally, he was challenged to respond to the French government’s need to identify children who needed extra attention to complete their studies. It was Binet and his colleague, Theodore Simon, who developed the Binet-Simon IQ test.
While they were attempting to gauge memory and problem-solving skills, rather than specific subjects, the test did not account for a variety of differences in the test-takers. That problem was remedied by a Stanford University psychologist who standardized the test and published it in 1916. While it has been revised several times (what hasn’t?), the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale is still in use.
*According to Brain Balance, this is defined as “… tasks and exercises that engage and strengthen the brain by activating our body and our senses at the same time.”
So, are IQ tests useful?
As with so many questions, the answer is, “It depends.” If the scores are used to facilitate learning by grouping students with similar capabilities and interests, I think they have positive potential. However, if scores–low or high–impact an individual’s prospects, I’m not a fan. I’m not thinking of the scores as a college entry component, but rather as how individuals see themselves. If the score is low, will the person quit trying to achieve goals he had previously sought to attain? Then there’s the flip side.
Those who receive a score over 130 (genius level) may have the same reaction. That is, they may expect that above-average GPAs will simply emerge from their professors’ grade books, in homage to their brilliance. I’d guess that some professors are influenced by bright pupils, but only to the extent that they appear to make an effort.
I’d put the ability to know my IQ on a par with knowing how close I am to the top of the heap relative to my teammate’s salaries. If I’m too far down, I feel used. If I’m in the 95% percentile, mightn’t I feel superior? I never wanted to know my coworkers’ salaries and certainly never shared my details with them. I feel the same way about IQs. Yours and mine. I think I should soldier on, giving new experiences the college try without the albatross of either doom or entitlement.
You?
I think standardized testing has a place. Placing students of like capabilities allows all the different groupings to move faster. Kindergarten was not free when I came through so I did not attend. Due to this, I was placed in the “slow group” upon entering first grade. (Obviously and fortunately, I came through pre-political correctness….so there!) By third grade, I was placed in the “fast” group. This was due to the importance my mother put on education and due to my competitiveness and my curiosity to learn. Coming in second has never been my deal.
Above all of the drivers to knowledge, I attribute curiosity. Detracting from the ability to gain knowledge is arrogance, the opposite of curiosity. You are not going to learn something you think you know. “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you in trouble. It’s what you know that ain’t so!” Mark Twain
Agree. I don’t know what triggered my intellectual curiosity, but I had very little until about 20 years ago. I got really lucky in school.
P.S. Not sure if Post Scripts are allowed on this Blog as I did not look at the rules. Not looking at the rules is creativity, but I digress. Standardized testing is a way academics put us in a box. I think that is okay because I put them in a box too. They have to do this else they would have to go out and get a real job making real contributions.Think about it. Engineers, scientists, chemists, doctors, OR academics…..who is bringing home the bacon?