Whenever an online “post your IQ/SAT score/penis size” posts gets posted anywhere on the internet, you can bet that the second person replying to the post (right after the one who notes that the scores will seem inflated because people lie and only the smart ones post), you get the ubiquitous “It doesnt matter since SAT scores are completely unrelated to how intelligent you are” or “IQ doesn’t matter anyway, the only thing IQ measures is your ability to do IQ tests” followed by a couple of people who agree and then a short flame war before it descends into mind numbing banality.
just WTF exactly did this little “factoid” slip into the public domain because I have never seen it be refuted anywhere even though, if you think it through, it is clearly absurd. to say that there is
to say that SAT scores NO correlation b/w SAT/IQ scores and intelligence means that the tests have NO predicitve powers however you measure Intelligence. A mentally disabled person with half his brain chopped out is just as likely to score a 1600 in the SAT as a valedictorian from a respectable HS. This is most clearly BS. What is under debate is the degree of correlation b/w SAT/IQ and intelligence but I don’t think any rational person would debate if there WAS a correlation.
basically the argument is that while these test measure knowledge and aptitude, they do not necessarily measure intelligence. If you have an otherwise uneducated but very intelligent person he may not do well at all on these tests though he may be of genius intelligence. Then again someone who has a hobby of solving some of the puzzles or questions presented he may have an aptitude for them that has nothing to do with his basic intelligence.
Any test is fundamentally only a measurement of how closely the test criteria can be met; if we could objectively define intelligence, then we could probably devise a completely reliable test for it.
I think it might. Someone who lacks the intelligence to solve puzzles would be unlikely to take up puzzle solving as a hobby because it would be frustrating. By the same token, if a person spends a lot of time solving puzzles, etc, wouldn’t it increase their intelligence a little?
It’s kind of like saying measuring how much I can bench doesn’t indicate how strong I am because I might work out a lot in the gym.
That “fact” is the result of a flawed statistical study. They found that GPA did not correllate much with SAT. However, the reason is that students in the hardest schools tend to all have high SATs, and vice versa. An “A” at Harvard isn’t the same as an “A” at Podunk.
I there were a bunch of students at Harvard with low SAT scores, they would get generally get poor grades.
Exactly… and therein lies the crux of the problem. At some point, taking a standardized test becomes more about how well one adapts to the testing methodology, and less about one’s actual intelligence. If I understand the method of the test, then I can do well on it. Of course, good (as in well-made) tests find ways to circumvent this. SAT and IQ are not particularly good tests, however, as their methodology is pretty plain.
That said, I agree with the OP in this – it is incorrect to say that there is no correlation between testing and intelligence. It is more accurate to debate the degree of correlation between a specific test and its accuracy/ability to objectively measure a person’s intelligence.
I have read enough of these threads now to be dying of curiosity. Can somebody point me to a reputable web-site where I can get my IQ checked? (If such a thing exists at all, which we could probably debate.)
After I go and find out my score, I will jump in the fight of how useless/useful they are in determining actual intelligence.
Perhaps I should have been more clear, I wasn’t trying to say that I thought that this “fact” was true, hence the " " as I too am skeptical about it. I was just reacting to the OP in that I have often heard people attack the SAT/IQ on the grounds that it allegedly has poor predictive ability, but I have never heard anyone allege that SAT/IQ results are completely unrelated to intelligence and/or education. My apologies if I was confusing.
An interesting observation. So do you believe that intelligence is more of a social construct than some objective truth? If so, isn’t it possible that the IQ test merely measures the potential of a person to function within the framework of their society? Isn’t that a more useful piece of information to know than some quantification of absolute intelligence? (whatever that means)
Einstein is a bit of a freak, and his IQ results don’t tell us much about the usefulness of the test in general.
The SAT test is meant to predict how well someone does in college. In theory, a reasonable indicator of how well you will do in college is a test that measures (1) what you learned up until high school, and (2) some puzzle-solving skills.
However, the test is flawed for several reasons: (1) people can take review courses and do significantly better; (2) it rewards people who are in better schools; and (3) it assumes a standard curriculum. I’m sure there are other problems.
Now, what is intelligence? Is it an innate characteristic that shouldn’t change regardless of how much you study or which school you went to? If so, the SAT is not a very good indicator.
Is intelligence an indicator of how successful you will be? Well, if that’s true, then IQ tests aren’t very good. Many Mensa members are not successful. I would take someone with drive and initiative as an employee over someone who can solve puzzles any day. Success in sports depends on your strength and agility. Success in acting depends on how in tune you are with your emotions. Success as a politician depends on your charisma. So what is intelligence?
Is Bill Gates a genius? Maybe, but my guess is he got to where he is because of an ability to “think outside the box” and see opportunities where others did not, and not because he was able to tell you which number came next in a series.
I took some of those classes, while some people undoubtedly gain a few points, you can’t make up for years of eductaion in two weeks;
Well, if the test is supposed to measure what you learned in HS, isn’t it reasonable to assume that people in better schools will have learned more? That may be ‘unfair’ but it isn’t the test’s fault;
As far as I remember, and this is going back some time here, all the questions on the SAT fell pretty squarely into the general category. Exactly what part of the “standard curriculum” do you think should not be being taught or should a college bound person not know?
Rhum Runner I don’t mean to be non-responsive, but what is your goal? I’m not sure if you are disagreeing with me or are just trying to ferret out my opinion.
Of relevance to the OP: What is intelligence? I really can’t help you there; I don’t have a very good definition. Webster’s says:
So, according to that definition who is more intelligent, Al or Bob?
Al and Bob take the SATs. Al scores a 1000 and Bob scores a 1300.
Al and Bob walk into a store, both trying to return an item without a receipt. Only Al is successful.
Al goes to a decent college and Bob goes to a very well respected college. Al gets As because he lives at the library and studies every chance he gets. Bob gets Bs without ever even opening a book.
Al and Bob both meet a charming, delightful woman. Al eventually marries her. Bob has never gone out with a woman for more than one date.
Al and Bob have a job interview at the same place. Al gets the job.
Al and Bob both try to develop competing products. Al works for a month and comes up with a design. Bob figures out the same design in 5 minutes. Al brings the product to market in a year. Bob gets fired because, although he figured out the design, he never followed through with getting the product to market.
At 35 Al has a beautiful home and a beautiful family and loves what he does.
At 35 Bob is living with his parents, rarely meets other people and is angry at the world.
This is part of a long-standing debate, which goes back around 100 years. One side believed there are several types of intelligence; the other side said it is possible to distill a single factor, called g (for general intelligence). IQ is supposed to measure g (if it even exists.)
So, as I understood it, you put forth your understanding of the purpose of the SAT, and then explained at least some of the reasons why you think that the SAT fails to fulfill that purpose. I then responded to each of your reasons with questions and comments. My purpose was to attempt (apparently without success) to show why I do not feel that your alleged flaws lead one to the conclusion that the SAT is a flawed test.
Later in your post you said:
This is an extraordinary claim to make, and in order to respond I would like to know what, exactly, you mean by success. That is why I asked the question:
My purpose in asking this question was to illicit information from you as to what your opinion and/or understanding of the word successful is in the context of Mensa members. In the future I will try to be more explicit.
This indicates to me that Harvard a) admits people on the basis of their hard work rather than their overblown SAT scores, b) isn’t any tougher to graduate than Podunk U. once you get admitted, and c) there are lots of people at Harvard with low SAT scores, which, depending on your opinion of Harvard, either confirms that Harvard is overrated or gives you reason to admire their graduates.
Based on that, would you care to revise your statement, december?
In any event, the SAT confirms that you have learned some of the things that are necessary to graduate college, but I would still say that as a measure of intelligence I find it lacking. There are plenty of people that would do well on the SATs, if only they had learned the answers, which in many cases is out of their control.
Furthermore, success on an IQ test and/or the SAT does not indicate success in the future. So basing intelligence solely on test results is silly.
