From: bbs-phaedrus@jwt.UUCP (larry wink)
Subject: Re: IQ Test Creation Question
Reply-To: bbs-phaedrus@jwt.UUCP
Organization: The Matrix
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:07:45 GMT

Re: IQ Test Creation Question

gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:

>You must admit that a skill can be broken down into constituents that each
>could be used to predict potential in another related skill.  General fitness
>could be used to predict success as a sprinter.  The argument that it does
>not predict 100% accurately, and that other factors enter in, is analogous
>to intelligence tests/academic success.  Certainly other factors enter in,
>but that does not make the intelligence tests useless, as you probably
>agree.  But, like intelligence tests, the failure in a fitness test should
>not prevent the testee from competing in marathons, as there may be latent
>potential untapped.  The use of intelligence tests for college admission
>(actually, achievement tests) may only be a necessary device for maximizing
>the utility of a limited resource, which is college admission.  The misuse
>of a test for discouraging others may be an unavoidable, but no less
>undesirable, side-effect.

I do agree that standardized tests (allow me to call them this rather than 
intelligence tests) are useful in a wide variety of circumstances, college 
admissions testing being but one example.  It is certainly appropriate to 
determine if an applicant has sufficiently mastered the subject matter 
necessary to profit from additional instruction.  I believe that this is 
precisely what the SAT and GRE attempt to do, and probably with good success.  

My concern is with much younger children (elementary school level in 
particular).  As you correctly point out in your analogy to physical fitness, 
standardized tests should not be used to prevent competition.  Unfortunately, 
IMHO, they are currently being used in exactly that way.  As I understand it, 
the current practice in elementary education is to make a "contract" with a 
child and his/her parents covering what will be accomplished in the current 
academic year.  Sounds good.  But, if the child has score poorly on recent 
standardized test the amount that is to be accomplished is reduced 
accordingly.  If this reduced program is accomplished, the child is promoted 
to the next grade where the process is repeated.

If you think about this process you begin to understand why American education 
is in trouble.  Obviously, the prophecies of the standardized tests are easily 
self-fulfilling.  In your physical fitness analogy it would go like this:  
Initial test  at 5 years of age - poor physical fitness - can't be expected to 
fully participate in the usual physical fitness training so - limit activities 
to indoors - test again at 7 years of age - physical fitness even worse - 
limit to the couch - test again at age 9 - this kids a basket case - confine 
to bed.  And so it goes.    

If intelligence was a single, immutable quantity and if standardized tests 
measured intelligence, then the use of such tests to plan the academic program 
of children could be justified.  But I do not believe that this is the case.  
The use of standardize test to structure educational programs can even be 
detrimental to the overall education of gifted individuals if they are used to 
focus narrowly on identified strengths and fail to encourage development in 
"weaker" areas.  Thus, I also find myself uncomfortable with attempts to "sub-
divide" intelligence into seven or three or twenty-two different abilities or 
aspects and measure these on different standarized tests.       

>I understand the need for people to try to avoid damage to the enthusiasm
>those who fail often encounter.  I do wonder how to avoid this while taking
>advantage of the increase in enthusiasm of those who succeed.  I wonder if
>this halo effect from feel-good politics in today's world is really mis-
>guided guilt-tripping.  Sometimes a person succeeds in spite of this,
>but that may not necessarily be a mark of the individual overcoming the
>Evil Testing Empire, but just a mark of maturity.  I can't say that
>testing isn't flawed, but I do wonder if too much time is spent whining,
>and too little is spent finding out what a person is good at.

I am less worried about damaging the enthusiasm of children who fail than I am 
about insuring that all children are given the chance to master the basic 
skills needed in life.  I personally find failure stimulating and believe that 
it can be a great motivator, if properly used.  However, having the 
educational system say to a child: "Since you failed, we will lower the 
standard," benefits no one.  

Testing can certainly be used to identify those who would profit from 
additional challenges without penalizing those that don't "measure up".  I 
have no paranoia about "the Evil Testing Empire" since I know of a least one 
lower middle class kid from the South Bronx who was sent to a special high 
school, had his college education paid for by the State of New York and his 
graduate education paid for by the National Science Foundation, thanks, in 
part, to standardized testing.  I just don't think that it should be paid for 
by depriving those who did not score as high of a basic education. 

>>standardized IQ test only measured what has been learned and not the >>potential to learn.
>
>I don't agree with this.  I don't disagree, either, not being able to prove
>it either way, but I'm not sure you can give a usable argument toward this.

Let me be slightly less global and delete the word "only" from my statement.  
While I can not prove this contention, I do draw your attention to a number of 
recent posts to this newsgroup concerning "preparing" for these tests.  If 
these tests are truly measuring intelligence, as opposed to acquired 
knowledge, why should preparation result in higher scores?  I  really can't 
accept that these books and courses will make you more intelligent.  Studying 
for an intelligence test should have no more effect that studying for an eye 
test.

 --Larry Wink
 Internet:fdmwink@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu Usenet:bbs-phaedrus@jwt.UUCP GEnie:l.wink   
    "What on earth would a man do with himself if 
                                    something did not stand in his way?"




  


Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa