In response to:

Jensen and Flynn

Chris from Kalifornia Wrote: Nov 27, 2012 9:41 AM
It is my opinion, based on my own observations that IQ tests are much more biased by the education level of a person than they are by the actual mental capabilities of the individual being tested. In other words, if a person of high intelligence somehow grows up not being taught to read and tries to take an IQ test he will fail dramatically. 6 months later after having been taught to read he may score a genius level IQ rating. I'm curious about the testing, not whether it's changed since I took my last one, but how and how do they account for the problem I've described? I wonder how I'd score now on the test that showed me at 136 in 7th grade and how I would do on a modern test, given that it was about 50 years ago when I took that test.
Words Wrote: Nov 27, 2012 10:41 AM
Our public school IQ tests for placement in classes. There are three separate tests. One is verbal IQ (reading). The second is math IQ. The third is nonverbal IQ. The nonverbal IQ is given the most weight. They give the test in 3rd grade, 4th grade, and I believe they are giving it now in 5th grade. They catch students who were missed in previous years. The IQ test is put into a matrix which also takes the standardized tests into consideration for class placement. Teacher input is given very little consideration. It's done in a objective manner.
Words Wrote: Nov 27, 2012 10:49 AM
I can honestly say this placement made a huge difference for my son. When they moved him into the harder classes he had explosive mental growth. It was shocking. He moved from a rather boring math class, to a class where they were learning EVERY way there is to answer a problem. New math, old math, logic, you name it, they learned it. They even had a math expert come in and work with the kids for a couple of days. He memorized some unpublished math shortcuts from the man which he still uses.

Anyone who has followed the decades-long controversies over the role of genes in IQ scores will recognize the names of the two leading advocates of opposite conclusions on that subject-- Professor Arthur R. Jensen of the University of California at Berkeley and Professor James R. Flynn, an American expatriate at the University of Otago in New Zealand.

What is so unusual in the academic world of today is that Professor Flynn's latest book, "Are We Getting Smarter?" is dedicated to Arthur Jensen, whose integrity he praises, even as he opposes his conclusions. That is what scholarship and science are...

Related Tags: Intelligence