I took 2 different IQ test. On the IQ test provided, I scored a 124. On the 2nd IQ test I took I scored a 122. I notice both tested heavily on finding patterns and correlation. Neither asked questions that would have required prior knowledge on any specific subject, it was more figuring out the patterns. The first one focused on patterns of numbers, analogies, and finding which one didn't belong. The 2nd IQ test was literally 60 questions of finding the picture to fit in the sequence or pattern. The 2nd IQ test had 3 times more questions with 3 times less variety and question, yet I scored almost the same on both tests. I don't believe it truly measures intelligence because it only test one of eight specific intelligences which was the logio-mathematical. Though I do consider myself a logical person, math is not my strongest subject. My strongest subjects regard linguistics and science. To score higher on the test, all one would need to do is practice identifying patterns. I had to take "gifted" tests before and I resulted in being "not gifted". However, if you look at the academic accomplishments and all the things that I have done based off my "intelligence", you would understand why I know those tests are not true measurements of intelligence They are just a standardized measurement of one type of intelligence.
ANALYSIS
To truly get an accurate "intelligence" reading, one would need to be tested on all specific intelligences. Had the test been in a foreign language or about correlating where different words originated from, I would have scored higher. Even if the tests were in Chinese, I would have scored very well, while a lot of other people would have scored poorly due to their lack of Chinese language skills. However, I am just looking at this from the bias so in which I would score the highest or be considered "genius". I can't just pick one type of intelligence to model these IQ tests after because no matter which one you choose, there will be a minority at a high disadvantage regardless of them being intelligent or not. For instance, if I said model the tests after interpersonal intelligence, it would be disadvantageous to the introverts and people who suffer from social disorders like Asperger's syndrome. If I were to choose naturalistic, there are going to be the people that have grown up in the city and would not be able to identify plants and animals as easily as those who live in more forest like areas. Thus, to have an actual intelligence test, it would have to test all areas of the currently known specific intelligences.
ANALYSIS
To truly get an accurate "intelligence" reading, one would need to be tested on all specific intelligences. Had the test been in a foreign language or about correlating where different words originated from, I would have scored higher. Even if the tests were in Chinese, I would have scored very well, while a lot of other people would have scored poorly due to their lack of Chinese language skills. However, I am just looking at this from the bias so in which I would score the highest or be considered "genius". I can't just pick one type of intelligence to model these IQ tests after because no matter which one you choose, there will be a minority at a high disadvantage regardless of them being intelligent or not. For instance, if I said model the tests after interpersonal intelligence, it would be disadvantageous to the introverts and people who suffer from social disorders like Asperger's syndrome. If I were to choose naturalistic, there are going to be the people that have grown up in the city and would not be able to identify plants and animals as easily as those who live in more forest like areas. Thus, to have an actual intelligence test, it would have to test all areas of the currently known specific intelligences.
No comments:
Post a Comment