Home
Search site Who we are
How to join ...
Admin Why IQ testing matters thoughts to consider... The following comments come unedited from the OG discussion list: From Keith McGuinness: IQ tests provide one means of assessing "intelligence"- and potential in certain areas - that is less sensitive to training (and, therefore, is a better measure of "true" intelligence) and better standardised than other means. Whether or not such tests are "adequate" depends on the objectives of the testing. The commonly used IQ tests (such as the WISC and Stanford-Binet, or SB) assess an individual's abilities in several domains (in the case of the SB these are verbal reasoning, quantitative reasoning, abstract/visual reasoning and short-term memory). Individuals get a score on each of several sub-scales and also have a full-scale, or composite, score. These scores are adjusted relative to the average for individuals of the appropriate age. For the Stanford-Binet (and I think the other major tests) the average score at any age on a sub-scale is 50 with a standard deviation of 8. The average composite score is 100, with a standard deviation of 16. An individual with a composite score of 132 is, therefore, 2 standard deviations above average: scores this high or higher are expected in only about 2.3% of the population (these calculations are based on properties of the normal distribution). | |
|
