Intelligence Assessment

After completing the Intelligence Assessment I have received a decent score, but nevertheless, one I would disagree with. Before I delve into the personal reasoning I have for not believing it being a proper assessment of intelligence I decided to do some research on the perception of what “intelligence” is. As David Wechsler noted intelligence is, “…the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment. [1]” However, with even such a seemingly enveloping explanation, it still leaves loopholes. For example, if one is to measure intelligence even within a given environment, it still fails to consider the deviation of one’s environment. Factors such as geographic environment, culture, race, and social status effectively alter one’s environment. In an even broader perspective, taking into consideration the different perceptions of individuals, and the inability to prove that there is a universal reality, one must doubt how an Intelligence test can actually exist.

However, in an attempt to create a more consistent understanding of intelligence, the psychometric school of psychology created two subgroups of intelligence; fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence.

[2] Crystallized intelligence is the acquired knowledge that comes from education and communication. For example a child’s belief in the existence of the Tooth Fairy is crystallized knowledge, it is created through the communication between two or more parties. Crystallized intelligence can be reshaped. For example if the same child were to be later informed that no such being exists, that newly acquired knowledge is re-shaped crystallized intelligence. However, as can be noted crystallized intelligence is relative to one’s current understanding of their surroundings (I.e. crystallized intelligence may vary amongst factors such as age, geographical location, social status, gender, and race.) Because of this, the measurement of crystallized intelligence always carries some byes, as was proven by Adrian Drove, a African American Sociologist ad creator of the Black Intelligence Test of Cultural Homogeneity.

On the other end of the spectrum lies what the psychometric school considers Fluid Intelligence. Fluid Intelligence, is the ability to recognize patterns, solve problems and the ability to learn itself. [2] This form of intelligence is assumable more difficult to find byes in, as general problem solving is a constant ability amongst the human populous. However, not intending to be cynical, but in order to test fluid intelligence, the factor of laziness also falls into play; if the subject becomes distracted or is unwilling to attempt to solve the problem the resulting score becomes a inadequate measurement. Also, without requiring an explanation of the reasoning behind answers, it is theoretically possible to have a chimp take an IQ exam and luckily guess all the correct answers resulting in the IQ of a genius! This creates the assumption, that while intelligence quotient tests are useful, they are not in the least bit accurate. However, relative to a willing participant who also belongs to the given cultural discriminates, the IQ testing works marvelously.

To conclude things I will release my score. After my first attempt of taking the Classical IQ test, it came up with a resultant score of 133. As we all know I’m not a gifted learner, I can assume that IQ tests are not only inaccurate but byes as well. A good portion of the test was vocabulary, which being the also found in the SAT I was able to skim by on. In addition, considering that vocabulary is a common value amongst middle-class white Americans, I would not be surprised if that particular group scored well in that portion of the IQ test. Naturally, knowledge of the English vocabulary doesn’t make one more intelligent than other individuals who are multi-lingual and have diversified their vocabulary. Conclusively, I would have to side with Gould’s opinion that intelligence cannot be measured, at the very least not with this form of testing. [1] However, to give a shimmering beacon of hoe, I can certainly say these tests have appeared to become less byes over the years.

As far as the test on learning styles, I also have to report there is simplistic byes on the part of the individual. While it certainly can help people understand how they learn, the answer choices are far to simplistic to accurately assess how people learn. After taking the test it assessed that I am “multimodal” meaning I earn through multiple methods equally well. The only problem is that the individuals themselves are reporting how they think they learn, which in turn will create the answer they desire. If the person believes they learn best through methods that are utilize vision, the test merely reciprocates that idea and notifies them they learn that way. Their assumptions are confirmed, always, which makes me doubtful of its accuracy.

Overall, one must wonder what purpose does an IQ test really have? Does it really matter? I would argue that it is merely a test, an a byes one at that. If you are to play one game show like Jeopardy and the categories are all tailored to your competitors who have respectively studied in that category while you have not, their scores will likely be higher. Similarly, the tests as far as crystallized intelligence a byes to certain groups, allotting them higher IQ scores. In addition, during said game show, if you are aware of the answer to a problem but are to lazy to answer the question, then the fluid intelligence will be measured inaccurately. Even with modern strides towards more accurate testing such as Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences, [1] it is still to be noted that it still holds byes according to culture in general. Conclusively, I would argue that IQ testing is completely byes, and should not be taken seriously.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence