• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

IQ Tests are Obviously Biased!

Judge

Well-Known Member
V.I.P Member
In the UK the 2 tier education system we used to have relied on an examination known as the "11 plus". If you passed with a high enough score you went to a Grammar school for the "clever" kids. If you didn't you went to a Secondary Modern school. The opportunities available were proportionate to your score in what was essentially a cobbled together IQ test of the sort under discussion that you took at age 10-11. It could completely alter the course of your life.

Good point.

Not all societies and their education systems are on the same plane when it comes to such tests. Certainly not ours compared to yours.

Though neither do I see our systems trending in such a way at the level of grammar schools either. At least not at the present. But then education itself remains somewhat of a political football here as well. Which shouldn't be the case IMO, but it is. Spread out over 50 states and territories where politicians and taxpayers have very different notions of how or not to fund education. Education here is neither socialized or centralized.

Sound familiar? That pesky Tenth Amendment again. ;)
 
Last edited:

All-Rounder

uwu owo uwu
V.I.P Member
In the UK the 2 tier education system we used to have relied on an examination known as the "11 plus". If you passed with a high enough score you went to a Grammar school for the "clever" kids. If you didn't you went to a Secondary Modern school. The opportunities available were proportionate to your score in what was essentially a cobbled together IQ test of the sort under discussion that you took at age 10-11. It could completely alter the course of your life.
Thatd be too tempting to score low so that you can get rid of math altogether
 

Fino

Alex
V.I.P Member
I've always disliked the separation of students based on testing.

In 4th grade, they tested our reading speed in order to separate us into groups, and I purposely went slow as some weird form of protest and was placed in the slow group.

In third grade, they wanted me to join an after-school program for "gifted" kids and I walked in the room to check it out and immediately walked back out LOL

And the standardized tests throughout school, for most of them I filled in random bubbles so I could have more time to read.

An honors program in college, which actually has nothing to do with ability, you just take the required courses, but I think it's a funny little story, I took all of the required classes except one then changed my mind and didn't get the certificate.

:cool:
 

Autistamatic

He's just this guy, you know?
V.I.P Member
The UK system that replaced it, the comprehensive system, took all kids in their area but then separated them into "streams" in subjects. It's better but still far from perfect. It's been further muddied by the recent introduction of privately run "academies" that have replaced state run schools in their areas. They are not governed by the same rules as state schools and many are "faith schools" which is a worrying development in a majority secular society.
 

Peter Morrison

Well-Known Member
V.I.P Member
IQ testing is quite flawed. There are many factors that influence a person's ability to answer "correctly". If you are unfamiliar with the test question formats, you could easily be thrown by the way the questions are posed. Tests, whether for IQ or general knowledge, require some preparation. As one who suffers rom ADD and test anxiety, I will easily miss words like "usually", "seldom", etc. if I am rushing under a time limit. As one who can categorize a series in many different ways, I can over-interpret a question and get stuck weighing the options. Then, if the vocabulary used is unclear, it's a potential failure again. Taking tests like these will produce false results (usually against the test taker) if the test taker is presented with an unfamiliar format.

I developed a simple test strategy for myself to combat my ADD interfering with my ability to answer questions. I don't remember the name of the test, but it was a test of general knowledge, vocabulary, math, and analogies. I bought the test book, and on my first practice I didn't finish on time and approximately half of my answers were incorrect. I had a lot to work on - timing, vocabulary, question interpretation, and ultimately choosing the correct answer. My analytical skills were in good order, but my ADD was difficult to harness. As the test involved selecting an answer from A, B, C, or D, I realized that I would read each possible answer before selecting it. That is where I got into trouble. I wasted time in my debate between all the choices. Once I had clogged my head with all the possibilities, I would get lost in the mire and lose all ability to focus. My strategy was to select the answer in my head before looking at the options. Based on the questions, the answer could be an emotion, a type of animal, a drawing with a missing part, a number, or some obscure word related to an idea (being mindful of an adjective, noun, or verb form). I was keenly aware that by looking at all 4 possibilities before answering would confuse me, I selected a probable answer before looking at the choices. Here, I was able to combat this aspect of my own learning disability so that I wouldn't make what teachers used to call a "careless error". I hate that term.

IQ tests throw a lot of unfamiliar test formats at people, and I believe that our inability to easily follow something new or different at a moment's notice gives us a serious disadvantage on tests of all kinds. Cultural biases can be harmful to all people. In our common language, there are terms that some people don't use. Consider foyer, entryway, front hall, or vestibule. Many of us need mental visuals to help us understand a situation. Unfamiliar words, or regionally preferred vocabulary, make that impossible for some.

Let logic and experience tell you what real intelligence is. The IQ rating system has its place, but it is by no means a guarantee or superiority or inferiority in learning or function. I tested near genius on an IQ test as an adolescent, but I have yet to see it played out in my life. I'm good at the paper folds and finding a clock in a drawing of a room, but I don't feel exceptionally bright. There are brilliant people who lock themselves out of their own houses, more than once.

It's difficult to produce a single number that represents a person's IQ. We all have strengths and weaknesses in the ways our minds operate. Standardized tests can't accommodate all the variables.
 

sidd851

If I'm not late, I'm not needed.
V.I.P Member
IQ testing is quite flawed. There are many factors that influence a person's ability to answer "correctly". If you are unfamiliar with the test question formats, you could easily be thrown by the way the questions are posed. Tests, whether for IQ or general knowledge, require some preparation. As one who suffers rom ADD and test anxiety, I will easily miss words like "usually", "seldom", etc. if I am rushing under a time limit. As one who can categorize a series in many different ways, I can over-interpret a question and get stuck weighing the options. Then, if the vocabulary used is unclear, it's a potential failure again. Taking tests like these will produce false results (usually against the test taker) if the test taker is presented with an unfamiliar format.

I developed a simple test strategy for myself to combat my ADD interfering with my ability to answer questions. I don't remember the name of the test, but it was a test of general knowledge, vocabulary, math, and analogies. I bought the test book, and on my first practice I didn't finish on time and approximately half of my answers were incorrect. I had a lot to work on - timing, vocabulary, question interpretation, and ultimately choosing the correct answer. My analytical skills were in good order, but my ADD was difficult to harness. As the test involved selecting an answer from A, B, C, or D, I realized that I would read each possible answer before selecting it. That is where I got into trouble. I wasted time in my debate between all the choices. Once I had clogged my head with all the possibilities, I would get lost in the mire and lose all ability to focus. My strategy was to select the answer in my head before looking at the options. Based on the questions, the answer could be an emotion, a type of animal, a drawing with a missing part, a number, or some obscure word related to an idea (being mindful of an adjective, noun, or verb form). I was keenly aware that by looking at all 4 possibilities before answering would confuse me, I selected a probable answer before looking at the choices. Here, I was able to combat this aspect of my own learning disability so that I wouldn't make what teachers used to call a "careless error". I hate that term.

IQ tests throw a lot of unfamiliar test formats at people, and I believe that our inability to easily follow something new or different at a moment's notice gives us a serious disadvantage on tests of all kinds. Cultural biases can be harmful to all people. In our common language, there are terms that some people don't use. Consider foyer, entryway, front hall, or vestibule. Many of us need mental visuals to help us understand a situation. Unfamiliar words, or regionally preferred vocabulary, make that impossible for some.

Let logic and experience tell you what real intelligence is. The IQ rating system has its place, but it is by no means a guarantee or superiority or inferiority in learning or function. I tested near genius on an IQ test as an adolescent, but I have yet to see it played out in my life. I'm good at the paper folds and finding a clock in a drawing of a room, but I don't feel exceptionally bright. There are brilliant people who lock themselves out of their own houses, more than once.

It's difficult to produce a single number that represents a person's IQ. We all have strengths and weaknesses in the ways our minds operate. Standardized tests can't accommodate all the variables.
It is explanatory to understand that brain and mind are distinctly separate.

The brain is a processing organ. Physical.

Mind is the culmination of the senses, and sensing ourselves in relation to them.
Moreso ephemeral, perhaps.

Intelligence is raw computing power.
The speed, efficiency, accuracy, and nimbleness of the brain in performing it's calculations.


I have known those with low to average IQ's
that were interesting, engaging and had a wide crystalline intelligence foundation.

I have known fantastically intelligent individuals who were uninteresting dullards.

The difference seems to be how one relates oneself to learning.

On the one hand, the genius level IQ that does not have the desire to learn about their world(school sucks. work sucks. life sucks.)
or themselves, will have very little of interest to say, have very little to offer conversationally, informationally, applicably.

On the other hand, I have met those with obviously avg. or below avg. IQ's that were fascinating, complex and sophisticated.

Those below avg. IQ's that believe the world to be a fascinating adventure, and have created in themselves the desire to see and understand it better are infinitely better companions than any above avg. IQ that does not engage in favor of cocooning themselves in a very small material comfort zone.

In short, those that are comfortable embracing large uncertainties and objectivity seem far better suited to companionship and growth than those that desire a small, dominated, strictly controlled world full of small certainties.

So, while IQ is very indicative of ability, it bears very little relation to propensity for investigation.

Open mind/closed mind.
Now there's your measuring stick,
right there.

sidd
 

sidd851

If I'm not late, I'm not needed.
V.I.P Member
For the gifted side of things, start with sites geared toward bringing parents up to speed on their gifted child. What they say about [those] children is still present in [us] adults. Many of those sites include information on 2e, as well.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1&q=gifted+children+characteristics
Thank you, very much.

It has become apparent that Khazad-dûm is not a destination, but merely a waypoint in a much larger quest.

I'll take rest, then continue the journey.

Now that you've indicated the path to Lothlórien, I have a better feel for where the journey is taking me.

Thank you, again.

sidd
 

Crossbreed

Neur-D Missionary ☝️
V.I.P Member
Khazad-dûm...
Lothlórien...
full
 

Fino

Alex
V.I.P Member
It is explanatory to understand that brain and mind are distinctly separate.

The brain is a processing organ. Physical.

Mind is the culmination of the senses, and sensing ourselves in relation to them.
Moreso ephemeral, perhaps.

Intelligence is raw computing power.
The speed, efficiency, accuracy, and nimbleness of the brain in performing it's calculations.


I have known those with low to average IQ's
that were interesting, engaging and had a wide crystalline intelligence foundation.

I have known fantastically intelligent individuals who were uninteresting dullards.

The difference seems to be how one relates oneself to learning.

On the one hand, the genius level IQ that does not have the desire to learn about their world(school sucks. work sucks. life sucks.)
or themselves, will have very little of interest to say, have very little to offer conversationally, informationally, applicably.

On the other hand, I have met those with obviously avg. or below avg. IQ's that were fascinating, complex and sophisticated.

Those below avg. IQ's that believe the world to be a fascinating adventure, and have created in themselves the desire to see and understand it better are infinitely better companions than any above avg. IQ that does not engage in favor of cocooning themselves in a very small material comfort zone.

In short, those that are comfortable embracing large uncertainties and objectivity seem far better suited to companionship and growth than those that desire a small, dominated, strictly controlled world full of small certainties.

So, while IQ is very indicative of ability, it bears very little relation to propensity for investigation.

Open mind/closed mind.
Now there's your measuring stick,
right there.

sidd

I started getting the weird feeling you were describing me when you described the one that desires a "small, dominated, strictly controlled world full of small certainties" :eek::oops::rolleyes:
 

sidd851

If I'm not late, I'm not needed.
V.I.P Member
I started getting the weird feeling you were describing me when you described the one that desires a "small, dominated, strictly controlled world full of small certainties" :eek::oops::rolleyes:
No, no, no, my friend.
You're much more fascinating and sophisticated than that, as are almost all of us here.
It would seem to me that most of us "ASD's" are of the "open mind" type, with only a very few exceptions.
It would also seem to me, that the
"closed mind" types are far more common in the larger, non-neurodiverse majority.

It's very rewarding, and I feel lucky to have discovered this community of overwhelmingly "open minds".

(Don't you go no-where, Duck!)
;)
 

Crossbreed

Neur-D Missionary ☝️
V.I.P Member
Many times, in your posts, all I get is "img", which turns out to not be a link.
I can't access your reply.
Do you have any idea why?
The last one is a confused smiley GIF. I imagine the others were smileys, too. Have you tried a different browser?

(I collect smiley GIFs for when boards don't have a good selection.)
 

Fino

Alex
V.I.P Member
No, no, no, my friend.
You're much more fascinating and sophisticated than that, as are almost all of us here.
It would seem to me that most of us "ASD's" are of the "open mind" type, with only a very few exceptions.
It would also seem to me, that the
"closed mind" types are far more common in the larger, non-neurodiverse majority.

It's very rewarding, and I feel lucky to have discovered this community of overwhelmingly "open minds".

(Don't you go no-where, Duck!)
;)

Duck!! :D :D:D
 

Dias

Well-Known Member
Sorry, I did not read all the posts but about this I can say I never had any IQ test and I do not want to. Always known through instinst that they are not reliable. Anyway what does it matter the high IQ one has if they can be horrible persons to each other? I would prefer much more to have a high emotional quotient ( is this correct?)
Which I imagine I do not have...
 

Bronzelincolns

Well-Known Member
they're also worthless in determining how well someone will do in life as success goes to those who apply themselves and not those with big brains.
 

NothingToSeeHere

Asexuowl
V.I.P Member
The UK system that replaced it, the comprehensive system, took all kids in their area but then separated them into "streams" in subjects. It's better but still far from perfect. It's been further muddied by the recent introduction of privately run "academies" that have replaced state run schools in their areas. They are not governed by the same rules as state schools and many are "faith schools" which is a worrying development in a majority secular society.
They've also brought back the eleven plus system in some counties .
 

sidd851

If I'm not late, I'm not needed.
V.I.P Member
My only problem with all of this is that
e-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y can apply themselves fully.
Or not at all.
Or any degree in between.

It is not my fault if others make arbitrary choices about how much application is
"enough".

No-one can "make" another apply themselves. One can only choose how much to apply one's self.

I also am of the opinion, and the strong one at that, IQ is no where near as important as application.
Application is the great equalizer.

I've known geniuses that were dullards
--- no application.

I've known those with below avg IQ's that were fascinating and very strong contributors in anything and everything they approached--- application at work.

The lack of application is never attacked:
"I gots da RITE ta do wut Ah wawnt."

And yet, application can raise IQ, very substantially--- some claim by more than 20 pts--- and I concur, given first hand observations.

IQ, however, and one's interest in it can be attacked--- especially if it's determined that yours is 1 pt over the average, or mean, and you're the one with the interest in it.

It is not lost on me that most attacks on all things IQ are perpetrated by those with no desire to apply themselves.

Some people have innate talents, sculpting, for instance. When the talent for sculpting is discovered, they apply themselves, learn more, improve by acquiring skill(s), and are generally encouraged, commended, and lauded for their talent of sculpting throughout their lives.
They can enjoy, talk about, and discuss and explore their talent for sculpting with just about anyone---
and no-one will take offense.

Now, go back and replace the word "sculpting" above, with the word "thinking".
Go ahead, I'll wait.

See how alien and offensive it sounds?

Why?

I am without question in the "profoundly gifted" category, however much I may dislike the nomenclature.
It's just an IQ.
It's just a number.
It is a measure of my innate talent.
But since it measures the raw processing power of my brain, what...
"Shuddup an siddown"? GTHOH.

That those that will not apply themselves are daunted and offended by my brain's raw processing power, concerns me not in the least.

Perhaps if we could discuss IQ, what it means, where it comes from, what it's worth, and how much we can improve it,
it would level the IQ playing field.

But that's not what this is about.

This is about the whiney people that will not apply themselves feeling all sorry and pitiful that they weren't given something.
Typical.

Stop attacking those of us that are smart, enjoy it, and use it.

If you want to attack someone, attack the
lazy slob that refuses to apply what s/he has, and instead openly attacks and secretly covets what I have.

Instead of chopping the head off of this flower because I'm a head above the rest,
encourage the rest to grow.

SMH

sidd
 

Autistamatic

He's just this guy, you know?
V.I.P Member
Gawd dayummm! Dat Sidd feller rilly unnerstannnnns some high falutin', rootin' tootin' thangs, doneejuss!
 

New Threads

Top Bottom