So, are you smart- or just motivated? When I was growing up, my elementary (K-9) school loved to test the heck out of us. I swear that I could have recited the test questions on the Stanford Binet Achievement test by heart, they tested us so often. This IQ test was actually used as a weapon by the school. Oh, no, they would never say that, but it was. You see, our grade was divided into two classes- the smart class and the dumb class. And, to be in the dumb class your IQ had to be 120. The smart class cut-off was a little less stringent, but it was somewhere around 140 or 150. (No, I am not making this up!)
Why do I say this? Because there is a new set of research that puts the use of this kind of testing in a whole different light. Drs. Duckworth, Quinn, Lynam, Loeber, and Southamer-Loeber published “The role of test motivation in intelligence testing” in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The research and analysis was performed at the University of Pennsylvania, but the affiliations of the authors are now spread across various institutions.
It has been the practice to employ IQ testing to determine maximum capabilities for individuals and to predict the professional, academic, and social outcomes for people for decades (just as my school did). However, to attain high IQ test results requires both high intelligence and high motivational factors. Yet, the converse- a low IQ score can result from poor capabilities OR low motivation. Moreover, given (small financial) incentives, the IQ test results can be noticeably augmented.
The researchers used test population (a total of 2008 subjects) to determine the effects of material incentives upon IQ test performance. Once one considers the facts, it is not surprising that incentives increased performance on the testing. However, the most notable improvements were at the lower end of the spectrum.
Examining a longitudinal study of 250 adolescent boys into adulthood, they determined that when the stakes are low, some individuals really try harder than others. And, as such, the IQ results were no longer a functional predictor of intelligence.
This means that our use of IQ tests needs reevaluation. Basically, life is an IQ test and a personality test. The IQ test primarily tests for intelligence, but life components play a factor. Maybe, that’s why we have learned to examine peoples social IQ (SQ), as well as their mental IQ’s!
I have never thought that written tests were a measure of anyone’s intelligence. I don’t like them as “book learning” measurements either. I guess I have seen our schools destroyed by tests being the determining factor in rating schools overall “achievement” and therefore have a jaded opinion! LOL As for IQ? Tell someone from a young age, they are smarter than their classmates and chances are, they will be! Same is true for the “dumb” ones. Sad.
Martha Giffen recently posted..Are You An Entrepreneur Here’s How To Tell!
Martha:
These tests are designed so that some bureaucrat can assign credit or blame to various teachers and systems. And, when a teacher is lucky enough to have a class of fairly bright kids, s/he gets the credit for her/his performance; conversely, when assigned children that have no support system at home, don’t do homework, have no incentives, he/she is blamed for their poor results.
Thanks for your elucidating comments.
Roy
I had a friend run into a situation like this with her son’s school. Her junior high (7/8th grade) son scored very badly on the standardized test they use. He has a slight reading disability that can be overcome by paying close attention. He grew tired of focusing on the test (they didn’t impact his grade and he didn’t realize it would impact which classes he would be allowed to take next year) and just started filling in bubbles. So, he thought the stakes were low and he did poorly on the test. She had to go in and talk with the administrators to explain the situation so they would allow him to enroll in the classes he wanted next year.
They don’t call it an IQ test, but the standardized tests are used in a similar way to the IQ tests you took.
Evie Burke recently posted..What Do You Do With Closed Doors
Evie:
The standardized tests are perfect for determining what the standard response will be to a given situation. However, most of what we do is not standard, nor do we want a standard response to a problem- we want creative solutions.
I have yet to see (large-scale) testing to determine what creative capabilities one has. There are many wannabes- and many proprietary concepts. But, nothing uniformly used.
So, emotional intelligence and creativity are not truly measured- even though they are desired and necessary.
Thanks for your comments!
Roy
Hi Roy,
Really interesting post! When I was finishing my coaching course I’ve worked in a research paper about emotional intelligence… it was interesting to know that at the moment big corporations hire their people based more EQ than IQ, skills like empathy, positive leadership, self awareness, social awareness, etc. are of more value than cognitive, mathematic knowledge – of course this also depends on what field you are going to work…
In many ways school curriculums should be re-evaluated… this is one aspect of many.
Best,
Marco
Marco Silva recently posted..D S- Profesora y Coach – Italia
Marco, you are so right.
We need folks who can lead and interact socially. Being quick-witted is critical; being capable of rendering intelligent decisions, is as well. But, if one fails to address folks properly, treat them with respect, the trust and effort in the team or the corporation wanes dramatically.
Thanks for your comments.
The IQ tests have to encompass the use of emotional intelligence scale too; as you mention her. Though emotional intelligence is so emphasized and relevant, when I was doing my Masters thesis on this I was a little surprised by the meagre amount of research done on emotional intelligence earlier and also the failure of educational institutions to adapt the changes bought about by emotional intelligence.
Hajra recently posted..WHAT I LEARNT WHEN FACEBOOK DITCHED ME!
Hajra:
I think that a lot of the work done on/with emotional intelligence is anecdotal or subject to too much interpretation. I agree- we need some folks to develop non-biased modalities to provide metrics in this area!
Thanks for bringing that up.
Roy