Lewis Terman’s IQ test simply ranked individuals based on
objective learning of the test material. He and his colleagues used the scores
to remove people from society and disqualify them from jobs. He then went onto
say that the IQ scores “tell a great deal about the ability to achieve either
presently or 30 years hence” (p212 from argument p40). Although the scores did
give an indication of an individuals performance in the present, explain why it
is not a good indication of future achievement using your own knowledge and
evidence form the book (also include Shenk’s view on plasticity).
Lewis Terman's IQ test was also used to find 'geniuses' at a young age. He then did a longitudinal study of those children as they grew up and noted what jobs they got, the salary, any awards of recognition, etc. He found that his gifted group had normal lives with normal personalities. In fact, few if any of them followed through with the 'success' stereotype of gifted children. The main positives were that they had lower divorce rates, were in good health, and did well socially and academically. But there were none who became academically famous or did things like win the nobel prize. So clearly this debunks his theory that IQ scores can "tell a great deal about the ability to achieve either presently or 30 years from now". For example, one of the children who did not test high enough to be considered "smart" ended up at Harvard, got a PhD, joined a company, and helped develop technology that won him a nobel prize (William Shockley in 1970). And so clearly IQ scores do not give an indication of future achievement.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, the William Shockley example shows that intelligence can be developed, and this si related to plasticity, the development of synapse contacts that can improve brain function in response to constant stimulation of that area in the brain. This is also related to the student vs learner concept in class. Even if you constantly get high scores whether it be on an IQ test or GPA-wise, it may not mean that you will be successful in the future. But it also doesn't mean that it's easy to just 'catch up later'. Developing intelligence is a process that takes time and commitment. Synapses don't just develop over night. And even so, that may just be for short term memory. Only constant stimulation over time will develop more synapses in the long term memory.
(http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Lewis_Terman)
(mindy shaw. mindyshaw95@yahoo.com)
Like Mindy Shaw stated above, the IQ of a person does not define who they are. It may show how much of a genius they are at that point in time, however it does not necessarily show the success of an individual in later years of their life. Shenk is correct though when he says that “Terman was correct to suggest a strong connection between academic skills and success in modern, industrialized society” (Shenk 212). But, this “success” does not measure the amount of “genius” an individual will have. Future achievement in life is not modeled by the IQ of a person alone. The EQ (Emotional Quotient) must also be taken into account. People with higher EQs tend to relate and interact with others more efficiently in their everyday life, via their job or during their leisure time (http://mqjeffrey.hubpages.com/hub/Intelligence-IQ-vs-Emotional-Intelligence-EQ). An individual may have a very high IQ and be considered a very intellectual person, but they may lack the ability to solve problems with others or have a conversation with another individual. A low EQ could, in turn, impact an individual’s ability to achieve “super-genius” success in their life. While people with average IQ scores, but high EQ scores, can become a “super-genius” and win a Nobel Peace Prize because of their ability to communicate and solve problems with other people.
ReplyDeleteAs Mindy Shaw also previously stated, intelligence can be improved. Because of the plasticity of the brain, new experiences can give the ability for the human brain to acquire more knowledge (http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/plast.html). The plasticity of the brain does not define how much knowledge we will acquire. The only way for an individual to obtain knowledge is with a growth mindset. A person with a growth mindset is always looking for more intelligence and improvement, and they welcome challenges as learning experiences (http://michaelgr.com/2007/04/15/fixed-mindset-vs-growth-mindset-which-one-are-you/). A fixed mindset only sees challenges as what they seem to be, obstacles stopping you from getting something. When a person has a fixed mindset, the plasticity of the brain does not matter, since the individual does not take new experiences in as knowledge. While individuals with a growth mindset see these challenges as experiences they can learn from, and they are able to acquire the knowledge that these experiences give them. Although a person might have a high IQ when they are younger, if they have a fixed mindset, then their intelligence will not improve as they get older. Thus, limiting their ability to become a genius. On the other hand, if a person has a lower IQ but a growth mindset, they are able to take in more knowledge from their experiences, and they are able to become a genius.
(Alexis Bauer, abauer9182@gmail.com)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the IQ test was originally intended for the detection of exceptional individuals within “Industrial Society” (Shenk 212), the modern IQ tests are extremely different from the eugenic methodologies described by Shenk. One, the modern IQ test does still utilize a “Score”, but the use of the test is no longer to look at who the “Outliers” will be, but to act as a psychological test to help determine how someone best learns. It is fairly clear that the old version of the IQ test does little to determine the future individual’s performance. For example, the IQ test described within the book, one similar to the one in Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell, became a fairly useless quotient without the influence of the environment. Gladwell, describes that while Bill Gates did possess a significant intellect, it was access to a computer at age 13 (A largely rare object at that time) that allowed him to become the uber-successful person he is today (http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2008-11-17-gladwell-success_N.htm). In relation to Shenks observation that IQ is increased over time does it not come into consideration that the increase in IQ over time could be largely a result of more of the world adopting a Western, Industrial styled social system and therefore being more competitive in the Western style environment. Another factor that can be combined with IQ to have a more clear vision of an individual’s future success is the socio-economic climate he or she is born into. For example, two individuals with “Genius-level” IQ would have completely different chances of success (In the way we perceive success) if one were born into a poverty stricken village in Africa and the other were born in a wealthy district in one of Finland’s large cities. The former would not have access to any technology related education and would have an extremely low likelihood for learning information that makes him or her competitive in an industrial economy as internet access would be fairly hard to come by. In the latter case, the child’s life would probably be more stable and more geared toward gaining knowledge, thus increasing his Western-Industrialized IQ. In terms of the aforementioned EQ, or emotional quotient, the latter would probably also have an advantage as he may have had the ability to both travel abroad, learning how to interact with individuals from different cultures and beliefs, and to interact with others via the internet. It also must be said that a high EQ isn’t actually required for the success associated with a high IQ if the individual is significantly driven and in the case of Howard Hughes, possessing a significant amount of capital. In the case of Hughes, the mentally ill (obsessive-compulsive) genius was able to catapult himself to the status level of being able to essentially ask the US air force to produce a pet project (The infamous “Spruce Goose”) (http://www.evergreenmuseum.org/the-museum/aircraft-exhibits/the-spruce-goose/). Although the individual was rather eccentric, the EQ and IQ aren’t the end of what make success, in actuality, it is the environment which the greatest factor.
ReplyDelete(Alex Nye, alex.nye95@gmail.com)