The Danger Of Assumptions

The validity of IQ/aptitude tests has been questioned for a long time, and as one might expect they have garnered many forms of criticism. However, it was not until yesterday that I learned the true extent of that criticism. While I thought it was only limited to studies saying that they might not work, there are actually many more studies that go much deeper than just saying they might not be valid.

The first thing that was mentioned was the so-called "Bloomer" study, by Rosenthal and Jacobson. This study took classes of students, assigned IQ test scores to the students at random, and presented those scores to the teachers. They pointed out which of the randomly-selected students were "bloomers" and were supposed to do very well that year, and which ones were not. At the end of the year, they found that the "bloomers" had in fact done well, even though they were randomly selected, hinting that teacher bias has some influence on how much a student learns.

The other point that was brought up was the argument that such IQ tests are culturally biased. To counter this, some mock IQ tests were made to demonstrate to us how uncomfortable not being familiar with the culture could make the testtaking process. Two examples of this are the Black Intelligence Test of Cultural Homogeneity and the Cultural/Regional Uppercrust Savvy Test, which if nothing else do an excellent job of proving their point.

This sort of thing really makes me question the existence of IQ tests and gifted programs.