paulsinnerchild wrote:
My non-verbal IQ was last measured at 123 but I slipped back badly on my working memory and that rated 78 so overall my full scale IQ was in the average range.
I was tested for short term and long term memory the following week and I was in the high average to superior range recalling complex visual imformation like the Rey Complex Figure test but I had difficulties with the subtle details as I was copying it.
Ha- I'm the opposite! I actually did terribly on the Rey Complex Figure test. I have problems with visual processing and memory, and my scores on the different sections ranged from mildly to severely impaired. If you translated those into an IQ score, my worst scores would be from 20-35, and on my best scores would be from 50-70. And apparently the "piecemeal" strategy I used in copying it is only developmentally appropriate up until around age 8 (I was 22). Yet my verbal IQ (as measured by the WISC-III) is 147. So I'm either cognitively disabled or highly gifted, depending on what you are testing. Not an easy profile to summarize with a single score! It sounds like you have the same issue.
I guess that's why IQ tests include different indices. Originally, only a single IQ score was produced (with the Binet tests), so if you had a learning disability, it would really mess with your score and the discrepancy in ability was harder to tease out.
Regarding the question of the utility of test scores, they have been shown to be somewhat predictive of academic achievement (don't remember the exact studies at present, but I will try to dig them up if asked). My mom, who is a school psychologist, does a lot of IQ testing. Often, a kid is referred if they are having either academic or behavioral difficulties in school. If a kid has a learning disability, the discrepancy in abilities will probably show up on the IQ test. Discovering the kid's strengths and weaknesses can help indicate possible directions to take when offering alternative instruction. If a kid is mentally ret*d, this is also helpful to know, as they may need more extensive intervention. On the other hand, if a kid demonstrates normal intelligence but poor academic performance, then professionals may have to dig a little deeper (problems at home, attentional issues, etc.) to find the problem.
On the other end of the spectrum, a kid may be extremely intelligent, but may have difficulty "dumbing down" his level of thinking to complete classroom activities, which can lead to academic failure. For example, can you imagine a typical sixth grader trying to learn in a kindergarten classroom day after day? That's what the academic experience is often like for extremely intelligent kids. Yes, kids who are extremely gifted (160+) actually *do* think significantly differently from even moderately gifted kids (130-145) and certainly from average kids. They actually are thinking and processing information at a much higher, more mature level, and need to be taught at that level if they are going to reach their potential or even be academically successful (as they may check out or act out if the material is too far below their level). IQ testing can also help reduce the over-diagnosis of ADHD in gifted kids (inattention may disappear when the kid is taught at an appropriate level).
So no, I don't think people should quote their IQ scores in order to lord them over other people. Having a high IQ doesn't mean that you know everything about everything, or that your reasoning is always correct. It just means that you have some specific skills which are highly developed. But IQ testing does have its place, and can provide useful information about someone, especially a child struggling in school. Although of course, other types of evaluations should be conducted as well to get a fuller picture of a kid's strengths and weaknesses.
15 Dec 2007, 11:51 am
