We've discovered these pictogram-format tests they are using nowadays for talented and gifted program eligibility, and see they are also marketed as IQ tests.
In our case, for grade schoolers, they claim to measure intelligence that "can't be taught", which was intimidating to us before we took a bunch of them for practice.
I disagree with that notion. It is clear to us that practicing them makes you a lot better at them. To be more accurate, I would say that in a pool of people, none of whom train for such a test, the smart people will do better than the dumb people. But a person who trains for it is going to cream another kid with the same raw intelligence, but who has not prepared. On the order of a standard deviation higher.
He likes doing them. It is interesting to listen to him talk through why he is giving the answers. Even if there is no direct benefit beyond burying the needle on one of these tests, they are intellectually challenging and worth being in his curriculum beyond just test prep:
In our case, for grade schoolers, they claim to measure intelligence that "can't be taught", which was intimidating to us before we took a bunch of them for practice.
I disagree with that notion. It is clear to us that practicing them makes you a lot better at them. To be more accurate, I would say that in a pool of people, none of whom train for such a test, the smart people will do better than the dumb people. But a person who trains for it is going to cream another kid with the same raw intelligence, but who has not prepared. On the order of a standard deviation higher.
He likes doing them. It is interesting to listen to him talk through why he is giving the answers. Even if there is no direct benefit beyond burying the needle on one of these tests, they are intellectually challenging and worth being in his curriculum beyond just test prep:
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1WOdI3J
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire