(no subject)
Feb. 19th, 2002 11:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ocelotI am now a living example of the subjectivity of standardized tests.
I took the IQ tests at http://www.highiqsociety.org/flash/nonmembers/iqtests.htm. On the first test I took (the Ultimate test, which covered a range of subjects), I got a 142, which is pretty durn good. Higher than I usually score on these silly web IQ tests.
Then I took the verbal test, and got 124. Not awful, but not quite high enough to join their snazzy little elitist club.
Then I took the logic test, and got a 97. Below average.
Now, seeing as the Ultimate test included both verbal and logic questions of the same type and approximate difficulty, it doesn't seem right that someone who scored a 142 on the ultimate test would get the scores I did on the other two test. There was more to the ultimate test than just verbal and logic, but I find it hard to believe that the other areas could make that much of a difference.
My guess is that, by the end, I was both physically and mentally tired, as well as bored with taking stupid tests.
It really does make me wonder about the validity of standardized tests.
The verbal portions were a good example of how cultural differences and education can effect score. In many cases, you have to understand the meaning of the word in order to determine the relationship between them. It's about your current knowledge level at least as much as potential ability. Potential ability seems like the more useful trait, but the test's ability to judge potential is limited by the knowledge you already have.
They freely admit this on the test, and encourage non-native English speakers to take a different test instead. However, they don't take this into account in many other standardized testing situations.
It does make me wish I'd taken the SATs over again. My score was significantly (50-100 points) lower than expected based on my scores on other standardized tests. This IQ test experience leads me to believe that having a bad day or something could really lower my score that much.
Then again, does it really matter for anything except an ego boost? I got into the college I wanted regardless, and it's not like my SAT score will ever matter for anything else in my life.
Of course, there's always the possibility that the scoring system on this test is broken, and I'm really a 31337 near-genius in logic, as well. Or vice-versa, and I'm really below average in everything :)
I took the IQ tests at http://www.highiqsociety.org/flash/nonmembers/iqtests.htm. On the first test I took (the Ultimate test, which covered a range of subjects), I got a 142, which is pretty durn good. Higher than I usually score on these silly web IQ tests.
Then I took the verbal test, and got 124. Not awful, but not quite high enough to join their snazzy little elitist club.
Then I took the logic test, and got a 97. Below average.
Now, seeing as the Ultimate test included both verbal and logic questions of the same type and approximate difficulty, it doesn't seem right that someone who scored a 142 on the ultimate test would get the scores I did on the other two test. There was more to the ultimate test than just verbal and logic, but I find it hard to believe that the other areas could make that much of a difference.
My guess is that, by the end, I was both physically and mentally tired, as well as bored with taking stupid tests.
It really does make me wonder about the validity of standardized tests.
The verbal portions were a good example of how cultural differences and education can effect score. In many cases, you have to understand the meaning of the word in order to determine the relationship between them. It's about your current knowledge level at least as much as potential ability. Potential ability seems like the more useful trait, but the test's ability to judge potential is limited by the knowledge you already have.
They freely admit this on the test, and encourage non-native English speakers to take a different test instead. However, they don't take this into account in many other standardized testing situations.
It does make me wish I'd taken the SATs over again. My score was significantly (50-100 points) lower than expected based on my scores on other standardized tests. This IQ test experience leads me to believe that having a bad day or something could really lower my score that much.
Then again, does it really matter for anything except an ego boost? I got into the college I wanted regardless, and it's not like my SAT score will ever matter for anything else in my life.
Of course, there's always the possibility that the scoring system on this test is broken, and I'm really a 31337 near-genius in logic, as well. Or vice-versa, and I'm really below average in everything :)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-02-21 07:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-02-21 10:02 pm (UTC)Hey, if you want good books about Australia, read the Tomorrow, When the War Began series by John Marsden. They've got the first several books in the Davis public library (well, except the first and the fourth, which I have checked out right now, but I'll return them if you want), and at least the first book at Borders.
Well, I guess they wouldn't teach you all that much about Australia, but there's some Aussie culture in there. And they're worth reading anyways.
Re:
Date: 2002-02-21 11:37 pm (UTC)