intelligence

Something I have been thinking about is whether changes to the primary school organisation and curriculum have resulted in children being looked at in a different way. I attended primary school in the 1990s complete with the National Curriculum and SATS. Conversations I have had with people who attended primary schools in the 1970s and 80s have revealed that they were very different places both in terms of the curriculum and the style of teaching and assessment. Impressions I get is that there was more emphasis on working hard rather than learning or muddling along rather than high intelligence. The curriculum was generally narrower as not every school taught science, computers, non-Christian religions, or even music with instruments. Some schools adopted a project based curriculum for subjects other than English, maths, and PE which often involved lots of writing and an invariable amount of learning.

I would probably have been less happy to attend primary school before the 1990s.

Depends on how you mean unsound, if you mean not the same as NTs then that's slightly different, not being normal is different from potentially having unsound methodology. When you look at the population at large it would appear that unsound methodology in daily decisions is the norm.

I don't trust myself either as I am also borne from "unsound methodology" ... erm...and "practice"! ....erm... and "thinking"....

Hi Mute, I'm a geek,one of my Asperger's traits is absorbing useless information! I wouldn't trust that test against those designations, particularly not at the extremes because of the unsound methodology. 

Thank you Matt and God bless your superior noggin!... sorry, extraordinary! :)

I wouldn't put any stock in it at all, some of the questions were badly worded and the methodology wasn't solid in a variety of ways, some of the questions wouldn't be regarded as "culture fair" either as they rely on knowledge rather than reasoning ability to answer. Additionally it doesn't state what kind of test it's based on or what percentiles your score places you in.

It would appear that they place the upper bounds of the score somewhere around 160-170 as I scored below with just a 160+ rather than a specific score. That would probably indicate that the lower bounds for a functioning adult would be around 80-90 which is normally where it's placed with tests that max out at or around 160. That would place the mid point at around 120-125 but I suspect as the rest of the methodology is flimsy at best I wouldn't put much weight in it.

If you want to get a better gauge give some of the MENSA online ones a go, if you really want to find out it's £25 to do a proper MENSA test.

For me these tests are an amusing enjoyable pastime, not to be taken seriously.

It genuinely depends on what sort of IQ test you have gone through.  I had a dyslexia assessment at Uni and they use a different one.  If I had 2% more I could have joined Mensa.  

When I studied Sociology we found that IQ tests, particularly the standard ones are biased.  Biased in terms of it favours those with favourable backgrounds.  

Check out Henry Wrinkler and what he says about it all.  You will feel reassured.

Not sure whether to feel dumb or proud! Lol

Plenty of free IQ tests available online, to give you confidence.  Here's one.   http://www.free-iqtest.net

...I think that we’ve all had at adapt and survive to pull through... and that shows real grit, determination alongside higher abilities... however it does have its frustrations and a legacy of being unsupported and slightly bruised 

I started off well academically but around the age of 9  went into  a tailspin. From subsequent research I've done it's obvious I had learning difficulties. The trouble being at the time, early 60s to mid 70s, such things were hardly seen as affecting those of above average intelligence. Of course there was the odd comment here and there such as- bad at drawing  and writing, maths especially geometry,disorganised and messy  but no one bothered to or was able to join the dots together and say "This boy needs help and support" .

As for social skills-you were just expected to be good at interacting with your fellow pupils. From the start at public school I got bullied. My local vicar wrote to my house master about it . He said some boys are the type to be bullied as though that justified it.

I'm another one whose academic career has been up and down many times with wrong choices being made.

Doing well at times has led to more social problems for me.

On one college course I did an assignment so well, I received 100% and the lecturer admitted to me that my solution was better than his own.  My assignment was given out as the specimen solution.

BUT.... I did it on a word processor and I included my details ( name, student id in the footer).  Other students noticed.  NOBODY spoke to me for over a week.

I feel that I am smart and intelligent but the others out there don't see it... and I haven't been given the right opportunities to prove it.

I do not know how to apply it.

testify brother testify

I think that intelligence is multidimensional and it is also linked in with child development. When I was in reception class I was considered talented because I could read complete lines of text and do maths taught to Y2 children but at the same time I couldn't ride a bike without stabiliser wheels and had difficulty interacting with other children in the playground. A classmate who was about two months older than me could ride a bike without stabiliser wheels on the day he started reception class and interacted well with other children in the playground but he was still reading flashcards and couldn't add two single figure numbers together on the last day of reception class. Who was the most intelligent of the two and why?

My classmate had extra help and support with reading and maths in every year he was at primary school but I never had any help and support with bike riding or social skills for the playground.

Schools and much of society have fallen into a trap that intelligence is one-dimensional and limited to academic subjects.

 I didn't get to fly until I hit university as was held back at school as streamed into a middle ability group as being so shy they thought that "would help me get out of my shell" - it just made me frustrated completing class work in half the time and not being stretched at all... 

finished my post grad qual last year....this years project is self....but I hope to embark on a Phd.

BTW...slightly perturbed by the infographic...I seem happy to sit on the "right" side of the infographic...not sure if there is any logic to the ordering of the types...as it is certainly not alphabetic...? seems a divide of mental and physical/social?

I was almost the opposite of this. I was identified as high academic ability at primary school, particularly in mathematics, science, and computers. The result of this was that SEN support and services were very limited because I had exceeded the National Curriculum targets for my year groups in literacy and numeracy. Teachers even said that I was too clever for my own good. If I had problems with reading, or spelling, or maths then all the help and support in the world would be available but there was no help and support for problems resulting from then undiagnosed AS. I was also accused as being lazy or slackassed with low standards, and told to pull my socks up and play my cards right, or even accused of attention seeking. 

At college I got 3 A grade A Levels in STEM subjects.

Well... I hope it’s relaxed any existential angst! :)