230 IQ ≠ intelligent

In the history of humans, figures as Stephen Hawking, Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Johann Goethe, Leonardo da Vinci or Terrence Tao were commonly listed as the smartest individuals in the world. But especially Terence Tao’s IQ score of presumed 230 got me thinking:

If someone like Terrence Tao scores an abnormal IQ score, does the score assume that the creator of the test sustains the same or higher score too?

General Notion#

Initially, Alfred Binet invented a method of measuring IQ simply calculated by dividing the test taker’s mental age by his or her chronological age and then multiplying this number by 100. I find this method obscure and I won’t be delving into the history of IQ testing—I’m interested in the conceptual question instead.

More often, we’re familiar with the so-called intelligence tests which include graphical logical questions testing dimensional thinking, arithmetic abilities, pattern matching, etc. After completion, you are given a raw score that usually follows this table:

Surely, a few people outpace this metric table since the nations gathered the smartest scientists and psychologists (by theory they should have 160 at the very least) to create these tests, but to what degree result valid?

Flawed System:#

In many ways IQ and standardized tests are flawed, for instance:

1)Some answers are more correct than others. Typically, in a multiple-choice question, some answers are closer to the truth but the final evaluation neglects this fact and only one answer receives points ending in result-based quantification.

2)Some prompts are less or more equal than others. This is an oversimplification, but usually, each prompt requires different amounts of mental energy but in a broader scheme, they can be evaluated equally by scoring guidelines. Meaning, if you have a test consisting of 10 or 8 questions, surely, 1/10 is less significant than 1/8.

3)Random error. My classmates loved me for this since I always killed a big chunk of class time by justifying my results or convincing my teacher that a different answer should be considered. But often we don’t have the opportunity to do so but if you do value healthy debate over argumentation.

This is a sneak peek into the underlying flaws, and my big point is this: “IQ and standardized tests aren’t made for measuring intelligence, they’re meant for collective screenings of masses and processes that require fast assertions for further decision making based on the limited time provided to each individual.”

Conclusion#

To be able to test someone on a topic, the person by itself has to be competent enough—duh, right? But as you see, the creators of IQ tests didn’t expect people like Terence Tao, meaning that IQ tests more come from a pragmatic standpoint and less from the need to estimate one’s intellect. Inherently, all smart minds are unchained by standards, rules, and conventions and they just don’t need to be told that they’re smart. What makes individuals smart isn’t a quantitative score but the relentless urge to discover new findings, explore curiosity, and expanding their horizons. At their playgrounds, they connect the dots of our world and give it a transformative spin whether it is by releasing a research paper, shooting videos, developing technology, and more. Score metrics, achievements, and recognitions are all side effects of the journey. Essentially, they never exit their childhood stage of asking “Whats, Whies and Hows.”

High IQ scores are sexy but they can take you only as far, in all cases, intellectual adventures and learning for mastery should be the ultimate goal of education.🚀

A little addition…

On many occasions, a certain range of a metric is the minimum requirement for entering the next round of the elimination process. It’s unavoidable but I’m of the opinion that anyone can be part of Mensa at one point in their life, just as getting a high score on IB, AP, SAT, or any standardized test. Scoring well on those tests is a skill you can learn and with sufficient support, practice, and resources you can excel at those. As cliche as this metaphor is, we’re living in the Golden Age of Learning—more than ever we have access to professional tools and learning resources. If you’re seeing this post, you have enough. However along the practice, the most important aspect is to reflect, and the best way to do it so to keep track of your mistakes in a notebook dedicated to them.

Essentially, test-taking is an attempt to fill in the answers the creators seek.🌟