<p>
[quote]
So your arguement is that only those who score in the top 5% on the IQ test can hope to successfully complete an engineering program?
[/quote]
No. I think that you need to be in the top 5% of "general intelligence ability" to complete a masters in engineering at any name brand school. Undergrad I bet you could squeak by at a lot of schools with a ~115 IQ, you'd best be putting in a lot of time though.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Did your engineering program require any courses in psychology or biology? You really should defer to molliebatmit when talking about malleability of human intelligence, which appears to be a topic you haven't read much about.</p>
<p>All IQ test items are samples of learned behavior.</p>
<p>Professor Alan S. Kaufman, a designer of one edition of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children and of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, writes frequently about the issue of “intelligent testing,” understanding what IQ tests are and how to interpret them correctly. As he lists issues to keep in mind when interpreting IQ test scores, he says that the scores are based on “what the individual has learned,” and are “samples of behavior and are not exhaustive” (Kaufman 1994, pp. 6-7). IQ test scores reflect the learning opportunities available to the test-taker and the cultural context in which the test-taker grew up. The many aspects of human behavior that are not sampled by an IQ test may not be well predicted by the test score, which therefore should not be taken as a global estimate of the test-taker’s intellectual functioning (Kaufman 1994, p. 7).</p>
<p>IQ scores change for individuals over the course of life.</p>
<p>IQ scores are sufficiently stable from one time of taking an IQ test to the next that most psychologists conclude that what is estimated by an IQ test can be regarded as a “trait” rather than a “state” of an individual test-taker. And yet IQ scores, especially in childhood, do vary over the course of a test-taker’s life, sometimes varying radically. Deviation IQ scoring was originally developed to make for more stability of scores over the course of childhood. Nonetheless, deviation IQs for children can also change considerably over the course of childhood (Pinneau 1961; Truch 1993, page 78; Howe 1998; Deary 2000, table 1.3). “Correlation studies of test scores provide actuarial data, applicable to group predictions. . . . Studies of individuals, on the other hand, may reveal large upward or downward shifts in test scores.” (Anastasi & Urbina 1997 p. 326).</p>
<p>For example, young people in the famous Lewis Terman longitudinal Genetic Studies of Genius (initial n=1,444 with n=643 in main study group) when tested at high school age (n=503) were found to have dropped 9 IQ points on average in Stanford-Binet IQ. More than two dozen children dropped by 15 IQ points and six by 25 points or more. Parents of those children reported no changes in their children or even that their children were getting brighter (Shurkin 1992, pp. 89-90). Terman observed a similar drop in IQ scores in his study group upon adult IQ testing (Shurkin 1992, pp. 147-150). Samuel R. Pinneau conducted a thorough review of the Berkeley Growth Study (1928-1946; initial n=61, n after eighteen years =40). Alice Moriarty was a Ph.D. researcher at the Menninger Foundation and describes in her book (1966) a number of case studies of longitudinal observations of children's IQ. She observed several subjects whose childhood IQ varied markedly over the course of childhood, and develops hypotheses about why those IQ changes occurred. Anastasi and Urbina (1997, p. 328) point out that childhood IQ scores are poorest at predicting subsequent IQ scores when taken at preschool age. Change in scores over the course of childhood shows that there are powerful environmental effects on IQ (Anastasi & Urbina 1997, p. 327) or perhaps that IQ scores in childhood are not reliable estimates of a child’s scholastic ability.</p>
<p>Anastasi, Anne & Urbina, Susana (1997). Psychological Testing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.</p>
<p>Deary, Ian J. (2000) Looking Down on Human Intelligence: From Psychometrics to the Brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</p>
<p>Howe, Michael J. A. (1998). Can IQ Change?. The Psychologist, February 1998 pages 69-72.</p>
<p>Kaufman, Alan S. (1994). Intelligent Testing with the WISC-III. New York: Wiley.</p>
<p>Moriarty, Alice E. (1966). Constancy and IQ Change: A Clinical View of Relationships between Tested IQ and Personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.</p>
<p>Pinneau, Samuel R. (1961). Changes in Intelligence Quotient Infancy to Maturity: New Insights from the Berkeley Growth Study with Implications for the Stanford-Binet Scales and Applications to Professional Practice. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.</p>
<p>Shurkin, Joel N. (1992). Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up. Boston: Little, Brown.</p>
<p>Truch, Steve (1993). The WISC-III(R) Companion: A Guide to Interpretation and Educational Intervention. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
[/quote]
None of this is new to me, I fail to see your point. IQ is a proxy for "intelligence". It is not intelligence (we do not have any way to measure this). The correlations are not debatable though, IQ correlates well with academic performance.</p>
<p>Kinda random but my cousin's cousin (not related) who came over from Hawaii said that his 2 cousins went to Punahou. That is a very expensive private school and apparently all the good teachers in Hawaii teach there, (according to my uncle). </p>
<p>What impressed me about Obama was his ability to make speeches and I don't believe that going to a brand name school was the sole contributer to his success. It's like night and day when listening to Bush and Obama make speeches. >_<</p>
<p>where IQ testing is really useful IMO, is when it is broken down to illustrate gaps in processing etc. despite overall high intelligence.</p>
<p>The stanford binet is able to rank highly verbal ability
<a href="http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/PDF_files/casesblm.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/PDF_files/casesblm.pdf</a>
something that may be missed in other gifted assessment testing.</p>
<p>those who are interested in gifted children and their abilities as young adults will be interested in this research by Dr Robinson
<a href="http://depts.washington.edu/cscy/pdf/AllRiversLeadtotheSea.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://depts.washington.edu/cscy/pdf/AllRiversLeadtotheSea.pdf</a></p>
<p>And now we are COMPLETELY off topic...</p>
<p>Personally, I liked the article. In my eyes the argument boils down to whether or not a Bachelor's is really required to be a run of the mill office/cubicle worker. And I think the answer is no. A Bachelor's is just a really expensive piece of paper used to prove that you are literate, competent, and with it, in this context. You really shouldn't need a degree for an office job...</p>
<p>You really shouldn't need a degree for an office job...</p>
<p>or for a job in a factory- and you often don't to start- however, if you want to move up you will unless you are working for yourself. While it is difficult getting a degree in your 20's, try getting it in your 30's or 40's when you find you are stuck at an entryish salary and job title.</p>
<p>
[quote]
[quote]
The correlations are not debatable though, IQ correlates well with academic performance.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What is not debatable? First you need to define "well."</p>
<p>I do not usually agree with Charles Murray considering most of the stuff he says is pretty stupid, but I must admit this article has got me thinking. While I don't agree that kids with IQ's under 115 should not be going to college, I'll go out on a limb and say there are many kids who really can't hack it in a traditional college program who are there "just because." I think it's pretty true that many jobs that require liberal arts degrees do not really require a liberal arts degree, however, I cannot say I would back his proposal.</p>
<p>At a neighbor's last night, we had a long conversation about the military (based on the PBS program Carrier). One of my neighbors had a nephew who did 5 or 6 years in the army as a medtech and then got out. Although all the family encouraged him to take the college option from the military, he didn't. He has been very successful, but now has hit a dead end-- he can't go any higher into management with out a college degree.</p>
<p>That said, we run a small business and our entry level and even mid level positions don't require a college degree -- just strong technical skills. We pay the same regardless of education level. </p>
<p>I think with the current state to the economy we can expect even more students going to college just because (right now they can't get a job). In a stronger economy, as much as work might have been unpleasant, the jobs were fairly plentiful and sometimes (at least in technology) lucrative.</p>
<p>As a recent job seeker myself, I find it absolutely tragic that I've seen temporary data entry positions that require a "four year degree."</p>
<p>Why? It's almost as baffling as the admin jobs that want a BA. Unbelievable.</p>
<p>Advanced training vs. liberal arts degree.
There are many jobs that do not require a liberal arts degree but require advanced training in a vocational field.
The problem is that too many high schools prepare (or fail to prepare) students only for liberal arts college and do not offer vocational training. I live in a state that fortunately has a number of excellent vocational schools and community colleges.
Welcome</a> to Minuteman
North</a> Bennet Street School
<a href="https://www.middlesex.mass.edu/AdmissionRequirements/%5B/url%5D">https://www.middlesex.mass.edu/AdmissionRequirements/</a></p>
<p>Yes, this is an off topic post but significant in my mind.</p>
<p>James Watson, the Nobelist who has half of the team who discovered the helical structure of DNA, had an IQ that led advisors to discourage him from pursuing a PhD in a science discipline. I think it was 125. Not only did he do his groundbreaking work, he authored a very informative and entertaining book about the race to discover this structure and led ran the Cold Spring Harbor laboratories.</p>
<p>Richard Feynman, even more brilliant to most observers because he discovered QED, Quantum Electro Dynamics, won a Nobel Prize for it, was a very talented artist, musician and writer, and a long time member of the Cal Tech faculty, had the same 125 IQ.</p>
<p>I would gladly cede some of my IQ points to be able to do science and math at the level of these gentlemen.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I find it absolutely tragic that I've seen temporary data entry positions that require a "four year degree."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Makes you wonder, doesn't it?</p>
<p>I'd like to know where kids can find out realistic job outlook projections. I've found the US Gov. outlook projections a little unrealistic, at least as applied to experienced workers. Why not publish job recruitment rates for all schools?</p>
<p>Treetopleaf,</p>
<p>I mean, really? I can honestly see why so many of my friends have basically "dropped out" of the job rat race. It's so full of stupidity that it's almost impossible to not want to give up and become a hermit.</p>
<p>Charles Murray (Mr Bell Curve) always has lots of ideas that ultimately seem to have the effect of keeping minorities and poor people locked into their innately determined place. The highly (overly) revered Terman, father of intelligence testing in the US, was a eugenicist who believed high grade "mental defectives", as measured by his test, should be sterilized. He was gracious enough to note, however, that they make great factory workers. </p>
<p>I am not one to totally discount IQ and other mental ability tests. But in the nature-nurture debate that inevitably ensues when talking about these issues, the literature is clear that socioeconomic factors play an important a role in academic and occupational success. In short, it isn't all about innate anything. I do a simple thought experiment with my students. Would they prefer to send their children to school in Andover, one of the wealthiest communities in MA, or in adjacent Lawrence, which lost its HS accreditation a few years ago? That decision doesn't take much thought! Then I ask them if they think students from those two school districts are playing on a level playing field when they sit for the SAT. </p>
<p>Education opens up whole new worlds for poor and working class kids. The last thing we want to do is start discouraging them from pursuing higher education.</p>
<p>cadbury,</p>
<p>Dare I say it? </p>
<p>Your argument is an ad hominem. Look, as much as I disagree vehemently with Murray's "Bell Curve" beliefs, it doesn't mean that he's wrong on this one just account of his being him. </p>
<p>I also dare say that most of your post, albeit true, doesn't get to the heart of the real question: is our love affair with trying to get everyone a BA really improving our society?</p>
<p>mythmom: In Watson's case, for all his brilliance, he's clearly playing with less than a full deck, as abundantly evident if you've ever seen him talk.
The brilliance in science had a cost in other areas of intelligence - he's been described as "the most unpleasant human being I had ever met" by EO Wilson.</p>
<p>The interesting thing is Watson himself is perhaps the biggest advocate of eugenics around today - and he is on record promoting genetic alterations to breed out those with low IQ's.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not necessarily. I know someone with an IQ of 106 thats passing his EE claases at UCLA. Sure he may be passing with C's while putting maximum effort, but he's still passing and going to graduate nonetheless.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Education opens up whole new worlds for poor and working class kids. The last thing we want to do is start discouraging them from pursuing higher education.
[/quote]
Actually, we should be encouraging them to do what is best economically for them, including the opportunity cost of going to school. For many, it will likely be better to become an electrician, machinist, welder, or mechanic than actually go to college. Do we look down on these professions so much to automatically preclude them from the job hunt?</p>
<p>
[quote]
the heart of the real question: is our love affair with trying to get everyone a BA really improving our society?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That really is the question, and that really is the topic of this thread. It seems to me that I can agree with molliebatmit that human abilities estimated by IQ tests are largely malleable (as I do) without agreeing that it is a good idea to make college degrees a strict requirement for job entry for many jobs that really don't require a four-year college degree to be done well. If a lot of hiring organizations said, "What you need to get in the door and start a career is a basic demonstration that you have the skills to start this kind of work, however you gained those skills," and people all had multiple opportunities to apply and to get tips from previous job entrants how to do that, wouldn't that provide a lot more opportunity to a lot more people than saying, "Successful candidates for this position must have a bachelor's degree"?</p>