Why don't colleges just use IQ tests in place of SAT and ACT?

Test Preparation
1

<p>This isn't going to be a long rant or anything against the SAT or ACT. But I was just thinking about the criticisms standardized tests like the SAT and ACT have gotten (The SAT in particular) because they don't actually measure a students ability to succeed in college like they claim. If this is really the case, and a college just wants to know how smart an applicant actually is, why can't they just require every applicant to take a professionally administered IQ test sometime in there junior or senior year for admissions purposes?</p>

<p>Yes I know there could be some flaws, but I always wondered why this hasn't been done/considered. (Or if it has I don't know about it)</p>

2

<p>IQ tests, unlike The SAT, are vastly uncorrelated to intelligence. Not to say that the SAT isn’t, but the SAT also tests grammar, maths, and vocab. Albeit in a silly disproportionate way, it is a better indicator of the “material you have learned” compared to a IQ test, which a 5 year old can take.</p>

3

<p>the IQ test a 5 year old takes is not the same as an iq test for adults.</p>

4

<p>Way too expensive, not to mention extremely politically incorrect. The College Board has gone through a lot of trouble, on behalf of Colleges, to distance itself from its IQ past. </p>

5

<p>Standard IQ tests are administered by licensed psychologists in a one to one setting. They involve the psychologist asking a series of questions and other tasks. The SAT can be administered to a large group of students and proctors are not required to have a professional degree. Considering the way the tests are administered it would not be practical or cost effective to use IQ tests .</p>

6

<p>To answer OP, i believe it wouldn’t be considered politically correct to select based on IQ tests. Because the widespread belief is that if you work hard, you can improve your SAT score. Which means in theory, according to what is said, anyone can get a 2300 SAT, which of course is hard to believe, but implicitly accepted. On the contrary it said you have an IQ and there is little you can do to significantly improve it. I didn’t hear anyone saying they got a 92 IQ and after working hard during the summer they managed to score a 134, probably because it didn’t happen.</p>

<p>Also, the english part is also effective to test language proficiency.</p>

7

<p>@meriks‌ exactly. CB wants people to know that the real world is about working hard… not just about pure intelligence. </p>

8

<p>I like all the responses. But I want to clarify that my question was more directed of why admissions officers at colleges wouldn’t want to value an IQ test over an SAT or ACT. Not necessarily why the CB wouldn’t want to administer them.</p>

9

<p>Again, they could value them, but it wouldn’t be fair- considering the time and expense to get one, it is unlikely that all applicants would submit them so they would not have a fair comparison base. In addition, expense isn’t the only reason people don’t have formal IQ testing. Many students won’t have a full evaluation unless there is some concern or reason to do it. </p>

<p>In addition, there are things an IQ test does not measure. One of them is achievement- how someone uses that IQ to learn and adapt. Many things can interfere with this process- learning differences, attention, emotions, motivation, as well as interest. IQ is not entirely predictable of achievent in college. </p>

<p>The SAT is a combination of both ability and achievement. Someone must have the inate skills to achieve on the test, as well as a certain amount of academic knowlege. The reason people are able to improve scores with practice is because of the achievement component. However, not everyone is able to attain superior scores this way.</p>

<p>There is a certain amount of influence of “teaching to the test” and formal IQ tests eliminate this by not testing a person more than once a year. One can take the SAT more often than this, but if someone can improve their scores significantly by practicing, it is a reflection of their ability to learn. </p>

<p>Some environmental factors can influence both IQ and SAT scores- poverty, deprivation, hunger, and so in some cases, neither one is a true reflection of ability.</p>

<p>Lastly is confidentiality. An IQ test is administered by a licenced professional, and it is personal . There are few reasons to get one unless it is for the use of other professionals such as educators- to help determine school placement, need for accomodations. </p>

<p>Really, there is no test that shows the entire picture of a student’s abililty. Where SAT is most useful is determining readiness for college and some standard for grades since grades can vary from school to school. </p>

10

<p>One advantage to using IQ tests would be the elimination of the practice factor- which is prevalent with the SAT. It is possible for a student who has had extensive SAT preparation and attended a top school and a student who did not have the same opportunities to have similar IQ’s and different SAT scores. </p>

<p>Some people are not great test takers, or don’t test as well in a format like the SAT. Some students may be anxious during these tests, even with practice. For some students, the SAT isn’t the best reflection of their ability or achievement.</p>

<p>However, IQ testing would be less informative than the other aspects of a student’s application- letters, classes, essays, background. Colleges are aware of the pros and cons of any testing, and this is why many of them ask for more information than grades and scores. </p>