One of the first things an aspiring school psychologist is taught is that there are many, many ways to be intelligent and that no intelligence test can test them all. So, what does that mean? It means that any one test can examine only a few skills and that the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) that is derived from it is an interpretation of the student's abilities or skills as measured by that test -- or another that tests the same type of abilities. The Intelligence Quotient cannot tell us a person's capabilities on everything. In addition, the most reliable and valid intelligence tests are those like the Binet and Wechsler scales. All other measures pale by comparison, so should be taken with a grain of salt.
We've all known people with high IQs who don't have a lick of common sense. Some would say they couldn't think their way out of a paper bag. They can ace the test, but fail at life. They seem incapable of balancing their checkbooks or justifying a bank statement. They can't work a budget. They just don't function well.
Others who can discuss Freud, Jung, Aristotle, Plato, cannot keep a roof over their heads. And then there are those who don't do well in school, but can dismantle and rebuild an automobile or re-plumb a house. How well can most of us do that?
There is also the real enigma, the person with the Midas touch. I used to joke that I thought it was a part of middle child syndrome because I knew so many middle children with that gift. (No, I've never performed any research on the topic).
How many gifted sales people would knock the top off an intelligence test? Can we even measure that kind of intelligence? Probably not. Certainly not with a measure of intelligence that produces an I. Q.
There are some problems with predicting and measuring gifts and achievement in this world. They might be defined by a classification called overgeneralization. We depend too much on scores on tests. We believe that if a child does well in school he will do well in all endeavors -- be kind of a Renaissance man. But folks, there is too much to learn in too many categories to produce very many "Ren" men in this day and age. One professor said Goethe was considered to be the last man to have all knowledge. That was a very long time ago. There is also a problem with how we define success and failure. (Different strokes for different folks).
Most of us do best when we stick to the areas where we show giftedness and have our training. We are also best served not to think that success in one endeavor makes us authorities in all fields. We are limited by ability, education, practice, experience. We are also propelled by ability, education, practice, experience.
We are not defined by an IQ -- good or bad. Neither are we limited by that IQ which does not show meaningful abilities like creativity, persistence, analysis, reliability, common sense, work ethic, people skills, charisma, friendliness, compassion, ability to relate to others, or the skill of taking a forest full of trees and figuring out the whole of a thing.
We are all complex, talented, gifted, and intelligent in our own ways. And the world needs us all to make it twirl. If you doubt me, remember my words the next time your car won't start or your drain won't drain.
No comments:
Post a Comment