IQ in children

[BaskeyJill]

My friend is a teacher and made a comment the other day that made me wonder. She thinks that she can identify which children in her year 4 class could go on to be doctors, solicitors, vets etc and which children would never be capable of achieving the grades needed.

My pfb DS is 7 and has just started year 3. When I look at him I assume he could be anything he wants to be. At the moment he is slightly below average (he is an August birth) but I think he is still so little! He has another 11 years of school until he does his A Levels and I am a bit that my friend thinks he isn't ever going to achieve the 'higher' tier jobs.

the problem with IQ tests I think beesknees is that intelligence is a many-faceted, fluid entity.

For instance, it was said of learning disabled children "he/she has a mental age of 3" or whatever. But how can you simplify intelligence to such an extent?

The child may have emotional intelligence of 12, reading ability of 4, spatial awareness of a 2 year old, etc etc.

When simplified into a single number, it ceases to be useful.

Cakebump

'IQ testing is meaningless unscientific bollocks anyway, if you take the time to look into it'

Can you explain that?

Goodness my mum is not very academic, not very good at academic thinking and I have graduate and postgrad degrees so not always LaQueen. Some people are just late bloomers, my performance at school bore no indication of my achievements in adulthood. I went back to my old schools old girls day, chatted with the headmistress and she almost fainted when I told her I got my degree

Raw intelligence is the ability to understand information, concepts and also create
. I think that is quite different from rote learning which is an act of will and deliberate effort. Retaining information and regurgitating it back out is not intelligence.

I just think IQ is a very small part of intelligence. Being able to apply knowledge and understanding is what I would class as true intelligence. The ability to parrot learn facts to me is not a sign of how clever a person is.

scarlet I think we x posted a similar point :)

We did! I think you said it better! :-)

Mellen I did an online IQ test and got an I Iq of around 30, which is a load of bollcks. Iq tests just test a limited range if intelligence, not everybody is good at iq tests, it just measures te ability to do iq tests imho

I've read the two biggest factors in how well a child does academically are the mother's educational level and the number of books in the parental home. >500 books adds three years to the average time a child will spend in education.

It doesn't seem that surprising to me that you can predict at a young age how well a child will do. Obviously there might be some surprises where children manage to overcome their disadvantages but generally an average to bright child who comes from a stable and supportive background will do reasonably well in life.

Well IQ testing was developed in the early days to "prove" that African-American women were educationally subnormal, and the US even at one point used it to follow a policy of enforced sterilisation on women.

It takes no account of nurture, or other more complicated environmental and social effects on the brain.

It doesn't seem to be able to separate cause and effect - ie musical training for children is said to increase IQ, but who knows whether it is the musical training which is responsible, or the type of parents and environment that is motivated to provide their children with musical training?
In the same way, criminals' IQs have been tested and found to be generally lower than average. Is this because of poor family environments? Genetic inheritance? The theory doesn't seem to have any answers.

Plus it takes no account of the multi-faceted nature of intelligence as I posted above....

And really, does it matter? So I might have a number "130" attached to me, and my neighbour might be "145" - it doesn't actually TELL you anything about me, or my neighbour, so why bother?

Not that it matters, but the quotation you mention 'give me the child when he is seven' is a misquotation. It's 'until he is 7'.

It's about Jesuits indoctrinating children. The idea is that if bring up a child until the age of 7, you can shape the person he or she will become.

It has bugger all to do with judging a class full of 7 year olds you've just met!

(And I agree with those who point out IQ is a dubious measure of future skills.)

But IQ tests don't ask you to parrot facts

fwiw (I'm going to stop posting soon and go to bed :) ) I did an IQ test in primary school and got offered to join Mensa.

I'm now a waitress. Funny how life turns out :)

I'd better start buying books - DC1 is due soon...

Does Jilly Cooper count?

narked - well, they can do. Not a big part of the test but general knowledge is in there, I think? (Fuzzy brain ...).

LaQ - I don't think 'deciding factor' and 'most accurate predicting factor' are the same. We don't know why mother's IQ is a factor, so it doesn't nec. decide the child's success, only predicts it.

pigletmania

An online IQ test isn't the best way of measuring IQ, I wouldn't set any store by a measurement gained in that way.

High IQ does not mean they will become high fliers career wise.

I assume all she is doing is thinking that the bright kids will be the doctors and lawyers and the not bright kids will fail their exams. But she is very naive if she thinks that is really how it works when a child is in Y4.

There are always those that fall outside the expected parameters

LRD it makes sense to me that if the mother is in the home more than the father, and is the one to generally liaise with school, help with homework and dish out discipline, her intelligence and educational motivation would be a strong indicator of the sorts of values which will be passed to the children.

IQ measures potential. It's standard to find people with high IQs in jobs that don't require qualifications. What you don't find is the reverse.

I think that year 4 is too early to tell whether a child will be a high achiever, given that some kids develop faster than others.

What really worries me about teachers making comments like this, is that they may let these beliefs influence their teaching,even subconsciously - for instance, I wonder if they'll push little Johnny to achieve more because he looks like a future doctor, while letting little Tommy coast along because he looks like a kid who'll never get the grades anyway.

Have seen a few IQ tests over time- online and paper based, in schools and out - imo the more you practise the types of questions asked the better you are at them. I am not convinced they are a true reflection at all. DH is generally not great at the type of things asked for on such tests but he is very bright. I however love that type of thing and generally score pretty well - I wouldn't say I was any brighter than DH tbh.

Perhaps tell her ppl with lower iq's can also get good jobs if there taught well