IQ and JWs
Academic types can have a mentality that flourishes in organizational surroundings, as they probably spent a good proportion of their lives, into their 30's, in the 'halls of acadaemia' and to be cut loose and thrown into the world to get a 'proper' job can be unnerving at best, devestating at worst.The JW's promote an environment of study, whether you agree with it or not, and this can prove a blessing for those released from fromal education who thrive on studying. Whether they undertake a 'Beorean' study or not is for each individual to decide.
I have found the discussions on IQ testing and SLD fascinating as I am a research fellow in the field of music education with a specific interest in SLD. Personally I give little credence to standardised testing. If anyone is interested to learn more please leave a message in my in-box and I will respond privately. I am currently studying subjects with Aspergers syndrome.
What is SLD?
Since I am dumber than a box of bricks, I don't know how to get to your in box or e-mail, so would you send me an e-mail, because I would like to know your area of interest and expertise. (I could blame my problem on Simon. I am on webtv, the dumb person's choice on getting here, so not all of the features here work for me.)
Now, regarding music education or music in general, isn't it true that the very good musicians are assessed, and are not they assessed in standardized situations, to determine their musical competence and their musical future? I would call that a standardized test. Think about it.
"Academic types" does not equate to all people of high intelligence. The stereotype of the egg head academic type does not fit all people who are very bright. I certainly not think of the Wright Brothers as academic types, although they were very good at using academic methods, even though they never went to college. Even among the academic types, the stereotype does not fit, certainly not in my case. I worked my way through college in a factory, so I do not fit the academic type by any means.
as they probably spent a good proportion of their lives, into their 30's, in the 'halls of acadaemia'
eh...some of us never leave...
What is SLD?
That's how you spell after too much LSD...eheh..
District Overbeer of the "Hallucinates Academia Every Day" clss
We've discussed the cultural bias of IQ tests before, haven't we??
One simple example of the cultural bias of tests: How well would you expect the average African bushman or South American Yanomami (hunter-gatherer societies) who still lives in his or her people's traditional ways, to pass any IQ test that uses questions such as "cat is to dog as car is to ___"?? Would you expect them to even grasp the concept of 3 dimensional figures drawn on paper in 2 dimensions?? Does that mean they have a low IQ? Victorians thought it did.
How many Americans could pass a Yanomami or bushman IQ test (if there were such a thing), which expected you to identify and give the uses of 700 or 800 plants native to your area; be able to make a bow and arrow, hunt, kill, dress, cook and eat game; recite, from memory, all the stories of your people and your ancestors going back a hundred generations?
I do understand your point. Someone's measure of intelligence should be based on the cultural context within which thay are taking the test. And, tests should be developed within the culture they live. I think this point is axiomatic. Tests are developed with this concept in mind, and there is careful attention given to which tests and which test items transfer to other cultures.
Now, with that said, all cultures have individual differences in people's ability to adapt and learn. So, in the example of the culture that you describe, there are individual differences in learning ability, as in all others. Some people are more successful than others. It is a fact of life. I am sure that you have observed this in your every day life, without the benefit of tests.
I read somewhere that the average IQ of a JW child is 101, which is slightly above normal. The researchers for this study, if I remember correctly, attributed this slight variation to the greater than normal amount of reading they do.
Maybe because I am a teacher, I subscribe to Howard Gardner’s definition of intelligence to seven (now eight) divisions: logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal. He added recently the Naturalist. You can read about them at
I do agree that IQ tests do what they are supposed to predict: academic achievement. The reason for this is that they mainly measure the logical-mathematical and linguistic aspects of intelligence, which is what most educational institutions rely on.
My personal idea of an intelligent person is:
- One that can survive and adapt to changes,
- Is ethical in that he will not harm self or others, but will work to their benefit.
- Can enjoy life and bring this joy to others.
- Is a life-long learner in a broad range of interests.