Do parents and kids typically have about the same IQs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the Bell Curve, although the authors' argument that kids usually come in somewhere b/w their parents doesn't make good sense -- b/c IQ would then keep trending downward. I guess the explanation is that there is the occasional statistical "blip" (which is how I account for my very smart husband, who comes from a family of really average folks). All of which means that it is largely a crap shoot, like every other gift (or curse) in life!

Shocking that "The Bell Curve" folks might not make sense.

[Anonymous]

OP,

I think the jury is still out. Click around beyond DCUM and you'll see what's out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mine is about 135, my son is 139, my daughter is 134 and we have no clue about my husband. I imagine his is likely about the same as mine as the kids are so close. Does this comport with those who understand heredity and IQ? Thanks.

We had our son tested (against my strong wishes) during the course of neuro/psych eval for IEP. He is a high functioning Asperger's and IQ came in at 138. I'm pretty sure mine is no where near that. I am probably a little above average (never tested) but determined--but DH is quirky brilliant, as are his Mom and Dad and brother. But my mother has a nearly genius level of intelligence. Intelligence is heavily coded on the X chromosome so is passed through the mother (and her mother).

Genetics. Itsa compleekated.

Wait a minute -- by your explanation (passed on by the mother) shouldn't your IQ also be near genius since your mother's is?

Not necessarily. I carry genes for intelligence. I can pass them on without getting my mother's high level (plus environmental factors) Also, my father contributed his X. I really believe that these tests are just one factor and I could not care less about the numbers but the the biology of it is interesting. It is definitely not limiting, as IQ score (within a range) does not even remotely determine happiness.

I'm definitely not well versed enough to explain it in depth but I do understand basic college level biology.

[Anonymous]

I would not put much stock in what your shild received on the WIPPSI. Its only 40% predictive of IQ long term.

Also, IQ is merely one component in what makes for a successful life. The ability to believe in one self, hard work and perserverance, recognizing one's passion and knowing how to be happy are more important. Trust me on this, I really do know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the Bell Curve, although the authors' argument that kids usually come in somewhere b/w their parents doesn't make good sense -- b/c IQ would then keep trending downward. I guess the explanation is that there is the occasional statistical "blip" (which is how I account for my very smart husband, who comes from a family of really average folks). All of which means that it is largely a crap shoot, like every other gift (or curse) in life!

Shocking that "The Bell Curve" folks might not make sense.

Lol. "The Bell Curve" is being quoted on DCUM. Unbelievably unsubstantiated racist screed. Wow.

[Anonymous]

The newest WISC test, the WISC IV, is normed higher so a 130 on the current WISC is equivalent, approximately, to a 138 on the WISC III.

Everyone in may family has about the same except for my dad and my son, both of whom have extremely high outlier IQ's (150's). So it must have skipped a generation!

And for those of you who roll your eyes at parents who know their kids scores and discuss them, believe me ... it's no picnic to be that kid or that kid's parents!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I recall reading something about IQ correlating more with the mom than the dad but can't recall any of the details, sorry.

Oh dear!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the Bell Curve, although the authors' argument that kids usually come in somewhere b/w their parents doesn't make good sense -- b/c IQ would then keep trending downward. I guess the explanation is that there is the occasional statistical "blip" (which is how I account for my very smart husband, who comes from a family of really average folks). All of which means that it is largely a crap shoot, like every other gift (or curse) in life!

I wouldn't trust anything Charles Murray has written, given that the overarching argument of his book is a racist one.

[Anonymous]

In NurtureShock, the authors have a chapter on intelligence testing. Turns out that none of these tests are reliable until children are about the age of third graders.

[Anonymous]

Our kid is at a top Ivy. My husband and I aren't as smart as that...not bad...but not genius level either. Two of my siblings are genius level Mensa members.

[Anonymous]

OP, scoring high on the IQ test only means you know how to take the test.
Same for other exams, like the GRE, or SAT.
In a significant measure, it is a learned skill.

I was tested in the 130s, once at 156, and got a perfect score on my verbal GRE.

Did it make me very "successful"? Not particularly.

The only thing you can do is train yourself and your kids to think happy!

[Anonymous]

both my son and i are 127.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP please do not focus on these numbers. IQ tests are a virtually worthless predictor of success or happiness in life. I used to be a teacher and I remember so vividly a student who was charming, adorable, and quick-witted but not high-IQ-smart like her parents, and the parents really struggled with it. They tried to keep it from her but kids are perceptive and she knew that they were hung up on the numbers and you could tell it really hurt her. This is a meaningless metric--I would worry instead about encouraging your children to love learning and persevere in the face of challenges.

I have to disagree, at least in part. It is not a meaningless statistic. I think it is quite meaningful to educators who are able to identify whether children are or are not working up to potential. For example, the child who does not turn in homework or do well on tests but has an outrageous IQ. A teacher can determine from that whether there is a learning issue, a learning style issue, a social problem at home or school and then attempt to address. An IQ on the lower side can provide explanation to why a child is lagging is some areas and nudge a teacher to provide extra support (and not just think a child is being stubborn in not doing the work or is not provided appropriate support at home). A deficit in the spatial relations area of the test provides context to the seemingly shy child just as a lower score on only the processing portion of the test provides additional context that can possibly be supported with OT or other therapies if it is determined to be helpful. And, of course, though rare, you will find the true outlier with the 160+ IQ (on other versions of the test that can norm this high and tease out higher scores) and that can also provide teachers or a school system with a wake-up call to provide or encourage a modified curriculum.

I do agree very much, though, with your statement above that parents should foremost encourage their children to love to learn and to persevere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, scoring high on the IQ test only means you know how to take the test.
Same for other exams, like the GRE, or SAT.
In a significant measure, it is a learned skill.

I was tested in the 130s, once at 156, and got a perfect score on my verbal GRE.

Did it make me very "successful"? Not particularly.

The only thing you can do is train yourself and your kids to think happy!

This just misses the point entirely. IQ testing isn't the same as the GRE or the SAT -- you can't prepare for the test and it's designed that way. And no one EVER says it's a predictor of success or happiness or anything else.

Look at it this way -- there are plenty of people with a superior sense of pitch who don't go on to be concert musicians. That doesn't mean it's not interesting to discuss whether perfect pitch is inherited, and how one might go about nurturing a child with this particularly ability.

You could also look at athletic ability -- not all kids are going to be professional athletes and not all professional athletes are going to have happy lives. That doesn't negate their superior athletic ability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please do not focus on these numbers. IQ tests are a virtually worthless predictor of success or happiness in life. I used to be a teacher and I remember so vividly a student who was charming, adorable, and quick-witted but not high-IQ-smart like her parents, and the parents really struggled with it. They tried to keep it from her but kids are perceptive and she knew that they were hung up on the numbers and you could tell it really hurt her. This is a meaningless metric--I would worry instead about encouraging your children to love learning and persevere in the face of challenges.

I have to disagree, at least in part. It is not a meaningless statistic. I think it is quite meaningful to educators who are able to identify whether children are or are not working up to potential. For example, the child who does not turn in homework or do well on tests but has an outrageous IQ. A teacher can determine from that whether there is a learning issue, a learning style issue, a social problem at home or school and then attempt to address. An IQ on the lower side can provide explanation to why a child is lagging is some areas and nudge a teacher to provide extra support (and not just think a child is being stubborn in not doing the work or is not provided appropriate support at home). A deficit in the spatial relations area of the test provides context to the seemingly shy child just as a lower score on only the processing portion of the test provides additional context that can possibly be supported with OT or other therapies if it is determined to be helpful. And, of course, though rare, you will find the true outlier with the 160+ IQ (on other versions of the test that can norm this high and tease out higher scores) and that can also provide teachers or a school system with a wake-up call to provide or encourage a modified curriculum.

I do agree very much, though, with your statement above that parents should foremost encourage their children to love to learn and to persevere.

I'm not the one you were disagreeing with, but just have to say that most educators and parents can tell this without an IQ test. I personally think most parents in this area test because they want to be able to say "my kid is so smart," bla bla bla