Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can prep for an IQ test. In an IQ test, there are a series of questions. If you memorize the answers you can prep. (or cheat). Note that this does not mean you are smarter. It does mean that you are dishonest.

Illicitly peeking at test questions and memorizing their answers is clearly cheating. This can't be compared to familiarizing oneself with the types of questions to be on a test. Regardless of your views on prepping, it does no good to equate the two.

If the questions being studied in advance are so similar that only a few words have been changed it is essentially the same as seeing the test itself.

Someone who has studied the questions on several practice tests is exhibiting a different kind of intelligence than someone who can look at a puzzle or problem for the first time and solve it quickly. It illustrates one area of intelligence to be able to study and memorize how to solve a type of problem; the person who looks at problem s/he has never seen before and solves it quickly and easily is exhibiting a different area of intelligence.

This. And this can be why certain cultures seem to emphasize memorization compared with creativity. In the US, we value creativity.

Judging by liberal arts salaries you are incorrect

I understand totally why so many disfavor leveling the playing be making test preparation materials available to all (even the poor and the indigent) since it takes away the advantages of the well to do. This longstanding response is natural behavior and human nature... much like "innate" and "raw" intelligence.

Anonymous wrote:The objective of Cogat and IQ test here is very narrow: to determine which kids need more challenging class work. So the question to ask is not so much as to whether the unprepped kid is innately smarter than the prepped kid, but whether they are indeed so different that they need different classroom instructions. The rest is just purely for parental bragging right.

We all get your aversion towards prepping. But you have misconstrued the intended purpose of CoGAT altogether, because of how the school system uses it as an enrollment criteria into a program.

As per (pdf link posted above in this thread ) David F. Lohman author of CoGAT, it's original purpose within a school system was to identify underperforming kids (who also happen to be from low income families) but have ability to take on advanced academic work. But now that the schools have started to use CoGAT as entry criteria to special program (much like SAT) to pick participants from all of the student population, he suggests that schools should level the field by providing preparation resources to all of the student population so that the low income families are not at a disadvantage.

From school system's perspective, CoGAT is not an IQ test, which medical practitioners administer when addressing an individual's psychological situation.

IQ tests, like race (self report or labels) in American, are concepts simply conjured for sociopolitical means. There is no scientific evidence-base underpinning these concepts.

Anonymous wrote:The objective of Cogat and IQ test here is very narrow: to determine which kids need more challenging class work. So the question to ask is not so much as to whether the unprepped kid is innately smarter than the prepped kid, but whether they are indeed so different that they need different classroom instructions. The rest is just purely for parental bragging right.

What about a child who does have a very high IQ but the parents do not have him/her tested?

What about the child who performs well on an IQ test but poorly on the CogAT?

The objective of Cogat and IQ test here is very narrow: to determine which kids need more challenging class work. So the question to ask is not so much as to whether the unprepped kid is innately smarter than the prepped kid, but whether they are indeed so different that they need different classroom instructions. The rest is just purely for parental bragging right.

Anonymous wrote:How would a sample of children in Papua New Guinea, if transported to the US for a moment, perform on this IQ test compared to our children? Why?

Flights to US aint cheap. How about quickly luring them to an island off of the Gulf of Papua? IQ Games: Mockingjay Part 3

Anonymous wrote:How would a sample of children in Papua New Guinea, if transported to the US for a moment, perform on this IQ test compared to our children? Why?

I assume we normalize for language and cultural biases?

How would a sample of children in Papua New Guinea, if transported to the US for a moment, perform on this IQ test compared to our children? Why?

Anonymous wrote:


What is an IQ test? Where can you take this IQ test? Who administers and grades this IQ test? How can anyone study or prep for this IQ test? I am confused since I never took an IQ test but I have taken the required prerequisites such as SSAT, ACT, SAT, MCAT, GRE, LSAT, GMAT just to name a few during my formal educational phase. Are any of these tests IQ tests? What is this special test creature you call IQ test?

An IQ test is mostly used in cases when a problem is perceived with an individual - uneven mental growth, academic academic performance, etc. It is not a test score for braggart parents to feed their ego in context of their child's academic setting. It is certainly not needed to assess High Academic Achievers unlike many here want it to. Academically high achievers have great potential to and most go onto pursue successful careers, get into lucrative professions, become entrepreneurs, and turn into m/billionaires, without ever having taken an IQ test. They do not care about IQ scores, their parents care least about IQ scores, and an IQ test is simply inapplicable in their situation.

But High Achievers are forced to take both achievement tests like SAT, GRE, etc as well as ability tests like CoGAT, NNAT, etc., to meet an entry criteria into an educational institution. High Achiever can and are expected to use all resources within their reach to prepare and perform well in these entrance tests. Some people have an opinion that ability tests should not be used as entrance criteria as it is meant to be used as an IQ test, and even if they do test takers should not prepare in advance, as preparation boosts scores. But educational institutions simply ignore that opinion and so do the High Achievers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having been given tons of IQ tests throughout my childhood, I will say that being more familiar with the format and types of questions will bump you up a few points, because you get better at those types of questions, at taking the test, and you get calmer about it. I remember they had to limit the frequency of testing me in order not to mess up their results. (Apparently I was a consistently ultra-high-scoring kid, and they had a tiny collection of us they'd test their tests on back in the 60s and 70s.)

Can you take more than 1 IQ test per year? Don't you have to space them out to prevent skewing results. If you take it in October and then in December of the same year, isn't that cheating?

I am not the PP. In my life, I have probably taken 20 IQ tests. Mostly because I was the kid who refused to do homework once I understood the material. FWIW, I also have a photographic memory: I see it once and I remember what I saw, the context where I saw it, and the discussions around it. (you would think that is good, but trust me, it is not in the real world).

In the second grade, when the school recommended holding me back, my parents had me evaluated; I came back with a very high: 144; When my parents presented it to the school, the school had me evaluated -- and gave me the same test; I scored a bit better, particularly on the timed sections (I had seen the questions before), and scored 155, which is practically off the charts.

But, in school, I coasted. I relied on my memory and my ability to derive the answers; I never studied until college. And even then, I did not put much effort in compared to my peers.

Now, as a professional, I work hard -- the work is interesting. Many of you would know my name. I have a reputation for solving hard complex technical problems that are of national and international importance. And it is not because of my prepping for IQ tests.

Anonymous wrote:

There are two separate issues: Learning makes one smarter. Reading helps. Exercising the brain helps -- it creates more neural pathways. It makes you smarter.

On the other hand, test prep -- learning test taking strategies will only improve the measure of intelligence, but not the raw intellectual problem solving capabilities.

As an example, I can take subject test that is multiple choice in subjects I know very little about, and do well -- not because I know anything about the subject, but I see that there is only one set of answers that can be correct for the questions. In this case, the test might be trying to measure what I know about 16th century chinese history, and I got an A, but I know nothing about 16th century chinese history.

Similarly, knowing how to take a CogAT -- strategies for the specific problems can improve your score, but it will minimally (if any) improve the raw intelligence.

Fools gold. Grade inflation. Your teacher liked you and gave you an A. You are not an expert in Chinese history despite your ribbon .

PP here. It wasn't chinese history...it was a different subject area, but I got a 100 on the test. Most did not. Because I figured out that the answers were in other questions (it was, ironically in a logic class).

Anonymous wrote:Having been given tons of IQ tests throughout my childhood, I will say that being more familiar with the format and types of questions will bump you up a few points, because you get better at those types of questions, at taking the test, and you get calmer about it. I remember they had to limit the frequency of testing me in order not to mess up their results. (Apparently I was a consistently ultra-high-scoring kid, and they had a tiny collection of us they'd test their tests on back in the 60s and 70s.)

Can you take more than 1 IQ test per year? Don't you have to space them out to prevent skewing results. If you take it in October and then in December of the same year, isn't that cheating?

+1

+1

Anonymous wrote:There are two separate issues: Learning makes one smarter. Reading helps. Exercising the brain helps -- it creates more neural pathways. It makes you smarter.

On the other hand, test prep -- learning test taking strategies will only improve the measure of intelligence, but not the raw intellectual problem solving capabilities.

As an example, I can take subject test that is multiple choice in subjects I know very little about, and do well -- not because I know anything about the subject, but I see that there is only one set of answers that can be correct for the questions. In this case, the test might be trying to measure what I know about 16th century chinese history, and I got an A, but I know nothing about 16th century chinese history.

Similarly, knowing how to take a CogAT -- strategies for the specific problems can improve your score, but it will minimally (if any) improve the raw intelligence.

+1