In Tuesday’s class we discussed IQ tests and their accuracy of testing intelligence. I do not think that IQ tests can accurately test intelligence, or rather they test one form of intelligence, book smarts and that’s about it. We’ve all heard about Gardner’s multiple intelligences which shows that there are a variety of different abilities and talents that can constitute intelligence, such as bodily-kinesthetic, those that are good at sports and dance; visual-spatial, those that are good at art or solving problems; and musical, to name a few. These kinds of intelligences cannot be tested by a simple paper and pencil test, so what are IQ tests really testing? They test book smarts, people that are well read, and that’s about it.
In class, we looked at a couple examples of test questions from an IQ test from the 1920s. To begin with it appeared that the first question was related to harvest and farming, which I thought was appropriate for the time, however the question really had nothing to do with farming and was once again testing book smarts. So are IQ tests created to make those in the upper class and read literature have high IQs and those in the lower class have low IQs? Is a farmer that can grow his own food and fix machinery any less intelligent than a lawyer? I actually think the farmer is smarter because he would be able to survive on his own; grow his own food and fix things when they break. The lawyer would be able to argue that he deserves the food more than anyone else but would he actually be able to do anything to successfully acquire his food? But mostlikely the lawyer would have a higher IQ than the farmer. As mentioned in class, the IQ tests may be creating the differences that they are pretending to measure. I think it would be interesting to see an IQ test that a farmer created and to see how someone with a “high” IQ would do.

I think one of the most important things for us as teachers to remember is that everyone is different and is intelligent in a different way. This is very important when we create our own methods of assessment. I think most of us have been taught that we should create different types of assessment for the different types of learners in our classes, however I wonder how many of us actually know how to do this. I was thinking about this for my PSIII. I am mostly teaching math and wonder how I could differentiate the assessment methods. Traditionally for math, tests are written and students are expected to show their work for how they arrived at their answer. I suppose I could have some students explain how they would answer the question orally but it could be tough for students to create a dramatization for math…or maybe I just need to think a little more outside the box. We’ll see what I come up with. Any suggestions?