relationship between SAT scores and intelligence?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I don't consider any of those except creativity (of a sort) to be constitutive for intelligence.

[/ QUOTE ]

what's your point, other than that the definition of intelligence is arbitrary?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think his point is that you guys are BADLY abusing the definition of intelligence so that every little kid gets to be called intelligence "in his own little way." Honestly you guys, intelligence isnt just a synonym for "vaguely good." It has meaninging. When you start to lump into intelligence basically EVERY SINGLE HUMAN CHARACTERISTIC that most people would consider positive, it starts to become foolish.

[furyshade]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I don't consider any of those except creativity (of a sort) to be constitutive for intelligence.

[/ QUOTE ]

what's your point, other than that the definition of intelligence is arbitrary?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think his point is that you guys are BADLY abusing the definition of intelligence so that every little kid gets to be called intelligence "in his own little way." Honestly you guys, intelligence isnt just a synonym for "vaguely good." It has meaninging. When you start to lump into intelligence basically EVERY SINGLE HUMAN CHARACTERISTIC that most people would consider positive, it starts to become foolish.

[/ QUOTE ]

i see where you are coming from, but also remember that 15,000 years ago being good at math didn't mean [censored], but if you could hunt really well you were highly regarded (most likely of course). in differnet cultures intelligence is defined differently; there were polls done of different people in different countries asking what makes someone smart. people in spain said that it was social ability, in an african tribe it was the ability to work with the community as a group and to follow elders. these are vastly differnet from the western definition of intelligence, but does that make them any less valid? intelligence when it comes down to is the metric of qualities a specific cultures holds in high regard, which is why there is no universal definition of intelligence

[hitch1978]

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed...igence?view=uk

[David Sklansky]

It is totally wrong to say that intelligence tests measure the capacity to do things that machines can do even better.

Finding a creative geometry proof or solving an algebra word problem, is way beyond the ability of any machine for the forseeable future.

Most tests are flawed because there is the possibility that a taker is unaware of aspects of the question that the test designer expected him to know. There are also people who have studied a lot of test taking tricks. Thus high scorers are sometimes slightly dumber than their score indicates. And the low scorer is on rare occasions a lot smarter. But these are just feel good exceptions. Same with SAT's. And there is a fairly high correlation between the SAT and IQ tests.
Mensa accepts, I believe, a 1350 score in lieu of an IQ test.

If SATs were not a pretty reliable indicator, the best colleges couldn't get away with using them. A random "genius" scorer of 1370, I would venture to say,is probly three times as likely to flunk out of Harvard as a random 1570. (The statistics might not show this because those few 1370s at Harvard are far from random.)

Another point not raised in this discussion is that high scorers are not just better at answering questions but that they are typically MUCH BETTER AT LEARNING AND UNDERSTANDING THINGS. Thus even though it is not nice to say it, the truth is that it is far more likely that the skill of intelligence will make an impact on the world than some other skill, motor or otherwise. If there was an asteroid hurtling toward earth we would be turning to intelligent people to save us. If starting 10,000 years ago, aliens kidnapped those 20 year olds who scored in the top 5% on IQ tests and SATs, we would barely be out of caves.

The average person takes for granted the monumental impact on his life, that could never have happened, except for the elite few who had super intelligence of the kind that tests do a pretty good job of measuring.

[tame_deuces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
uh, in my OP i never even used the phrase "IQ", im asking about the relationship between SAT scores and intelligence, not IQ scores and intelligence

[/ QUOTE ]

I know.

I am saying that I find it incredible that people can say there is no correlation between any two of the THREE.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is correlation, but a lot of people are going with the correlation as the sole indicator. That is the fallacy.

[blah_blah]

[ QUOTE ]
If SATs were not a pretty reliable indicator, the best colleges couldn't get away with using them.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best colleges barely look at SATs, but manage to accept a ton of 1600 scorers anyways (and reject a ton of 1600 scorers). The important thing here is that correlation does not imply causation. Yes, Harvard accepts a ton of really bright kids but there are better indicators of intelligence contained within an application than merely an SAT score. It's a bit of a sanity check, really, just as the GREs are a sanity check for a graduate school application.

That being said, the correlation seems pretty good.

[AlexM]

More intelligent people are going to do better at most anything. More intelligent athletes will do better than less intelligent ones given that all their physical skills are equal or close, but obviously being a better athelete doesn't mean you're more intelligent.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]

If SATs were not a pretty reliable indicator, the best colleges couldn't get away with using them.

[/ QUOTE ]

SATs are certainly a pretty reliable indicator of academic proficiency and knowledge, but not much else, which is why the scores are used. Certainly more intelligent people are more likely to have these skills, but these skills are only a tiny portion of what makes up intelligence. They just happen to be the intelligence based skills that are most useful for school. A very large portion of this is based on personality rather than intelligence though.

[willie24]

[ QUOTE ]
I am grunching here a little bit. But there is no real relationship between IQ(if you want to use that as a standard for intelligence) and results on SAT or ACT. SAT is a test that will try and figure out how one will do in their first semester of college. ACT is a test to figure out how much of the high school information a student can remember.

I don't know much about the SAT, but I do know that there are classes that people can take so when they take the ACT they can improve several point. If you put a lot of effort into this class your test results increase greatly. If you're trying to gauge someone's intelligence they should not be able to greatly improve their results from a class once a week for a couple of months. Since I was not forced to take the SAT I would not know if there are classes that are capable of doing that.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm pretty sure you are wrong. there is probably a very high correlation between SAT/ACT scores and IQ scores...much higher than the correlation between SAT/ACT scores and college performance. I have no evidence, and may be wrong, but i doubt it. seems like something that could be looked up.

[furyshade]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am grunching here a little bit. But there is no real relationship between IQ(if you want to use that as a standard for intelligence) and results on SAT or ACT. SAT is a test that will try and figure out how one will do in their first semester of college. ACT is a test to figure out how much of the high school information a student can remember.

I don't know much about the SAT, but I do know that there are classes that people can take so when they take the ACT they can improve several point. If you put a lot of effort into this class your test results increase greatly. If you're trying to gauge someone's intelligence they should not be able to greatly improve their results from a class once a week for a couple of months. Since I was not forced to take the SAT I would not know if there are classes that are capable of doing that.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm pretty sure you are wrong. there is probably a very high correlation between SAT/ACT scores and IQ scores...much higher than the correlation between SAT/ACT scores and college performance. I have no evidence, and may be wrong, but i doubt it. seems like something that could be looked up.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is untrue, the SAT has been proven quite accurate in predicting college performance, that is what the test is designed to do. while there is probably some sort of connection between IQ and those scores, it isnt nearly as strong as that of academic performance. one thing that does appear true is that stupid people in my experience rarely do well on the SAT, it does tend to be a level playing field at least on a small scale. it is hard to expand it to a large field but within a school, or district i think it is a decent metric