relationship between SAT scores and intelligence? - Page 2

Subfallen · #11 11-22-2007, 10:03 PM

Willie is of course right that the SAT has no granularity at the upper range of analytic intelligence.

However, if someone cannot score perfect or near-perfect on the SAT, it is very unlikely that person will flourish in a difficult academic setting.

Mr_Pathetic · #12 11-22-2007, 10:16 PM

In high school I took all the AP and honors english, history, and science classes but not math. When I took the SAT I took it once and scored 640 on the verbal and 420 on the math in 1998. My math education was the pits in high school, a total joke. I am talking I never learned geometry or very much Algebra 2. So based on my results and quality of education throughout math, english, science, and history, I tend to think that SAT scores take into account your quality of education as well as your level of intelligence.

Now when I took the GRE in 04 I did poor on it as well. I think I scored 1000 for quantitative and verbal with verbal being much higher. However on the analytical writing part I scored a 5 out of 6 which I was told is very good (wonder what the % is for ppl getting a 6). I credit much of my poor results on this test to my poor math skills which are nonexistent outside basic statistics and my lack of vocabulary. So to me this is a test of how much math you remember from high school unless you major in math and how big your vocabulary is. When I got my results it was no shocker to me that I did the best in the analytical writing part. I actually thought I was going to score 800 or lower on the Q+V. Luckily for me I had a prof who really wanted me in the program so my results did not matter.

I took an IQ test in middle school and scored a 122 on it, or two points away from being considered "academically gifted" and put in advanced math and english classes which is why I ended up in poor math classes but the best history science and english classes since the math you could not select but you could the others regardless of your "academically gifted" standing.

Cliffnotes: I think the whole point I am trying to drive home here is that your results on these tests are determined by your quality of education, how hard you worked in school, AND your level of intelligence.

Mr_Pathetic · #13 11-22-2007, 10:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
However, if someone cannot score perfect or near-perfect on the SAT, it is very unlikely that person will flourish in a difficult academic setting.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is spot on b/c one who will not take the time to get a high score on the test is not going to take the time to get good grades in a difficult setting since they have no idea how to get it done on a smaller scale like in HS. I did not even go to college after HS cause I was so lazy in HS and had such bad math classes I knew I would flunk out so I did two years in a comm. college first. Best money I ever spent/saved as I was nowhere near ready for college level work.

tame_deuces · #14 11-23-2007, 04:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If school results correlate with intelligence, then intelligence tests seriously need some work.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think it should be a random relationship?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, not random. In my drunken state I probably failed to get my point across. Some logical puzzle solving ability probably gets you a long way in school, but I don't think that alone makes anyone worthy of being called intelligent. I've certainly met my fair share of stupid people with top grades.

Subfallen · #15 11-23-2007, 05:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If school results correlate with intelligence, then intelligence tests seriously need some work.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think it should be a random relationship?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, not random. In my drunken state I probably failed to get my point across. Some logical puzzle solving ability probably gets you a long way in school, but I don't think that alone makes anyone worthy of being called intelligent. I've certainly met my fair share of stupid people with top grades.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the point of such an amorphous definition of "intelligence"? For example, Godel starved himself to death after his wife was hospitalized because he believed everyone else was conspiring to poison him.

Obviously by your all-encompassing fuzzy terminology, Godel was a very stupid man. And yet you can count on the fingers of your two hands the number of mathematicians rivaling his staggering insight IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY.

You seem to think intelligence denotes self-actualization, but it really doesn't in any usage I'm familiar with.

tame_deuces · #16 11-23-2007, 05:29 AM

Sorry if I fail to see where in my post I stated that paranoia = stupidity.

Maybe at one time academic provess was a testament of intelligence, these days it is just a skill like any other. Fine mathematicians probably need high capacity for solving logical puzzles, so you need some well developed brain centre. Someone who needs complex motoric skills in their professions also have a well developed brain centre and indeed well developed nervous system, and their skill is just as high demand.

Yes I hold that the definition of intelligence as proposed by IQ tests are indeed simple and stupid, and think it is abhorrent the way it is often used to create arbitrary differences of worth.

Subfallen · #17 11-23-2007, 05:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Sorry if I fail to see where in my post I stated that paranoia = stupidity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I've misunderstood your gist. You agree that Godel was in the upper tier of attainable intelligence, even though he starved himself to death?

[ QUOTE ]
Yes I hold that the definition of intelligence as proposed by IQ tests are indeed simple and stupid, and think it is abhorrent the way it is often used to create arbitrary differences of worth.

[/ QUOTE ]

But IQ isn't an arbitrary measure of worth, if it's impossible to score well on IQ tests without being intelligent. (And this does appear to be the case.)

Even if you don't like the idea of calling low IQ people "stupid" (or some pejorative), still you agree that the property commonly referred as "intelligence" correlates with IQ? (That is: high IQ is a sufficient---if perhaps not necessary---condition for intelligence.)

tame_deuces · #18 11-23-2007, 05:57 AM

I don't think you have to score high on the IQ measure to be very intelligent, nor do I agree that scoring high on an IQ test necessarily means you are very intelligent.

But scoring high does mean your brain is well geared to perform certain forms of thinking, and I'll agree that the IQ scale measures one facet of intelligence.

blah_blah · #19 11-23-2007, 06:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
However on the analytical writing part I scored a 5 out of 6 which I was told is very good (wonder what the % is for ppl getting a 6).

[/ QUOTE ]

a 5 on writing on the GRE is 73rd percentile.

Subfallen · #20 11-23-2007, 06:15 AM

I must be very out of the loop usage-wise, if you're comfortable labeling so many domains as referents of "intelligence."

E.g., this baffles me:

[ QUOTE ]

...nor do I agree that scoring high on an IQ test necessarily means you are very intelligent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell me Taryn consistently scores 150 on IQ tests. I cannot think of a single cognitive function for which I would not bet that Taryn easily outstrips a 120 scorer. Pattern matching, memorization, logical deduction, language acquisition...I mean, ANYTHING.

What am I missing? How is it that high IQ is not sufficient for intelligence?