[lbo-talk] 'American kids, dumber than dirt'

Wojtek Sokolowski sokol at jhu.edu
Tue Oct 30 13:09:08 PDT 2007


Doug:

What do you think IQ is measuring, anyway?

[WS:] Good question, indeed. The assumption underlying the IQ measurement is that there such a thing as "generalized intelligence" that is independent of the socio-cultural context in which cognitive tasks are performed. This is an article of faith that underlies the whole edifice of IQ testing (as Stephen Jay Gould showed in _Mismeasure of Man_). Without that assumption the whole IQ testing business looses it sex appeal as an indicator of the "innate worthiness" of a person and becomes a mere indicator how well that person performs on that particular task - no different that, say, measuring a score on some video game (a kid got a score of a 100 or 356,456,769 points - so fucking what?).

Without the assumption of the "general" context-independent intelligence, the IQ scores merely represent the ability of performing automated tasks in a standardized environment i.e. picking the "right" option from those circumscribed by the testing authorities. Those who do well on such tests are likely to function well in a standardized environment with a limited set of predefined variables and standard modes of information processing. In other words, those who score well on IQ test are good robots.

However, IQ tests says little how well a person can function in an environment that does not fit the above description. It is quite possible that people who score well on IQ tests, may function poorly in an environment that requires thinking outside the box, improvisation, employing social or emotional skills/intelligence, or being creative. Likewise, people who function well in these other environments may (but do not have to) score poorly on IQ tests.

With that in mind, it is very likely that as the IQ scores improve, people are getting dumber and dumber in the sense of being unable to function in an environment for which IQ testing was designed. The increased skill of taking standardized multiple choice tests, emphasized by the misguided the "No child left behind" policies, may go together with decreased social skills, creativity, ability to improvise etc.

And then there is the learned helplessness effect. Kids who are repeatedly subjected to standardized tests that are implicitly "the ultimate indicator" of their worthiness as human being in the environment in which they spend most of their time - and they are not that good at standardized test taking -quickly learn that they are not good at all and act accordingly. Since they are not tested in their social, creative, artistic etc. skills, they have little chance of knowing that they can function in their areas. The god of standardized testing has repeatedly told them that they are falling behind - so they learn to be helpless and stupid. This is yet another way how the increase in IQ and standardized test scores leads to greater stupidity i.e. learned helplessness.

In my book, standardized testing is an educational version of fascism and a crime against humanity.

Wojtek



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list