Intelligence Testing and Improvements

Intelligence Testing

Intelligence and achievement are very different. Intelligence is a measure of one's aptitude, or ability, which is in essence a measure of potential. It is actually only a measure of potential in one skill area -- the cognitive. Intelligence testing is usually focused on things like problem solving and pattern recognition. Intelligence testing continues to be an evolving field as well, with the definitions of intelligence being challenged and expanded, and different types of intelligence identified (Benson, 2003).

Intelligence, ultimately is an input, a measure of potential output. Output itself is measured in terms of achievement. It has been shown that intelligence is a predictor of achievement, certainly in academic settings (Colom & Mendoza, 2007). Some of the factors that contribute to whether or not intelligence translates to achievement include cognitive engagement and goal orientation -- high levels of those will result in a person outperforming someone who many have greater intelligence but lower levels of engagement and goal orientation (Dupeyrat & Marine, 2005).

Thus, there is a clear difference between intelligence and achievement. One is an input, and one is an output. There is a correlation between the two, but this correlation is not exact. There are many factors that influence the degree to which the correlation exists in any given person. A British study showed that the correlation is 0.81. The variance differed by subject as well. The highest level of variance was in mathematics, and the lowest in art and design. The authors of this study noted that the correlation between intelligence and achievement is often found to be a lower, from 0.4 to 0.63, indicating that the two can be quite different, depending on how they are studied (Deary et al., 2007). There is no support for the idea that intelligence and achievement are the same thing.

2. The normal intelligence instrument is intelligence testing. This is constantly being revised to account for the latest knowledge, so it is still the best methodology today. A search in the literature for a review of different testing methods did not turn up anything, which is unfortunate because a peer-reviewed study would have shed more light.

But in this information vacuum, it is worth noting that there is also no data to show that current methods of intelligence testing are either a) inadequate or b) perfect. There is some information about the merits of emotional intelligence. This field is presented as complementary to standard intelligence testing, and to personality tests (Landy, 2005). It is reasonable that multiple different tests are available, but if you are testing for intelligence as defined as problem-solving and pattern recognition, then tests for things like emotional intelligence do not suffice. A test for intelligence is purpose-built.