I've seen Einstein's riddle on the net many times but never bothered to solve it. However, I finally decided to take a crack at it and it took me less than five minutes. Apparently, only 2% of the population should be able to solve it. The problem is my 14 year old can also solve it in 5 mins. We are not members of Mensa although my IQ is well above average. I am also of African origin which according to some (ignorant) people should make me less intelligent. I checked on the net for the answer - lo and behold I was right, but it suprised me how many so-called intelligent people spent between I hour and 1 day solving it, and how many didn't manage to solve it at all. Basically, I couldn't be bothered to sit there for one hour racking my brains ( I only had 5mins to bedtime) so I decided to draw 5 columns on a piece of paper, cut out little bits of paper with each of the pets, nationalities etc. on it and staple together any that had to go together. Then I put the stapled bits on the paper like a jigsaw.... the solution was remarkably easy, using that method a child could do it. 1) Did I cheat ? Does my method of achieving the result make me less intelligent? 2) Does it matter how you achieve the result? 3) Is intelligence using a sledgehammer to crack a nut or finding the simplest route? 4)Does formal education focus too much on the pencil and paper to solve problems and less on other tools? Is that why people with extremely high IQs do not always do well is soceity? My eight year old daughter has difficulties with word problems usually involving money or time. However, if you ask her to put herself in the situation and imaging she went to a shop and bought xyz for x amount, she instantly comes up with the answer. 5) Isn't it time as well as IQ tests and EQ tests we had tests for measuring practical skills rather than purely mental ones?
yes, reminds me of the often sited psychology paper about the kids in Brazil who worked selling fruit or something. If you bought something and asked them to make change they could do the calculation quickly and accuratly but if you took out the context and just asked them the same question with just numbers they had a hard time. there are plenty of examples of people who don't score high on IQ test who go on to do very "intelligent" things.
Intelli-gents I do believe and have fallen victim(like you) to the never ending cycle of staying "within the fringe" and isolating those of us who are far out side the fringe from any idea of how to relate to others. I believe that so called "intelligence' is too often used as an excuse to ensure the desired results are met. Here is my Meaning: IQ's in your case,Travesty, was used to relate your race with the ideal that because you are non white you are not up to par for the species. (Yes, I do find this disgusting and offensive but it is a GREAT example of my point.) The era in which IQ was used to prevent certain races from participating in political, educational forums chose to use this particular "scientific method" to "prove" that certain races could not qualify for such privileges. Did this method carefully explain the races natural abilities of survival? Nope. Does this test offer any race an fair estimate of social and cognitive capabilities? Nope. Does this test fairly and accurately access the minds capabilities of functioning? Nope. This test is and was based on true "educational methods". Therefore, if you were not privy to that of a proper education then you are sure to fail. Since our country like so many other countries-has chosen to isolate certain groups of persons from the educational system's) it is likely that the one race that is consider within- the Fringe in this case white educated persons) the group to find the IQ tests successful. A Setup? Yup. I think so. I do not believe that it is strictly based on race. Yes, Id did say that I don't think it is just racial bias. I believe it is based on status as well. As I have expensed, the public education system(s) here in the US vairy's greatly from town to town and state to state. I was lucky enough to experience 23 public schools(not miltary reasons)and because I attending "poor" schools I found that my opportunity's and my goals were less then that of the children who were offered private schools and I find that those children-dominantly of white Mid-upper class environments had higher expectations then I ever thought of. I thought surviving the walk from my apt to the school yard was major stuff. These kids thought of Duke or Harvard as survival requirements. as an adult and a parent I so deeply wish my child not to expense these cruelty's and I have worked so hard to protect my child from this kind of treatment. Just to discover the public schools and the government still pushing these IQ tests and not examining the realities of the human brains. Again, always questions if it is nature or nurture that increases our brain size. It is not race, sex,sexuality, religious beliefs and or savings accounts
I am not sure what a modern IQ test is like. When I was much younger, the usual IQ test had an interesting history. For whatever reason, it was decided or assumed that success in a standard American (or perhaps English) academic environment was equivalent to intelligence. This is not a terrible concept or some kind of gross error. It merely an idea with some flaws. I do not think the originators of these tests were racists or men with an evil agenda. They were researchers out to produce a meaningful test, which goal they considered worthwhile. They can be accused of chauvinism, not evil intent. They were academically successful men who considered themselves intelligent, and their assumptions seemed reasonable to them. I think they were from the early 20th or late 19th century. The originators of IQ tests experimented by giving various test to individuals and applying statistical methods to the correct and incorrect answers. Questions which successful students tended to answer correctly were kept as part of the test. Questions which successful students tended to answer incorrectly were eliminated. After a good set of questions were developed using these methods, they made the further assumption that intelligence does not vary with age (except for abnormalities due to disease or age-related senility). They then began to analyze the questions used and make adjustments based on the age of a testee. Essentially they experimented and fiddled with the tests, discarding some questions and adding others. These efforts resulted in a set of questions and some formula using the age of a testee that resulted in a given testee pretty much getting the same IQ score no matter how old he was when he took the test. This was not so bad an idea, since it tended to give a person the same score before and after he went to college. They did not want to test knowledge gained through education. With the 20-20 vision of hind sight, it is now obvious that the above methodology has some serious flaws, basically due to a fierce cultural bias. Picking success in an academic environment as the basic definition of intelligence essentially defined intelligence as being a member of the class of people who went to college in the early part (or perhaps first half) of the 20th century. This group was almost exclusively white Anglo Saxon males from affluent families. It included few women, no self made businessmen, no ingenious craftsmen, few people from other cultures, hardly any poor people, et cetera. The test has since been tinkered with further to allow women to obtain better scores. I am not sure what other tinkering has been done. It is sad that nobody seems to have taken advantage of the fact that the test really does do a good job of predicting success or failure in an academic environment. At least it accomplished that goal over a period of at least 30-50 years. Instead of criticizing the test for its flaws, why did nobody consider the possibility of considering an obvious implication? If various groups do poorly on the test and can be expected to similarly do poorly in a standard academic environment, why not try to change the teaching methods? An obvious use the test and others which could be devised would be to decide what types of teaching methods should be used for the different types of people who want to attend college. In my life I have noticed that some people learn by doing instead of by reading text books and listening to a teacher talk. Some people learn better in a group discussion environment, with the teacher directing the discussion rather than dictating the detailed format. Regardless of the teaching method, some students display their knowledge better with interactive oral tests than fixed format written ones. Why do almost all courses at almost all high schools and colleges have essentially one basic methodology for teaching students? This cannot be correct, and oddly enough the IQ test should have told those responsible that the system needed some redesign. At an excellent private school I attended, the better students were allowed to not do homework if they spent time helping the students who were having trouble. An hour a day was set aside after lunch as a time when students with poor grades were assigned a special study period. Teachers and the better students (volunteers) were available as tutors or mentors. Often, a fellow student was able to explain concepts from a different point of view than the teacher’s, and provide a lot of help. The better students were rewarded by eliminating homework. An interesting rule at these study periods was that a teacher did not work with his own students, in case the problem was partially due to his methodology not being suitable for certain students. This approach was very successful. I never heard of another school which used the idea, and I am sure that no college uses this method, which is one simple example of a successful non standard teaching method. It is my understanding that so called IQ tests are not longer given much credence unless you want to be a member of Mensa. This seems to be a good idea. The bad idea is that the educational system is still trying to fit square pegs into round holes, instead of designing some square holes. The students who do not do well in a standard academic environment are given all sorts of help designed to force them to adjust to that environment. The right approach seems to me to be acceptance of the obvious fact that there are many types of people in this world and one size does not fit all when it comes to educating people. It is my hope that computer technology will be used as part of the solution to this problem. A well designed teaching program would allow a student to learn at his own pace. It could also allow the student to have some control over the methodology and/or subject matter. A program could be designed to be highly interactive, changing to accommodate a particular student. Consider the teaching of history. Would it be a crime to have history courses tailored to the students interests? Currently, there are courses in Early American History, 19th century American history, Ancient history (mostly Egyptian, Greek, & Roman cultures), English history, medieval history, etcetera. Pick one from column A and two from column B. then live with those choices for the next year. Suppose a student wanted to study what he considered great men from many cultures and historical periods? Suppose he wanted to study wars over many time periods and cultures? Suppose he decided that his initial choice resulted in boring him? Wouldn’t it be nice he could make some adjustments in the course content? The ideas of the last paragraph are impractical in a standard high school or college environment, but a methodology using computers could manage it.
An excellent post! Thank you. I wish more people could see things with such clarity. Perhaps one day parents will be able to choose a school on the basis of the teaching method employed. Children could be assessed to determine by which methods they learn best and channelled into the right environment/school. Roll on the day!
Intelli-gents CT I appreciate your inputs. I am glad that you can somewhat agree. I have received multiple IQ test and they have proven to be a method in which those of us who did not go to private schools or have parents in the PTA --another method at denying higher education. I HAD to take these tests to get into a college. How silly. I have the option of joining Mensa but I do believe the individuality is key and mensa has its purpose. Not for me. Yes I do understand that the IQ test was intended to be a scientific method and was intended to be used properly. However, we are human and history will prove that our intentions are rarely apart of the outcome.
Was I supposed to read all of that? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :bugeye: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Intelli-gents No need to read all of that.......as one of my collegues would say" read the Blah Blah Blah....."
I agree Dinosaur, a good post! There seems to be an obsession with 'private' schools for some people. What do you class as a 'private' school? A school where fee's must be paid to the school for the childs education or do you class a school that is regularly very well placed in the national league tables at GCSE and A Level as immediately 'private' because it has a good record? What about a school that was previously private (i.e. fee's were neccesary for entrance) but is now grant maintained i.e. the government gives the school the money to educate each child, and the money is granted per child! Less children= less money. If a school has boarding facilities i.e. the children do not live with their parents but live with teachers does this make it a 'private school' (even if they were both miles apart)? Is it still a private school despite the fact that boarding fee's for many children were also granted by the govenment? Pri'vate a. secret, not public; not general, individual; personal; secluded; denoting soldier of lowest rank -n. private soldier (taken from Collins Gem Dictionary and Thesaurus). Any school that is open to the public is surely not a private school. And surely any school that is open to the public is a public school i.e. state schools are open to the public and so are 'public' schools. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :bugeye:
Movin' on........ I hope you do not mis construe my personal view as an insult or a means of "picking on the more fortunate". That is not the case. I am simple a person who has been privileged enough to work in both forms of educational arenas and have found that private schools have much more advantage in many ways then that of a NON private school. Private schools--my personal view--- are meant and designed for persons who have better socio economic standing then others. These schools do not share one room with 3 grades,(yes even in America we have one room school houses still active) the private school rooms are not filled with children who can barely read-their parents dont read- These schools have parents who network, who have opportunity's that most of our children do not. In order to get into these schools one must have many extra curricular activities.....something that most children can not provide due to the public schools budget cuts and/or maybe these children have to work after school. I had to work. I did not have time to join after school clubs or sports. Mind you this was for me a very long time ago. For the youth I work with now, this situation is prevalent even today. The budget cuts are more aggressive-some schools do not offer P.E. anymore. Simple physical education has been cut because government funding for the public school's) is simply not there. I am surrounded by private schools and have looked into the requirements for one to attend. Unfortunate, I do not have an uncle that is well to do and Bill Gates wont return my phone calls. I am passed the age that would allow me to attend a private school but I know and advocate for many who wish they could but again, no answers the phone.....I am sure this debate and difference in opinion would continue on and on......Lets move on.........
And why does a student need p.e. anyway?! Does anyone really need a class to learn 'physical education'? The class that teaches us how to run around ( :bugeye: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) or kick a ball. I don't think it's a neccasary part of education. In fact i dont think it should even be part of education. Good point that class rooms shared with people who can't read aren't really going to benefit anyone but i wonder how many people have actually experienced this. However it is unlikely that they'd have any use for the internet as us on sci-forums do here so i think it is not very likely that anyone here would know someone and it is not really worth doing a poll. Travesty i dont think it matters how you solved the puzzle however i think when testing the brain, memory and visualization (the ability to 'turn shapes' in ones head etc) are important and I.Q tests should take this into account (imo).
I wonder .... They still teach kid's handwriting at school, extra points for neatness etc.. My handwriting is as bad as everyone else's. I rarely write by hand, I usually type what I need to communicate. I can write legibly; that's all I need to do. I only make the point to illustrate the following: Just how far do you need to take these mental gymnastics anyway? Is there actually a point of diminishing returns? By focusing on these types of skills e.g. memory does society/the education system actually condition children from an early age to develop these skills and perform well 'academically' but be less skilful at translating these into 3D/real-world solutions? Meanwhile those that are good at the other skills get discouraged and drop out. ( I actually did the exercise on paper again to see how fast I could do it without the aid of tokens. It took slightly longer but once you realise the principles behind the puzzle you're going to be able to solve it anyway, whichever method you use. The reason I used the tokens in the first place was because when I first looked at it, to me it resembled a jigsaw puzzle, which is 3D, so my first instinct was to translate it.) Children learn how to solve quadratic equations. Very few could tell you why you'll ever need to. I actually think the term 'intelligence' sorely needs to be redefined by the scientific community or governments wont act to change things for the better. The people we call intelligent seem to be people with a pre-designated but nevertheless narrow set of skills and it seems these people get all the opportunity. In case anyone thinks this is a case of sour grapes, I was educated at a 'private' fee paying school. All girls, boarding and elitist. I am not from a socially or otherwise disadvantaged background, rather the reverse; I've been give ample opportunity. I usually perform well on IQ tests but don't agree with them, they are flawed. My kids also go to private schools, their grades tell me they are doing well, even excelling, but I happen to think that they are under-educated because of our interpretation of intelligence, the focus on the pencil and paper method of teaching and the restrictive curriculum. I can think of people I know who are so-called brilliant but would find it difficult to boil an egg. Maybe that's why in the UK plumbers earn more than lawyers, and the lawyers spend all their years at university etc. so they can earn enough money to pay the plumber to change a washer on a tap because they don't know how to do it themselves. As to the IQ test being racially oriented, I can assure you it's not. People of African origin can perform as well on these tests as much as anyone given the correct exposure. The problem with them is they are without meaning to be, cultural. Since I can cross cultures, I can do them. I can actually improve my scores and at the risk of contradicting my earlier post, I could probably get into Mensa if I tried. However, I'm more interested in pursuing other skills. Having been degree/university level educated, I'd like to be able to do my own plumbing. Intelligence is a social and cultural problem not a racial one. In my daughter's year last year the top two performers were African and you'll find that success repeated in many (private) schools. Within my immediate family last year, my brother's son was top of his year, my sister's son was top of his class and my daughter was top of her year. They all won their form prizes, they all were minorities in their classes. They all feel privileged to be African, to them it's a positive thing because as well as the opportunities the other kids have, they have opportunities other kids do not. This is the twenty-first century. It's time "science" stopped following politics and some of the rather archaic views of society and did the leading instead. Intelligence needs to be redefined to include a wider skill set or failing that a debate needs to be started just so awarenes is increased.
P.S. P.S. I'm not advocating that we all become plumbers ..... perhaps I laid it on a bit thick. I'm all for the development of mental ability. My point is that even amongst the intelligent, there are skills that are not being developed because of this narrow definition and the way we are taught at school. I don't particularly want to do my own plumbing, but I want to be able to do it.
I hope that you are being funny in thisPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It is not the point of which class is cut. Some schools cut Art Classes, drama, after school programs.....even music. (I remember my sister telling me that she could no longer play her Flute because Jazz band was cut from the budget. How awful. I think teaching some children who are more cyber then physical is helpful..... Like many kids-my child(and co horts) would prefer to play video games or talk on the phone then go and build a fort or take a walk......That is a skill that we are all losing....Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I wonder if all children(including myself) forget(or not use) what it is like to pretend and use our minds for creativity-will they re write the IQ test and omit the puzzles and the pictures?
my humble input Please correct me if I'm wrong (with references) but I believe it is accepted (by even the test-givers themselves) that IQ tests are educationally, racially and culturally biased. These tests are still given however because there is currently nothing better with which to measure intelligence. (There is actually a way to test the educational aspect of this by measuring the IQ of the same individual through grade school, high school, college, post-grad and if the test has no educational biases, all the results will be the same). Another point; my belief is that intelligence in humans has low variance. If I may explain, picture a graphical distribution of human intelligence (x-axis) and frequency (i.e. numbers of people, y-axis). I think the curve will be normally distributed (i.e. like a symetrical hill or mountain) where most people will be near or around some mean intelligence level, however there will be some outliers at either end of the curve. If most people are of equal or near intelligence, this curve will be very narrow (more like a spike than a hill) indicating low variance in intelligence. A broadening of this distributional 'spike' would therefore be due to biases in the measurement of intelligence, e.g. cultural, racial or educational differences affecting accurate measurements. A third point; I think it is important to point out the differences beween intelligence, education, and training (of the mind). The latter two things one may think are the same, but I have separated them because one can envision an individual who is educated and intelligent, but has never been taught to think critically (an all too common occurrence among college graduates in my opinion). One example: my grandfather was a toolmaker and was lucky enough to have a government job and so was never out of work during the depression. He ne'er had more than a high school education (and he graduated high school in like 1910 when subjects like algerbra, chemistry, physics, statistics, and even accounting were taught only in college) but he was extremely intelligent. One day, he's like 90 and I'm a grad student in biology, we're sitting on my mom's back porch looking at the forest. He turns to me and says, "You see all those trees out there? They grow pretty close together. They must take from one another." Imagine my shock, as a biology student, hearing my grandfather expound on biological competition theory he never even knew existed. Amazing.
