People with high IQ talk about that in context like there is only one way to be that way. When in reality, there is only one way that we measure intelligence in the public school system. The current assessment use one type of data. Parents can talk with the teacher about other ways the child is adjusting, when the focus is on grades and test score.

Here is a breakdown of the 2 types of data for those that are not familiar with them:

Qualitative Data

Image is from: https://www.questionpro.com/blog/qualitative-data/

Qualitative data works best for people-related environments. They are things like surveys and customer service reports. They report on feelings about a program or a subject and rely on self-awareness of the ones who are surveyed. Those that are fans of Quantitative Data say that this is not reliable like numbers when really plenty of substantial research is conducted everyday using this method. Teachers can be encouraged to use Qualitative data in the classroom. I used to use a spreadsheet with a column for every activity and I had different categories that I collected data on each day. Over time, I would see if the student was paying attention in class one day, participating, doing the work, struggling with the work and so on. I asked the student at the end of each lesson, recorded on my sheet this question, “How did you feel about this lesson today?” This paints a qualitative picture of the student over time. This could be more focused to help the student in the long run. They have taken out the discussion on this kind of data to focus daily on test questions. This is because money is leading the discussion on learning. They want to know the number of learning just like dollars in a standard way of valuing things. You cannot value people like a number and expect to get human outputs. 

Quantitative Data

Image from: https://stats.mom.gov.sg/SL/Pages/Quantitative-vs-Qualitative-Data-Uses.aspx

Quantitative Data is the basic data that most scientists, finance people, and businesses use to prove to their investors they are getting their money’s worth.

In my opinion, the fastest way to see better results with student behavior and engagement in public schools is to use mostly Qualitative Data. Parents can demand schools use more qualitative data to make decisions on schools. Schools should meet a community need and each community has different needs, whereas the assessment is set by the state, sometimes suing federal requirements, not considering localities and their needs. 

Changing self-Esteem through looking at Intelligences

Let’s look at Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences to begin with. 

We use these theories to teach in the classroom but the bottom line is we are still coming up with a glass ceiling in test scores for certain groups of students. Without going into all of the socio economics and culture part of these intelligences, the current methods are disengaging kids and causing systemic instability. Parents are moving their kids from school to school trying to find one that teaches their style. Usually this is a charter school, which does not have to follow the same curriculum nor standards as state run schools. The problem is not the state run schools, the problem is the state running the schools. 

The main types of intelligences that are tested are Verbal-linguistic, Logical-Mathematical, and partially Space Strong. Those with other intelligences are left without a place to showcase their talents. How a child feels about school is an asset. It is an asset to have well adjusted, athletic, musical kids. These programs are cut to make room for testing and make them better at the top 3 tests areas. We can look at statistics of the breakdown of intelligence types.

Image from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871187120301802

This diagram was from a survey taken in a study of the inclusion of MI in a science textbook.  The results are categorized as follows:

VL-Visual Spatial

LM- Logical MAthematical

BK-Bodily Kinesthetic

M-Musical

IP-Interpersonal

IR-Intrapersonal

N-Naturalist,

VS-Visual- Spatial

There is more discussion around things being student centered, but it has not had significant impacts on student achievement on standardized tests. The tests are the problem.

Looking at this Qualitative Data, you can see that most students are not cutting it on today’s tests, not because they have low IQ but because their IQ is not being properly treated and assessed.

Limitations of this theory

Most of the study assessing Gardner’s theory is based on the models that have them looking at better standardized test outcomes. They attempted to use some strange qualitative assessment models such as blindfolding.  The methods of assessing Gardner’s Theory failed as we can see:

Image from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289621000507

This should line up if it fits within Gardner’s theory if their analysis methods are spot on. The criticism deserves criticism. In my experience, other qualitative methods would achieve different results. 

Bottom line is that we need to apply different learning models as well as get rid of standard assessment models if we are to reward each student based on what they possess and what they are able to build from where they started.

Other theories to consider

Spearman’s general Intelligence

Thurstone’s Primary Mental Abilities

Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

These all are based on the same premise that there are skills that contribute to a productive society and they aren’t limited to reading, math and science skill level.

IQ Tests

There is a prevailing theory that IQ is a scale, and in my experience it is fluid, instead of crystallized. Very few people do not grow their intelligence if they want to. Your intelligence grows just by experiencing new things and exposing yourself to different people. Here is the  general range of IQ. I think this is because most people stay in the same circles and do not put themselves into learning situations.

How do they come to these scores? Early memory tests focused on the person’s memory and problem solving skills, which we know change over time. We know a person can have an average memory and a high IQ. As we learn more, this idea may not prevail but as of now, the memory has no bearing on IQ. Standardized tests in school put those with low memory recall into rooms where they cannot thrive. In the Stanford-Binet Intelligence scale, a specific part of memory called Working memory affects the IQ in this model. Yet, you can still have a slower working memory and a higher IQ. Stress affects the working memory but not the IQ. There are tests for differing age ranges. Usually when you have an IQ test, they compare your results around people of your sex and the same age as you. So you do not get compared to 8 year olds when determining your IQ. 

IQ Changes over the generations

There is something called the “Flynn Effect” that hypotheses that the average IQ of the population changes over time and can be compared by generation. Boomers have a lower IQ than Gen Alpha and so on. I would think that the older you get, the more knowledge you get but thinking about this may shake that theory. 

Aptitude Vs IQ Tests

IQ tests measure achievement potential. If the child does not learn, they do not live up to their full potential and this is why learning theory is so important to getting the child started on a successful path. Standardized tests measure learning in a narrow and very specific area. 

Criticism of measuring IQ

These tests were created in Western Ideology and since varying cultures value various types of intelligences, moving to a new culture creates new areas to assimilate and struggle. Intelligence valued in the other culture of the immigrant is not valued at all.  This can create a problem with the person assimilating quickly.