24th April 1999 : Gwen Jones
RE : ALAN EDMONDS’ "WHAT DOES IQ MEASURE ?" (C96/5)
Statistics can too easily be misunderstood or misrepresented. The 20th Century has an appalling record for this, particularly where policies based on racial and social assumptions have been carried out. The measurement of intelligence hasn't been immune to such prejudices, so it's worthwhile to look at the history of intelligence testing.
When states began to invest money in compulsory education they did so not out of altruism, but because the industrial revolution had created a demand for an educated labour force (and perhaps for other reasons too). It was soon realised that an enormous amount of talent was being wasted. In order to identify those children who would most benefit from advanced education (and who would therefore be of particular value to a state wishing to compete in the world's market-place) intelligence testing was developed. For the first time in history, children could gain access to advanced education purely on intellectual ability, regardless of the wealth of their parents. (It has never been that simple, but I'm not writing a book !) Most of us consider that this was Progress and a Good Thing.
In time it became clear that much talent was still slipping through the net. Comprehensive schools were seen as the answer; intelligence testing as a screening tool became unnecessary.
Until that time, there had been no demand that intelligence tests (IQ is a score relating performance on an intelligence test to age) should test anything more than the understanding and use of language and logic (ie. the abilities necessary for a child to benefit from an academic education). Now a demand for intelligence tests which could be used for diagnostic purposes arose, and hence a desire to identify and define different facets of intelligence.
What intelligence is not is a fixed feature of the individual. It can change over time (even during the course of a day), and is influenced by heredity, environment, health and other factors. It can be enhanced by making improvements in certain of these factors - or is it that an individual's test performance ability can be enhanced ?
It is not the case that if we can't define what we measure, it doesn't exist. It's my view that the question WHAT DOES IQ MEASURE ? is pointless outside of the context WHY DO WE WANT TO MEASURE IT ?
Gwen Jones