bhs bi -hijau -pmbngkang.docx

7/26/2019 bhs bi -hijau -pmbngkang.docx

1/15

My point is, people don't want intelligencePeople want results

'm not so sure about that. Fact is that in employment there are far more

variables than intelligence and effort, so perhaps it is not something that

is worth arguing. But bearing in mind all jobs require some sort of

learning, I might be inclined to pick the candidate who showed more of

an aptitude for things. lthough enthusiasm is important, obviously.

But there is a lot to be said for potential, particular where schooling is

concerned. nd someone with more raw intelligence is likely to have

more interesting ideas than someone who has just worked hard.

People are intellegent in diferent ways just because you

can't solve simultanious equations dosn't mean you

aren't going to be successul

nd then of course there is the fact that even some of the brightest

people can have e!am troubles, or troubles in coursework, like I did, "n

my #hysics $%& e!am last year I got ())*, not a question wrong, but

overall came out with an , because I have writing troubles, and I couldnot do the coursework essay to a high enough standard, and this year, I

probably no more than most in my school do about chemistry, and yet I

got a + in the & e!am, because I had a bad day, and panicked a little,

so I am inclined

&o yes I am very strongly against the Idea of e!ams, but frankly I don't

have much choice, so I guess it's back to 'revision'

fter reading through all of this discussion, I find it interesting that

overall, people agree that e!amstests are not a good measure of

intelligencesmartsclevernesswhatever you want to call it. -e

may all differ in our definitions of what intelligence is, and


2/15

whether or not it is something that should or can/ be measured,

but nevertheless no one here seems to think it is a good ideathe

best system. nd yet, e!amstests are almost universally used to

determine which student is smarter than the rest, which student hasmore intelligence that the others. 0ost people seem to know

someone they see as a smart, intelligent individual, but who isn't

valued as intelligent by the current educational system simply

because they don't perform well on tests.

#ersonally, I think tests are a good tool when used as checkpoints.1he teacher receives information on which lessons were effectively

taught to students, and can see which students are struggling to

grasp certain concepts. s a learner, tests are useful to see how

much you know, and where your knowledge could be broadened.

+nfortunately, here is merica standardi2ed testing is used in part

to determine how much funding a school should get, or whether or

not a teacher is doing a good job. -hile I agree that there should

be a basic amount of understanding and knowledge everyone has, I

believe that standardi2ed tests are not a good way of measuring

that understanding and knowledge. It should also be noted that

every state uses a different test, and the quality and difficulty of

brilliant at something, but generally slow to average at everything else. 3o you think of them as

unintelligent4 the test changes depending on the state. 1his seems a tad

ridiculous to me5 if a standard of learning is the goal, why not have a

federal test rather than state tests4 But I digress.


3/15

0y point which I don't think I've really said anything about yet/ is

that intelligence id defined by the individual. !amstests do not

determine how smart one is, but rather provide information on

which skillslessons a student has mastered in a controlledenvironment.

0ore seriously, you just have to watch the brightest people this

planet has ever given birth to, and 6.6 times out of () they were

known to be bad asses in school. 7ou might question whether it's

their educational system that made them or whether they were far

too intelligent not to succeed in any system whatsoever. ither

way, our system produces intelligent, capable people and has beendoing so for decades. -e shouldn't worry about its efficiency,

although we can always improve.

"f course, if you like 8oward $ardner's theory of multiple

intelligences, then e!ams are absolutely not a test of intelligence in

general. I put savants into this category. 1hey areI certainly do not.

o, to sum everything up, exams are not a good judge o

intelligence, but they are a good judge o knowledge

(temporary knowledge i the individual crammed at home

the night beore and only engaged peripheral route

processing in class o a particular subject and thereore

appropriate in a classroom situation!however, i you read my whole post, you would know why

" do not consider exams a good judge o intelligence! #his

is because de$nitions o intelligence vary! %y $rst two

sentences, taken alone, sound like "'m saying that exams


4/15

are terrible judges o aptitude in a subject! #hat is not the

point o my post and is not what " said! &ead in context

and ocus on more than the one sentence with which you

happen to disagree! lso, take a look at loom'staxonomy or some added clari$cation o what can be

tested on an exam in varying levels! " personally think

that they can be indicators o intelligence to a limited

extent, but that being a good student does not inherently

make you intelligent!

, e!ams only test knowledge, not intelligence. But also, what do you

mean by intelligence4 solving problems, good at language, etc.

I know I don't spend as much time as I should studying, mostly because

there isn't anything I'm particulary interested in. I get however, good

grades, not e!cellent.

I'm pretty la2y I guess, I have a hard time when it comes to sit on my ass

and study. 9ike right now, I should be studying for a math test.

0ost tests focus on knowledgeability rather than intelligence. In the

e!ample of that history final, I could've been a genius and still gotten

every question wrong. It didn't involve logical deduction, it involved

memori2ation. nd anyone can memori2e. 1hose who study and learn

the material will always beat la2y raw intelligence in schools.

s for an alternative, we have I: tests. ;o one really cares what your I:

score is, but no one really cares about your intelligence, either. It's your

ability to function in a certain situation that's important.


5/15

to me intelligence is raw brain power5 just as some people are instinctive

athletes or instinctive musicians some people are instinctively better at

grasping highbrow concepts and doing mental acrobatics.

"n the other hand, I don't believe it's that important. I think most people

have an aptitude for something, and most of those people we think of as

geniuses had to put in time and effort to master their field. ven instein

spent most of his time studying #hysics. "f course you do get your

0o2art's who are composing symphonies when you were just eating

cereal and watching cartoons, but even they work at it. 1here is no such

thing as a free lunch.

!ams to me aren't really good to show intelligence. Before each e!am,

you spend hours studying and go to school brain


6/15

to contribute to this conversation. InWith Other Opinions and

Aphorisms, he writes ?Imagination is more important than knowledge.

For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire

world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution. It is, strictly

speaking, a real factor in scientific research.@

instein, regarded as one of the smartest people who ever lived.

Aegardless of the formal definition, the way we classify intelligence is

e!tremely subjective. For e!ample, person ?@ might view a crowas avery intelligent creature because it demonstrates problem solving skills,

while person ?B@ sees the bird as being unintelligent because its learning

curve is so slow. &imilarly, one could call Beethoven intelligent for his

composing abilities, or assert that he is merely musically inclined. &o

you see, measuring intelligence has always been an issue among

psychologists because there are so many factors critical thinking

problem solvingthe list goes on and on/. nd there>s still no consensus

as to what should be measured when talking about intelligence. 1he bestthing we can come up with are I: tests.

I: intelligence quotient/ tests are one of the most popular ways to

measure a person>s intelligence though these tests vary nearly as much

as the very definition of intelligence/. I: tests are tests in which you
http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/quoth-the-raven-nevermore-hardly/http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/quoth-the-raven-nevermore-hardly/


7/15

cannot study, this means that the test measures the general intellect of a

person at any age. 1o do this, researchersin the early (6))s developed a

concept known as Mental agevs chronological age. 1he rational

is as follows, if a child is si! years old, but can only perform tasks as

well as a three year old, that child is said to have a ?mental age@ of threeyears. "ne then takes the mental ageand divides that by the child>s

chronological ageto determine a mental quotient.1he si! year old

child performing at a three year old>s rate would be said to have a mental

quotient of .C three divided by si!/, 1his number is now multiplied by

()) to get rid of the decimal, so we end up with an I: of C).

3istribution of I: scores

Image viaD 3mcq of -ikipedia

1his seems like a silly abstract measurement, which is why scientists

developed many types of standardi2ed testsfor I:, trying to reduce the

subjective and unscientific nature the measurement. 0odern I: tests

often measure a person>s ability in a few distinct areasD &patial ability

visuali2ing shapes and figures/, 0athematical ability using logic to

solve problems/, 9anguage ability solving word pu22les or recogni2ing

words with jumbled letters etc./, and 0emory recalling visual or aural

information/. 1hese subjects are chosen because they are said to measure?general intelligence,@ which boils down to the ability to understand

concepts rather than have previous knowledge of concepts. breakdown

of I: scores can be found here.
http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/iq.htmhttp://curiosity.discovery.com/question/what-an-iq-test-measurehttp://psychology.about.com/od/psychologicaltesting/f/genius-iq-score.htmhttp://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/iq.htmhttp://curiosity.discovery.com/question/what-an-iq-test-measurehttp://psychology.about.com/od/psychologicaltesting/f/genius-iq-score.htm


8/15

I: tests cannot accurately measure every aspect of a person>s brilliance

or lack thereof/, and results can even vary from test to test it>s worth

noting that only professional, peer reviewed tests are accurateaccepted.

"nline I: tests are just ?for fun@/. In recent years there have been many

: emotional intelligence quotient/ tests that attempt to measure aperson>s ability to identify, control, and assess emotion in others and

themselves. 1hese tests have not been widely accepted as useful, and in

no way replace current I: testing E but they are perhaps another way to

measure a person>s mental faculty.

wouldn't be subject to the )lynn *fect! ut they are! ndnow two psychology researchers have shown why +hile

" is oten held as a steadast measure o a person-sability to perorm academic tasks, that-s not the wholestory! #here are many other untested variables thatcontribute to a person-s intelligence.learning style,personality, mood.all o these things can impactintelligence and can sway the results o our cherished "tests!

"n part two o this article, " will attempt to blow " out o

the water, armed with recent research, the notion o"ntelligence may be changing or the better . /hangingrom an oppressive statistic to an upliting challenge orthose who wish to become great!

every ten years, the average " goes up by about 0points! Psychologist 1ames )lynn has spent decadesdocumenting this odd act, which was eventually dubbed

the )lynn *fect! #he question is, does the )lynn *fectmean we're getting smarter2 3ot according to )lynn, whoargues that the efect simply reveals that " measuresteachable skills rather than innate ones! s educationchanged over time, kids got better at standardi4ed testslike the " test! nd so their scores went up!


9/15

ut some thinkers cling to the idea that " measures aninborn intelligence that transcends culture and schooling!" that's true, one would expect that the most abstract,5culture ree5 elements o " testing that is!

ducators are e!periencing almost relentless pressure to show their

effectiveness. +nfortunately, the chief indicator by which most

communities judge a school staff's success is student performance on

standardi2ed achievement tests.

1hese days, if a school's standardi2ed test scores are high, people think

the school's staff is effective. If a school's standardi2ed test scores are

low, they see the school's staff as ineffective. In either case, because

educational quality is being measured by the wrong yardstick, those

evaluations are apt to be in error.

"ne of the chief reasons that students' standardi2ed test scores continue

to be the most important factor in evaluating a school is deceptively

simple. 0ost educators do not really understand why a standardi2ed test

provides a misleading estimate of a school staff's effectiveness. 1heyshould.

WebMD News Archive

3ec. ), )(


10/15

?1here are multiple types of intelligence,@ says researcher dam

8ampshire, #h3. 8e is apsychologistat the Brain and 0ind Institute

;atural &ciences %entre in 9ondon, "ntario, %anada. ?It is time to move

on to using a more comprehensive set of tests that can measure separate

scores for each type of intelligence.@

-hile pretty much everyone I know spent his or her summer interning,

working or lounging at the beach, I spent mine studying for the 9&1.

nd as we have progressed into the school year, I have continued

preparing for the test. But as I get deeper into preparing for the e!am, I

have started to ask myself G-hat is the point4 -hat will this test

prove4G

ver since we were si! years old we have had to take test after test, year

after year. It seems that everything we do in school is to help us prepare

for yet another test.

-e learn material, get tested on it, and then we forget what we have

learned. I have been thinking about this a lot and have come up with my

own philosophy on education.

In the real world, we won't have to take tests. -e will have paperwork,

essays and presentations. &o why do we focus so hard on taking e!ams

in school4 Isn't the purpose of school to prepare us for the real world4

ll tests really assess is our ability to memori2e, and the second the test

is over, we lose some of the knowledge we learned to prepare for the

test.

0aybe there is a better way to measure our knowledge on a subject.

1hink about where your life is headed after college. I am going to law

school, and then will hopefully become a lawyer. 0y time working willbe comprised of writing case briefings, going to meetings, giving

presentations and speaking in the courtroom < none of which have to do

with taking tests. In my opinion, it would be more beneficial to be

evaluated in my classes by writing papers and giving presentations.
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/guide-to-psychiatry-and-counselinghttp://www.webmd.com/mental-health/guide-to-psychiatry-and-counseling


11/15

fter all, that is what I will be doing when I graduate. nd I don't think

it matters if you don't plan on being a lawyer, I'm not aware of many

jobs that require you to take tests consistently.

lot of what we learn here at 3e#auw accumulates. It builds upon otherknowledge we have learned. I am a communications major, so I

incorporate information I have learned from my other classes into the

classes I am in now. 1hat is better shown through writing as opposed to

answering multiple


12/15

This investigation was reported by Dana Goldstein and Maurice Chammah for The

Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization focused on the !"! criminal justice

system! #ou can sign up for their newsletter, or follow The Marshall Project on

$aceboo%or Twitter!

ver since the &upreme %ourt ruled that prisoners suffering from ?mental retardation@ Ha now outdated term H could not face the death penalty in the )) caseAtkins .

!irginia, debates about whether a felon qualifies for e!ecution have often revolved

around a single numberD an I: score. "n 1uesday, $eorgia prisoner -arren 8ill was

e!ecuted for the (66) beating death of a fellow inmate. 8is attorneys argued

unsuccessfully that his I: of ) disqualified him for the punishment. 1his evening, 1e!as

is set to e!ecute Aobert 9add for beating a woman to death with a hammer in (66J. 8is

attorney haspointed outthat 9add>s I: of J would disqualify him from e!ecution in

most other states.

9ast 0ay, the &upreme %ourt built on theAtkinsdecision by rulingthat Florida could not

e!clusively use a simple I: cut


13/15

promiscuity, and low achievement in school and life. %ourtsand state agenciessometimes

ordered the sterili2ation of people with low I: scores. By (6C, I: tests were in wide use

in merican public elementary schools to track students toward either the vocational or

academic curriculum. arly I: e!ams asked questions that required cultural knowledge,

such asD ?1he forward pass is used inD tennis, handball, chess, football circle one/.@+nsurprisingly, I: scores were correlated with race, class, and immigration status.

n e!ercise used in the Binets evaluation, ordered after 9add committed arson,

9add satfor the -echsler intelligence test, which required less factual knowledge and

more performance, such as verbally repeating a series of letters or numbers back to a

proctor. 7et the test also included questions on vocabulary and arithmetic. 1hat meant
http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/static/themes/39.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/10/us/redress-weighed-for-forced-sterilizations-in-north-carolina.html?pagewanted=allhttp://archive.org/stream/memoirsofnationa15nati/memoirsofnationa15nati_djvu.txthttps://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/2015.01.29_robert_ladd_cert_pet.pdfhttp://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/static/themes/39.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/10/us/redress-weighed-for-forced-sterilizations-in-north-carolina.html?pagewanted=allhttp://archive.org/stream/memoirsofnationa15nati/memoirsofnationa15nati_djvu.txthttps://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/2015.01.29_robert_ladd_cert_pet.pdf


14/15

9add>s score of J reflected not only his innate ability, but also his e!posure H or lack

thereof H to educational opportunities at home and in school.

Aegardless of the still


15/15

direction, and an individual>s score can change over time. 8all>s score ranged between

J) and N) over multiple tests. lthough 9add took the -echsler e!am OC years ago, his

score of J figured prominentlyin his defense team>s strategy over the past year./ -hat is

considered an average score shifts over time as well.

dditionally, although the court has ruled against a simple numerical cuts son,

1homas &teinbeck, recently saidhe wasn>t happy about this, and that ?the character of

9ennie was never intended to be used to diagnose a medical condition like intellectual

disability.@
https://www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/ex-parte-laddhttp://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/briseno2004.pdfhttp://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/steinbeck-family-outraged-texas-judge-cited-of-mice-and-men-in-execution-ruling/?_r=0https://www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/ex-parte-laddhttp://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/briseno2004.pdfhttp://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/steinbeck-family-outraged-texas-judge-cited-of-mice-and-men-in-execution-ruling/?_r=0

Documents

bhs bi -hijau -pmbngkang.docx