..We do use largely irrelevant test scores to prevent highly competent students from getting the quality of education they deserve, and we do place a priority on these scores which can easily lead students who tests poorly to aim lower in life than they otherwise would. This I think is unnecessary.
Hear, hear!
The real problem, in my opinion, is that test scores are a very poor predictor of ultimate "success". That is, someone who scores a perfect 1600 on his/her SSATs is likely to do better than someone who scores a 600. But usually we are talking about much smaller differences.
To "succeed" at a task we set ourselves, very often it is not sheer potential brainpower that is the deciding factor, but qualities like persistence (or lack of it), the willingness & ability to work hard, originality (capacity for "divergent thinking"), understanding of other people & the ability to handle them, etc., etc.
I don't know whether you regard the CEO's of major companies as exemplars of "success". (Personally, they would not be my first choice.) In any event, one study demonstrated that they did not have remarkably high IQs -- from 110 to 120, on average, if I recall.
Many of the best things in life (and in the human being) cannot be measured... |
