For this part of the assignment, you are going to create some intelligence test questions of your own. You
will create 5 questions that you might give people to see how “intelligent” they are.
In your first 3 questions, create questions that do not show cultural bias—ones that all students,
regardless of background, should have an equal opportunity to answer correctly.
Your last 2 questions can show cultural bias, and can be similar to those you tried on the Chitling and the
Australian test. Include your test answers.
1. What is the next number in the sequence: 2, 4, 6, 8, ___?
Answer: 10
2. If a triangle has angles measuring 30, 60, and 90 degrees, which angle is the right angle?
Answer: 90 degrees
3. How many sides does a hexagon have?
Answer: 6 sides
4. If a joke goes over someone's head, it is said to have gone "______."
Answer: Above one's head (This question is a play on words and may be more easily understood by individuals familiar with English idioms).
5. What is the name of the famous festival celebrated in India that involves lighting oil lamps and fireworks?
Answer: Diwali (This question shows cultural bias towards individuals familiar with Indian culture and traditions).
different ones
1. Which planet in our solar system is known as the "Red Planet"?
Answer: Mars
2. What is the capital city of Australia?
Answer: Canberra
3. Who is the author of the Harry Potter book series?
Answer: J.K. Rowling
4. What is the traditional dance of the Maori people of New Zealand called?
Answer: Haka
5. In which country would you find the ancient ruins of Machu Picchu?
Answer: Peru.
Once you have taken the three tests listed above and have created your test questions, answer each of
the following questions (responses should be 3/4 to 1 page each):
1. How did you do on the three tests, and what did you learn from taking them?
2. Students in today’s schools gain entry into gifted programs based on their scores on standardized
intelligence tests. Is this fair? Why or why not?
1. In taking the three tests, I performed reasonably well but found some questions to be quite challenging. On the Chitling Test, I struggled with understanding the slang terms that were presented, and without prior knowledge of the cultural context from which they originated, I was unable to answer those questions accurately. This highlighted the importance of ensuring that assessments do not contain inherent cultural biases which could disadvantage certain groups of individuals. Regarding the Australian Test, I felt more confident in my responses as the questions were more general knowledge-based, allowing for a fair assessment of intelligence regardless of cultural background. Lastly, creating my own intelligence test questions emphasized the importance of creating tests that do not show cultural bias to ensure equal opportunities for all individuals. It also highlighted the difficulty in balancing questions that are challenging yet still accessible to a wide range of test-takers.
2. The use of standardized intelligence tests as the sole criteria for entry into gifted programs raises several concerns about fairness. While these tests provide a standardized way to measure cognitive abilities, they may not accurately reflect a student's full potential or unique strengths. Factors such as test-taking anxiety, cultural biases within the test, or limited opportunities for test preparation can all impact a student's performance on these assessments. Additionally, relying solely on test scores for program entry may overlook talented individuals who excel in areas not measured by traditional intelligence tests, such as creativity or emotional intelligence.
Furthermore, the use of intelligence test scores as the primary criteria for gifted program entry can perpetuate disparities in educational opportunities. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds may not have access to resources or test preparation tools that could help them perform better on these assessments. This could result in talented individuals being overlooked simply because they did not score as high on a standardized test.
In conclusion, while standardized intelligence tests can provide valuable information about a student's cognitive abilities, they should not be the sole determinant for entry into gifted programs. A more holistic approach, considering a student's multiple intelligences, creativity, and unique talents, would create a fairer and more inclusive system for identifying gifted individuals.
Once you have taken the three tests listed above and have created your test questions, answer each of
the following questions (responses should be 3/4 to 1 page each):
1. How did you do on the three tests, and what did you learn from taking them?
In taking the three tests, I found varying levels of difficulty and areas where my performance differed. On the Chitling Test, I struggled with understanding the slang terms and cultural references used in the questions, resulting in lower accuracy compared to the other tests. This test highlighted the impact of cultural biases on intelligence assessments and the importance of language and context in testing.
On the Australian Test, I performed well and felt more confident in my answers as the questions were based on general knowledge rather than cultural-specific information. This test reinforced the idea that assessments that do not exhibit cultural bias provide a fairer opportunity for individuals to showcase their intelligence regardless of background.
Creating my own intelligence test questions was an insightful experience. It made me consider the balance between challenging questions and accessibility. I realized the importance of crafting questions that are clear, unbiased, and not tied to specific cultural knowledge to ensure equal opportunities for all test-takers.
Overall, taking the tests provided me with a better understanding of the impact of cultural biases and the importance of creating fair and equitable intelligence assessments that can accurately measure cognitive abilities without favoring specific groups.
Stay tuned for the response to the next question.
Students in today’s schools gain entry into gifted programs based on their scores on standardized
intelligence tests. Is this fair? Why or why not?
The practice of using standardized intelligence tests as the primary measure for entry into gifted programs raises important questions about fairness and equity. While these tests are designed to assess cognitive abilities, they have limitations that can introduce biases and inequalities into the selection process.
One major concern is the potential for cultural bias in standardized tests. Tests developed within a particular cultural context may contain language, references, or assumptions that are more familiar to students from that culture, putting others at a disadvantage. This can lead to underrepresentation of students from diverse backgrounds in gifted programs, as their performance may not accurately reflect their true abilities.
Additionally, standardized intelligence tests may not capture the full range of a student's talents and potential. Intelligence is a multifaceted trait that includes various dimensions such as creativity, emotional intelligence, and problem-solving skills. Relying solely on a test score to determine giftedness overlooks these other important aspects of intelligence and may result in talented individuals being overlooked or excluded from gifted programs.
Furthermore, the emphasis on standardized testing for entry into gifted programs can create a high-stakes environment that places undue pressure on students to perform well on a single assessment. This can lead to test anxiety, stress, and a limited view of intelligence that values test-taking abilities over other valuable skills.
In light of these concerns, it is important to consider alternative and more holistic approaches to identifying gifted students. Supplementing standardized tests with teacher recommendations, portfolio assessments, observations, and interviews can provide a more comprehensive and fair evaluation of a student's abilities and potential. By incorporating multiple measures, schools can create a more inclusive and equitable process for identifying and supporting gifted learners.
In conclusion, while standardized intelligence tests can offer valuable insights into cognitive abilities, using them as the sole criterion for entry into gifted programs may not be fair or representative of a student's full range of talents. A more comprehensive, culturally sensitive, and inclusive approach to identifying gifted students is essential to ensure that all individuals have the opportunity to thrive and reach their full potential.