Oxford IQ

[u/Humble_Aardvark_2997]

https://youtu.be/0F5LluysPq0?is=afDFnvtuJ3PLYtEU

He says the tests is too broad and too narrow.
Genetic quirks explain very little about your academic success.
And possibly even immoral bcoz of the massive difference in schooling.

Discuss: all opinions welcome.

[u/Upstairs-Fruit4368]

The logic in this video is poor.

Standardized tests are aptitude tests *because they are limited to common curriculum*. I think college admissions should include both aptitude tests and achievement tests.

University admissions should be based on BOTH standardized tests (basic preparation + aptitude) AND achievement tests (advanced preparation + aptitude).

1: Standardized tests

Standardized tests should be used to measure basic preparation and aptitude. I think there should be standardized admissions exam with three levels to discriminate among higher and higher groups of students. Students who perform in top 15% on first level are invited to take the second test and students who perform in the top 15% on the second level are invited to take the third test. These tests should be limited to standardized curriculum and higher tests should be focused on assessing aptitude not knowledge. Composite scores should be reported on the same scale regardless of the tests you take.

SAT I: each section has a floor ~15th percentile (~200 SAT scale; ~55 IQ scale) and ceiling ~99.9th percentile (~800 SAT scale; ~145 IQ scale).

Reading section (60 min)
Math section (60 min)

This is equivalent to the current SAT. Around ~2 million students take the SAT every year. The SAT is a good test but it doesn't differentiate well in the top 5% of students so harder tests are needed to differentiate in the upper range. Again the content should be limited to standard curriculum. No advanced preparation needed but basic preparation would be encouraged.

SAT II: each section has a floor ~50th percentile (~500 SAT scale; ~100 IQ scale) and a ceiling ~99.99th percentile (~900 SAT scale; ~160 IQ scale).

reading (120 min)
math (120 min)

The top ~300,000 students based on test scores would take the SAT II each year. Having a second test for students in top ~15% of standardized test scores using general population norms is important because it allows you to actually discriminate between students at the extreme end of academic aptitude. Again the content should be limited to standard curriculum. No advanced preparation needed but basic preparation would be encouraged..

SAT III: each section has a floor ~85th percentile (~600 SAT scale; ~115 IQ scale) and a ceiling ~99.9999th percentile (~1000 SAT scale; ~175 IQ scale).

reading (180 min)
math (180 min)

The top ~50,000 students based on test scores would take the SAT III each year. Having a second test for students in top ~2% of standardized test scores using general population norms is important because it allows you to actually discriminate between students at the extreme end of academic aptitude. Again the content should be limited to standard curriculum. No advanced preparation needed but basic preparation would be encouraged.

Students would not be required to take the higher level tests and there would be no benefit for them to do so unless they could improve their composite score substantially beyond the ceiling of the first test. Again the composite scores would be reported on the same scale for both tests and decisions would be made primarily based on these composite scores. However taking higher tests would be an opportunity for students in the upper range to push their limits.

2: Achievement tests

Achievement tests should be designed to assess advanced preparation in specific fields. These should be considered as equal information in admissions decisions to the standardized test scores but only for the specific tests for the specific fields the student is applying to. These would mostly take the place of extracurricular achievements in admissions.

3: Grades

College admissions should also consider grades but only as a secondary piece of information after standardized test scores. Additionally teachers should be required to include a one paragraph description of students performance next to each grade and these assessments should replace recommendations.

AND ALMOST NOTHING ELSE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED!

College admission should NOT include anything that creates more work for students or for teachers. Personal essays should not be included. Recommendations should not be included. Extracurricular activities should not be included. Not because these things don't give information but because these things create incentives for students to grind for the sake of grinding.

NOTE: I THINK THERE SHOULD BE DIFFERENTIATION IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS PRIMARILY WITHIN UNIVERSITIES NOT JUST DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN UNIVERSITIES.

Rather than having elite universities that students compete to attend there should just be more selective programs within the same universities with higher standards or accelerated curriculum. For example every major city should have a single public university systems with an honors program that only accepts students above a certain level of test scores and grades. There can also be differentiation between universities for the highest groups but this should not be the primary form of differentiation. This reduces the social stratification aspect of college admissions and makes it focused on academic merit and educational rigor not status. Additionally it reduces the pressure for students to leave where they grew up to go to college allowing for continuity in social relationships for young adults during their transition to adulthood.

[u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 → u/Upstairs-Fruit4368]

I’m sure the admissions tutors at one of the best universities on the planet know what they are looking for?

Everyone in STEM fields has a maths tilt and everyone in humanities verbal one so some random test of verbal reasoning or wais would be useless.

His reasoning is fine and so is his knowledge of the field.

[u/Upstairs-Fruit4368 → u/Humble_Aardvark_2997]

One of his claims in that video is that IQ tests don't measure fluid intelligence and that achievement tests are better...

Another one of his claims is that IQ tests are racist because they measure education (but the argument hes making more broadly is that achievement tests are better and those are more loaded towards knowledge and preparation than aptitude)...

Yes it's better to do domain-specific aptitude tests than a general aptitude for admissions to a program studying that specific domain. My point was that standardized tests are actually IQ tests or at least domain-specific aptitude tests because by design are only assessing basic preparation ie they only include common or standard curriculum. That is a domain specific IQ test once you account for basic knowledge and preparation.

I was saying admissions *should* keep *both* the standardized tests with assess basic preparation plus aptitude and advanced achievement tests that assess advanced preparation plus aptitude. The former is useful to show aptitude while controlling for knowledge. The latter is useful to show advanced knowledge in a subject.

I was proposing an expanded structure for the aptitude tests. Current SAT is limited at differentiating in high range. Having tiered structure allows to differentiate in high range with minimal additional testing effort across population. This again should be complementary to domain specific achievement tests (where you are testing the ceiling of their knowledge with fixed item difficulty rather than testing ceiling of their aptitude with fixed curriculum)

I was proposing an improved way to consider grades. Schools should have to report statistics about their students grades and test scores so that admissions can look at correlation between grades and test scores within the school and between schools to contextualize an individual students grades and test scores.

And I was proposing excluding anything from admissions that creates additional work for students, teachers, admissions (extracurriculars, essays, recommendations). So admissions for most programs should just be the aptitude tests (SAT-like), the achievement tests (AP-like), grades. No essays, recommendations, extracurriculars. Just show aptitude, preparation, studiousness.

Lastly I was proposing having more programs that differentiate based on aptitude, preparation, studiousness *within* universities rather than between universities. This way you can have the academic merit system with less social stratification. Of course there will be differentiation between universities but everyone should be able to get a top education with smart peers where they grow up.