well for starters: the test instructions are in English - which doesn't seem relevant to the test, it focuses on abstraction as a modality of measuring cognitive capability, test taking, and computer user interface knowledge.
I work with high performing undergraduate students (think top 10 US public university). In one of our classes, they work on global public health design projects. Last year, the project was centered in the country of Chad.
One thing the students learned was that if someone isn't part of a culture that regularly uses paper/2D representations of things then using those modalities to communicate prototypes doesn't work.
Does that mean my students are smarter than the Chadian people? Why? Because they come from a culture where interacting with abstractions and representations of information is normed? The people of Chad certainly can.
If they are smarter shouldn't I be able to drop my students near Lake Chad and let them learn how to navigate without a map and compass? its just cognition so they should be able to figure it out right? They could memorize the map in advance?
It's not that 'some things have bias' its that all things are socially constructed at some level...
Right, but that was just an example of the types of questions on most IQ tests. The one I was given at a psychiatrist's office had no words or even letters for the multiple choice answers.
As far as dropping your students near Lake Chad, that's not general intelligence. Babies born in Chad learn how to navigate their area, just as your students can. The question would be who would be able to learn how to do it faster, and how many of each group could learn more complex things.
So what is general intelligence? And why does it always seem like definitions of general intelligence just happen to align with the current hegemonic culture?
I work with high performing undergraduate students (think top 10 US public university). In one of our classes, they work on global public health design projects. Last year, the project was centered in the country of Chad.
One thing the students learned was that if someone isn't part of a culture that regularly uses paper/2D representations of things then using those modalities to communicate prototypes doesn't work.
Does that mean my students are smarter than the Chadian people? Why? Because they come from a culture where interacting with abstractions and representations of information is normed? The people of Chad certainly can.
If they are smarter shouldn't I be able to drop my students near Lake Chad and let them learn how to navigate without a map and compass? its just cognition so they should be able to figure it out right? They could memorize the map in advance?
It's not that 'some things have bias' its that all things are socially constructed at some level...