Hi Matt, I managed to secure an offer for Law! As an international applicant, I really found your videos immensely helpful and insightful. I would love to have the opportunity to meet you in person this fall to convey my gratitude :)
I really needed this video. I've just received an offer to study English at Oxford and was feeling some major imposter syndrome. I've never done an IQ test and likely never will, but as a black person I have been told in life that on average I can expect to have a lower IQ than the rest of the human species. Whilst I discounted these so-called 'scientific studies', I guess a part of me had internalised them, and this video has taken a weight off my chest that I didn't even realise was there!
Dean - IQ is not a measure of intelligence, much less a measure of your ability to succeed in writing extensive, critical essays. If you're interested to know more about IQ and the notion of generalised intelligence, feel free to check out the blog post from my comment above which goes into more detail on this topic.
Congrats (I emphasize from another minority, and female). Hopefully those foul persons will now be eating their Shoes. lol. Enjoy Oxford, where u can learn in the same halls where CS Lewis, JRR Tolkien, Oscar Wilde and Lewis Carroll once did!
This is actually one of the massive issues with IQ tests is that they are susceptible to a phenomenon known as the stereotype threat. Demographics who are stereotyped as being "less intelligent" will actually perform worse on these types of tests simply from the anxiety of the stereotype alone. It can artificially improve or impede performance on the test. Of course, there are a long list of issues that IQ tests are susceptible to.
Hi Matt, This is a very encouraging video. lol. Even for a middle aged man like me. You are a smart and good man , and Oxford is very lucky to have you working with them. A man like you belongs there. All best to you, Matt, Jeff
I did the TSA last year and used each mock as a check to see if I was improving, and after the first 2-3 tests which did see improvement (probably as I was getting used to the format), my scores then plateaued. They did not improve over the next 10 tests or so, despite me working as hard as I could to improve. So do you think the standardised tests that Oxford use can be significantly improved upon or is it basically based on someone's genetics or upbringing past that initial point? How would you improve your TSA score beyond that initial improvement if you were sitting the test?
The tests can be improved upon when you plateau, but you may need help. Everyone needs help to excel. That's why I'm trying to publish as many videos on TSA and other such tests. I suspect your plateau was also pretty high! Bear in mind that the best scoring marks on TSA are still a way off 100%.
Thank you for putting this so eloquently. For years I've failed to explain my belief to others that 'IQ' really has no value and isn't a measure of anything in particular. I always would get a strange look from people or they'd argue. IQ is useful for detecting learning disabilities. In normal people it really isn't useful for anything. So many people believe in this myth that others are mentally superior to others and this can be demonstrated through IQ. This is probably one of the most horrible widespread beliefs in society. IQ has been used to justify horrible atrocities. Its only value is in putting people down. If you are born healthy and in a stable environment, for the most part you are on an even playing field with those around you.
Hi Dr Williams! I've been watching your videos for at least 3 years now and I'm really glad to tell you I got an offer for French at Christ Church!!!!🌈🌈🌈🍾🍾🍾🎉 Thank you so much for your videos, they really helped me (I'm afraid I wouldn't have stood a chance otherwise, as I live in a small village in the Pyrenees hahaha, I'm in the newspaper and everything). I really hope I bump into you around Oxford so I can thank you in person!
Congratulations Please. Unfortunately I just got to know prof Matt when he announced the decision day this January. But all in all I did my best and hope I meet the eligibility criteria 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏I wish I got to know him earlier.
IQ scores are not related to "natural selection", because people are able to adapt to the environment. Survival is the winner. However, during this pandemic hope university not choose candidate students with a certain type of HLA genes.
In Portugal when you finish the 12th school grade you have to take 2 or more standard exams, this depends on if you choose humanities, or science for your last 3 year speciality. The usually are Math and Portuguese. Most people fail or get a bad grade on the math one not because the math or that they don't know about it but because it has a lot of text. and they just get bored of reading.
Hi Sir! I'm an IB student and im applying to Oxford in this year for Economics and Management. I'm just a huge fan of yours and watching your videos introduced me to Oxford's TSA in the first place! Just wanted to say hi :D
The world needs to see this video. I used to think I was almost alone in believing the same thing. My take on IQ is that it is a control mechanism for society, not a measure of intelligence. There is no concrete definition of intelligence, so how can we precisely measure something we can't define properly? Accuracy and precision are not the same when it comes to science. There are many different types of intelligence. I also think that people can improve their performance in anything, like how I went from doing bad in school to getting mostly A's, all because I needed to learn some life lessons, and realize my potential. As a Psychology student I want to share a very important message BECOME the best version of yourself and never settle for less. The BEST test of intelligence that we have is the game of life. The power is yours to decide your fate, and time is precious.
Hi matt, what if I take my gcses in one school which may be considered disadvantaged but my a levels in another school which is considered privileged and advantaged. How do oxford take that into account?
The problem is, is that when applying to Oxford, you need to have gotten A's or A* in virtually every GCSE and A-Level subject you have undertaken, I know thise grades have been replaced by 1's and 2's now but when I was at school in the early 2000s we had the old grading system. So you do need to be a generalist as well. I got A's in English Literature and English Language but an E in Maths and I used to get kicked out the lesson for messing about in my Maths class as I was in the bottom set and will disruptive pupils who also were not interested in Maths!.
Not necessarily true. One of my students had poor GCSE marks (a couple of As, some Bs, the rest Cs). She did exceptionally well in her AS-Levels (when most people still took them), was offered a place at St Hilda's College and got in. As Dr Williams has said in other videos, they will look at the whole application as well as your reference.
Nice video! Thanks. I am curious if every applicant is interviewed regardless of their academic results? This would seem a logical deduction based on what is said in the video. Not all academic assessments are correlational to IQ but at least some of them are. It is only fair if those who do not get high public examination scores to be interviewed as well.
We don't interview every applicant, no. But, we do contextualise academic results. Meaning that someone with relatively poor academic results will be interviewed if they come from a disadvantaged background. The deselection process entails not only academic results, but also admissions tests, personal statements, teacher references, and contextual information.
IMO it's the same thing as 'lies, damn lies, and statistics'. You can 'prove' anything depending on the boundaries you set for the measurement. Ironically discovery starts with removing those artificial boundaries, but too many 'measurements' are unknowingly bounded by our existing biases, based on 'knowledge' which due it's finite nature, is by definition incomplete. TLDR; do not be overconfident in your knowledge, as history repeatedly shows that human knowledge is frangible. Personally, I find the academic method to start with a hypothesis troubling in this regard; as the tests, and our interpretations of them, that are chosen to prove or disprove the hypothesis will be colored by the same cognitive biases that are inherent in the limits of our existing knowledge, and the greater we believe that knowledge, the easier it is to make these mistakes. Better to assume that we know very little and what we do know is likely flawed in some way. As such, 'expertise' could be seen as something of a paradox.
People are different. Most people are not going to learn advanced mathematics if you locked them in a room and taught them all day long. I saw all the pre-med students who had their hopes dashed when they got to organic chemistry. They truly tried their best.
Me, IQ 146, I never saw or see myself as superior to anyone else. Thank God. I think ego is a big part as well; those with very high IQ might think they have founded the wheel, but its the opposite. It's about how creative someone is, in acts and/or imaginal thinking. All my friends have ''IQ'' of the average, or below average. They are very smart people, lovely, kind, caring and most of them even very creative in arts, instruments etc. :) God created all of us equally. Yes, someone might be better in calculation/math and someone else might be 1000 times better in making portraits, animals, scenery. Thanks sir, your video is very very brightful and a good lesson for all of us. I bookmarked this video ;) Btw, I only see myself as ''genius'' in the sense of making art since I have been a child, but not of the ''magical IQ test'' I took (out of fun lol)
Would you say that students/graduates from oxford do not have above average IQs? - As you said it is not something that is looked for. I know all of the top colleges in the US (and many around the world) have frighteningly high average student IQs, and I was expecting a similar statistic from a world class college like Oxford. What makes Oxford so different and hospitable for people with average IQs? How could Oxford be ranked so highly with all of these other top colleges (with incredibly high average student IQs), without having a student body with high average IQs?
It's a good question. I would say that Oxford students *could* do well on an IQ test, because they have exceptional thinking skills. But, we don't use IQ tests to identify or nurture those skills. Also, English Lit students likely would not perform as well on mental arithmetic style questions, and Maths students may perform less well on verbal reasoning. So, the IQ test is at once too broad to be of any help in identifying academic talent, but also too narrow to say much about intelligence.
The biggest problem I have with IQ tests is, if it is supposedly actually testing your Inteligence, and a person cannot become more intelligent, than you should not be able to improve on the IQ tests with studying. but you can, and people do.
I'm sorry to burst any bubbles but all relevant IQ tests are not math nor language based. They do not test skills but they test ability. These test acutely measure fluid intelligence, which presenter mistakenly calls creativity. Creativity is the skill that is not part of fluid intelligence. Example of these test are well known: Raven's Progressive Matrices, Naglieri, Cattell etc.
One must be a pretty dim bulb to think that a number on a linear scale could possibly convey any meaningful information whatever about a person. Really, the whole notion is pointless. I’ve done a lot of thinking on this subject because to me it’s so obviously useless. Oh. Here’s a number. It tells me how smart I am. Maybe I can take a different test and be smarter. One day at college I was thinking on this subject, just trying to solve the linear scale problem . The notion of a radial scale occurred to me- Imagine a center point, with rays originating from the center and going outward in all directions. Almost immediately I thought- spherical, a spherical scale. Imagine being (magically) in the earth’s core, the center of the earth. From there, imagine rays traveling out in all directions. Each one of those rays represents an individual, though, I think. One cannot measure that which cannot be measured. Intelligence cannot be quantified. Standardized testing itself is garbage, since it’s all about learning what the teachers want you to learn. Hey teacher, um, I was thinking if it wasn’t too much trouble maybe you might consider leaving those kids alone. Do universities actually use IQ test scores in the admissions process? I didn’t know that, but I’m not surprised. Hey, maybe IQ could be part of your social credit score. Now, that does sound kinda fun, maybe I’m wrong.
IQ can absolutely be measured and it is a single number, not multiple. Standardized testing is only a problem in so far as often they often do not test what they purport to test. That is not really true with IQ tests (but of course you can be more familiar with the problems, making the test less accurate.) IQ just doesn't give you all the information. A lot is determined by interest and personality (e.g. 5 Factor Model). Experience (including previous education) is also an important factor. The thing is: medium to low IQ people will already have been filtered out by the time there is a chance to go to Oxford or other universities. There is no point in applying a filter that has already been applied. There's not gonna be many people bellow 110 IQ points or so, and many will be over 120. You can still be a good scientist with an average IQ, you just won't be at the forefront in your field.
@@timiddrake The "Intelligence Quotient" is invalid, I say. A two or three digit number can't possibly convey anything of importance about a person. An IQ test measures how well you do on IQ tests. It measures what the makers of the test say is important. All IQ tests are biased and arbitrary. What about someone who is illiterate? Dyslexic? Has extreme test anxiety? A person who has never had contact with western culture? Someone who had a bad experience in school with math or other area covered on the test? The sole aim of our educational system is to find the approved pigeon hole you will fit in. Culture does not care about you as a person at all. You are only useful if you go along with the agenda of the culture. Tests are more efficient ways for the unconscious overlords to check our progress. Science isn't doing us any favors, by the way. Anything new discovered is fair game to be weaponized or packaged for our consumption. I don't believe in science. That is to say that I am not a member of the congregation and I don't just take their word for it, I don't care who it is. I don't NOT believe in science; I will consider any reasonable evidence, argument, etc. But science isn't the boss of me. Somehow we have been sold the notion that everything must pass the Science Test or it's not real. This simply isn't so. I honor the scientific method and I use it on a regular basis. I enjoy shows and podcasts on physics and mathematics. I grok the concepts easily, but when it comes to the math I just have to take their word for it. My math education is lacking, for sure. I certainly understand the utility of standardized testing and even IQ testing, dumb as that is. I say the benefits of this sort of testing are one-sided. There is no pay-off for those who are subjected to bs testing. This paradigm is only useful to the testers, the establishment. I am, I admit, a radical. I thought COVID was the perfect time to reflect upon our (American) educational system. We could have closed all post-secondary schools for a year. We could have closed school for grades 5 through 12. My rationale is that the little ones are learning to read and everybody else could have taken a year off. Pay teachers during the closure. Soul search as a nation to find out where we could improve. I know- that will happen when hell freezes over. Like I said, I am a radical, but I have no political agenda. Primates will do as they please and it's not for me to tell anyone else what to do. Thanks for reading my novel. 🙃
Oxford major problem is the high number of spoiled rich kids that doesn't deserve to be there, but somehow manage to "pass" the tests. Full of people without common sense, good manners, and not wise in any way, maybe "smart" yes, but mostly youngsters full of drugs and useless thoughts like everywhere else. It's really not how imagined or depicted, let me add one thing though, I met students on exchange from Harvard, and in respect to them, everyone at Oxford looks like a genius.
Using IQ to measure the "intelligence" of individuals is extremely unreliable. However, doesn't it still have value in the sciences in statical analysis? Isn't it a good predictor of success in academia?
It definitely has it uses, but only when answering specific questions. Even then, the typical IQ battery of tests needs to be pared down to specific tests so as to get more accurate and useful data.
I really doubt any serious academic institution is using IQ tests. It would be pretty shocking if they were from what I know about the state of the humanities and social sciences. It would be about as credible as reading your star sign.
Fluid reasoning is actually a core subtest of virtually every single veritable psychometric instrument that exists. It is a vital and inseparable constituent of the IQ testing process.
Disagree, IQ scores are statistically useful for detecting intelligence. Because the skills involved in IQ are partially overlapped with the skills needed to succeed in college. They are not same, but overlapped, and that's significant. It shows that IQ is a good indicator statistically. You can argue that it's too mechanical or too general as mentioned in the video, but the approach is to come up with a better testing method judging both the talents and mindsets, not claiming IQ is morally evil or some similar excuses. As for your argument involving the racial part, I have to say that the admission decision is a trade-off between competitivity and diversity. IQ test isn't helpful for diversity doesn't mean that it is morally bad. It means that IQ test is focused on competitivity. A moral admission decision considers both competitivity and diversity and therefore may use IQ test as part of the judging process combined with other factor like cultural background.
"not claiming IQ is morally evil or some similar excuses" Its not a moral excuse. Hes literally telling us why the basic foundations of the IQ test has not rectified the issues perpetuated by its founding ideological basis, and how that leads the test into being to vague and unhelpful for people, who actually interact with establishing peoples potential in higher education on a daily/yearly basis.
I got rejected 4 weeks after my entrance exam. If they used IQ tests they would’ve rejected me after 4 days so I am grateful for Oxford’s decision.
(this was made in good humour)
My problem with IQ tests is that it’s basically the same question over and over again… it’s simply pattern recognition. It truly is too narrow.
Definitely!
Matt is just a lovely guy. I watch his uploads all the time and I just love how kind and supportive he is
Thank you! That's very kind of you
Hi Matt, I managed to secure an offer for Law! As an international applicant, I really found your videos immensely helpful and insightful. I would love to have the opportunity to meet you in person this fall to convey my gratitude :)
Congratulations!
@@CraigBukenya thank you!
Congratulations! I hope to meet you soon.
Congrats well deserved
Congratulations darling 😘. Pray for us who are still waiting
Imagine thinking patterns or a few questions could determine the intelligence of anyone, that's unreliable.
I really needed this video. I've just received an offer to study English at Oxford and was feeling some major imposter syndrome. I've never done an IQ test and likely never will, but as a black person I have been told in life that on average I can expect to have a lower IQ than the rest of the human species. Whilst I discounted these so-called 'scientific studies', I guess a part of me had internalised them, and this video has taken a weight off my chest that I didn't even realise was there!
I'm really glad the video has been of some help. It's awful that you were ever told such things. Congratulations on your offer!
Dean - IQ is not a measure of intelligence, much less a measure of your ability to succeed in writing extensive, critical essays. If you're interested to know more about IQ and the notion of generalised intelligence, feel free to check out the blog post from my comment above which goes into more detail on this topic.
Congratulations Dear 😊. I am waiting for linguistics here
Congrats (I emphasize from another minority, and female). Hopefully those foul persons will now be eating their Shoes. lol. Enjoy Oxford, where u can learn in the same halls where CS Lewis, JRR Tolkien, Oscar Wilde and Lewis Carroll once did!
This is actually one of the massive issues with IQ tests is that they are susceptible to a phenomenon known as the stereotype threat. Demographics who are stereotyped as being "less intelligent" will actually perform worse on these types of tests simply from the anxiety of the stereotype alone. It can artificially improve or impede performance on the test. Of course, there are a long list of issues that IQ tests are susceptible to.
So much quality information in a five minute walk. Excellent stuff!
Thank you!
IQ tests are similar in scope to the countless brain training games out there.
Ed Kemper had an iq of 145. And he was also a monster
At least there are still people who have honesty about this subject
Hi Matt,
This is a very encouraging video. lol.
Even for a middle aged man like me.
You are a smart and good man , and
Oxford is very lucky to have you working
with them. A man like you belongs there.
All best to you, Matt,
Jeff
Thank you Jeff!
Matt, Spot on: I couldn’t agree more with what you said (apart from disinterest is not the same as not being interested!).
Thank you! (And, fair point on dis/not interested).
I did the TSA last year and used each mock as a check to see if I was improving, and after the first 2-3 tests which did see improvement (probably as I was getting used to the format), my scores then plateaued. They did not improve over the next 10 tests or so, despite me working as hard as I could to improve. So do you think the standardised tests that Oxford use can be significantly improved upon or is it basically based on someone's genetics or upbringing past that initial point? How would you improve your TSA score beyond that initial improvement if you were sitting the test?
The tests can be improved upon when you plateau, but you may need help. Everyone needs help to excel. That's why I'm trying to publish as many videos on TSA and other such tests. I suspect your plateau was also pretty high! Bear in mind that the best scoring marks on TSA are still a way off 100%.
Why Oxford and Matthew can be so kind!
You're so kind!
Such an important video, thank you 🙏🏻
Thank you!
Thank you for putting this so eloquently. For years I've failed to explain my belief to others that 'IQ' really has no value and isn't a measure of anything in particular. I always would get a strange look from people or they'd argue. IQ is useful for detecting learning disabilities. In normal people it really isn't useful for anything.
So many people believe in this myth that others are mentally superior to others and this can be demonstrated through IQ. This is probably one of the most horrible widespread beliefs in society. IQ has been used to justify horrible atrocities. Its only value is in putting people down.
If you are born healthy and in a stable environment, for the most part you are on an even playing field with those around you.
Funny seeing you here, I used to watch you ages ago!
@@bzztbzztboy thanks man i appreciate that
Thank you for your comment. I really appreciate it!
Full agreed with you until that last part, there is a reason 40% plus of Oxbridge students are from private schools and privileged backgrounds.
@@gordonramsdale Perhaps because they have a stable background.
Hi Dr Williams! I've been watching your videos for at least 3 years now and I'm really glad to tell you I got an offer for French at Christ Church!!!!🌈🌈🌈🍾🍾🍾🎉 Thank you so much for your videos, they really helped me (I'm afraid I wouldn't have stood a chance otherwise, as I live in a small village in the Pyrenees hahaha, I'm in the newspaper and everything). I really hope I bump into you around Oxford so I can thank you in person!
Congratulations! I absolutely can't take any of the credit though! This is all on you.
Congratulations Please. Unfortunately I just got to know prof Matt when he announced the decision day this January. But all in all I did my best and hope I meet the eligibility criteria 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏I wish I got to know him earlier.
Can we meet up when I start my course this October please, you are the defenition of a legend
Of course! I'd be delighted to meet up.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 omg thank you, see you there :)
IQ scores are not related to "natural selection", because people are able to adapt to the environment. Survival is the winner. However, during this pandemic hope university not choose candidate students with a certain type of HLA genes.
In Portugal when you finish the 12th school grade you have to take 2 or more standard exams, this depends on if you choose humanities, or science for your last 3 year speciality.
The usually are Math and Portuguese. Most people fail or get a bad grade on the math one not because the math or that they don't know about it but because it has a lot of text. and they just get bored of reading.
Hi Sir! I'm an IB student and im applying to Oxford in this year for Economics and Management. I'm just a huge fan of yours and watching your videos introduced me to Oxford's TSA in the first place! Just wanted to say hi :D
Did you get an offer?
Hi. I haven’t applied as I’m going to apply this year
Hi! Thanks for your comment.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 Thank you for acknowledging! I Hope to meet you in person one day!
The world needs to see this video. I used to think I was almost alone in believing the same thing. My take on IQ is that it is a control mechanism for society, not a measure of intelligence. There is no concrete definition of intelligence, so how can we precisely measure something we can't define properly? Accuracy and precision are not the same when it comes to science. There are many different types of intelligence. I also think that people can improve their performance in anything, like how I went from doing bad in school to getting mostly A's, all because I needed to learn some life lessons, and realize my potential. As a Psychology student I want to share a very important message BECOME the best version of yourself and never settle for less. The BEST test of intelligence that we have is the game of life. The power is yours to decide your fate, and time is precious.
Well said! Thank you.
Hi matt, what if I take my gcses in one school which may be considered disadvantaged but my a levels in another school which is considered privileged and advantaged. How do oxford take that into account?
We will have contextual information on your GCSEs and your A-levels, so we have some information on both counts.
The problem is, is that when applying to Oxford, you need to have gotten A's or A* in virtually every GCSE and A-Level subject you have undertaken, I know thise grades have been replaced by 1's and 2's now but when I was at school in the early 2000s we had the old grading system. So you do need to be a generalist as well. I got A's in English Literature and English Language but an E in Maths and I used to get kicked out the lesson for messing about in my Maths class as I was in the bottom set and will disruptive pupils who also were not interested in Maths!.
Not necessarily true. One of my students had poor GCSE marks (a couple of As, some Bs, the rest Cs). She did exceptionally well in her AS-Levels (when most people still took them), was offered a place at St Hilda's College and got in. As Dr Williams has said in other videos, they will look at the whole application as well as your reference.
Nice video! Thanks.
I am curious if every applicant is interviewed regardless of their academic results? This would seem a logical deduction based on what is said in the video. Not all academic assessments are correlational to IQ but at least some of them are. It is only fair if those who do not get high public examination scores to be interviewed as well.
We don't interview every applicant, no. But, we do contextualise academic results. Meaning that someone with relatively poor academic results will be interviewed if they come from a disadvantaged background. The deselection process entails not only academic results, but also admissions tests, personal statements, teacher references, and contextual information.
IMO it's the same thing as 'lies, damn lies, and statistics'. You can 'prove' anything depending on the boundaries you set for the measurement. Ironically discovery starts with removing those artificial boundaries, but too many 'measurements' are unknowingly bounded by our existing biases, based on 'knowledge' which due it's finite nature, is by definition incomplete. TLDR; do not be overconfident in your knowledge, as history repeatedly shows that human knowledge is frangible. Personally, I find the academic method to start with a hypothesis troubling in this regard; as the tests, and our interpretations of them, that are chosen to prove or disprove the hypothesis will be colored by the same cognitive biases that are inherent in the limits of our existing knowledge, and the greater we believe that knowledge, the easier it is to make these mistakes. Better to assume that we know very little and what we do know is likely flawed in some way. As such, 'expertise' could be seen as something of a paradox.
Ok but why is the footage flipped?
I don't know! I'm really annoyed by it. We'll have to fix it for next time
People are different. Most people are not going to learn advanced mathematics if you locked them in a room and taught them all day long. I saw all the pre-med students who had their hopes dashed when they got to organic chemistry. They truly tried their best.
Agree with everything said. Quotient or quotas are never good
Me, IQ 146, I never saw or see myself as superior to anyone else. Thank God. I think ego is a big part as well; those with very high IQ might think they have founded the wheel, but its the opposite. It's about how creative someone is, in acts and/or imaginal thinking. All my friends have ''IQ'' of the average, or below average. They are very smart people, lovely, kind, caring and most of them even very creative in arts, instruments etc. :) God created all of us equally. Yes, someone might be better in calculation/math and someone else might be 1000 times better in making portraits, animals, scenery. Thanks sir, your video is very very brightful and a good lesson for all of us. I bookmarked this video ;) Btw, I only see myself as ''genius'' in the sense of making art since I have been a child, but not of the ''magical IQ test'' I took (out of fun lol)
Thanks for your comment!
Would you say that students/graduates from oxford do not have above average IQs? - As you said it is not something that is looked for.
I know all of the top colleges in the US (and many around the world) have frighteningly high average student IQs, and I was expecting a similar statistic from a world class college like Oxford.
What makes Oxford so different and hospitable for people with average IQs?
How could Oxford be ranked so highly with all of these other top colleges (with incredibly high average student IQs), without having a student body with high average IQs?
It's a good question.
I would say that Oxford students *could* do well on an IQ test, because they have exceptional thinking skills. But, we don't use IQ tests to identify or nurture those skills.
Also, English Lit students likely would not perform as well on mental arithmetic style questions, and Maths students may perform less well on verbal reasoning.
So, the IQ test is at once too broad to be of any help in identifying academic talent, but also too narrow to say much about intelligence.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 thanks for the quick reply!
The biggest problem I have with IQ tests is, if it is supposedly actually testing your Inteligence, and a person cannot become more intelligent, than you should not be able to improve on the IQ tests with studying. but you can, and people do.
I'm sorry to burst any bubbles but all relevant IQ tests are not math nor language based. They do not test skills but they test ability. These test acutely measure fluid intelligence, which presenter mistakenly calls creativity. Creativity is the skill that is not part of fluid intelligence. Example of these test are well known: Raven's Progressive Matrices, Naglieri, Cattell etc.
I love Oxford
One must be a pretty dim bulb to think that a number on a linear scale could possibly convey any meaningful information whatever about a person. Really, the whole notion is pointless. I’ve done a lot of thinking on this subject because to me it’s so obviously useless. Oh. Here’s a number. It tells me how smart I am. Maybe I can take a different test and be smarter.
One day at college I was thinking on this subject, just trying to solve the linear scale problem . The notion of a radial scale occurred to me- Imagine a center point, with rays originating from the center and going outward in all directions. Almost immediately I thought- spherical, a spherical scale. Imagine being (magically) in the earth’s core, the center of the earth. From there, imagine rays traveling out in all directions. Each one of those rays represents an individual, though, I think. One cannot measure that which cannot be measured. Intelligence cannot be quantified. Standardized testing itself is garbage, since it’s all about learning what the teachers want you to learn. Hey teacher, um, I was thinking if it wasn’t too much trouble maybe you might consider leaving those kids alone. Do universities actually use IQ test scores in the admissions process? I didn’t know that, but I’m not surprised. Hey, maybe IQ could be part of your social credit score. Now, that does sound kinda fun, maybe I’m wrong.
IQ can absolutely be measured and it is a single number, not multiple. Standardized testing is only a problem in so far as often they often do not test what they purport to test. That is not really true with IQ tests (but of course you can be more familiar with the problems, making the test less accurate.)
IQ just doesn't give you all the information. A lot is determined by interest and personality (e.g. 5 Factor Model). Experience (including previous education) is also an important factor.
The thing is: medium to low IQ people will already have been filtered out by the time there is a chance to go to Oxford or other universities. There is no point in applying a filter that has already been applied. There's not gonna be many people bellow 110 IQ points or so, and many will be over 120. You can still be a good scientist with an average IQ, you just won't be at the forefront in your field.
@@timiddrake The "Intelligence Quotient" is invalid, I say. A two or three digit number can't possibly convey anything of importance about a person. An IQ test measures how well you do on IQ tests. It measures what the makers of the test say is important. All IQ tests are biased and arbitrary. What about someone who is illiterate? Dyslexic? Has extreme test anxiety? A person who has never had contact with western culture? Someone who had a bad experience in school with math or other area covered on the test? The sole aim of our educational system is to find the approved pigeon hole you will fit in. Culture does not care about you as a person at all. You are only useful if you go along with the agenda of the culture. Tests are more efficient ways for the unconscious overlords to check our progress. Science isn't doing us any favors, by the way. Anything new discovered is fair game to be weaponized or packaged for our consumption. I don't believe in science. That is to say that I am not a member of the congregation and I don't just take their word for it, I don't care who it is. I don't NOT believe in science; I will consider any reasonable evidence, argument, etc. But science isn't the boss of me. Somehow we have been sold the notion that everything must pass the Science Test or it's not real. This simply isn't so. I honor the scientific method and I use it on a regular basis. I enjoy shows and podcasts on physics and mathematics. I grok the concepts easily, but when it comes to the math I just have to take their word for it. My math education is lacking, for sure. I certainly understand the utility of standardized testing and even IQ testing, dumb as that is. I say the benefits of this sort of testing are one-sided. There is no pay-off for those who are subjected to bs testing. This paradigm is only useful to the testers, the establishment. I am, I admit, a radical. I thought COVID was the perfect time to reflect upon our (American) educational system. We could have closed all post-secondary schools for a year. We could have closed school for grades 5 through 12. My rationale is that the little ones are learning to read and everybody else could have taken a year off. Pay teachers during the closure. Soul search as a nation to find out where we could improve. I know- that will happen when hell freezes over. Like I said, I am a radical, but I have no political agenda. Primates will do as they please and it's not for me to tell anyone else what to do. Thanks for reading my novel. 🙃
Oxford major problem is the high number of spoiled rich kids that doesn't deserve to be there, but somehow manage to "pass" the tests.
Full of people without common sense, good manners, and not wise in any way, maybe "smart" yes, but mostly youngsters full of drugs and useless thoughts like everywhere else.
It's really not how imagined or depicted, let me add one thing though, I met students on exchange from Harvard, and in respect to them, everyone at Oxford looks like a genius.
Using IQ to measure the "intelligence" of individuals is extremely unreliable. However, doesn't it still have value in the sciences in statical analysis? Isn't it a good predictor of success in academia?
It definitely has it uses, but only when answering specific questions. Even then, the typical IQ battery of tests needs to be pared down to specific tests so as to get more accurate and useful data.
They are used by better universities than Oxford like Harvard.
I really doubt any serious academic institution is using IQ tests. It would be pretty shocking if they were from what I know about the state of the humanities and social sciences. It would be about as credible as reading your star sign.
Fluid reasoning is actually a core subtest of virtually every single veritable psychometric instrument that exists. It is a vital and inseparable constituent of the IQ testing process.
Disagree, IQ scores are statistically useful for detecting intelligence. Because the skills involved in IQ are partially overlapped with the skills needed to succeed in college. They are not same, but overlapped, and that's significant. It shows that IQ is a good indicator statistically. You can argue that it's too mechanical or too general as mentioned in the video, but the approach is to come up with a better testing method judging both the talents and mindsets, not claiming IQ is morally evil or some similar excuses. As for your argument involving the racial part, I have to say that the admission decision is a trade-off between competitivity and diversity. IQ test isn't helpful for diversity doesn't mean that it is morally bad. It means that IQ test is focused on competitivity. A moral admission decision considers both competitivity and diversity and therefore may use IQ test as part of the judging process combined with other factor like cultural background.
"not claiming IQ is morally evil or some similar excuses"
Its not a moral excuse. Hes literally telling us why the basic foundations of the IQ test has not rectified the issues perpetuated by its founding ideological basis, and how that leads the test into being to vague and unhelpful for people, who actually interact with establishing peoples potential in higher education on a daily/yearly basis.
So should I not even mention my IQ in my personal statement or Mensa? It’s in the top 0.1% or something
trying to flex a score given by a shitty website as if anyone would care anyway
@@lawsong6663 Not a website. A proper, certified IQ test.
@@oliverqueen5883 no one cares? The video does not suggest in any way that you should even consider IQ scores, you’re clearly just trying to show off
Just do well on the TSA
I would actively avoid putting it in your personal statement. It shows a level of arrogance.