FratFiles

• Save Paper

Intelligence: A Product of Social Construction

Since the development of the intelligence quotient, schools in every part of the world have been using the IQ test to categorize millions of students into three groups. These three groups, which are the gifted, the average, and the retarded, are falsifications that perpetuate in our world culture and cause many gifted students to be deemed retarded and vice a versa. Why then is the IQ test so heavily relied on in our school systems? For schools the answer is simple, an I.Q. test is a reliable predictor of a students later performance in academics. This answer is relatively true, but where the I.Q. test falls extremely short is with testing the multiple intelligences of the human brain. The intelligence quotient test, developed by Alfred Binet, was created to evaluate ones intelligence with a test that would yield a numerical value that could be compared with a collective average to determine ones level of intelligence.......

View the rest of this paper...

Approximate Word Count: 1419
Approximate Pages: 6 (250 words per double-spaced page)

Similar Essays

1. Intelligence: A Product Of Social Construction
   

   Intelligence: A Product of Social Construction Intelligence: A Product of Social Construction Since the development of the intelligence quotient, schools in every part of the

2. Sexism In Advertising
   

   and advertisement that struck at these values. The advertisement brings up many social issues in advertising today, such as the idea of No means Yes, street harassment is

3. The Many Forms Of Art
   

   such as hoof prints, ("natural history intelligence") 2. Intentional communication ("social intelligence"); and 3. The ability to produce artefacts from mental templates, e.g. a

4. International Marketing
   

   social responsibility to the society and as this industry is closely linked to the construction industry it has greater chances of emerging into wider market. By companies

5. Ssssssssssssssssssssssss
   

   class groups were equally likely to make inferences about product owners, but lower social class individuals were more likely to attribute the purchase of status symbols to