1
A study of these 1000 I Q's shows the following significant facts:-
2
One case has been reported, however, in which the I Q was not far from 200.
3
The inference is that a child's I Q, as measured by this scale, remains relatively constant.
4
This time the I Q was 73.
5
The Binet tests gave an I Q of approximately 75; that is, the retardation amounted to about two years.
6
Those who tested between 96 and 105 I Q were never seriously misplaced in school.
7
Knowing a child's I Q, we can predict with a fair degree of accuracy the course of his later development.
8
What do the above I Q's imply in such terms as feeble-mindedness, border-line intelligence, dullness, normality, superior intelligence genius, etc.?
9
The facts presented above argue strongly for the validity of the I Q as an expression of a child's intelligence status.
10
Does the I Q furnish anything like a reliable index of an individual's general educational possibilities and of his social worth?
11
Are there not "feeble-minded geniuses," and are there not children of exceptionally high I Q who are nevertheless fools?
12
It is only the ratio of retardation or acceleration to chronological age (that is, the I Q) which has significance.
13
By the Pearson formula the correlation found between the I Q's and the teachers' rankings on a scale of five was .48.
14
The I Q resulting from such a test is usually between 130 and 140, occasionally a little higher.
15
Do the cases described in this chapter give a reliable picture as to what one may expect of the various I Q levels?
16
A few of this class test as low as 75 to 80 I Q, but the majority are not far from 85.