Free-IQTest.net – Quick IQ Test
I’ve got more intelligent – my last formal test was 159!
Tags:
DPF,
IQ
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, April 14th, 2009 at 10:54 am and is filed under DPF.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
April 14th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Skite.
April 14th, 2009 at 11:12 am
It gave me an application form to join Densa — the group for those with an IQ in the lower 2% of the population.
What does that mean?
April 14th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Then, David, you are wasting your talents. An IQ of 160+ (if this brief test had any measure of accuracy), would put you in the category of a Nobel prize Winner… (well, according to this, probably just as dodgy ‘guide’)…
High IQ & Genius IQ
Genius IQ is generally considered to begin around 140 to 145, representing ~.25% of the population (1 in 400). Here’s a rough guide:
115-124 – Above average (e.g., university students)
125-134 – Gifted (e.g., post-graduate students)
135-144 – Highly gifted (e.g., intellectuals)
145-154 – Genius (e.g., professors)
155-164 – Genius (e.g., Nobel Prize winners)
165-179 – High genius
180-200 – Highest genius
>200 – “Unmeasurable genius”
I scored at 142, fwiw…
April 14th, 2009 at 11:32 am
last time i did one of these i scored 154… im happy with that. i dont wanna risk going down a notch!
ive done terrible things to my brain since then
April 14th, 2009 at 11:38 am
had a quick look.. its a dodgy IQ test!
April 14th, 2009 at 11:41 am
ewww yuk…I rank with the post grad students.
I feel like I need to wash.
April 14th, 2009 at 11:58 am
bruv – that makes you perfect for Greenpeace hahaha or amnesty international
April 14th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
mmm! It’s too easy – the score is rigged to make one feel better.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
It’s the NZ Education System’s new test – designed not to let even the dumbest of students feel as though they have failed – everyone’s a winner baby!
April 14th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
All IQ tests are rigged – they merely highlight the “skills” the designer has in spades and reflect their cultural prejudices thereby proving his/her intelligence.
I would like to see so called intellectuals take the Kalahari Bushman IQ test. You are dumped in the desert with no clothes, food or water. If you survive you pass thereby demonstrating your intelligence. The ability to rapidly solve anagrams, visualize geometric and numeric progressions and the other mainstays of standard IQ tests do not help very much with this one.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
It’s about 30 or 40 points generous, so you can stop worrying BB.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
There was a scene in an early Arthur C Clark story I recall. Alas I’ll have to paraphrase from memory rather than quote but it goes something like this.
Scientist one: “He’s an uneducated fellow I doubt he can even integrate ex”
Scientist two: “Surely nobody is that ignorant”
Scientist One: “Perhaps I exaggerate, xex then.”
April 14th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
I took an IQ test recently, a different one that scored a max of 155. My IQ test was judged to be invalid as the gap between my verbal and non-verbal IQ was more than 30%.
This is exactly the reason for taking the test, to check for visual dyslexia.
My non-verbal lagged around the 69th percential, which explains why I got through school and my first uni degree ok (thank you microsoft spell check).
Now with a few tools for my scanner and computor the thesis will get finished.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Alas no superscripts
read ex as e to the power of x
April 14th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
I seem to recall a study somewhere that showed that, beyond a certain point, increasing IQ (v’s EQ and all those other interesting measures) started to be correlated with diminishing success. Hence all the Mensa members who know they’re terribly intelligent, but don’t seem to be doing all that well in life.
If I recollect correctly, most Nobel Prize winners come from a bit further down the scale, not in the pure genius categories. You need to have an ability to work with others so as to win a Nobel Prize – most prizes are given for work that was done in a team.
April 14th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Inventory2 said: It’s the NZ Education System’s new test
Just the kind of the we expected from Tolley!
April 14th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
greenfly
I hope we get some form of national testing in schools although I do understand that if we have winners we will have loosers and administration of a school and an education system is much easier when we are all the same eh.
Oh BTW, I always get between 145-159 when I do IQ tests, how about you ?
April 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
burt – I usually find that if you are intelligent in a useful way, it will be visible in your interactions – say, your blog comments. If you have to tell people about it, it probably indicates that you’re one of the people for whom measured intelligence isn’t really reflected in the way they interact…..
April 14th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
PaulL
Of course you need to tell people about it – how else would they know? Doooh!
April 14th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
burt – the ‘winners and losers’ is of little account in the ‘national testing’ debate. It became a steaming pile of humanure in England and would become the same here, were National daft enough to do it here. Tolley has no clue, but I believe the Nat team will not go ahead – they know its shite.
As to my I.Q. – my tiny greenfly brain would barely register in such a test and it’s well known that I am a moron. (I was judged such by a 159! Must be true!)
April 14th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
btw burt – I once worked with a man whose medical notes had him recorded as a ‘bird-headed dwarf’. I swear he was brighter than some who comment here.
April 14th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
PaulL
As a testament to how useful a high IQ is in the real world….
I did an online one a few years back and got a number much in keeping with other more formal tests I have been subject to in the past. I was interested because I had heard that many online sites that try to sell you a certificate report much higher scores than what the participant would normally get. Suffice to say – who would buy a certificate that states “You are of average intelligence”.
So I consulted a bright friend of mine (who I know has been tested more formally for other reasons) and invited her to take the test. Her score was also in keeping with other scores she had previously achieved.
Hers was 155, mine was 159. When she told me my immediate response was:
Beat ya by 5!
So, yes it’s just numbers at the end of the day – my response to the difference between our scores proved I couldn’t reliably subtract 5 from 9 !
April 14th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
greenfly
Teachers spend years training to deal with the massive difference of aptitude and attitude in a single classroom – just to give them all a “Participated” grade. Yep that’s a good system isn’t it!
!
April 14th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Here is another test to see if you qualify for densa:
http://www.pressanykey.com/cgi-bin/jquiz.cgi
April 14th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
burt – and is that what the teachers say, burt, or the ideologues?
April 14th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
greenfly
The teachers that want to be in the union and all be paid the same – they have no issue with one size fits all. The ones that agree with the Dept of Ed charter that their job is to help each child reach their full potential… different story.
April 14th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
And I promise you not all professors are geniuses.
April 14th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
burt – bullshit. You are making that up. All teachers ‘agree with the Dept of Ed charter’. All know their job is to help each child reach their full potential. The argument that 7 year olds need standardised testing across the nation has nothing to do with it.
April 14th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
greenfly
Sorry, wrong. I’m married to an X-Teacher…
Why did she leave teaching? Well like many she got into it to make a difference and was completely disillusioned with being told to teach to the middle of a large class. No time to help the stragglers and no time to challenge the high achievers.
But hey if it makes you fell better to say I’m making it up – go right ahead and believe that – one size fits all and what would one teacher (x-teacher) know – and she left the job anyway so clearly she has no desire to help kids reach their full potential.
April 14th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
greenfly
You have got me curious now. To date I’ve assumed that with a name like ‘greenfly’ you are a Green Party supporter? Have I got this correct?
If so, then I’m struggling to see why you are such a watermelon? Do you actually believe that environmental policies are inseparable from left wing policies or are you just a typical NZ style environmentalist/Green party supporter which has more concern for having the Labour in govt than any single environmental issue.
greenfly
Well if that is true, and I hope it is – then lots of teachers are failing. If lots of teachers are failing then why are we paying them at all, how do we identify the ones who are useless?
Why were we (NZ) 1,000 teachers short last year? Who’s the nasty evil employer of teachers that keeps teachers wages so low that the occupation cannot attract (and retain) talented individuals?
Perhaps I’ve got it all wrong, are you going to tell me it’s not about talented individuals but about a homogenous collective that are all the same and all agree with the Dept of Ed. Charter, even if many are failing to deliver on that charter for one reason or another ?
April 14th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
The funniest thing is that everyone is smarter than Roger Nome
http://rogernome.blogspot.com/2009/04/look-how-brainy-i-am.html
Baw haw haw
April 14th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Intellect is an interesting concept.
My children both fall into the 145 – 160 band.
Their education has been a difficult affair in a country that stereotypes and discriminates against young people with a high IQ from their first day at school.
Many teachers are in complete denial about gifted children who are then forced to spend much of their school lives dumbing themselves down. (Don’t even start me on NCEA)
This was particularly apparent under the Clark government.
I think life is very much about finding out what you are passionate about and going for it.
To that aim David, I think your intellect is well employed.
Your blog is the “Thinking Person’s daily devotion”
April 14th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Meh. Not all teachers want to be in the union, not all teachers want to teach to the average (or, more likely, slightly below the average so that the maximum number can keep up).
In my experience, the less competent teachers want to be in a union, it protects them. They’re also the ones who think it is too hard to teach a classroom of mixed skill levels. Unfortunately, the union acts mostly to keep these teachers in the profession, whilst driving away those who are better. Not deliberately driving them away, but driving them away because they refuse to accept that better teachers should be better paid. So all teachers get paid at average (again, probably a little below average so that the dumb ones can keep up), and the good ones leave because the pay is poor.
A friend was recently debating the great job offer she had in a private school – paying much more money. I think she felt a bit like a class traitor (she was well indoctrinated through her years of education learning…), but the bottom line was that the private schools recognised a good teacher, and it’s hard to turn down the extra money. Result, further lowering of the average standard of teachers.
As I’ve said before, the last bastion of unions is in the sector that has a monopoly employer that refuses to pay market rate. The employer that pays less than the consumers of the service would be willing to pay if they had free say in the matter. That sector of course being the government. Surveys regularly show that parents would be prepared to pay more for education if they could, but that the structure of the sector forces you to either accept the service the govt offers, or to find enough money to pay the full cost of private. There is no option to top up the extra.
April 14th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Patrick Starr
nome must be very excited that he got into triple digits.
April 14th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
democracymum
I agree with that. The teachers simply don’t have time to extend them. The fast learners are more of a problem than the slow learners to teachers. They get bored and there is nothing the teachers can do about it. To be fair this is a more a fault of the monopoly one size fits all system rather than a failing of individual teachers. However you need to wonder about the integrity of the teachers who defend the system that has neither the resources nor the desire to help these kids reach their full potential.
PaulL
That pretty much sums up my experience as well. Good teachers get out of the state system or get promoted out of the classroom.
April 14th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
I am very disappointed in you DF. My wife, and an avid reader of your blog, a blond of 70 years of age took the test and her mark was 152. I am never going to hear the end of this!!!!!!!! Why did you encourage her!
JDA
[DPF: heh]
April 14th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
burt/democracymum
as a beneficial recipient of a streamed system where teaching approaches were sometimes varied to support the brighter I utterly detest a one size fits all system based on the fiction that it’s elitist. Is it elitist that the top rugby players get special training at school?
However, what I have seen (many years ago admittedly but I think it still exists) is that many of those of average or lesser ability, those with family/personal issues or those who are just a bit unlucky tend to end up an environment with practically no chance of success. Grew up in Liverpool where the accent alone sentences you to failure.
This has convinced me that the apparent lack of true specialism in teaching (other industries do it) is hurting kids. From my personal experience high (academic) achievers seem to require less attention than under achievers. The high achievers generally need to get taught fast enough in an environment where being bright is not seen as a mark of shame. The late developers, varied dyslexic, children in a poor environment etc. also need to have their specialised issues addressed in specific manners.
But all of this would require a teaching system that addresses the teaching issues. I know enough teachers to believe it’s more systemic than individual but that’s no excuse.
On a side note; we are already anachronisms as average substantially IQ increases every generation.
April 14th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
burt, yes, he’s not too bright but claims he can lift heavy objects
dont know if you’ve seen his latest outburst on whale – but it’s really quite sad (but funny)
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/content/no-shit-sherlocks
April 14th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
burt – apologies for not replying – (visitors x 3)
Good teachers get out of the state system or get promoted out of the classroom.
There are very good teachers in the state system (as to ‘getting promoted out’ of the classroom – it can only happen if you allow/want it to happen).
This statement of yours: you need to wonder about the integrity of the teachers who defend the system that has neither the resources nor the desire to help these kids reach their full potential
is poorly chosen. There are countless teachers with integrity in the system who are not ‘bagging’ the system (you would say, ‘defending’ the system) and who still ‘desire to help these kids reach their full potential’ – so really, your statement is not correct.
I’d like to hear from you, whether you believe Anne Tolley and her Natty Mates will improve the situation and how you believe they will do that. Big question. I believe sh is incompetent. I also believe the National Party way, when it comes to education, is very, very lacking (I’ve followed this closely and with members of the National Party who have presented the parties ideas). One aspect would be enough to explore. Another standardised national test round anyone?
I am, as I’m sure you realise, a Green Party supporter. (I have had more experience with teaching than your partner btw)
I genuinely recommend that you read or listen to Metiria Turei and her representation of the Green Education policies. She’s talented, that woman.
I don’t understand your ‘watermelon’ question at all.
April 14th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
I reckon it’s about 20 points on the generous side, as is the gay test for which I scored 15%, definately 20 points overstated!!!!
April 14th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
greenfly
Why do you say this? Unless you can demonstrate this as being true then I’ll take everything else you say as being only your opinion with no basis in fact.
I have no doubt there are good teachers (in the state system) who care about kids and don’t bag the system. But will they defend it in the face of some very appalling outcomes? If you think “defend” is the opposite of “bagging” and there is nothing in between then I’m even more worried about the fact you say you have a lot of experience teaching. Most (state school) teachers I know complain about the lack of resources and the class sizes (sure – not always openly in the context of “bagging” the system)- quite frankly I have no idea why you deny this?
The Watermelon question is simple, I don’t see a lot of comments from you about environmental policies. Lots about left wing ideology (national = bad) type BS. Do you have any interest in the environment or are you just a Labour party supporter who’s happier waving a green flag than a red one?
April 14th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
burt – can you demonstrate the veracity of the claim that your partner was a teacher?
Give me a break.
Big Bro maintains that I’m a single mum on the DPB, despite my listing my job history and present employment situations following his question, so, by all means
nevertheless, it’s true. I don’t lie (on this blog
I don’t deny that teachers ‘complain’ about this and that, but what do imply that that means? That they want to dump what they have and embrace the Tolley-way? I don’t think so.
I don’t see a lot of comments from you about environmental policies.
That’s really funny. Let’s just say that it’s not a topic that is raised very often here on Kiwiblog. Understatement of the year! Excuse me while I laugh cynically at length. The environment is MY RAISON D”ETRE!! Excuse me while I go and lie down for a bit, I’m overcome by your question.
April 14th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Shit, only 145!
The problem is those numercial sequences. The cube root one stuck out like dogs balls, but some of the others were not so obvious.
Given that numbers are infinite, there is an infinite number of numerical sequential combinations involving any or all of natural, rational, real or complex numbers that will result in a finite sequence of six numbers. On one of them, I saw three obvious options that would have resulted in the sequence, but there would have been many more, and have no idea if I picked the correct one.
I presume the aim of test with regard to numerical sequences is to pick the most obviously intuitive one, in which case I guess I failed.
April 14th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
greenfly
So here we stand, I have said my wife is an x-teacher and you have said you have more teaching experience than her. Yet you won’t even say how long you were a teacher… Oh well, it sounded good in the context you said it so I guess you were justified in trying to spin the “I know more than you” BS.
Back to you saying that I was wrong when I said:
Have you back tracked on saying I’m wrong now about that?
April 14th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
greenfly
It’s a good question, as I’ve given up (opted out) of the state system for my kids I must admit I’ve been reasonably disinterested in what they are planning. The whole idea that the assessment system needs to be changed with every change of govt is a major issue in itself. What is wrong with other proven forms of assessment? Why do we need to have a home grown assessment system that we constantly tweak and tune to try and deliver the desired social outcome de-jour?
I haven’t opted out of funding the public system, I still do that. ACT policy would give me my contribution to the state system to spend at my choice of private school – excellent idea, but I’m picking that you wouldn’t like that policy?
April 14th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
“Shit, only 145!”
imagine what it could have been without all the years of dope Toad??.
I’ll bet you got fucked up on the Bloops, Razzies and Lazzies?- you would have been wondering which got you most high
April 15th, 2009 at 3:53 am
Toad, you’re quite right about the sequences. They suck as a question. These kind of tests often put in ones where you use one rule for the odd elements and another rule for the even ones. For example I think that test had something like double the previous number, then add 3 to he previous number, then double the previous number, then …
But it’s all bullshit and there are always an infinite number of possible answers.
If it’s not multi-choice then you can always just “fit a polynomial” to the series, which you can effectively do by calculating the difference between adjacent items, then the difference between adjacent differences , etc, until you get a column of constant differences (and then later columns are all zero).
For example:
1
7
8 12
19 6
27 18
37 6
64 24
61 6
125 30
91 6
216 36
127
343
Constant differences in the 2rd column so it’s a cubic (d’oh). Write another 6 below the last one and add back in turn to the 36, 127 and 343 giving 42, 169, 512. No one can tell you that 512 is wrong.
If the thing isn’t “really” a polynomial then you’ll eventually get down to a column of differences with a single item in it, which you can then claim is a constant column, and extend it. In which case you just fitted a polymonial to the data anyway. Easy.
April 15th, 2009 at 3:54 am
gah .. so much for my formatting, and I can’t edit it to try tags or something