Why aren't IQ tests used for college admissions instead of the SAT and ACT?

Because IQ tests show how intelligent you are whereas SAT show how intelligent AND hard working you are.

Sorry you were dumb and didn't do well on your sat lazy garbage

SAT and ACT are IQ tests.

why should I be beaten by a lower IQ who worked harder? It's poor design

Wrong.

Bad ones, at the very least.

How long ago did you take the SAT. Do you mean 1220/1600 on the 2004-2016 SAT, ignoring the writing component? Or the 1220/1600 on the 2016 SAT? Or 1220/1600 on an earlier SAT. They keep making it easier, so today 1220 would not be a very good score, while on the 1994-2004 SAT it would indeed correspond to a 126 IQ.

No, it's good design. You're not going to coast through any STEM degree by being muh "smart but lazy" (you're not even smart, you're fucking sub-130).

2014, no writing.

So your IQ is higher than 128? I have to agree with you, then. IQ is all that matters, so your judgement is superior. I apologize.

/thread.

the IQ meme has flayed your mind

IQ doesn't measure knowledge, which is much more required to be admitted to college than raw intelligence.

Because the education system gives an opportunity to everyone, whereas IQ limits you to your intelligence only.
While you can study for IQ tests, the questions vary so much it doesn't matter usually if you'll study or not.

I'd be happy if it was IQ tests only but it's not the case + the amount of highly intelligent yet lazy people exist is large.

Everyone should be given a chance to exercise their will, if not from an empathetic perspective, then from a sympathetic one.

If someone of average intelligence is so determined to study STEM that he practices for the SAT every day for months, who are we to deny him? Moreover, he'd probably do quite well academically.

this, undergraduate education is at least 75% effort

1220/1600 is pretty bad for a 120+ IQ. Though that probably shows little correlation between the two tests, especially considering I got a 1470/1600 but am an IQ 90 brainlet :(

Scores?

>IQ: 134
>2160, M: 800, R: 780, W:580

I think the more recent SATs are about not making mistakes than IQ. I am 131 SD 15 and I got a 1400/1600, even though I finished in time and felt confident about all my answers. On the other hand, I got a 32/34 on my ACT and ran out of time on almost every section. I felt the questions on the SAT were very easy and your score was more determined by how prone to errors you were and whether you read the question through all the way.

32 composite 34 superscore out of 36 I mean

Because they want to know how much you've already accomplished, which is a better predictor of success than how smart you are.

SHUT UP I'M SMART BUT LAZY

Which IQ test did you take?

>tfw stupid and lazy

Because there is no degree for IQ taking at any university.

You can have a 190 and fail an english degree (I know this from first hand experience) if you cant focus or won't study or just aren't that good at writing. IQ tests are sometimes a good measure of how well you'll do at IQ tests, but not much else.

>If someone of average intelligence is so determined to study STEM that he practices for the SAT every day for months

That's not a good thing though.

Because then only STEM majors would be a thing. They need brainlets to pay for the humanities and liberal arts user.

>mfw when 138 IQ but 1500/2400 SAT

>You can have a 190 and fail an english degree (I know this from first hand experience)
lol

>no comma after "arts"

Really? How?

Didn't study and didn't take the actual test seriously because I was a moron/I wanted to rebel against standardized testing.

sat/act is a proxy iq test.

t. 2400

>why should I be beaten by a lower IQ who worked harder?

because a low iq retard that works hard is better than a high iq twat who skips all lectures and doesnt do any work because theyre too busy playing dota

>You can have a 190 and fail an english degree (I know this from first hand experience)

dont fool yourself m8.

You could have said 130. 1 fucking 90?

> go to shit hs and get shit marks
> everyone thinks i am a dummy
> come to college and discover pure math
> excel
> people think i am the next Newton

But IQ predicts university performance better than the SAT, anons...
I'll answer OPs question. There was a time when the race and IQ stuff caused a great deal of controversy in the USA. This and other factors contributed to IQ being viewed negatively, years later we now know that all these statistics are actually pretty solid (read The Bell)

So the people who score the highest are actually the least intelligent.

Judging from the people in Veeky Forums that seems to be accurate.

Then how come like no country uses an IQ test for admissions?

I don't know, but if I had to speculate I'd say the ethical issues related to IQ are probably to blame. IQ is essentially immutable and isn't a direct demonstration of your knowledge of some academic field.

Because they're based on a French elementary school placement test

You really take IQ too far. Stay off sci for a bit and try to study.

>citing a meme
>t. brainlet

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>IQ is essentially immutable
Pretty sure you can study for IQ tests to improve your score, plus IQ can change with age.

The fact that you studied to try to cheat the test into getting a higher measured score is immaterial to the fact that IQ is almost completely immutable. It's like putting on high heels and having your height measured.

I'm okay with it. IQ is all that matters.

Daily reminder Feynmann's IQ was 105 and Grothendieck's was 112

Even your faulty data isn't accurate. Feynman's IQ was reportedly 125, which it obviously wasn't.

There would be too many asians and not enough blacks to meet the quota

Because then there would only be Jews and Asians there.

>128 on WAIS-IV, 1220 on SAT
Right on target
iqcomparisonsite.com/SATIQ.aspx

Worked for me too. 141, and 1440 on SAT.

>The fact that you studied to try to cheat the test into getting a higher measured
What if you are exposed to things that help you train for it without explicitly training for it? It's a measure of how well you can do the test...not objective intelligence.

Do you believe in evolution? How about climate change? Contour believe vaccines cause autism? Then why do you presume to judge the veracity of the scientific veracity of psychometry without a shrewd of your own expert credibility? Do you think the tests are just arbitrary questionnaires thrown together like a horoscope? Get fucking real.

>psychology
>scientific
Don't ever again compare psychology to actual sciences.
Kys.
Also being paid to take an IQ tests can increase scores by up to 1 SD. IQ is a meme.

I'm actually baffled how people could fail English

I have to study hard for math so obviously I'm not a 300IQ genius or anything, but I always wrote my essays for GE classes either the night before or the day of and always got straight As

Because illustrating that you can grasp/apply material is the only objective measure of intelligence and competency that we know works

no, it means that it's not a accurate measurement of intelligence

I don't understand it either. IQ is the only measure in life that shows if you can be successful or not, everybody below at least 120 will be a loser/simple slave.
I am the proof of this. When I was younger I thought "Everything is possible if you just work for it!". I studied CS, learned 4 hours a day every day from start of uni until the end of the exams and failed almost everything, after my third failed exam I was forced to drop out, I tried EVERYTHING and learned my ass off, still failed while everyone around me learned just 3 weeks before exams and passed or got good grades.

Life is determined by genetic coincidence, if you don't have an above average IQ, just give up and apply to a dead end job which pays like shit.

What would be the point? Most people who apply are going to have around the same average IQ.

This, but instead of working a dead end job you should just kill yourself. It's what evolution explicitly and society implicitly expects of you. I'm not saying this to hurt anyone, especially since I will be applying it to myself.

Soon enough brainlets like us are gonna be phased out through genetic engineering, which speaks volumes to our worth. We're just the last miss of the blind rock-throwing giant called evolution before the great tide of technology drowns it off.

It would hurt ETS' monopoly on standardized tests if we stopped issuing the SAT, then they'd only be able to get $500 from every grad school applicant :(

Because blacks and spics would never get in.

I got a 1240 on the 2001 SAT, does this mean me have big brain?

There are Nobel prize winners in the sciences (including physics) with IQ's in the 125 - 135 range. Two of the Nobel prize winners physics were not allowed to enter a prestigious genius school, because their IQ's were below the 135 range by like 3 points. Guess what, none of the kids from that school won a Nobel prize or did anything special. One of the kids that got rejected and eventually won a Nobel prize in physics was Louis Alvarez.

Since when did "success" become an objective thing? And when did "intelligence" become a quantifiable thing?

IQ is a scam. An intelligence test is impossible. Think about it like this, an intelligence test needs to be created by someone with maximum intelligence, and minimum intelligence, for it to be valid. It's utter bullshit.

>. I studied CS, learned 4 hours a day every day from start of uni until the end of the exams and failed almost everything, after my third failed exam I was forced to drop out, I tried EVERYTHING and learned my ass off
I have good news for you user.
If you're smart enough to get on a computer and shitpost on Veeky Forums, you're smart enough to get a CS or EE degree because it is that fucking easy.
The problem is people study stupid shit in stupid ways. You can say it's a sign of low IQ but I think it's more a sign of not being willing to fucking listen because "muh methods" that got them A's and B's in high school.

t. ECE TA

>Test tomorrow! Time to get the key to last year's test and spend hours memorizing whole assembly code snippets verbatim! Actually learn the concepts so I can write my own code? Who has time for that?! OK, test time! Oh no!! He changed all the questions! I got a 19/100 after studying so hard!
>OK, lab time! Time to google search and find code I can cobble together. Hmm, this doesn't work. Let me spend the next 8 hours trying every possible line combination until one works. What? Read the textbook chapter, which describes the algorithm in full detail, complete with code snippets? I glanced at it but I didn't instantly understand it so really who has time for that?! Ahh, finally done -- that was a tough 8 hours! It's kind of working now... time to take it to that asshole TA and hope he doesn't test it on anything other than the example case in the lab writeup because boy I worked long on this one!

Yep, majority of "education" is more akin to indoctrination. Think like this or you will fail.

Code is a good example of this. At the binary level, it's about as objective as you can get, but the further away you get from it, the more you will have to do things the way other people have subjectively designed it.

People will be better than others using a coding language created by another person(s), but that doesn't necessarily mean they are "smarter", just they gel with it more.

2/10 for making me reply.

I don't shitpost, I wanted to study CS, I tried my best, the best possible, 4 hours everyday, at least 2 months before exams, still failed or got very bad grades.
There are people who will never deadlift 300 kg regardless how hard and long they train and there are people who will never get a university degree regardless how hard they learn.

While others got drunk and made party, I studied
While others tried to fuck everything that moves, I studied
While others never were once at a lecture, I visit all of them and studied 4 hours after that

And guess who is a CS major now and who is 24 and posts on fucking Veeky Forums?

You failed a CS degree even after doing all that? Fucking CS? Wow. Just work construction or something.

That's exactly what I trying to say, there are differences in the intelligence spectrum, not everybody is able to do everything, some people, just like me, are straight up retards that will never achieve anything in life regardless how hard they try.
I would unironically consider suicide because I don't want to be an expendable slave, but I'm too much of a coward so I will just live as a Neet, because fuck society, I believed the bullshit they told me as a kid and ended up as a failure and it's not even my fault because I was lazy or anything.

Not everyone can achieve anything, I could learn 10 hours a day concentrated with the best learning method that exists and would still fail.