Controversies in intelligence and standardized assessment Given the problems with tests, should we continue to use them? What guidelines would you provide if you think we should still use them? If you do not think we should use them, what would you do to give us useful information and help in decision making and serve the purpose that they did? Reference/Cite proof of your Responses.

Note: the information I have provided in parentheses corresponds to the citations I have listed at the bottom of this response.
Because standardized testing, particularly through the use of IQ assessments and the SAT, is one of the most highly reliable and trusted metrics that psychologists and other educators have to measure individual intelligence and learning, it is difficult to make a definitive answer as to whether it should be done away with entirely. However, there are obvious drawbacks to the process. Instead of abandoning the use of standardized testing altogether, especially considering that there is no suitable replacement at the moment, it might be helpful to consider what some of these drawbacks are and how future tests can be modified so as to respond to them.
One of the first issues associated with standardized testing is that it is not a very good indicator of general intelligence, which might be roughly defined as a person’s capacity for understanding complex ideas, adapting effectively to the environment, learning from experience, reasoning, and problem solving (Neisser and others, 1996; Sternberg, 1997). Instead, standardized testing almost overwhelmingly measures a person’s aptitude for academic success.
To begin, the IQ (intelligence quotient) test is designed to measure a person’s cognitive performance in relationship to other people of the same age. It is derived from the following equation:

IQ = (mental age / chronological age) * (100)

In order to determine a person’s mental age, psychologists have a number of methods, but today the most commonly used metric is the Wechsler Scale. In this test, a person is evaluated according to their completion of various verbal- and performance- based tasks. In general, verbal tasks assess knowledge of language-based associations, whereas performance tasks test spatial awareness. For example, a verbal subtest may ask a question like, “What does the word inane mean in the context of this sentence?” A performance subtest would require a person to identify a pattern in a picture and fill in the missing parts.
The problem with this kind of test, however, is that with the emergence of mass testing, IQ tests are almost exclusively administered via paper format or electronically. The format of the test, therefore, in many ways mimics the format of a classroom, and test-taking operations are limited as a result. Furthermore, IQ test questions rarely correspond to the application of practical knowledge that a person may have acquired in the real world. Vocabulary and arithmetic subtests on the Wechsler Scale overwhelmingly test abilities that would be most relevant in a classroom setting, leaving little room for the expression of alternative intelligence types.
To follow through with the aforementioned point, psychologists have long recognized the existence of different planes of intelligence. Much of what is assessed on IQ tests measures what the US psychologist Louis Thurstone in 1938 referred to as "primary mental abilities," which include things like visual and spatial abilities, numerical ability, and verbal ability. These are important areas of intelligence, no doubt, but they hardly represent the full range of cognitive ability. Over the years, various other psychologists have come up with new theories of intelligence that have augmented the primary mental abilities that are common to most people. For example, in 1983, Howard Gardner proposed his Theory of Multiple Intelligences, which, in addition to Language, Spatial-relational, and Logical-mathematical skills, also included previously ignored cognitive abilities, including Musical, Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Bodily-kinesthetic skills. Around the same time, psychologist Robert Sternberg proposed a new, Triarchic Theory of intelligence, in which the “Componental Intelligence” that forms the stuff of IQ tests was only one part (Sternberg, 1997). Sternberg argued that intelligence is also derived from experience and context, something that academic standardized tests do a poor job of measuring.
Other factors affect the validity of standardized testing as well. It is well known that in the 1920s, American universities used intelligence tests to exclude immigrants from admittance, and psychologists now recognize that these kinds of tests can not and do not accurately represent the intelligence of people who do not speak English as their first language. Still, the SAT (or the GRE, MCAT, LSAT, and other graduate-level examinations) is the only test used to assess the future academic potential of incoming applicants in most universities, a test fully administered in English. Furthermore, even within the United States among children and students who speak English, significant environmental, cultural, and ethnic factors can leave some individuals at a disadvantage in taking standardized tests, a phenomenon known as cultural bias. Overall, standardized tests seem to reflect the cognitive capacity primarily of middle-class, white culture in America (Garcia, 1981).
African Americans, for example, suffer from several kinds of cultural bias on tests. In one experiment, psychologists suggested that African Americans feel that they must perform at above-average levels on academic tests in order to do away with the cultural stigma that black students are intellectually inferior to white students. This is an example of what psychologists call stereotype vulnerability, and it significantly affects the outcome of African American standardized test scores. This perceived burden increases these students’ performance anxiety, which in turn can cause lower scores in comparison with their white classmates (Steele, 1996, 1997). There are several other instances of cultural bias that can lead to poor performance on standardized testing that does not necessarily reflect intelligence level.
In keeping all of this information in mind, we may come closer to an answer to your question. I do not think that throwing out the concept of standardized tests altogether would be an effective solution, because there is no guarantee that their replacement would resolve the issues that I have just mentioned. Therefore, a useful first step would be to take these issues, as well as other problems, into consideration when revising annual iterations of standardized tests, especially such universally determining ones like the IQ and SAT. First, it may help to design a test that does more than simply measure a student’s mathematical and verbal comprehension skills. Tests that would allow for responses that are determined more by personal experience, individual cultural characteristics, and different intelligence types would more accurately reflect the range of intelligences test-takers have and would likely be more useful in predicting what majors/career fields would be best suited to individual test-takers. This would likely require a format that moved beyond multiple-choice questions and incorporated essays, personal interviews, artistic renderings, and various other formats of inquiry. Administering tests that do not overly rely on multiple-choice analysis would be one of the best ways to measure different degrees of intelligence, but because academia in general is not funded well enough to accommodate this style, systemic political reform would also need to occur.
Citations:
Garcia, J. (1981). The logic and limits of mental aptitude testing. American Psychologist, 36, 1172-1180.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. New York: Basic Books.
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., bouchard, T. J., Jr., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., Halpern, D. F., Loehlin, J. C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R. J., and Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologists, 51, 77-101.
Steele, C. M. (1996, August). The role of stereotypes in shaping intellectual identity. Master lecture presented to the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). The concept of intelligence and its role in lifelong learning and success. American Psychologist, 52, 1030-1037.