Should IQ be a requirement?
Depends on the job - some things are "no" brainers.
I thought IQ exists regardless of requirements?
oooh sorry. The question and poll didn't pop up the first time. Weird.
No. IQ doesn't determine success. Sure, there is a point where a person's IQ is so low that they can't possibly handle a job well. As long as you're at least average, I think you should be allowed to achieve whatever you can. (So says the man with a significantly above average IQ.)
Although intelligence is needed for many jobs, I don't think an IQ score should be a component of any hiring decision. So, no.
Absolutely. I don't want a dumb doctor.
And it should be a requirement for, say, President or something.:rolleyes:
i personally think it should be a requirment for some jobs. i think perry winkle's heart is in the right place when he said if you're at least born average you should be able to do whatever you want, however there are TONS of jobs that mandate certain physical requirments, such as professional athletes, fire fighters, ninjas...
Specific jobs need people with specific skill sets and the IQ to fulfill what the job demands. If it is your job to be brilliant- then yea.
It doesn't even take an IQ test to determine that either.
shawnee thats actually what i had in mind when i thought this question up. :p
I don't want a dumb doctor.
Well, yeah. But if you have a dumb doctor, that means a dumb person was able to get through medical school and get a medical license. Throwing in an IQ test won't keep that from happening.
'High IQ" does not equal wisdom. Just means you are good at taking IQ tests.
I have worked with many people who probably score higher than me on a typical IQ test, but are dumb as posts about more things than not.
I got a 31 (perfect in the science reasoning section) on the ACT (eons ago) but have a hell of a time spelling. Chemistry kicks my ass. English? Dumb as a box of rocks. *shrug*
We all are experts at something, some of us more somethings than others. Some of us, at things that can't be 'measured' on a currently available scale.
That's what's cool about the cellar. A whole bunch of intellegent people who are experts in a whole lotta different areas.
It's already been said but I mean c'mon, a designated IQ test for a job? Getting the job is already an indirect way of expressing your intellectual quotient, why discriminate so openly.
why does the NFL discriminate so openly against out of shape people?
Because they can't keep up with the competition of professional football players.
"intelligence" is different than an intelligence quotient score. People are more than a number.
IQ measures the ability to learn, not what you've learned. You can have a high IQ and know jack shit.
Yeah, numbers are toopid.
The way things work is that if you have a high IQ (and high motivation too), you receive high scores (SAT, ACT, grades), thus getting into the better universities and receiving better a education, which leads to fields of study and employ that generally require above-average intelligence people.
That being said, I don't really believe there is a truly accurate measure of intelligence.
I think it's easier to measure stupidity.
if IQ tests were accurate all the time, then maybe.
How about personality tests?
Your IQ score accurately measures how well you have done on an IQ test.
EQ > IQ I always say.
A sky breaching IQ with no EQ (emotional quotient [people skills and the like]) is useless. But even someone with low IQ but high EQ can go far. Very far.
Human beings cannot be quantified (by currently available methods); we aren't like computers with "specs" you can measure. For example, one "leap" of associative thinking can out-perform a thousand linear calculations. Which kind of thinker is better? Neither. If you can get the job done, you can get the job done.
Many famous people, in their respective fields, weren't the "right type" of person to do that job (as was traditionally understood); but they excelled in that field by breaking down the barriers that others were not equipped to understand. [COLOR="White"]. . .[/COLOR] And I'm citing that right out of my ass.
People who are really smart, but are not sensitive to others, rise to the top and dont care who gets hurt on the way.
People who are really dumb, but have great sensitivity don't rise to the top, but they don't care about that because they're too dumb to know the difference, and people like them because they're so nice.
People who are really smart and really sensitive are fucked.
Many famous people, in their respective fields, weren't the "right type" of person to do that job (as was traditionally understood); but they excelled in that field by breaking down the barriers that others were not equipped to understand. [COLOR="White"]. . .[/COLOR] And I'm citing that right out of my ass.
Maybe you are but I think you're right. The "right type" of people for the job, often become the "right type", by following the traditional path to the job. That means they don't bring much new to the job in the way of experience and education.
Absolutely. I don't want a dumb doctor.
You go to medical school to become a doctor. The course of study should be (more than) difficult enough to weed out anyone who's not bright enough.
The problem is there are people who lie, cheat, steal, or coast through to becoming a doctor. Regardless of IQ, you don't want this person to be your doctor.
Nope just skill and aptitude. IQ tests are just tricks and tell you nothing.
Someone raised on a farm will test very low on IQ tests yet may be a genius, the questions are based on "common" knowledge.
Shows those who came up with them must have had low "IQ"s.
If I am honest on an IQ test I do pretty well, around 170-175, but if I decide to give answers that I know the test "wants" I get insanely high scores.
Both tests are the same in this respect.
Someone may have an aptitude that has nothing to do with their general knowlege... it is a ridiculous idea.
i personally think it should be a requirment for some jobs. i think perry winkle's heart is in the right place when he said if you're at least born average you should be able to do whatever you want, however there are TONS of jobs that mandate certain physical requirments, such as professional athletes, fire fighters, ninjas...
My heart doesn't enter into it. Physical requirements are easy to measure: speed, strength, whatever. However, IQ is a good
indicator of potential, but it is
not a hard and fast measure of intelligence or aptitude for a specific task.
Discriminating based on a task's physical requirements makes sense (if you also take into account other qualifications also). Using IQ to determine whether someone can complete a task is nonsense.
Ideally, you discriminate based on past accomplishments (education, work experience, references, whatever) and physical ability to do the work. You can't use one in exclusion of the other and make a good decision.
If someone with average IQ has shown they can do the job as well as I can, let them do it.
(I hope that made sense. I usually don't make serious posts...)
If I am honest on an IQ test I do pretty well, around 170-175, but if I decide to give answers that I know the test "wants" I get insanely high scores.
I guess that explains how you've mastered (what seems like) practically every profession known to man. At the low end you claim to be a genius, at the top end you claim to be a "profound genius" or a savant.
Saw this article...breakdown that states IQ gives a good indication of the occupational group that a person will end up in, with a list of general categories for a certain IQ level.
I guess that explains how you've mastered (what seems like) practically every profession known to man. At the low end you claim to be a genius, at the top end you claim to be a "profound genius" or a savant.
Did you read what I wrote at all? Seems to be an issue lately, the test is just a game. I claim nothing more than what I have stated before.
I think I am slightly above average in intelligence, with some problems with dyslexia that is overcome with a very strong memory.
I have stated this before.
Did you read what I wrote at all? Seems to be an issue lately, the test is just a game. I claim nothing more than what I have stated before.
I think I am slightly above average in intelligence, with some problems with dyslexia that is overcome with a very strong memory.
I have stated this before.
It was a joke, man.
You made a claim about your IQ, in terms of that test your IQ makes claims about you. That's all I was saying.
Sorry, did not detect the sarcasm.
Nah, I think he's full of shit too.
170 is like super genius range, right?
I think it's "Evil Genius" but not quite "Mad Scientist" ...
Nah, I think he's full of shit too.
Does that mean we're related?
Sorry, did not detect the sarcasm.
The basis of my fun poking was that you have a couple of distinct characteristics to what you post: one is that you always seem to have done any profession anyone brings up (I said seems, i.e., a perception not necessarily a fact); another is your persistent statement that someone has not read what you said or that someone is putting words in your mouth, regardless of how apparent it is that this has, in fact, not happened. (It's weird, you often do this whether they are mostly agreeing with you or not. I think it's a perception of being misunderstood.)
Does that mean we're related?
you should be smart enough to figure that out, einstien
The basis of my fun poking was that you have a couple of distinct characteristics to what you post: one is that you always seem to have done any profession anyone brings up (I said seems, i.e., a perception not necessarily a fact); another is your persistent statement that someone has not read what you said or that someone is putting words in your mouth, regardless of how apparent it is that this has, in fact, not happened. (It's weird, you often do this whether they are mostly agreeing with you or not. I think it's a perception of being misunderstood.)
I have never stated that I have done a job I have not done.
Name one that you question and I will do my best to scan documentation or a photo.
I resent the implication, it is sad of you... I am not surprised however.
Lending my perception to a conversation based on something I experienced being viewed by you as making a statement beyond exactly what I am writing is on you and your issue alone.
As stated above, if someone states that my post carries meaning not stated in the post, that it is only their personal assumption is a fact, nothing more.
It is not about being misunderstood, it is about people who
choose not to separate their ego from other's statements.
you should be smart enough to figure that out, einstien
LOL... so sad.
I have never stated that I have done a job I have not done.
I never said nor had such a thought.
I resent the implication, it is sad of you... I am not surprised however.
I didn't make any implications. I was explaining my humor as a reflection of my own perceptions and as a verifiable fact (a fact founded on the set of your posts that I have read, which is far from all of them).
Lending my perception to a conversation based on something I experienced being viewed by you as making a statement beyond exactly what I am writing is on you and your issue alone.
It took me a couple minutes to parse that sentence. But I have to agree. If I see a message to what you say that isn't explicitly stated, you didn't say it.
Gotcha... pot. kettle. black. At least I don't get all reactionary about it when it someone does it to me, or when I perceive that they've done it to me.
It is not about being misunderstood, it is about people who choose not to separate their ego from other's statements.
Which causes misunderstanding.
I think it's easier to measure stupidity.
LOL Shawnee!:D
Is there a comedic intelligence quotient test (c.i.q.t.)posted anywhere? I would say cellarites excel in that. Oh and pissing contests.
Even if they do lie about their IQ score at least they're funny. (sometimes)
Oh and that career guide to IQ comparable was suprisingly dead-on in my case. (that was most unexpected)
LOL... so sad.
How exactly is it sad? did I hurt your feelings? do you pity me for my lowly 130's IQ? Are you just feeling blue because it seems like everyone is breaking your balls lately?
Or is it something else?
The trouble with IQ tests is that they're very crude measures of intelligence. The more we learn about the human brain and the different kinds of intelligence, the less relevant those tests become.
I guess that explains how you've mastered (what seems like) practically every profession known to man. At the low end you claim to be a genius, at the top end you claim to be a "profound genius" or a savant.
No. Thats called nepotism.
How about the job of President of the United States? Should a person with an IQ that's below average be allowed to run one of the most powerful countries in the world? Could you imagine what kind of horrific decisions a person like that might make?
I think everyone except the person who posted 50th on this thread is stupid.
It depends on what you're trying to measure. IQ doesn't say much, and IQ test results can vary depending on alertness level, physical condition (if you've spent the previous night spewing your guts out with a stomach flu you won't do yourself any justice) etc. A general IQ test isn't the best, but some sort of aptitude tests, of which the IQ test may be a small part, are common these days.
I would only use IQ tests to weed out the below average intelligence people in non-manual tasks, but I wouldn't require a manager to have a membership in Mensa, say. Many people with extremely high IQs have a very low EQ. I know I'd far rather work with a people person who isn't afraid to ask his or her co-workers when they're unsure about something than a hyper-smart know-it-all who thinks the sun shines out of his orifices.
Maybe the real question is, "Should there be aptitude and knowledge testing requirements for politicians?"
An IQ test would do well to indicate a person's ability to do a job...as a developer of IQ tests. That's probably all, though.
I think everyone except the person who posted 50th on this thread is stupid.
Counting to 50 again? I bet momma's proud.
:D
j/k
Given the content of the written answers, the poll votes surprise me.
...I got a 31 (perfect in the science reasoning section) on the ACT (eons ago) but have a hell of a time spelling. Chemistry kicks my ass. English? Dumb as a box of rocks. *shrug*
...
I think one of your ass-ets is that you are ass-tute. It must be the way you were reared.
...
How about personality tests?
To check one's asshole quotient?
How exactly is it sad? did I hurt your feelings? do you pity me for my lowly 130's IQ? Are you just feeling blue because it seems like everyone is breaking your balls lately?
Or is it something else?
No, that I stated that my numbers are incorrect due to the nature of the tests, but you don't see that... you take them personally because you buy into the game.
Maybe the real question is, "Should there be aptitude and knowledge testing requirements for politicians?"
No, an empathy test.
Nope just skill and aptitude. IQ tests are just tricks and tell you nothing.
Someone raised on a farm will test very low on IQ tests yet may be a genius, the questions are based on "common" knowledge.
Shows those who came up with them must have had low "IQ"s.
[COLOR=red]If I am honest on an IQ test I do pretty well, around 170-175[/COLOR], but if I decide to give answers that I know the test "wants" I get insanely high scores.
Both tests are the same in this respect.
Someone may have an aptitude that has nothing to do with their general knowlege... it is a ridiculous idea.
maybe i didnt understand what you meant by honest.
Given the content of the written answers, the poll votes surprise me.
I personally haven't voted because none of the answers exactly matches my opinion.
maybe i didnt understand what you meant by honest.
If I answer the questions with what I
really think and feel (remember I have unusual ideas about eating and other things based on being raised on a farm and intimate knowledge about how humans think having studied human thought processes though an advanced degree in acting... I don't go through the same steps as most to reach an end as many) insead of what I know the tests are geared to see as "intelligent".
Some of the simpler questions like "how does one get eggs" for me can be "go into the back yard", I know that will skew the score low, so I change the answer.
I also answer questions very intellectually because I take certain steps logically that most take emotion into account... that is not a sign of intelligence. It has to do with abuse, rape and other things that have happened to me. The test "sees" this as intelligence, it is not, not by a long shot.
I have learned tricks to overcome my dyslexia, I am still just as dyslexic and have just as many problems with numbers and spelling as others and with practical application have a hard time and have to study much more than most, but can test my ass off. Again, not intelligence, I just know how to play the game.
This is why the Mensa meetings disgusted me so much, people who think a skill-set made them something/someone special are pathetic little animals.
I have known people with almost no education, who had very few social skills, some who were mentally disabled in some areas... but had TRUE wisdom that I, to this day, work toward and try to emulate... that I envy.
Again, those tests are a game, set up by people with little egos who want to separate people who are like them so they can say "see, I am better than others" and they are for NOTHING else and serve NO OTHER purpose.
and intimate knowledge about how humans think having studied human thought processes though an advanced degree in acting...
so....you're like Ginger on Gilligan's Island? Having acted the role of genius, you are now a genius too? or did you stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
nigga please
I realize I am going to walk right into the fire here, but my stomach hurts from laughing so hard, and I can't resist any longer...
I never... bragged about how educated I am once.
just for perspective's sake, of course.
link to more info
There is no IQ test that asks a question like "how does one get eggs"
There is no IQ test that you can "game" by figuring out what the test is looking for other than correct answers.
Here are some sample IQ test questions that are pretty representative of the several actual psychologist-proctored tests I've taken.
http://www.mensa.org/workout2.php
http://www.iqtestforfree.com/
A sample question would be
The same three-letter word can be placed in front of the following words to make a new word:
LIGHT BREAK TIME
You can't game a question like that. You can only be right or wrong.
Inaccurately describing a gamey sort of test as an "IQ test" is a particularly
ironic form of failure, and we all hope you take it in good humor. That's why I can't help but post the fail kitty.
Cite.
The egg example was and example of a situational question.
Shame someone could not figure that out, and the IQ tests for younger people do use practical situations to test responses.
I really could care less if you believe what my test scores have been... as I have stated numerous times they are fake to begin with, so I do not feel they are an accurate representation of my intelligence.
It is very telling how much so many of you are focusing on that one thing.
Cite.
What in the world are you asking him to cite? He did cite evidence of typical IQ test questions.
Incidentally, I had an IQ test administered to me around the age of 6, because my neighbor was a child psych major and needed someone to practice on for a class assignment. There were no situational questions. There were "make this shape" tangrams, and "define this made up word" to see if you understood the suffixes of parts of speech yet...
On the other hand, I also took a test to see if I would be allowed into school early, and it did have situational questions. One was, "What do you need to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich?", and my mother was pissed because they said my answer of "a plate and two knives" was wrong ("bread, peanut butter, and jelly" was correct.) But that was't an IQ test. It was just a test made by the school to determine if I was ready for kindergarten. That test also required me to try to catch a ball that was thrown towards me (which, incidentally, I failed to do.)
That he states that I brag about my education.
I quoted it but the internal quote did not show-up.
I have stated my education, never as a brag. If someone chose to take a statement a certain way, that is on them.
Originally Posted by rkzenrage
I never... bragged about how educated I am once.
Cite.
Wikipedia on IQ
A typical IQ test requires the test subject to solve a fair number of problems in a set time under supervision. Most IQ tests include items from various domains, such as short-term memory, verbal knowledge, spatial visualization, and perceptual speed. Some tests have a total time limit, others have a time limit for each group of problems, and there are a few untimed, unsupervised tests, typically geared to measuring high intelligence. The most widely used standardized test for determining IQ is the WAIS (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale).
Wikipedia lists the WAIS subtests:
Verbal Subtests
Information Degree of general information acquired from culture (e.g. Who is the president of Russia?)
Comprehension Ability to deal with abstract social conventions, rules and expressions (e.g. What does "Kill 2 birds with 1 stone" metaphorically mean?)
Arithmetic Concentration while manipulating mental mathematical problems (e.g. How many 45c. stamps can you buy for a dollar?)
Similarities Abstract verbal reasoning (e.g. In what way are an apple and a pear alike?)
Vocabulary The degree to which one has learned, been able to comprehend and verbally express vocabulary (e.g. What is a guitar?)
Digit span attention/concentration (e.g. Digits forward: 123, Digits backward 321.)
Letter-Number Sequencing attention and working memory (e.g. Given Q1B3J2, place the numbers in numerical order and then the letters in alphabetical order)
Performance Subtests
Picture Completion Ability to quickly perceive visual details
Digit Symbol - Coding Visual-motor coordination, motor and mental speed
Block Design Spatial perception, visual abstract processing & problem solving
Matrix Reasoning Nonverbal abstract problem solving, inductive reasoning, spatial reasoning
Picture Arrangement Logical/sequential reasoning, social insight
Symbol Search Visual perception, speed
Object Assembly Visual analysis, synthesis, and construction
Optional post-tests include Digit Symbol - Incidental Learning and Digit Symbol - Free Recall.
The egg example was and example of a situational question.
Real IQ tests are not situational or subjective.
...and the IQ tests for younger people do use practical situations to test responses.
Did you... did you game a
child's test, Rob?
It certainly wasn't the
Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence
I really could care less if you believe what my test scores have been... as I have stated numerous times they are fake to begin with, so I do not feel they are an accurate representation of my intelligence.
It is very telling how much so many of you are focusing on that one thing.
Hey I could give a shit about your actual score. You'll notice I haven't posted any of mine.
I haven't voted, or posted, except, I'm posting now. Fortunately there are no IQ tests for installing carpet, Surprise!! Any way I just wanted to ask what the answer is, to the three letters that change the word.
tea
But that only works if you're a Brit :)
Hey I could give a shit about your actual score. You'll notice I haven't posted any of mine.
Nor do I, the tests I have been given from MENSA, at schools and college, form psychiatrists and psychologists all seemed different... of course they all happened pretty far apart.
The reason I gave a score, was to illustrate how ridiculous the tests are in my opinion.
What I find to be very funny is that people focused on the number, even though I was saying that I feel it is wrong.
Again, people should not compare themselves to others, especially when it comes to something as fake as an IQ test.
What is really telling is that the scoring systems were different for every test, so the number may not mean what some think it does.
Though I have been tested at, or above, genius, consistantly... and AGAIN state that I am NOT a genius, I just test that way. The tests are a joke.
Yes, I gamed a child's test, kids are not stupid they know what people want to hear and tell it to them consistently. I was called out for it more than once.
tea
But that only works if you're a Brit :)
Tealight?
Tealight?
It's a kind of small candle.
But I think tea time and tea break are redundant.
I thought the word was "sex."
I find it interesting that so many people here claim to have had their IQ tested.
What I think would be more interesting is to know if those tests were formal IQ tests or not.
In Australia, it's very rare for someone to be formally tested because IQ testing is considered to be generally unrepresentative of a persons actual intelligence. That is to say, you might score well, but be totally useless in other situations. Education and vocational training is tending to follow gardiner's theory of multiple intelligences which is probably a lot more realistic in every day situations.
Most kids that are formally IQ tested tend to be tested because they have learning issues. IQ tests are also used to determine disorders such as aspergers and autism. They're not used to predict how many A's a kid is going to get on their next test.
Tea lights are those little candles in a metal cup.
But I think tea time and tea break are redundant.
Exsqueeze me? Nothing redundant about a tea break. Certainly nothing redundant about tea time. Case in point, a text conversation this very afternoon:
me: you wanna do friday drinks? tea time at the Hairy Lemon. I'll scurry up the puzzlers
friend: ok but J not there til later. 5.30 at the lemon.
See? tea time on this occasion was half five.
Any time is tea time!
Speaking of tea, I hosted a high tea at my place last Saturday complete with cucumber sandwiches.
It went over very well with the girls.
Did you cut the crusts off?
Of course! I also had little asparagus roll ups with snow pea sprouts and hollandaise sauce. I had little cakes and chocolates and about 6 different types of tea to choose from. I even had cake stands!
Yeah me too. I just put some left over lasagne in the microwave. :)
Did you cut the crusts off?
Cucumbers have crusts?
Long Island Ice Tea is about the closest I get to a tea party in Texas, girls. Well, there's Sweet Tea, too . . .
And, BTW Aliantha: I :heartpump lerts!
GABBLY IS DOWN THERE (points down there )
Cucumbers have crusts?
What, yours don't?
Do you want a chat Jimbo?
What, yours don't?
I might be wrong. Cucumber's a vegetable, and I don't fraternize with vegetables.
Thank you for the answers. I got hung up trying different prefixes, a 3 letter word didn't even occur to me. I usually do good playing Jeopardy. I like to shout out the answers, if it's on, in the house I'm working in. We could have some sort of Jeopardy tournament here to see who is the top dog.
But "three-letter word" was in the instructions. You score zero for reading comprehension!! :)
I find it interesting that so many people here claim to have had their IQ tested.
I was tested twice. The first time for admittance into a gifted school/program in 3rd grade. I was accepted but didn't attend. The second time I was tested because I had filed for disability when I was REALLY, really sick, and when I got better the govt. provided career counseling and a formal IQ test was part of the evaluation.
But "three-letter word" was in the instructions. You score zero for reading comprehension!! :)
I must be a genius then, Einstein, or some other famous, really smart guy was like that.
why does the NFL discriminate so openly against out of shape people?
Do they?? Some of those guys have impressive spare tires on them.
hey
look what Neatorama recently posted.
That's a very interesting graph Rex.
Interesting. It's a little hard to tell, but it looks like salesmen and security guards (i.e. "protection services excluding policemen") have the biggest range, while clerical workers and doctors have the smallest range. So feel free to stereotype your secretary, but maybe drop some literary references around your building's security guard to find out if he's one of the smart ones.
If you're really interested in that graph Rex posted,
here's a 92 page pdf that explains it.
where are all the 170's people working?
where are all the 170's people working?
They're "too smart" to actually
work.
see....i should have known that. :smack:
They're too busy hating everyone else.
I'm too smart to work.....
There are a ton of factors that make an IQ test unfair and inconsistent. There's no way to judge a person's complete intelligence.
You could hang out with them on a message board for a few weeks. It's not very efficient, I know. I'm pretty sure I could put the more active users in order from smartest down and be fairly accurate, though.
You could hang out with them on a message board for a few weeks. It's not very efficient, I know. I'm pretty sure I could put the more active users in order from smartest down and be fairly accurate, though.
I'll agree with you there; talking to someone can give you a much better understanding of someone's brain than just a test. But you'll still never know how smart someone really is. I've been going to school with this kid for four years, and thought he was an alright person, but a little dim. Suddenly he's doing well enough to skip a grade; he'll be graduating high school this year as a junior.
overacheiving does not equate to intelligence. has he gotten smart all of the sudden, or just working really hard?
overacheiving does not equate to intelligence. has he gotten smart all of the sudden, or just working really hard?
I think he was quietly working hard for a long time. I talked to him almost everyday for four years and thought he was gonna have a tough time with school. And he even dropped out of the IB (
International Baccalaureate) program last year to regular school. And all the sudden he beats all of us IB kids by a year.
Personally, I think the IQ or any personality test shouldn't be a be a main determinant for any job since someone with a lower IQ can easily outperform someone with a higher IQ if they know what they are doing and have common sense.
In football for example, they don't determine who is going to be on the team just from forty times or how much someone can bench, they determine that from who performs best on the field and it should be the same way for any job. Being extremely fast helps a receiver a lot but I guarantee that 7 out of 10 times, the fastest guy will not be the best just like I bet the person with the highest IQ will rarely be the best person for a job. If they are not smart enough to make the cut they will naturally be left behind just like an unathletic person will be left behind at football.
The IQ or whatever tests can be good to weed out some people but it should never have the final say.
And he even dropped out of the IB (International Baccalaureate) program last year to regular school. And all the sudden he beats all of us IB kids by a year.
Any monkey can graduate early from high school if they want to. The requirements are actually surprisingly low. IB is for kids who actually want to learn something above and beyond the curriculum. More likely your friend just has overpowering social issues that make him want to get out as soon as possible.
One of the classes I used to help out in for Community College was an entry class, humanities.
Occasionally I would get kids who could not read... that was one thing, but every now and again I would get those who could not communicate at all.
How those in their previous schools passed them from class to class, year to year is unconscionable.
I don't think so -- IQ isn't a really reliable predictor of success. I have a high IQ, for instance, but I suck at office work and a lot of other practical things because I don't have a lot of mental discipline, and my mind wanders.