<p>bluebound18: “Every intellect knows ACT, SAT, GMAT, etc. are a form of IQ test.” </p>
<p><== this isn’t really an English sentence, but let me assure you that you don’t know what you are talking about: AT BEST, SAT/GMAT et.al. have something like a 48% r-measure, so the explanatory power, the square, is actually quite low…around 25%. And, by design, they are not “like” an IQ test. Finally, IQ tests are pretty well debunked as being predictive/useful in tracking life trajectory…some theories argue for 9 dimensions of intelligence which are not strictly tested by IQ tests or under tests of “g”.</p>
<p>“If this is surprising to you, it sounds like some of you supposed UMich students and graduates could use some more psych electives. Not only are standardized tests a form of IQ measurement, studies show your IQ is relatively stable over time.”</p>
<p><== Given that standardized tests are NOT a form of IQ measurement, the relation to the types of study which you mention are meaningless. Further, what does the stability of IQ have to do with anything? For one thing, IQ is NOT stable. For another thing, it is not stable between generations (c.f., Flynn (sp?) effect). For another, the stability of a quantity like IQ which is so poorly explained by standardized tests means that any putative causal link would be spurious. For another, for your comment to be useful, you’d also have to prove both that the standardized tests themselves are stable (which they are not, they are periodically re-normed) and that the relationship between the presumtively stable components of the analysis are also stable. That stability has never been demonstrated.</p>
<p>In sum, rather than insulting UM students and graduates, you should spend 5 minutes on this topic on Wikipedia in order to realize that your arguments/reasoning are junk. As I’ve stated in another comment, you don’t seem like UM material. Feel free to matriculate elsewhere…I don’t think UM needs you out in the world as a brand ambassador.</p>