Skip Navigation

Applied Linguistics 1997 18(4):467-507; doi:10.1093/applin/18.4.467
© 1997 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by OLLER, J. W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Articles

Monoglottosis: What's Wrong with the Idea of the IQ Meritocracy and Its Racy Cousins?

JOHN W OLLER, JR

University of Southwestern Louisiana Lafayette

For about 100 years, certain enthusiasts have claimed that IQ tests measure innate intelligence (Binet and Simon 1905, Brighman 1923, Eysenck 1971, Herrnstein 1973, Herrnstein and Murray 1994, Jensen 1969, 1980, 1984, 1995, Lynn 1978, 1979) and show racial differences. These ideas have roots in ‘social Darwinism’ (Darwin 1874) and the eugenics movement (Gallon 1869)—the aim to ‘purify’ the gene pool Linked to these racy theories are the over-representation of minority language children in classes for the mentally retarded, language disordered, etc, and their under-representation in classes for the gifted (Ortiz and Yates 1983. Oakland and Parmelee 1985). In opposition to the IQ élitists, others have claimed that the data are misconstrued (Figueroa 1989, Fraser 1995, Gould 1981, 1995, Isham and Kamin 1993, Jacoby and Glauberman 1995, Macnamara 1966, 1972, Mercer 1973, 1984, Valdés and Figueroa 1994) or perhaps irrelevant (Gardner 1983, 1993, 1995). While the research of Herrnstein, Murray, and Jensen (not to mention Carroll 1993, 1995, Sternberg 1996, and others) cannot be ignored, it can be shown that the IQ enthusiasts have largely discounted acquired language/dialect proficiency as a factor in their tests (Oller and Perkins 1978, Oller 1978, Oler, Chesarek, and Scott 1991, Oller and Jonz 1994). Monoglottosis, near total language/dialect blindness, is partly to blame. This condition accounts for Herrnstein's ‘meritocracy’ theory that intellectual cream rises to the top But do IQ tests measure ‘innate’ intelligence?. It is shown here empirically and theoretically that even ‘nonverbal’ IQ tests mainly measure powers of reasoning accessed through the primary language of the test-takers and that ‘verbal’ IQ scores assess proficiency in the language of the tests. The IQ literature needs to be reconceptualized.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Language TestingHome page
J. W. Oller Jr., K. Kim, and Y. Choe
Testing verbal (language) and non-verbal abilities in language minorities: a socio-educational problem in historical perspective
Language Testing, July 1, 2000; 17(3): 341 - 360.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.