Tests based on Binet's theory What questions are included in tests to determine IQ? Many of us have heard about such tests, have been tested once or twice, but are unlikely to remember the specific content of the questions. In fact, too many people like to talk about

Address by HIS MAJESTY KING HUSSEIN, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to the Museum of Tolerance (branch of the Simon Wiesenthal Center), March 24, 1995. In memory of Simon Wiesenthal

Address by HIS MAJESTY KING HUSSEIN, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to the Museum of Tolerance (branch of the Simon Wiesenthal Center), March 24, 1995. In memory of Simon Wiesenthal Mr. President, distinguished guests, it is a great honor for me to be a guest of the Museum of Peace and Tolerance in

1. Catch the ball

1 point – the child did not begin to cooperate even after training and behaves inappropriately (throws the ball, puts it in his mouth, etc.).

2 points - the child has learned and began to cooperate, tries to roll the ball and catch the ball, but this is not always possible in practice.

3 points – the child began to cooperate independently, but it is not always possible to catch the ball due to motor difficulties; after training the result is positive.

4 points – the child immediately began to cooperate with the adult, successfully catching and rolling the ball.

2. Hide the balls

1 point – the child did not understand the task, does not strive for the goal; After training I didn’t understand the task.

2 points – the child did not understand the task; after training, he strives to achieve the goal, but he does not have correlating actions; indifferent to the final result; does not complete the task independently.

3 points – the child immediately understood the task, but difficulties arose when performing matching actions (could not match the corners of the lid with the box); interested in the results of his activities; After training he completes the task.

4 points – the child immediately understood the task; completed the task and at the same time used correlating actions; interested in the end result.

3. Disassembling and folding the matryoshka doll

1 point – the child has not learned to fold a matryoshka doll; after training, he acts inappropriately on his own: he takes it in his mouth, throws it, knocks, holds it in his hand, etc.

2 points – the child completes the task while imitating the actions of an adult, but does not complete the task independently.

3 points – the child accepted and understood the task, but completes it after the help of an adult (pointing gesture or verbal instructions); understands that the final result has been achieved; After training, he folds a matryoshka doll on his own.

4 points – the child immediately understood and accepted the task; performs it independently; the presence of correlating actions is noted; interested in the end result.

4. Disassembling and folding the pyramid

1 point – the child acts inappropriately: even after training, he tries to put rings on a rod covered with a cap, scatters the rings, holds them in his hand, etc.

2 points – the child accepted the task; does not take into account the dimensions of the rings during assembly. After training, he strings all the rings, but still does not take into account the size of the rings; the leading hand is not defined; there is no coordination of the actions of both hands; indifferent to the final result of his actions.

3 points – the child immediately accepts the task, understands it, but strings the rings onto the rod without taking into account their size; after training, completes the task without error; the leading hand is determined, but the coordination of the actions of the hands is not expressed; adequately evaluates the result.

4 points – the child immediately independently disassembles and assembles the pyramid, taking into account the size of the rings; the leading hand is determined; there is a clear coordination of the actions of both hands; interested in the end result.

5. Paired pictures

1 point – the child, after training, continues to act inappropriately: turns the pictures over, does not fix his gaze on the picture, tries to take the picture from an adult, etc.

2 points – the child understands the task, but cannot complete it immediately; during the learning process compares paired pictures; he is indifferent to the evaluation of his activities and does not complete the task independently.

3 points – the child immediately understands the conditions of the task; makes one mistake, but after training acts confidently; understands that the final result has been achieved.

4 points – the child immediately understands the task and confidently compares paired pictures; interested in the end result.

6. Colored cubes

1 point – the child does not distinguish colors even after training.

2 points – the child compares colors, but does not identify the color from the word even after training; indifferent to the final result.

3 points – the child compares and identifies colors according to the word; shows interest in the result.

4 points – the child compares colors, identifies them according to the word, names the primary colors; interested in the end result.

7. Cutting pictures

1 point – the child, after training, acts inappropriately: does not try to correlate the parts of the cut picture with each other.

2 points – the child folds a cut picture with the help of an adult; he is indifferent to the final result and cannot put together a picture on his own.

3 points – the child immediately understands the task, but puts together the picture with the help of an adult; After training, he puts together a picture on his own; understands that the end result is positive.

4 points – the child understands the task; independently folds a cut picture; interested in the end result.

8. Stick construction

1 point – the child, after training, continues to act inappropriately: throws sticks, puts them nearby, waves them; indifferent to the result.

2 points – after training, the child tries to build a figure, but compliance with the model is not achieved; indifferent to the final result.

3 points – the child correctly understands the task, but builds a “hammer” only after imitating the actions of an adult; interested in the end result.

4 points – the child correctly completes the proposed task according to the model; interested in the end result.

9. Get the cart

1 point – the child does not understand the task; does not strive to achieve the goal.

2 points – the child tries to reach the target with his hand; After several unsuccessful attempts, he refuses to complete the task.

3 points – the child tries to reach the cart by one end of the ribbon; after two or three attempts he achieves the result; understands the end result of his actions.

4 points – the child immediately finds the correct solution and completes the task; interested in the end result.

10. Draw

1 point – the child does not use a pencil to scribble on paper; behaves inappropriately to the task; does not follow verbal instructions.

2 points – the child has a desire to depict something (scratching); indifferent to the final image; the leading hand is not highlighted; there is no coordination of the actions of both hands.

3 points – the child understands the instructions; tries to draw a path, depicting it with multiple broken lines without a specific direction; understands the end result of his actions; the leading hand is determined, but there is no coordination of the actions of both hands.

4 points – the child completes the task according to verbal instructions; interested in the final result (in most cases This straight continuous line); the leading hand is clearly defined, coordination of the actions of both hands is observed.

Based on the total score, the examined child can be classified into one of four groups.

First group(10–12 points) are children who are not guided in their actions by instructions, do not understand the purpose of the task, and therefore do not strive to complete it. They are not ready to cooperate with an adult; not understanding the purpose of the task, they act inappropriately. Moreover, this group of children is not ready to act adequately even under conditions of imitation.

The indicators of children in this group indicate deep disadvantage in their intellectual development. These children need to form emotional contact with adults. Emotional communication between an adult and a child arises on the basis of joint actions, which should be accompanied by a friendly smile and a gentle voice. An adult should gently touch the child, stroke him, take his hand, etc.

These children must be taught to understand basic instructions and perform actions in accordance with verbal instructions consisting of one word denoting the action. At the same time, it is necessary to teach children to understand the purpose of the action; develop in them the actions of grasping with two hands, one hand; develop attention, gaze fixation, and eye tracking of a moving object.

In addition, these children need to be physical exercise, focused on the development of all basic movements, as well as general developmental exercises aimed at strengthening the back muscles, coordination of movements, and development of balance.

When teaching children of this group, the main methods are joint actions of the child with an adult and imitation of the actions of an adult.

To the second group(13–23 points) includes children who cannot complete the task independently. They have difficulty coming into contact with adults and act without taking into account the properties of objects. The nature of their actions is marked by the desire to achieve a certain result, therefore they are characterized by chaotic actions, and in the future - refusal to complete the task.

In a learning environment, when an adult asks them to complete an imitation task, many of them do it. However, after training, the children of this group cannot complete the task independently, which indicates that the principle of action remained not realized by them. At the same time, they are indifferent to the results of their activities.

This group of children needs to develop ways of assimilating social experience. The first condition for this is the formation of cooperation between the child and the adult. The basis of such cooperation is, on the one hand, the emotional contact of an adult with a child, and on the other, the correct determination of the way to set educational tasks for the child. It is important to develop in children the ability to imitate the actions of an adult, the ability to understand and use gestural instructions and pointing gestures, the ability to work according to a model and verbal instructions.

A special place in correctional work with these children should be given to physical education. It is aimed at the timely development of motor skills, abilities and physical qualities, at developing interest in the various types of motor activity available to the child.

At the same time, attention must be paid to improving manual motor skills, developing the dominant hand, coordinating the actions of both hands, as well as developing fine movements of the hands.

The central task of working with this group of children is the formation of guidelines for face-to-face cognitive activity: the development of practical orientation to the properties and qualities of objects, the formation of targeted tests, practical trying on, and then visual correlation. The main thing is to remember that the development of perception comes from the ability to distinguish objects, their properties, the relationship to their perception on the basis of an image, and then to the fixation of the image in a word, that is, to the appearance of an image-representation.

In the future, correctional work on the development of orientation-cognitive activity should be aimed at forming the relationship between the main components of mental activity: action, word and image.

One of the main areas of work with these children is speech development. It is carried out throughout the child’s entire life activity and in special classes where decisions are made specific tasks: development of communication, cognitive and regulatory functions.

In addition, the main correctional task in working with these children is the formation play activity and prerequisites for productive activities (drawing, design).

Children need to develop an interest in didactic and story-based toys, play actions with these toys, and the ability to play next to peers, and later together.

Considering all of the above, it is necessary to remember that in all these children it is necessary to form the correct behavior taking into account a certain situation, as well as some personality traits of each child, where the main attention is paid to such qualities as mutual assistance and responsiveness. This possibility is ensured by the creation of a positive microclimate as in preschool institution, and in the child’s family.

Third group(24–33 points) are children who cooperate with adults with interest. They immediately accept tasks, understand the conditions of these tasks and strive to complete them. However, in many cases they cannot find an adequate way to do it on their own and often turn to an adult for help. After being shown how to complete a task, many of them can complete the task on their own, showing greater interest in the result of their activities.

In children of this group, it is necessary to clarify the primary disorders. Regardless of the primary disorder, all children need to develop an active interest in the properties and qualities of objects and develop perceptual actions (testing, trying on). At the same time, it is necessary to develop productive activities: modeling, appliqué, drawing, design.

An important direction in correctional work with these children is the formation of a holistic idea of ​​the surrounding reality, of a person and of interactions between people, and familiarization with various types of activities.

In all cases, correctional work is carried out with these children on speech development. Depending on the primary disorder, a specific system is created for including the child’s speech in the process of sensory cognition of the surrounding reality.

Fourth group(34–40 points) are children who accept all tasks with interest, complete them independently, acting at the level of practical orientation, and in some cases at the level of visual orientation. At the same time, they are very interested in the results of their activities. These children usually achieve good level mental development.

Thus, the proposed psychological and pedagogical examination allows us to identify early age deviations in mental development and helps psychologists and teachers-defectologists outline ways correctional work with each of the examined children, taking into account their individual structure of the disorder.

Stanford-Binet test for children from 3 years old

Among the numerous translations and adaptations of Binet tests, the most viable was the Stanford-Binet test (restandardized in 1972). It is designed to measure IQ from 3 years to adulthood. However, according to Western psychologists, the Stanford-Binet scale is not suitable for testing adults, and especially those whose intellectual development is within or above normal limits.

Based on our own experience, we can say that this scale is most applicable for examining children from 3 to 5 years old, so subtests are given here only for these ages, and it is better to examine children from 4 years old and older using Wechsler tests WPPSI And WISC.

The test battery for each age level consists of six tests.

Tests within each age level are approximately equal in difficulty and are arranged without taking into account the complexity of the tasks. For each age level, a reserve test of the same degree of difficulty is provided, which is used as needed instead of any of the tests of this level, for example, when one of the main tests cannot be used because it is not suitable for a given individual or something prevents it from being presented.

Four tests from each level, in accordance with their validity and representativeness, are selected for an abbreviated scale, which is used in cases where time does not allow presenting the full scale. Comparisons IQ, received on full and abbreviated scales on different groups subjects conducted by Western psychologists have established a fairly complete correspondence between them, the correlation is approximately as high as the reliability coefficient of the full scale. Average value IQ, however, it decreases slightly on the short scale. This discrepancy also manifests itself when comparing the number of subjects who showed higher results in each version of the scale. Over 50% of them receive lower values ​​in the short version compared to the full version IQ and only 30% have a value IQ higher.

Like most intelligence tests, the Stanford-Binet test requires well-trained experimenters, since the presentation and processing of many tests is quite complex. Therefore, a clear test is impossible without sufficient familiarity and experience with the scale. Indecision and ineptitude can have a detrimental effect on mutual understanding with the child. Minor changes in wording can change the difficulty of items. The test is also complicated by the need to process it immediately after presentation, since the subsequent administration of the test depends on how the child completed the tasks of the previous levels.

Many clinicians view the Stanford-Binet test not only as a standardized test, but also as a diagnostic interview. The Stanford-Binet test allows you to observe the methods of intellectual work of the subject, his approach to the problem and other qualitative aspects of completing tasks. The experimenter can also judge some personal qualities, such as activity level, self-confidence, persistence, ability to concentrate. Of course, any qualitative observations during the Stanford-Binet test should be recorded as observations, but not interpreted in the same way as objective test indicators. The value of qualitative observations depends on the skill, experience and psychological insight of the psychologist.

In the Stanford-Binet test, no one subject is tested on all tasks. The individual is presented only with those tasks that correspond to his intellectual level. It usually takes 30–40 minutes to test young children.

If the child being examined copes with all the proposed tasks for three-year-old children, then this level of his development is called basic age.

Testing continues in increasing order (for four years, five years) until at some level the subject begins to fail in all tests. This level is called the ceiling age. Once this level is reached, testing ends.

Jobs are processed on an all-or-nothing basis. The instructions for each test establish the minimum level of execution from which the test is considered completed. Certain tests are given at different age levels, but the criteria for their completion are different for each level. Such a test is presented only once, and its completion is determined according to the age level to which the child is classified. The tasks solved or not solved by the test subject give a certain spread to adjacent age levels. It is not the case that subjects pass all tests of their mental age or below and fail all tests above their level. In addition, successfully solved tests are distributed across several levels from the basic to the maximum age of the subject. The mental age of an individual in the Stanford-Binet scales is determined by taking the base age and adding two additional months to it for each correctly solved test above this level.

For example, a child of 3 years and 2 months is examined (38 months is calendar age). The child completed all the tasks for three years; this means his base age is 36 months. And then he completed two tasks for the age of four. Consequently, another four months are added to him (two months for each task). Since he could not cope with a single task for five-year-old children, his mental age is 40 months. IQ is calculated using the formula:

that is (40:34) × 100 = 110.

For age 3 years (6 tests, one every 2 months)

1. Indicate: nose, eyes, mouth, hair (norm – 3 answers out of 4).

2. Name: key, cup, penknife, watch, pencil (3 out of 5).

3. Name three objects in each picture (1 of 3; Fig. 1–3):

a) “Mother and daughter”;

b) “On the river”;

c) “At the post office.”

4. State your gender (“Tell me, are you a boy or a girl?”).

6. Repeat a phrase of 6–7 syllables (1 of 3):

a) “We have a kitten”;

b) “Peter gave me a toy”;

Additional test. Repeat 3 rows of numbers (1 of 3): 6‑4‑1; 3‑5‑2; 8‑3‑7.

Additional tests are offered only as an exception in cases where for some reason one or another main test cannot be used. Replacing an incorrectly solved main test with an additional one is not allowed.

For age 4 years (6 tests, one every 2 months)

1. Comparison of lines. There are 3 options available (3 out of 3): Which line is longer and which is shorter?

___________________________________________________________

_________________________________________

2. Difference in shapes: circle_______ square_________ triangle_________

4. Draw a square (1 of 3): 1 2 3.

5. Questions of the first degree of difficulty “What needs to be done?” (2 of 3):

a) When you want to sleep___________________________;

b) When you are cold_________________________________;

c) When you feel like eating___________________________.

6. Repeat 4 numbers (1 of 3): 4‑7‑3‑9; 2‑8‑5‑4; 7‑2‑6‑1.

Additional test. Repeat a phrase of 12–13 syllables (1 out of 3 without errors or 2 times with one error in each phrase):

a) “His name is Maxim. He is studying at school";

b) “Sasha heard the whistle and saw the train”;

c) “In the summer there were a lot of mushrooms and berries in the forest.”

For age 5 years (6 tests, one every 2 months)

1. Comparison of weights (2 of 3): 3‑15 g________ 15‑3 g_______ 3‑15 g_________.

2. Name the 4 colors on the dice (without mistakes): red ________yellow _______blue _________green_______.

3. Aesthetic comparison. “Which people do you like best in each couple?” (no errors):

Top pair ________Middle pair ___________Bottom pair_______.

4. What are the following items (4 of 6) used for?

Chair______________? Doll______________?

Automobile______________? Pencil______________?

Fork______________? Table______________?

5. Folding a rectangle from two triangles (2 out of 3; 1 minute for each execution):

6. “Remember and complete three instructions” (without mistakes): Place the key on the table.

Close the door______________. Give the box______________

Additional test. State your age.

Binet-Simon Mental Development Test.

In 1905, by order of the French Ministry of Education, A. Binet first developed a method with which it was possible to assess the mental development of children. For each age, tests of mental development were developed, which were solved by children of a certain age from an experimental sample of 300 subjects. Solving problems for 80-90% of children was a criterion for assessing the norm of a given chronological age.

The test began with the completion of normative tasks. If the subject coped with the proposed test, he was offered tasks for an older age. If he could not solve the problem, testing was stopped. The maximum age at which the child could solve the tasks was recorded as his basic mental milestone.

Children under six years of age were asked to complete four tasks, and children over six years old - six. Each task completed above the age standard reflected two months (6 tasks for 2 months = 12 months). For example, if a child whose chronological age is six years old solves all the problems for six years and completes three tasks for seven years, then his mental age will be six years and six months. The discrepancy between mental and chronological age was considered either an indicator mental retardation(when the child failed to cope with the normative tasks of his age), or giftedness (when the child solved the problems of the older standard).

American psychologist L. Theremin is the co-author of the Wiene-Simon test. Having improved this test (Stanford-Vine scale), he brought it to the so-called intelligence index. Currently, this indicator is most popular in studying the general mental abilities of people. The intelligence quotient allows one to correlate the test subject’s level with the average level of a social, age or professional group.

The Stanford-Vine scale is based on the Gauss-Laplace law of normal distribution. The average score corresponding to the population norm is 100 points. The so-called average zone, limited by a standard deviation of ±15-16 points, includes the values ​​of indicators IQ approximately 68% of subjects. The remaining results represent high and low scores IQ. People with very low and very high level there are very few abilities (Fig. 3.1). If a child’s result is higher than the test norm and reaches 116 points, then, according to the authors, he is considered gifted.

The Stanford-Vinet scale is used all over the world and is known in several editions (1937, 1960, 1972, 1986).

However, psychologists can hear a lot of criticism towards her.

Rice. 3.1.

“Progressive matrices” by J. K. Raven are intended to assess a person’s ability for systematized, planned, methodical intellectual activity. The test consists of non-verbal tasks (matrices), which has great value, since this reduces the influence on its results of knowledge acquired in the process of life of the subjects.

The instructions for the method provide information only about the procedural side of problem solving. The principles laid down as decisive rules, are not disclosed.

The method consists of 60 task tables (five series). In each series, the tables are compiled in order of increasing difficulty and complexity from series to series. The subjects, looking through the matrices, identify a certain pattern and choose the correct answer, from their point of view. Series "A" is built on the principle of establishing connections in the structure of matrices, using the operation of supplementing the entire structure with the missing fragment. Series "IN"- on the principle of analogy between pairs of figures, the use of a mental operation of searching for similar features in drawings, as well as determining the axis of symmetry, according to which the figures are located in the main sample. Series "WITH" - Based on the principle of progressive changes in the structure of matrices, the operation of searching for the principle of development of the pattern of matrices is used. Series "D" - based on the principle of regrouping figures and searching for this regrouping in the horizontal and vertical directions. "Series E" is based on the principle of decomposing the figures of the main image into elements; mental operations of analysis and synthesis are used.

The correctness of solving matrix tasks is checked using a “key” and assessed in accordance with the conversion table into points (Appendix 3). 20 minutes are allotted for solving all tasks.

Intelligence test CFIT (literal translation from English - “free cultural intellectual test”), created in 1949 by R. B. Cattell and A. K. Cattell, belongs to tests free from cultural influence. It appeared as a result of the authors' efforts to overcome shortcomings in measuring general intellectual abilities (intelligence) using traditional methods. These methods contain predominantly verbal material, reflecting the properties of the cultural layers of the society to which their compilers belonged.

Psychodiagnostics Luchinin Alexey Sergeevich

4. Binet-Simon scale. The concept of "mental age". Stanford-Binet scale. The concept of “intellectual quotient” (IQ). Works by V. Stern

First scale (series of tests) Binet-Simon appeared in 1905. Binet proceeded from the idea that the development of intelligence occurs independently of learning, as a result of biological maturation.

A. Binet scale in editions (1908 and 1911) was translated into German and English languages, was distinguished by the fact that it expanded the age range of children - up to 13 years, increased the number of tasks and introduced the concept of mental age.

Items in the Binet scales were grouped by age (from 3 to 13 years). Children under 6 years old were offered four tasks, and children over 6 years old were offered six tasks. The tasks were selected through a study of a large group of children (300 people).

The indicator of intelligence in the Binet scales was mental age, which was determined by the success of completing test tasks.

Second edition of the Binet scale served as the basis for verification and standardization work carried out at Stanford University (USA) by a team of employees led by L. M. Theremin. This version was proposed in 1916, had many serious changes compared to the main one and was called the Stanford-Binet scale. There were two main differences from Binet's tests: the introduction of intelligence quotient (IQ), determined by the relationship between mental and chronological age, as an indicator for the test, and the use of a testing evaluation criterion, for which the concept of a statistical norm was introduced.

IQ Quotient was proposed V. Stern, who considered a significant drawback of the mental age indicator to be that the same difference between mental and chronological age for different age levels has different meanings. Stern proposed to determine the quotient obtained by dividing mental age by chronological age. He called this indicator, multiplied by 100, the intelligence quotient. This is how normal children can be classified according to the degree of mental development.

Another innovation of Stanford psychologists was the use of the concept of “statistical norm.” The norm became the criterion by which it was possible to compare individual test indicators and thereby evaluate them and give them a psychological interpretation.

The Stanford-Binet scale was designed for children aged 2.5 to 18 years. It consisted of tasks of varying difficulty, grouped according to age criteria.