Low IQ or Bad Grades? Why You Can Still Succeed in Math
No, a low IQ score, poor competition results, or weak high-school grades do not disqualify anyone from succeeding in mathematics, physics, or engineering. Success in these fields depends far more on consistent, deliberate practice and how a person responds to setbacks than on any single test score or early academic result.
Table of Contents
Key Takeaways
- IQ tests were originally designed to identify intellectual disability, not to predict success in advanced mathematics.
- The author scored 96 on an IQ test and still built a career in academia.
- Performing poorly in math competitions does not predict poor performance in mathematical research.
- Research mathematics rewards patience and slow, careful problem examination, while competitions reward speed under time pressure.
- Weak high-school grades may signal a need for preparation steps such as retaking foundational courses, targeted tutoring, or starting at a community college.
Why New Students Doubt Themselves
New members of technical communities often ask whether they are cut out for mathematics, physics, or engineering. Many became discouraged in high school and concluded, incorrectly, that they could not succeed. The concerns below address the most common reasons for that discouragement.
Concern 1: “My IQ Is Too Low”
Why High Schoolers Worry About IQ Scores
Students who take an IQ test and score around 110 sometimes conclude that this number means they cannot succeed in mathematics. This is one of the most common concerns raised by new students.
What IQ Tests Were Actually Designed to Measure
IQ tests were originally devised to identify intellectual disability, not to forecast success in advanced mathematics. A score around 60 or 70 may indicate a need for professional support, but IQ scores are not reliable measures at the high end of the scale, where most students asking this question fall.
How to Assess Ability Instead of Relying on IQ
Online IQ tests are unreliable and should be avoided. Only an assessment administered by a qualified professional should be treated as meaningful, and even then the number alone does not determine academic success. In my own case, I obtained a score of 96 on an IQ test and have still been relatively successful in academia. If I can succeed with that score, so can students who are worried about their own results.
Practice Matters More Than a Test Score
Mathematics requires some natural aptitude, but consistent, deliberate practice matters more. Students who achieve decent results on math tests without excessive study are likely able to do well in university-level mathematics, provided they are prepared to work both hard and smart.
Concern 2: “I Struggle with Math Competitions”
Competition Results Are Not a Predictor of Research Ability
I have always performed poorly in mathematics competitions, and, somewhat ironically, did better in physics competitions despite understanding physics less well than mathematics. Performance in timed contests is not a meaningful indicator of research or long-term mathematical ability.
Why Research Math and Competition Math Reward Different Skills
Research mathematics rewards the ability to digest a problem slowly, examine it from multiple angles, and peel away its layers with patience, sustained effort, broad knowledge, careful planning, and some luck. Competitions instead require solving several problems under strict time constraints. These two activities emphasize very different skills, so struggling with one does not predict failure at the other.
Concern 3: “My High-School Results Were Low”
Why Low Grades Create Real Challenges
Low high-school grades are a genuine disadvantage because university places heavier and more frequent evaluation on students than high school typically does. Students who were not strong on math tests in school will likely face greater challenges in a university setting.
Steps to Build Readiness Before University Math
Low high-school results do not necessarily mean a student is not cut out for university-level work. Reflecting carefully on what went wrong and which factors affected those results is a useful first step. Depending on the cause, re-taking foundational courses, pursuing targeted tutoring, or starting at a community college can all be sensible ways to build readiness before attempting university-level mathematics.
How to Respond When You Hit an Obstacle
Response Matters More Than the Obstacle Itself
Everyone meets obstacles over the course of a scientific career. Some people encounter them earlier than others, and some face more obstacles than others, but what determines a person’s development as a scientist is how they respond to those obstacles. Giving up is an understandable response, but choosing not to put in the effort to overcome an obstacle does not make a person unintelligent. It does, however, mean they are not following the path that working scientists take.
The River Metaphor
Scientists are those who repeatedly address obstacles rather than avoiding them. Like a river encountering a stone, the river yields at first, and slowly the stone is eroded until the river regains its path. Be the river.
Read the follow-up article on dealing with doubt as a science student.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a low IQ score mean I cannot succeed in mathematics?
No. IQ tests were originally designed to identify intellectual disability, and they are not reliable indicators at the high end of the scale where most students asking this question score. A person can score below average on an IQ test, such as 96, and still succeed academically through consistent, deliberate practice.
Should I trust an online IQ test result?
No. Online IQ tests are unreliable. Only an assessment administered by a qualified professional should be treated as meaningful, and even a professional score does not by itself determine academic success in mathematics.
Does poor performance in math competitions predict poor research ability?
No. Competitions require solving problems quickly under strict time limits, while research mathematics rewards slow, patient examination of a problem from multiple angles. These are different skill sets, so weakness in one does not predict weakness in the other.
Can I still succeed at university if my high-school math grades were low?
Low high-school grades create a real disadvantage because university evaluates students more heavily and more frequently. However, they do not permanently rule out success. Retaking foundational courses, getting targeted tutoring, or starting at a community college can help build the readiness needed for university-level mathematics.
What actually determines success as a scientist?
How a person responds to obstacles matters more than whether they encounter obstacles at all. Every scientist meets setbacks; those who continue to work through them, rather than giving up, are the ones who follow the path scientists take.
Advanced education and experience with mathematics
I am not particularly intelligent, I don’t have any gifts for maths or physics and I am left bewildered at some of the discussions here. I have little understanding of what the formula mean or the terms used, but I enjoy my time here very much, and little by little I am learning. I am teaching myself as I have no other way of doing it, and the experience I have here is very positive.
I am driven by a crazy curiosity, physics fascinates me it’s like an endless rabbit hole, the further you fall, the more it delights and frustrates you. I’ll never come up with a theory or a breakthrough, never work in a lab but I will keep trying and keep learning.
This insight is very motivational, thank you.
“This is a pet peeve of mine, as well, especially when two occurrences of “it” in one sentence have different antecedents. For example, if a student says, “It converges because its limit is zero,” with the first it being “the series” and “its” referring to the general term of the series.
I’ve often advised students that they should use the word “it” in a math class only when what it refers to is crystal clear.”
Yes. This is the right kind of thinking. I came to the same understanding many years ago.
“If this is about post #15, he is just trying to be realistic based on the people he has met. Some people or students resist trying to learn, for whatever reason – they actively resist to learn. You find reactions like, “that was not the way I was taught”, or “this is too complicated”, or someone will refuse to draw a diagram or picture. Others…”
I was talking about the original post :smile:.
“I think there are people who innately lack the ability to use precise language. For example, there are people who seem to be infested with pronouns.”This is a pet peeve of mine, as well, especially when two occurrences of “it” in one sentence have different antecedents. For example, if a student says, “It converges because its limit is zero,” with the first it being “the series” and “its” referring to the general term of the series.
I’ve often advised students that they should use the word “it” in a math class only when what it refers to is crystal clear.
“That was motivating.”
If this is about post #15, he is just trying to be realistic based on the people he has met. Some people or students resist trying to learn, for whatever reason – they actively resist to learn. You find reactions like, “that was not the way I was taught”, or “this is too complicated”, or someone will refuse to draw a diagram or picture. Others…
That was motivating.
“Good suggestion. But is it something you have to have, or is it something you gain during your education?”
I think there are people who innately lack the ability to use precise language. For example, there are people who seem to be infested with pronouns. They say things like “I’ll get it done when they find it and he brings me the one that fits onto its other thing.”
As another example, I know a small number of people who are very capable at practical matters, but simply cannot write. I don’t mean that they write badly. I mean that when they need to write something, they face a “mental block”. They can’t start the process of writing.
There are people who reject formal presentations. For example, one encounters forum posters who take the view that they know what a certain mathematical object “really is” and reject formal mathematical definitions. I think such a person can be educated in mathematical formality if they can retain their enthusiasm for mathematics after they realize their limitations. However, I think the statistically most frequent result of a collision between education and a person who thinks they know how mathematical things “really” are is that the person either rejects the education or he understands the education and loses his enthusiasm for the subject because the subject is disappointingly different that what he expected.
“Not really. Most cashiers jobs you don’t need to work very hard or very smart. You can get by with a mediocre work ethic as long as you are honest and don’t steal any of the cash passing through your hands.
I worked a bit of retail in high school and college. I got mad when I figured out they kept putting me as a cashier because I wasn’t stealing from them. I liked the other jobs better. The most important lesson was to aim for a career where one had to offer a bit more than simply not stealing.”
“As a consumer, I see good cashiers who are honest (with me) and not-so-good cashiers that are honest. If we are discussing the standard as “getting by” then what would that mean when referring to science and math ?
All I’m suggesting is that there could be some explicit insights of the form “You need Y” to balance out those of the form “You don’t need X”. – Or perhaps the conclusion is that you don’t absolutely need any particular thing to succeed specifically in science or math ?”
Some or at least a few people in scientific careers who are not handling money are also dishonest. Usually a matter of social and personal deception for the purposes of gaining power and position.
“As a consumer, I see good cashiers who are honest (with me) and not-so-good cashiers that are honest. If we are discussing the standard as “getting by” then what would that mean when referring to science and math ?
All I’m suggesting is that there could be some explicit insights of the form “You need Y” to balance out those of the form “You don’t need X”. – Or perhaps the conclusion is that you don’t absolutely need any particular thing to succeed specifically in science or math ?”
You probably need at least an average intelligence to go along with a work ethic.
You’d be surprised how a good work ethic can make you smarter and smarter if you keep working hard in the educational process.
If you are interesting in “just getting by” pick another major.
“With the caveat that I’m not a guidance counselor, I think that to understand pure mathematics, one must have a tolerance for “legalism” – i.e. interpreting things exactly as they are written, splitting hairs, tolerating less ambiguity in statements that is normal in common speech etc.
”
Good suggestion. But is it something you have to have, or is it something you gain during your education?
“So what would be some of the things you need according to you?”
With the caveat that I’m not a guidance counselor, I think that to understand pure mathematics, one must have a tolerance for “legalism” – i.e. interpreting things exactly as they are written, splitting hairs, tolerating less ambiguity in statements that is normal in common speech etc.
I’ve encountered people who expect devices like cars, dishwashers and voltmeters to “just work” by themselves and become impatient and indignant when it’s necessary to fiddle with them. Can such a personality succeed in experimental science?
“As a consumer, I see good cashiers who are honest (with me) and not-so-good cashiers that are honest. If we are discussing the standard as “getting by” then what would that mean when referring to science and math ?
All I’m suggesting is that there could be some explicit insights of the form “You need Y” to balance out those of the form “You don’t need X”. – Or perhaps the conclusion is that you don’t absolutely need any particular thing to succeed specifically in science or math ?”
So what would be some of the things you need according to you?
“Not really. Most cashiers jobs you don’t need to work very hard or very smart. You can get by with a mediocre work ethic as long as you are honest and don’t steal any of the cash passing through your hands.
”
As a consumer, I see good cashiers who are honest (with me) and not-so-good cashiers that are honest. If we are discussing the standard as “getting by” then what would that mean when referring to science and math ?
All I’m suggesting is that there could be some explicit insights of the form “You need Y” to balance out those of the form “You don’t need X”. – Or perhaps the conclusion is that you don’t absolutely need any particular thing to succeed specifically in science or math ?
“Doesn’t that describe what you need to succeed in anything ?
”
Not really. Most cashiers jobs you don’t need to work very hard or very smart. You can get by with a mediocre work ethic as long as you are honest and don’t steal any of the cash passing through your hands.
I worked a bit of retail in high school and college. I got mad when I figured out they kept putting me as a cashier because I wasn’t stealing from them. I liked the other jobs better. The most important lesson was to aim for a career where one had to offer a bit more than simply not stealing.
” hard work, smart work, a little bit of talent, seeking the possible opportunities and taking advantage of them instead of letting them pass, good mental health, etc.”
Doesn’t that describe what you need to succeed in anything ?
Your insight encourages people who have studied science or math to some extent to persevere. That’s probably good advice for most people who frequent physicsforums. But if you imagine yourself in the role of a guidance counselor to a more general population, surely there are cases where you’d advise a person differently – or warn them that they need to change some mental traits if they want to continue.
Of course, “negative” advice is not always correct. One can cite cases like “X’s teachers told him he would never suceed in science, but he became a great ….”. However, there are also cases like “Y’s teachers told him he would never succeed in science career and he didn’t”. Perhaps the latter case is statistically more frequent – so frequent that it examples of it don’t become prominent.
“The insights focus on giving answers of the form: “Don’t worry about X, you can do well in (advanced) mathematics or science without having it”. What about some insights of the form “Worry about Y, you’ll have trouble in advanced mathematics or science if you don’t have it.” (?)”
I do believe I covered that implicitely. I didn’t want to put the focus on it though. But I’ve been very clear what you need to make it in the sciences: hard work, smart work, a little bit of talent, seeking the possible opportunities and taking advantage of them instead of letting them pass, good mental health, etc.
Excellent insight! As a high school student aspiring to be a physicist – there are often moments where I feel like giving up – it’s too hard for me , maybe I’m not smart enough! This post underlines most of what goes through our minds. Thanks :smile:
Good Insight. Majoring in math or science is more of a test of one’s perseverance and work ethic than anything else.
Are you a quitter when the going gets tough? Don’t bother. No matter how smart you are, the going will get tough.
The insights focus on giving answers of the form: “Don’t worry about X, you can do well in (advanced) mathematics or science without having it”. What about some insights of the form “Worry about Y, you’ll have trouble in advanced mathematics or science if you don’t have it.” (?)
A really good insight. Times are tough, competition is very high, through all fields and levels in science, so this justifies up to a point an easy discouragement; on the other hand the only viable way to succeed, is covered very well in the insight. And yes, it is very hard – if at all, to find a reliable IQ test on the net. The real IQ test, is done through high efforts and time spent to overcome the obstacles.
I am not particularly intelligent, I don't have any gifts for maths or physics and I am left bewildered at some of the discussions here. I have little understanding of what the formula mean or the terms used, but I enjoy my time here very much, and little by little I am learning. I am teaching myself as I have no other way of doing it, and the experience I have here is very positive.I am driven by a crazy curiosity, physics fascinates me it's like an endless rabbit hole, the further you fall, the more it delights and frustrates you. I'll never come up with a theory or a breakthrough, never work in a lab but I will keep trying and keep learning.This insight is very motivational, thank you.
That was motivating.