Can IQ Determine Success in the Math Olympiad?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter roya-s
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Iq
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between IQ and success in the Math Olympiad, exploring whether IQ is a significant factor in achieving success in mathematical competitions. Participants share personal experiences, opinions on IQ testing, and the importance of effort and training in mathematics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern that IQ is perceived as a primary determinant of success in the Math Olympiad, questioning the validity of this belief.
  • Others argue that being good at math is the most crucial factor for success in competitions, rather than IQ scores.
  • A few participants suggest that IQ tests are poorly designed and often misapplied, with limited relevance to real-world performance.
  • Some contributions highlight that success in mathematics can be achieved through hard work and training, regardless of initial ability or IQ.
  • There are claims that IQ tests do not accurately measure intelligence and can lead to unrealistic expectations and pressure on individuals.
  • Participants discuss the idea that many factors, such as determination, opportunity, and luck, contribute to success beyond just IQ.
  • Several comments emphasize that the collaborative nature of learning and competition can lead to greater insights than individual IQ scores might suggest.
  • Some participants share personal anecdotes about the negative impact of knowing their IQ scores on their academic experience and self-perception.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the significance of IQ in determining success in the Math Olympiad. While some downplay its importance, others express concern about its perceived role. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the true impact of IQ compared to other factors like effort and training.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that IQ tests may be biased based on societal norms and expectations, and there are unresolved questions about the validity and purpose of such tests in measuring intelligence.

  • #31
I don't remember when it happened, but according to my dad, I got a psychologically done IQ test done once and I got a 173 IQ. At least I think that's what it was. Either that or 137.

So yeah, since I have a high one, IQs are therefore all-important and you should use them for everything. I'm totally not biased at all.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I have been trying to improve my problem solving skills and I have some experience to share. When I read an IMO type of question, there are three stages for me.

1. I freeze after reading the problem. It takes a while to understand the problem (not always but most of the time). I believe that cognitive ability (measure of which is IQ) plays a major role here. It is just a matter of time. If you stare at it for a while, it will sink in. Certain heuristics given in Polya's book help in getting a grip on the mathematical situation given in the problem.

2. If I managed to cross the first phase, then the second phase is to figure out what can be done to solve the problem. A proof is basically a chain of implications. A=>B=>C=D, A, B, C, and D being mathematical statements. It can be more complicated like (A&B)=>(C OR E) => D. The tricky thing about really hard problems is that while statement A would be given, they say nothing about statements B, C and E. We will need to show that D is true. So based on experience, B, C, and E have to be "figured out". More obscure these intermediate statements, harder the problem. If these intermediate steps are more in number, then the problem gets exponentially harder.

These intermediate steps are the ones Paul Zeitz refers to as the "crux moves".

Here too, better cognitive skills will help. I feel that it is not as crucial here as in #1 because once I cross the stage mentioned in #1, then it is a matter of working hard to figure out potential candidates for statements B, C and E. For me, being creative and coming up with more number of potential crux moves is easier than the first stage which often happens to be a big problem. Nevertheless, this stage of problem solving is not trivial at all. This is perhaps 70 on a scale where step #1 is 100.

Metacognition is what is needed in this stage. You can read Alan Schoenfeld's "Mathematical Problem Solving" for more details. Having good control of "direction of thinking" is extremely important for this stage and the final stage of problem solving.

3. This step is the final step in solving the problem. I feel that this stage is almost as hard as #1. I do manage to come up with humongous number of potential crux moves. But IMO problems are very difficult because seeing the crux move is very very hard. Most of the times, after seeing the crux move, proving them might be hard too but is a problem of lesser magnitude.

I have solved some problems from the IMO (only 1s and 4s). Lack of intelligence can be made up by practicing a lot of problems. That way, getting through stage #1 will become easier if there is good familiarity with the mathematical situation that is given in the problem. Also, practice helps in gaining good control in using tools (like recognizing the auxiliary construction in geometry, or looking for something that is a constant or a mono-variant etc). Stage #3 is subject to the creativity that I have in the area on which the problem is given.

Quite honestly, I believe that intense practicing "in the right direction" can get you through IMO even with moderate IQ. But I needed a tonne of practice to solve a meager number of IMO problems.

I may not have added much here to what others have said but thought I will share my experience. Basically IMO requires intense training and also guidance from someone who knows. IQ is needed to a good extent but given that many of the medalists start out from nowhere, it must be possible to get to IMO bronze medal level with intense training. One thing to keep in mind is that good meta-cognitive skills are needed on top of good intelligence. Changing direction of thought based on the fact that current approach is not working is very critical. I used to simply keep trying one approach and not back off inspite of knowing that it is not working. I can now (after a lot of practice) try a lot of directions in order to solve a problem.
 
  • #33
That's nice. Nothing to do with IQ tests.

Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K