The Role of IQ Scores
The purpose of this post is to discuss the value of a client’s IQ score that might be reported in a criminal justice file. I’m not a psychologist. I’m not an expert in the validity of IQ scores. The comments here reflect anecdotal, personal experiences and what I believe are some commonsense principles applicable to using IQ information when working with incarcerated or criminally supervised youths.
Basic information on IQ is available from a Google search:
According to Verywell Family, the standard IQ scale for children is:
130 and above: Extremely high
120-129: Very high
110-119: High average
90-109: Average
80-89: Low average
70-79: Very low
69 and below: Extremely low
A glance at a random group of detention center files will show a majority of scores in the 70’s and 80’s. IQ scores generally have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 points. This means that most of our clients would be in the Low Average or Borderline (Very Low) range of intellectual functioning. If you’re actually working with this population, you know this characterization isn’t true. Our youths have intelligence. They hold ideas, often understand complex principles, and in many cases have used creativity and thought to adapt to severe circumstances to survive. If you have trouble seeing the client’s adaptations and strengths, you will be limited in what you have to offer.
Why the scores are so low is a question for psychologists and academics. For practitioners, why doesn’t matter. What matters is that the score doesn’t prejudice your assessment.
I can’t guess how many times I have asked a group of youths who they admire and got back a blank look. “What you mean?” Often, only one or two youths in group knew the word admire. Admire is on the list of words third graders should be expected to know. Why don’t our kids know words like admire, recreation, digit, voyage, or whimper (all from the third-grade list)? Do you think kids with this level of word knowledge could correctly answer this sample IQ test question?
“What imaginary line divides the planet earth into north and south hemispheres?”
Probably not. Could these deficits have something to do with the quality of education in poor neighborhoods, trauma in the homes, or nobody making sure their kid even goes to school? The answer is beyond my knowledge and expertise and it’s irrelevant here. Once again, why they are in this condition doesn’t matter to a counselor, case manager, or PO in the moment. If you work in this field, it’s important to know who the client is and what he can and cannot easily understand.
So when is IQ information useful? If a youth is unresponsive, slow or hostile in the first session, I often check the IQ score. A score in the low 70’s on a client who presents as dull suggests that intellectual impairment is real and has to factor into treatment. When a client comes across as really bright and alert but manipulative, an IQ over 100 suggests a potentially challenging youth. One who is smart enough to organize a group or get the keys to the van or some such. When an articulate and attentive 17-year-old has only 8 or 9 high school credits, a decent IQ score might let you know to check out the possibility of a learning disorder.
Can a youth go through years of incarceration in Texas with a learning disability undetected? Absolutely, he can. He can be functionally illiterate and get through the system just fine.
IQ scores in the files of kids in juvenile justice can tell you some things, but they’re not the most important part of assessment. Who is the client? What’s important to him? How can you relate? What can you do that facilitates growth? These things are important in my view.
JOHN T. CONBOY, LCSW, LSOTP, LCDC | THE COUNSELOR’S CORNER | 512-944-9153
THE COUNSELOR’S CORNER is a periodic educational blog discussing issues related to counseling young males who are involved with the juvenile justice system.
Comments