The War on Time #3TC

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone on this cold Boxing Day. When I saw today’s #3TC prompt, I was reminded of a newspaper article my father shared with me in late 1999. It was called something like “The war on time” and was about all the ways people have fought over timekeeping and calendars over the centuries. It included, of course, the change from the Julian to Gegrorian calendar in 1582. I gathered from that article that our calendar’s still not fully aligned with the sun, so that it’s proposed that the year 4000 won’t be a leap year.

By the way, can you believe we’re closer to that year now than we are to the year Jesus was born? Interestingly, in that same article I read that Jesus wasn’t born in the year 0 (which I’m pretty sure no-one had a number for back then) or 1. He was probably born at least five or six years before then and most certainly not on Christmas day. It makes some sense to celebrate his birth around the end of the year though, but that would be closer to March rather than January. Then again, back in the day the months of January and February didn’t exist.

I used to love learning all about timekeeping and calendars. I could probably find a lot more info about it now, over 25 years later and with my having access to the Internet. But I can’t be bothered, honestly. I’d rather be writing random ramblings.

Now going to turn off my little electric heater. The heating in the care home broke down on Wednesday. I noticed I was freezing, but didn’t connect the dots, since it was supposed to be -5°C outside too. I spent the holidays with my wife and came back around 5PM this evening to a home that was still cold. The staff figured out the problem yesterday and it got fixed, but with the type of heating we have, it takes forever for the entire home to warm up, hence why I put on the heater.

I Am (Not!) 154

Posted on by Astrid

Hi all. Today’s topic for Friday Faithfuls is IQ testing. This topic is very dear to my heart, as IQ tests have often been used and even more often misused to determine my entire life path.

When I was twelve, I had an IQ test administered to me. It was the verbal half of the Wechsler intelligence scale for children (the performance half can’t be administered to me because of my blindness). On this verbal IQ test, I got an overall score of 154. According to the educational psychologist writing the report, this is a sign of giftedness.

There were several problems with this assigned IQ score. For one thing, like I said, it’s just a verbal IQ score. The year prior, another ed psych had tried an intelligence test for visually impaired children which utilizes non-verbal components, but had given up on the test midway through because I got too frustrated. This ed psych had also administered the verbal half of the Wechsler scale, but her report doesn’t give an IQ number.

Another thing, which you might figure out from my previous paragraph, is the possibility of a retest effect, since I took the exact same test twice in a year. The ed psych that labeled me with an IQ of 154 did try to find out whether this had actually happened. He asked me whether I had been told when taking the test the last time which answers were correct and which weren’t. I had, in fact, with some, and besides, my father had given me extensive advice on how to answer some questions even more cleverly than I had done. However, I knew the purpose of this assessment: to get the green light for me to go into mainstream, high level secondary education rather than special ed for the blind. I wasn’t at the time really sure whether that’s what I wanted, but my parents did and I, being twelve, didn’t question their authority. So I said “no” and the ed psych concluded there was no retest effect.

I don’t doubt that I have an above-average verbal IQ. But 154, in my opinion, is probably too high. Besides, verbal intelligence is what you need to succeed in traditional schoolwork. What you need to succeed in life, is more related to performance IQ, if you ask me.

Even now though, nearly a quarter of a century later, the number 154 pops up here and there and everywhere with regards to me. Professionals keep assigning new dates to the original IQ score, calling it a total rather than verbal IQ, and making more nonsense out of these ever-intriguing three digits.

I have tried to talk to the behavior specialist about this. What I really want is to be re-evaluated. Not just with respect to (verbal) IQ, but with respect to other things too. She for now only agreed to write a note by the IQ score of 154 saying that it dates back 25 years.

You’d assume that, in intellectual disability services, it wouldn’t matter whether your IQ is 100 or 150, since it means no intellectual disability regardless. However, several of my current staff have admitted being wowed at my IQ score before they got to know me. I hate that the most, being reduced to being 154.