Because those have similar uneven racial distributions.
IQ tests have similar characteristics to the SAT. Practice makes you better, uneven distribution across the population, etc
Do you have a source for “practice makes you better”? Last I checked only N-back benefits from practice, the rest doesn’t.
"Retest effects in cognitive ability tests" by Scharfen & friends is a good overview that mentions other studies that go into more detail and tweak different parameters (e.g. time between tests, tests that are more repetitive than others, etc). The meta-analysis found that retaking a test can add a couple points each time. So taking an IQ test 4 times on average yields an 8 point increase, almost an entire standard deviation.
Thanks, this actually matches my initial intuition about the matter. It's been awhile since I've looked up info in this area, partly due to the fact that a lot of IQ test proponents I spoke to seemed to have a great deal of personal identity staked in its significance.
Because the en vogue thought among "elites" at Harvard (and elsewhere) is that there are no smart individuals. Everything is simply a function of opportunity and privilege. Its the same sort of thinking that is behind removing gifted and talented programs and higher level math courses from schools. By that "logic" any sort of standardized test or objective standard that show differences in intelligence or learning are simply measures of privilege. Objective metrics are also the only concrete way to debunk these absurd, anti-science assertions about intelligence and learning, which makes them even more of an anathema.
An IQ test is just another form of standardized test, isn't it?