I need to get a detailed answer for this thing

Image transcription text

Subscribe Background: When I was in secondary school, Ontario testing of Math and English skills were at their peak. Unfortunately, the results of these tests often did not correlate to school performance. In school, my marks in English were in the range of a B+ to an A, whereas Math was a low "C" every year. The standardized Ontario tests gave a percentile rank against students in the same grade (not by age). I was miserably low in English yet in the top third in Math. Nevertheless, guidance counsellors only considered my school performance and directed me into a languages program at university. (I nearly failed my first year and then switched to social sciences). What went wrong with the predictions of success based on school performance? Were my "IQ" tests a better predictor of my aptitude? Did you ever feel unfairly assessed by an "IQ" test? Discussion Questions: 1. Outline the reasons you believe the results of the standardized "IQ" tests were so much different from academic performance. What other factors other than IQ tests and academic performance should counsellors consider when advising students? 2. Both Sternberg and Gardiner outlined different types of intelligence. Choosing one of these theories, outline how one of these "types" could be assessed to create a clearer picture of "intelligence" in the secondary school system.