The Case Against Intelligence Testing in Early Intervention

Abstract

A legal-like format is employed in this article to put intelligence testing in early intervention “on trial”. Six major presumptions that underlie the use of early intelligence tests are presented and disputed. The concerns center on the construct of early intelligence, reliability, prediction, standardized administration, professional acceptability, utility for decision making, and congruence with P.L. 99--457. Logic and evidence are marshaled to refute each presumption. In the summation and closing arguments, we urge professional solidarity in opposing the continued unwarranted use of intelligence testing in early intervention.