John P. Ertl. PhD.

(Dr. Ertl never had the opportunity to present this unedited compelling letter

as he passed away shortly after writing it. Jack Durban, Pres. Vorelco)

Chief Justice Berger and the California Legislature have said it all when they ruled against the use of IQ tests:

"The facts of this case demonstrate the inadequacy of broad and general testing devices as well as the infirmity of using diplomas or degrees as fixed measures of capability. History is filled with examples of men and women who rendered highly effective performances without the conventional badges of accomplishment. Diplomas

and tests are useful servants, but Congress has mandated the common sense proposition that they are NOT to become masters of reality. (401 US Duke Power Co. )" Despite these conclusions by men of common sense, IQ tests are being given to the children of California and across the nation. Profits of the major corporations in this field are in the hundreds of millions of dollars and the cost in salaries for performing what I view as "valueless services" runs into billions of dollars. It is time for a re-examination of this issue. First,from a practical, common sense point of view and then from a scientific point of view.

1 (a) We ask by what tortured logic are individually given IQ tests acceptable, and group ID tests not legal? Every group IQ test, when originally designed, has to

correlate with the main individually given IQ tests such as the Stanford-Binet or Wisc. If a new IQ test, group or individual, does not correlate significantly with the old standards it is unsaleable. Since the concepts and contents of all IQ tests are the same, what is the difference between group and individually given IQ tests? The real difference is MONEY. However, to be charitable, a responsible professional can help a child to do his/her best by establishing rapport and reducing anxiety.

1 (b). Based on information from the L. A. school system, about 5% of the children receive the benefit of these expensive individually given IQ tests and several other tests which are used to assess the potential of placement within a special education programme. Incredibly,black children are not tested at all and this issue is before the U. S. Supreme Court. If these tests are so useful, why discriminate against all blacks and the other 95% of the population? These are the claims of the most widely used tests, the Stanford-Binet ($300) and the Wechsler Intelligence for Children ($300): "measures general comprehension, memory, Judgment and reasoning. "Wouldn't all parents and teachers like to know how their children are performing in these areas in order to plan for their future? The answer is 'yes' and 'no'. If these tests worked and were meaningful predictors, !yes!.

Politicians and legislators are confused by the statistical jargon they get from their advisers. The predictive validity of any of these tests in real life situations, according to their makers, is. 5 maximum. What does this mean in English? The test will predict correctly 25% of the time, and be wrong 7% of the time. Why are we paying $300 per child to do this when we could get the same or better answers by looking at the grades given by teachers, for free. Einstein, Churchill and 90% of the Fortune 500 leaders did poorly in school and don't have MAs or PhDs All that IQ tests measure is academic achievement, not potential to learn, not motivation, not creativity.

2. When IQ tests and the rationale behind them are examined by physical scientists trained In logical thinking and the scientific method, the whole issue becomes a perversion of the human mind. A quote from an Astrophysicist, who wasted his time on this matter to put an end to this nonsense, states: To call IQ a measure of intelligence conforms neither to ordinary educated usage nor to elementary logic. "

(Layzer, D., Cognition, 1972, p. 265-300). The entire article is appended and worth reading.

Using IQ test scores to measure anything about human intelligence is like using a rubber ruler. The definition of intelligence is what IQ tests measure. The definition of heat is not what you read on a thermometer; the definition of power is not the meter reading on your utility bill. There is no substance, no science behind the IQ concept, and Dr. Layzer does a fine job of explaining this. Human intelligence is not measurable, but the functional efficiency of the brain is measurable, lust like kidney, liver and heart efficiency is measurable. The Synchroencephalogram (BWA) does this, without prejudice and without limiting human capability.

An Alternative: THE BWA we have developed and validated on twenty thousand children and adults a test of brain efficiency. It is a reliable culturally and racially unbiased indicator of learning potential. The SYNC is a totally safe battery operated instrument which analyzes Brain waves. The test takes less than three minutes, it is non-invasive and completely painless. The theory and research results are described in the appended publications: Brain wave Analysis and Neural Efficiency, and BEG, Race. Sex and Maturation. An important point to note is that unlike IQ tests which define intelligence as a score on an IQ test, we do NOT validate the Brain Efficiency scores based on how well they correlate with IQ tests. Instead, we use established physiological, medical standards concerning the electrical activity of the brain. For example, there is no dispute that anesthetics cause a lowered level of consciousness and that the EEG is slowed. We have tested proven geniuses, obvious mental retardates and everything between. The empirical results are in clear agreement with every physiological and psychological study of brain maturation. The SYNC measures the key EEG parameters which are related to mental functioning. Specifically, the SYNC can perform the following functions that would be useful in the school system:

1. A culturally and racially unbiased measure of learning potential, in compliance with PL 94-142.

2. Detects learning disabilities at an early age permitting preventative medical and/or psychological intervention.

3. With repeated testing the maturational development of a child's brain can be monitored. If there is a deviation from the predicted developmental pattern., which can be caused by drug abuse, various diseases, head injury, etc., early intervention becomes possible.

Practical Matters:

Current psychological testing of children in schools does provide a useful evaluation of academic achievement, emotional stability and the type of learning disability that may be present. The SYNC cannot do this and is certainly NOT designed to replace these professional functions. However, over 50% of professional time is used to determine the IQ of a child. This, in our view, is unnecessary since the SYNC can provide more important information concerning learning potential in less than three minutes. IQ tests measure nearly the same thing as simple grades given by teachers. The truly important factor, from an educational point of view, is why the learning potential of a child does not match the academic achievement. Professional time would be better spent on helping a child to achieve his/her potential.

Cost:

Individually given IQ tests take at least two hours of professional time to give and interpret.

There are many other associated costs which we conservatively estimate at about $300 per test. The SYNC does not require a professional operator, but does require a professional to interpret the results as part of a complete evaluation.We estimate that using the SYNC would be at least ten times less expensive.