Research has found that IQ predicted leadership skills when the tests were given under low-stress conditions, but under high-stress conditions, IQ was negatively correlated with leadership – that is, it predicted the opposite.

　　①Such standardized tests may not assess all the important elements necessary to succeed in school and in life, argues Robert J. Sternberg.

　　②In his article “How Intelligent Is Intelligence Testing?”, Sternberg notes that traditional test best assess analytical and verbal skills but fail to measure creativity and practical knowledge, components also critical to problem solving and life success.

　　③Moreover, IQ tests do not necessarily predict so well once populations or situations change.

　　④Research has found that IQ predicted leadership skills when the tests were given under low-stress conditions, but under high-stress conditions, IQ was negatively correlated with leadership – that is, it predicted the opposite.

　　⑤Anyone who has toiled through SAT will testify that test-taking skill also matters, whether it’s knowing when to guess or what questions to skip.

　　参考译文

　　①(论点：总)罗伯特·J·斯特恩伯格认为，这类标准化测试也许并不能评估对于学业和生活的成功来说必须的所有重要因素。

　　②(具体：分1)斯特恩伯格在他的“智力测试有多大可信度?”一文中指出，传统的智商测试能够很好地评估分析能力和语言能力，但不能评估创造能力和实践能力，而这两个因素对于解决问题和在生活中取得成功也至关重要。

　　③(并列：分2)此外，一旦测试群体或情景发生改变，智商测试不一定能做出准确的预测。

　　④(结果：分3)研究发现，在压力小的环境下进行测试，智商能够正确地反映出领导能力的高低;但是在压力大的情况下，智商与领导能力呈负相关关系——也就是说，根据智商分数预测出的领导能力与实际情况相反。

　　⑤(并列：分4)任何参加过“学术评估测验”的人都可以证明，应试技能也很重要，比如知道何时应该猜测或者什么题目可以略过不答。