One of the largest controversies about intelligence testing has been around since the tests first started being used. This has to do with symbolic logic, which is largely the type of question that is used on the classic Binet test to measure IQ. The feeling held by many people is that many different types of intelligence exist and that classifying someone as intelligent or not merely based on their facility with symbolic logic questions is both unfair and inaccurate.
Another controversy is created by the fact that very strong verbal skills are typically required in order to be successful at an IQ test. Not only are strong verbal skills needed to answer many of the questions in the verbal section, but verbal acuity is also needed to understand what the questions in other sections may be asking. Some hold the opinion that a person's ability to read is not directly related to his intelligence, rendering tests that rely too much on facility with language inaccurate.
One of the largest controversies around these types of tests is whether or not they are effective at identifying the special needs of students. Ideally, tests should be able to identify gifted and challenged students so that they can receive the education that they will benefit the most from. Many have cried out against these types of tests, saying that students could end up being classified as challenged or in need of special education when that is not the case due to the various factors that can affect the scores.
Some feel that there are other valid types of intelligence beyond those measured by the standard Binet or Weschler IQ tests. Intelligence is ultimately supposed to be something that influences the measure of a person's potential based on mental prowess. The argument is made that people with high emotional intelligence (EQ) can succeed in academics and in life through different mechanisms than a person with a high IQ. It is argued that this must make that second measure of intelligence just as valid, although it is measured in different ways.