First published June 16, 2019.
In 2019, Tara Sharifi, an 11-year-old pupil at Aylesbury High School in Buckinghamshire, England, scored 162 on a supervised Mensa IQ test taken in Oxford. That is the highest mark the test reports, and it comfortably qualifies her for Mensa, the society for people who score in the top 2% of the population. Headlines claimed she had "beaten" Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking, but neither scientist ever took a comparable test, so that part of the story is a myth rather than a measurement.
Below is what is actually known about Tara's result, how Mensa testing works, why the Einstein comparison keeps appearing, and what a very high score can and cannot tell us about a child.
Who is Tara Sharifi and what did she score?
Tara's story was first reported by her local paper, the Bucks Herald. According to the paper, she sat a timed, non-verbal Mensa test in Oxford after she and her parents decided together that she should give it a try. Her result of 162 was the top possible score on that test.
She told the paper she was shocked when the result arrived and had never expected to do so well. She said she was looking forward to meeting other Mensa members at their gatherings, and that when she is older she hopes to work in a field connected with mathematics. When she shared the news with school friends, they were, unsurprisingly, impressed.
Her father, Hossein, said he was extremely proud and surprised. He had noticed for some time that Tara would call out the answers to maths questions on television quiz shows before the contestants could, so he knew she was quick, but he had not expected a score that high.
The story was picked up internationally, including by IFP News, which highlighted the family's Iranian background, and Truth Theory. Some of those retellings added details that do not appear in the original report, which is a good reminder to go back to the first source when a story goes viral.
How Mensa testing works
Mensa was founded in 1946 at Lincoln College, Oxford, by Roland Berrill and Lancelot Ware. It has one entry requirement: a score at or above the 98th percentile on an approved, supervised intelligence test. Today it has around 150,000 members in more than 90 countries.
Because different tests use different scales, the qualifying number changes from test to test. According to Mensa's published criteria, as summarised on Wikipedia:
- Cattell scale: 148 or above
- Stanford-Binet: 132 or above
- Wechsler scales (WAIS and WISC): 130 or above
That is why the same person can have very different-looking "IQ numbers" depending on which test they took. A 162 on a Cattell-style scale and a 162 on a Wechsler scale are not the same thing. On the Cattell scale, which spreads scores out more widely, 148 marks the top 2%; 162 is well beyond that, but it is not the dizzying rarity the raw number suggests if you assume the more familiar Wechsler scale.
Tests for younger candidates also have a ceiling. Once a child answers almost everything correctly, the test simply cannot measure any higher, so a top score means "at least this high on this test," not an exact ranking against every other bright child in the country.
Did she really beat Einstein and Hawking?
The short answer is no, because there is nothing to beat. The figure of "160" that is often attached to Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking is an estimate repeated across the internet, not a recorded score. Einstein died in 1955, and there is no evidence he ever sat a modern IQ test. Hawking did not know his own IQ and was openly dismissive of the whole contest.
Asked about his IQ in a 2004 interview with The New York Times, Hawking replied: "People who boast about their IQ are losers." (as reported by the Guernsey Press). It was a joke, but it carried a serious point: his reputation came from decades of work on black holes and cosmology, not from a number on a test sheet.
Comparing a child's score with a guessed figure for two famous physicists makes a catchy headline, but it says nothing meaningful about either side. A fair comparison would need the same test, under the same conditions, at a similar age.
What a high IQ score does and does not measure
IQ tests are good at what they are designed for: measuring abilities such as pattern recognition, working memory and abstract reasoning under time pressure. Scores are also reasonably good predictors, on average, of academic performance. That is useful information for parents and teachers who want to make sure a child is properly challenged at school.
But a score is a snapshot, not a destiny. Things a single test does not capture include:
- Persistence and curiosity, which drive long-term achievement in science and mathematics;
- Creativity, the ability to ask new questions rather than solve set puzzles quickly;
- Specialised knowledge, which takes years of study to build;
- Social and practical skills, such as collaboration, communication and judgement.
Most people who made famous discoveries combined strong reasoning with years of focused work, good teachers and a fair share of luck. A brilliant test result at 11 is an excellent start; it is not the finish line.
Common myths about child IQ scores
"A high score means the child is a genius"
There is no scientific definition of "genius" on any IQ scale. Some newspapers describe 140 as the genius level, but that is a media convention rather than a technical cut-off.
"Children's scores are fixed for life"
Scores in childhood can shift, especially when tests are taken at different ages or on different scales. They tend to become more stable in adulthood.
"IQ is the best predictor of success"
It is one predictor among many. Family support, education, health, motivation and opportunity all play large roles in how talents develop.
"Joining Mensa is a reward in itself"
For many bright children the real value of Mensa is social: meeting others who enjoy puzzles and ideas, which can be a relief for a child who feels different at school. Tara said exactly this when she spoke about looking forward to its gatherings.
Supporting gifted children
Stories like Tara's tend to end with the hope that the child will become "the next Einstein." That puts a lot of weight on an 11-year-old. Educational psychologists generally suggest a gentler approach for highly able children:
- Offer harder material and enrichment, not just more of the same work.
- Follow the child's own interests – in Tara's case, mathematics.
- Praise effort and problem-solving, not just the score, so setbacks do not feel like failure.
- Leave room for friendships, play and rest.
Tara's result is worth celebrating on its own terms: a hard test, sat under supervision, with the highest possible outcome, by a girl who wants to do something with mathematics. That is a better story than any made-up contest with two scientists who never took part.
Sources: Bucks Herald: Aylesbury's brainiest child; Wikipedia: Mensa International; Guernsey Press: 8 times Stephen Hawking proved physicists can be funny. Image: 123RF.
COMMENTS