We should seek an updated perspective on intelligence testing because it is useful to reevaluate any practice that has long become institutionalized, especially one that is subject to severe criticism. Cultural bias is the most prominent criticism. Testing proponents contend that intelligence tests reflect skills and knowledge emphasized in school (although these may be culturally influenced), and that test makers are using sophisticated techniques to detect biased items. Some object to intelligence tests because they measure a narrow range of abilities; few test makers can identify other abilities which would increase predictive ability as efficiently. Test makers contend that teachers can and should develop and review expectations of individual pupil progress, based on intelligence test results; furthermore, the vast majority of teachers and adults feel that the tests do not measure inborn intelligence alone. Some critics discount results because they fluctuate over time; but a study with 2,000 students retested on the Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test, after three and six years, challenged this view. Human concerns center around labeling and quantification of individuals' ability. In conclusion, the original need to group students still prevails; intelligence tests have improved; and their discontinuation would harm both disadvantaged and mainstream groups. (CP)