Intelligence_Testing_Article_Analysis

Intelligence Testing Article Analysis Intelligence does not have one consensual definition. Instead, the idea of intelligence can be described as a set of mental abilities that provides the capacity to acquire and use knowledge, demonstrate problem-solving skills, and to excel at a variety of tasks (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). Intelligence has been additionally explained as the capability to adapt to changing social and environmental conditions. The differences among individuals concerning intelligence are the ability to comprehend intricate thoughts, to adjust successfully to one’s surroundings, to gain knowledge from practice, and to connect in several types of analysis (American Psychological Association, 1995). Though these individual variations can be extensive, each distinction is in no way completely constant because a certain person’s intellectual functioning will fluctuate in different incidents, in different areas, and as determined by different decisive factors. Perceptions of intelligence are efforts to simplify and classify this compound series of occurrences (American Psychological Association, 1995). Intelligence testing was developed partially because of the psychometric approach to intelligence. Essentially, this perspective suggested that human intelligence can be given a numerical value (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). Today intelligence testing is used to highlight differences in cultural groups all over the world. Problems with intelligence testing are plentiful as a result of the differences in culture, gender, social status, and socioeconomic issues; however, the use of intelligence testing is on the rise. To reach a better understanding, it becomes necessary to discuss a couple of the theories proposed regarding intelligence as well as the effectiveness of intelligence testing, which is better known as IQ testing. Theory of Multiple Intelligences The theory of multiple intelligences was introduced by Howard Gardner in the late 1980s. His proposal included a comprehensive set of intelligences that could describe the complete spectrum of human intelligence. Rather than focus solely on IQ test scores, Gardner instead suggested that numerical expressions were not a full and accurate portrayal of a person’s intelligence. Gardner proposed eight distinct characteristics he thought were representative of skills and abilities valued across all cultures. Gardner’s theory of intelligence (MI) includes “…linguistic, logical-mathematic, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic qualities” (Klein, 1997, p. 377). Gardner later went on to propose that he saw intelligence as nothing more than “…a bio-psychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems and create products that are of value in a culture” (Goodnough, 2002, n.p.). Essentially, the framework for the theory of multiple intelligences is rooted strongly in cultural background and is predicated on potential problem-solving in cultural settings. Furthermore, this definition of intelligence is extremely helpful in an educational setting and can inform teachers of subject matter, curriculum, instructions, strengths, and weaknesses on behalf of the students (Goodnough, 2002). However, Klein argues that the broad scope of the theory of multiple intelligences negates or at any rate reduces the relevancy of the theory in each particular educating assignment. Altogether, it would appear that the theory of multiple intelligences has encouraged a broad array of innovative teaching methods, yet is restricted by its vague significance (Goodnough, 2002). Triarchic Theory of Intelligence Whereas Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences represents intelligence as a wide array of skills and abilities, Robert Sternberg suggested that the intelligences described by Gardner were more of individual talents than culture-specific intelligences. As a result, Sternberg offered a triarchic theory of intelligence suggesting that flourishing intelligence is composed of three major aspects: analytical intelligence, creative intelligence, and practical intelligence (Sternberg, 1985). From this perspective, intelligence can be defined as “purposive adaptation to, shaping of, and selection of real-world environments relevant to one's life" (Sternberg, 1985, p. 271). Sternberg’s theory is unique in that it suggests methods of intelligence in contrast to areas of intelligence as is evident in Gardner’s theory (State University, 2010). Within this theory, intelligence is described as expressions of the capability to obtain victory in life established on one's individual principles and within one's sociocultural environment (State University, 2010). Sternberg believed that no IQ test could ever fully account for the cultural discrepancies, and this is represented in the contextual dimension of the theory. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Intelligence Testing Even as the use of intelligence testing has both pros and cons, one of the major downfalls is that the tests fail to take into consideration the daily activities within any given culture. Currently, IQ testing is largely analytical and static. The tests attempt to assign a numerical assessment on intelligence thus successfully diminishing the difficulty of cognition and potential cognitive ability to a sole number (Shiraev & Levy, 2010). The results from IQ tests are presented as percentages and are in relation to the scores of others; therefore, the results become more of a comparison than a sum. To be effective, intelligence tests must take into consideration the variance of different culturally appropriate behaviors to be applicable to the study of cross-cultural psychology. Conclusion Both Gardner and Sternberg’s definitions of intelligence offer a unique perspective into the origination and development of intellect. Both reject traditional IQ testing as an accurate measure of intelligence and instead suggest that culture greatly influences the manifestations of intelligence. Through the use of intelligence testing; however, cross-cultural psychologists can continue to study the variations of intelligence across different cultures and can continually reinterpret the definition to suit the constantly changing social environment. References American Psychological Association. (1995). APA Task Force Examines the Knowns and Unknowns of Intelligence. Retrieved April 17, 2011 from http://web.archive.org/web/20041130090438/http://www.apa.org/releases/intell.html Goodnough, K. (2002). Multiple intelligences theory: a lens for guiding professional practice. Orbit, 32 (4). Retrieved April 17, 2011 from CBCA Complete Klein, P. (1997). Multiplying the problems of intelligence by eight: a critique of Gardner’s theory. Canadian Journal of Education, 22 (4), p. 337. Retrieved April 17, 2011 from EBSCOHost Database Shiraev, E. B., & Levy, D. A. (2010). Cross-cultural psychology: Critical thinking and contemporary applications (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn Bacon State University. (2010). Intelligence – Triarchic Theory of Intelligence. Retrieved April 16, 2011 from http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2104/Intelligence-TRIARCHIC- THEORY-INTELLIGENCE.html Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press