Question 10 (3)

Question 10 (3)

1. Robert Sternberg (2001): Triarchic Theory of Successful Intelligence

   • Expanded the componential approach into a comprehensive theory that views intelligence as a product of inner and outer forces.
     • Consists of 3 broad, interacting intelligences:
       • Analytical intelligence
         • Information Processing skills
           • Serves as a foundation for intelligence: Strategy application, Problem solving abilities.
       • Creative intelligence
         • The capacity to solve novel problems.
           • Make processing skills automatic to free up working memory for more complex thinking: Ability to deal with new situations using past experiences and current skills.
       • Practical intelligence
         • Application of intellectual skills in everyday situations.
           • Practical, goal oriented activity aimed at adapting to (changing to suit), shaping (change environment to suit), or selecting environments (find another one to suit you.) to meet goals of everyday life.
             • Intelligent behaviour is never culture free, many ethnic minorities have their intelligence overlooked.
       • Intelligent behaviour involves balancing all 3 to achieve success in everyday life according to one's personal goals and requirements of cultural community.

2. Contributions

   • Spearman and Thurstone: Resolved their differences to combine their models to propose hierarchical models of mental abilities.
     • Paved the way for extended factor-analytic theorists such as Cattell and Carroll
   • Cattell: His theory has important implications for the issue of cultural bias in intelligence testing.
     • Tests aimed at reducing cultural specific content can emphasise fluid over crystallised.
   • Carroll: Most comprehensive factor-analytic classification of mental abilities to date.
     • Reiterates great diversity of mental factors.
     • Provides a useful framework to understand mental-test performance in cognitive processing terms.
   • Componential approach: identifying relationships between cognitive processing and mental test scores assisted in trying to isolate the cognitive processes/skills that contribute to high intelligence.
   • Sternberg: Expanded componential approach.
     • Views intelligence as a product of inner and outer forces.
       • Emphasizes the complexity of intelligent behaviour and the limitations of current intelligence tests in assuming that complexity.
       • States that mental tests can easily underestimate, even overlook, intellectual strengths of some children, esp. minorities.
         • Helps explains why cultures vary in behaviours they define as intelligent.
   • Gardner: His theory has stimulated innovations in education in many countries.
     • Helped clarify efforts to understand and nurture children's special talents.
     • Calls attention to several intelligences not tapped by intelligence tests. e.g. interpersonal intelligence.

3. Howard Gardner (1983-2000): Theory of Multiple Intelligences

   • Another view of how info processing skills underlie intelligent behaviour.
   • Defines intelligence in terms of distinct sets of processing operations that permit individs to:
     • solve problems and create products
     • and discover new knowledge in a wide range of culturally coded activities.
   • Proposes at least 8 independent intelligences, dismissing the idea of general intelligence.
     • Each has a unique biological basis, a distinct course of development and different "end state"/expert performances.
       • Requires lengthy education process to convert any raw potential into mature social role.
         • Cultural values + learning opportunities affect child's strengths and how they are expressed.
           • If tests available to test all abilities, would show little to no relation to one another, findings supported by neurological factors e.g. savant syndrome.
   • Similar to core knowledge perspective: innately specified, core domains of thought existing at birth/emerging early in life.
     • As children respond to the demands of their culture, they transform those intelligences to fit the activities they are called on to perform.

4. Limitations

   • Spearman: Downplayed significance of specific intelligences to focus on g as central and supreme.
   • Cattell: Crystallised and Fluid highly correlated in children with similar educational and cultural backgrounds, making it difficult to distinguish with factor analysis.
     • In children differing greatly in culture and educational experiences, the two show little to no relationship.
       • Thus runs the risk of cultural bias.
   • Componential approach: major shortcoming: regards intelligence as solely due to causes within the child, not taking cultural and situational factors into account.
   • Gardner: Questions as to the independence of the different intelligences.
     • In contrast, excellence in most fields requires a combination of intelligences e.g. musician: logico-mathematical intelligence to interpret music score.
       • Savant's skills usually inflexible and mechanical because those skills not aided by other abilities.

5. CONCLUSION

   • Factor analyses alone cannot be used to understand children's intelligence levels, as it is focusing mainly on the WHAT, ie. identifying the mental abilities used in intelligence performance.
     • Information Processing approach focuses on measuring basic working-memory capacity, examining how information is coded, processed etc. ie. the HOW and WHY.
       • By combining and then extending these approaches, the relationship between cognitive processing and mental test scores can be identified: this increases possibility of being able to isolate the cognitive processes and skills that contribute to high intelligence. Once one also takes into account situational and cultural factors, one can better understand children's intelligence.