Intelligence Testing Article Analysis
Intelligence Testing Article Analysis
One of the vague terms that can easily be figured out visually is intelligence. However, mapping out the exact dimensions of this term is a different aspect. Though, one clear thing is that it is impossible to meaningfully explicate intelligence outside the realm of cultural framework (Shiraev and Levy, 2010). This is partly due to the fact due to the different cultures hold different meanings to questions relating to intelligence scores. Intelligence basically refers to the potential or ability to understand and know both the internal and external aspects of the world, with the eventual outcome of achieving set goals, overcoming obstacles and acclimatizing to the changing situations and conditions (Shiraev, 2010).
Though intelligence can be analyzed on the basis of the definition given above, it is essential to give a definition that is culturally precise and that accounts for the theories governing intelligence testing as well as the effectiveness of the testing.
Theory of Multiple Intelligence’s
In the late 1980s, Howard Gardner made a proposition concerning an understandable set of intelligence’s, and an extra one in the mid 1990s. These set of intelligence’s could make explanations regarding the entire panorama surrounding human intelligence (Klein, 1997). The aspects of Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory include logical-mathematical, linguistic, body-kinesthetic, spatial, intrapersonal, interpersonal and musical (Klein, 1997, pp 377). According to Gardner, Intelligence’s can be defined as the bio-psychological ability for processing information, which can be activated in a cultural environment with the aim of creating products that are valuable to the culture (Goodnough, 2002).
It is therefore clear that the multiple intelligence’s theory has a cultural context foundation and has the ability to sole problems at the end of tasks that are applicable to a cultural setting. Goodnough (2002) further postulates that the conceptual definition of intelligence put forth by Gardner as well as the cosmopolitan comprehension regarding multiple intelligence gives information to teachers concerning curriculum, subject matter and instructions as well as weakness and strengths associated with the various instruction forms. Klein (1997) Counter argues by postulating that the theory is least applicable in any form of teaching activity. Generally, a wide variety of novel teaching strategies and practices have been motivated or inspired by multiple intelligences theory. This theory is however limited by broad applicability and non-specificity in relevance.
Theory of the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS)
This theory is founded in another form of theory referred to as the planning, attention, simultaneous and successive cognition (PASS). This theoryâ€™s implementation is based on its ability to identify talented and gifted individuals that can not be found out through traditional methods used to test Intelligence Quotient (Naglieri and Kaufman, 2001). Traditional Intelligence Quotient tests mainly focus on analytical skills without considering other forms of intelligence like PASS. Johannes, Naglieri and Kroesbergen (2005) used an example of implementing CAS on a 51 children of Dutch origin, who showed positive diagnosis results for ADHD. The findings of the test indicated that even though there were low attention and planning scores, the children scored extremely highly in successive as well as simultaneous scales.
The implications of the findings is that despite the fact that ADHD does not significantly influence attention, the deficits observed do not imply a general cognitive deficit when it comes to successive and simultaneous cognitive activities. Furthermore, the basis of traditional IQ tests is static and outdated intelligence theory that depends on the relationship between achievement and the IQ scores without considering the fact that intelligence can have an evolving and fluid nature. The PASS theory, which was implemented on the basis of CAS, aims at overcoming the barriers and defining intelligence in a sense that is more dynamic and contextual.
As earlier mentioned, the demerit of traditional IQ testing is that it is founded on the perception that intelligence is static and analytical in nature. The aim of psychometric approach to intelligence as utilized in IQ Test is to accord digital values to intelligence and hence minimizing the complexity associated with cognitive as well as cognition ability to one number (Shiraev, 2010). The number in question is percentage, which is expresses in relation to the scores of other individuals indicating that it is based on proportions instead of an altogether summation.
The daily activities surrounding an applicable culture must be considered during intelligence testing during involving different cultures. Cultural activity is therefore an important variable since without it intelligence tests are mere measures of non-applicable and unrelated cognitive structures, which may be insignificant in some cultural settings.
In conclusion, Gardner defines intelligence by adding various dimensions such as cultural utility, cognitive potentiality and multiple intelligences to the basic definition of intelligence presented at the start of the paper. PASS gives an explanation that it is possible to measure intelligence beyond simple analytical potentiality by taking into account attention, planning, successive and simultaneous cognitive processes as fundamentals of intelligence. Finally, the Intelligence Quotient test is enough during the determination of static intelligence in single cultural settings. It is however limited by the lack of cross-cultural basis as a form of comparison.
A thrifty way of defining intelligence by taking into consideration multiple intelligences, IQ tests and PASS should make use of strategies for problem-solving, overcoming barriers, achieving the set objectives and finally acclimatizing to changing situations and conditions. The definition should also be based on the multiple platforms of multiple intelligences theory, based on PASS theory and finally working under the assumption that the IQ tests only apply when cultural activities are taken into consideration.
Goodnough, K. (2002). Multiple Intelligences theory. a lens for guiding professional practice. Orbit 32(4) Retrieved on February 15, 2011 from CBCA
Naglieri, J. A., Kaufman, J. C. (2001). Understanding intelligence, giftedness and creativity using the PASS theory. Roeper Review 23(3), 151-156. Retrieved February 15, 2011 from Research Library
Van Luit, J. E., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Naglieri, J. A. (2005). Utility of the PASS theory and cognitive assessment system for Dutch children with and without ADHD. Journal of Learning Disabilities 38(5), 434-439. Retrieved on February 15, 2011 from Research Library