Theory

In an attempt to answer the debatable topic of what “intelligence” really is, and how to measure it, psychologists have devised an assessment to conclude the overall intelligence of an individual. Currently, the most commonly used measures are IQ (intelligence quotient) tests. “Although the test – and the many others that would be developed over the years – was designed to yield a measure of ‘intelligence,’ it was devised with a very specific type of intelligence in mind: the type it takes to succeed in formal education. Even the best IQ tests used today measure only a very specific type of intelligence,” (Steinberg, L., 2010, p. 74). The test is devised around a score of 100, with IQ scores below 100 indicating a below average student, and a score above 100 indicating a better performance than the “average student,” or comparison group. Although these intelligence tests are the most popular evaluation of “school smarts,” theorists have contemplated the exclusiveness of the test; the results are solely based on abilities related to success academically, therefore producing a one-sided illustration of what it means to be intelligent. “Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences also stresses that there is more to being smart than being ‘book smart.’ Gardner proposed that there are seven types of intelligence: verbal, mathematical, spatial, kinesthetic (having to do with movement), self-reflective, interpersonal, and musical,” (Steinberg, L., 2010, p. 75).

The idea of teachers using intelligence tests to assess students’ strengths and weaknesses has been an ongoing debate within the education system for years. Personally, I think the emphasis on intelligence and standardized testing has blown out of proportion. Just as Gardner theorized, there are multiple types of intelligence, and “school smart” should not be the only measure of students’ abilities. I think that teachers spend too much time focusing on preparing their students for these types of tests, consistently repeating basic facts until the information is instilled in students’ memories. Rather, the school curriculum should integrate various components into the school day, like creativity, technology, and the traditional mathematics, social studies, etc. There are three principles supporting Gardner’s work. They explain that “individuals should be encouraged to use their preferred intelligences in learning, instructional activities should appeal to different forms of intelligence, and the assessment of learning should measure multiple forms of intelligence,” (www.instructionaldesign.org). I do think that it is important that teachers use some sort of measurement to track their students capabilities and improvements. But, would a “do it yourself” project of what you learned throughout the course of a social studies class be an adequate substitute to a multiple-choice unit test about the social studies content?

Teachers could develop different techniques integrating several domains of education into one. For example, students could use computer-generate programs, like Blogger, to collaborate, communicate, and share ideas amongst each other. They can use the Internet to research concepts and theories about mathematics, social studies, or science. They can use virtual applications to grasp concrete facts about geography, our ecosystem, music, and art. Given our rapid developing society, the possibilities and opportunities are ample for children to receive a highly diverse education. Rather than a one-size-fits-all solution to the educational system, the technology is providing teachers with unique, beneficial ways to educate our children. Ultimately, these options for teaching will embrace students that specialize in different types of intelligence.