Parents who see their child placed in one kind or other of instructional 鈥渟pecial class鈥� or 鈥済ifted class鈥� based on perceptions of IQ might well learn more about IQ testing in general and IQ testing as it applies, or does not apply, to their unique child.
Experts continue to argue about what intelligence is and whether it can be accurately measured by IQ tests. Yet IQ tests continue to be used to screen job applicants and sometimes to identify children who are thought to need additional or different kinds of academic assistance or advancement.
The really big, and as yet unanswered, questions are: 鈥淚s intelligence a single ability?鈥� and 鈥淒oes it accurately reflect an assortment of multiple skills and abilities?鈥�
Howard Gardner, in his 1983 book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, suggested that all people have different kinds of 鈥漣ntelligences.鈥�
Gardner proposed that there are at least eight kinds of intelligences: Visual 鈥� good with art; linguistic 鈥� good with words; logical 鈥� good with math; bodily 鈥� good at sports; musical 鈥� good with tone and rhythm; interpersonal 鈥� good at communicating; intrapersonal 鈥� good at self-reflection; and naturalistic 鈥� good at appreciating the natural world.
Larry Summers, an American economist who is president emeritus and Charles W. Eliot Professor of Harvard University, is reported to have said: 鈥淎t Harvard, the A students tend to become professors and the C students become wealthy donors.鈥�
Simple observation and common sense indicate there is not only more than one kind of intelligence, but that traditional intelligence testing that tends to measure academic potential might miss much of what we now know about bright successful people deemed not too clever academically, but who excelled in other aspects of life, business, music, sports, even teaching.
Then there is the classic nature-versus-nurture debate. Is intelligence inherited, or does the environment play a larger role? Again, research tells us that there are way too many factors in the development of some kinds of intelligence to allow a simple answer to that question.
Parents who provide a home environment with lots of reading material, and who set an example by reading themselves and talking about what they are reading, are more likely to influence their kids toward verbal fluency and reading ability, but that is still a narrow spectrum of general intelligence.
Another unresolved debate about intelligence tests raises the question of whether the tests are biased. Some argue that tests can be culturally biased as in 鈥淣apoleon is to beer as _____ is to salad dressing.鈥� The multiple-choice options were: a. Washington, b. Arthur or c. Caesar.
That question on a U.S.-based test assumes that the respondent comes from a culture that commonly has Napoleon beer or caesar salad dressing.
Nonetheless, school potential seems to correlate with performance on IQ tests. Generally speaking, psychologists and psychometricians agree that if someone has a high-tested IQ, odds favour them doing well in school, which tends to focus on verbal and logical intelligence, but not on interpersonal or naturalistic intelligence.
One thing even divergent researchers agree about is that intelligence can take a person only so far. In order to achieve success, other elements such as support, motivation, and life experience must play a part.
Just as important as formal measures of intelligence, and maybe even more important for parents and teachers to watch for, are observable factors such as a positive 鈥淚 can do this鈥� work ethic. Perseverance, as in 鈥淚鈥檒l stick with this even if it seems harder than I thought,鈥� is an important characteristic of successful learners and eventual success.
Social environment (鈥淚 like to hang with people and situations that challenge me鈥�) also plays a role in success at school.
Churchill said it best: 鈥淐ontinuous effort 鈥� not strength or intelligence 鈥� is the key to unlocking our potential.鈥�
Geoff Johnson is a retired superintendent of schools.
