Intelligence

What surprised me in reviewing this week's readings was the sheer breadth of information available about the way in which intelligence scores can be calculated and used. Earlier in the class, I shared how I was administered an intelligence test in third grade which consisted of being asked to assemble various puzzles. As a result of these assessments, my spatial ability was determined to be sub-par, and I was not placed in the gifted program because of this initial assessment. Fortunately, this did not have much impact on my academic career as my grades and academic achievement allowed me to be placed in the same honors and AP courses as my gifted peers. If I knew what I do now about intelligence, though, I would have certainly explored other options as there seem to be so many more assessment options available that would be more valid. As it was, my parents had to be called into a meeting with a school counselor and psychologist to examine the reasons why my verbal and written capabilities were so advanced as compared to my spatial and mathematical abilities. If they would have asked me, I may have described how nervous I felt the day I was pulled out of class to take the assessment because I had no idea where I was going or for what reason the test was being administered. I would have told them about the pit in my stomach as I tried to assemble the various puzzles which the test administrator seemed to deem simple. I would have also shared how I always ignored legos, puzzles, and other mechanical tasks in favor of settling down with a good book. They didn't ask me though-in fact, they didn't have any discussion with me or my parents until that later meeting when they shared the results. I found the Ester and Ittenbach article interesting because it described how Stanford-Binet exam was designed without having a clear understanding of the construct of intelligence. Similarly, the Weschler Scales were based on the concept of g, which viewed intelligence as a one-factor construct, but was later found to be lacking in adequately explaining the concept. The Fluid-Crystallized Theory of Intelligence is more comprehensive, including nine factors, such as fluid reasoning, crystallized intelligence, visual and auditory processing, processing speed, short-term memory, long-term retrieval, quantitative knowledge, and correct decision speed. Unfortunately, this theory contradicts the concept of g, upon which the original assessments were based, but this theory makes more sense to me-if only because it includes many more elements which can be measured. According to the authors, Carroll's Three Stratum theory may be the most widely accepted theory accounting for intelligence-perhaps because it combines the two competing ideas (g and fluid-crystallized theory) and organizes cogntive abililities into three different levels. Regardless of the model used, it is helpful to understand the theory upon which popular intelligence tests are grounded-if only so we can have more understanding and ammunition when attempting to explain results to teachers, students and parents. Esters, I., & Ittenbach, R. (1999, June). Contemporary theories and assessments of intelligence: A primer. Professional School Counseling, 2(5), 373. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database