Week 5 - Intelligence

There were several main ideas that I found in this week’s reading. The first is that there is a broad spectrum of definitions for the word “intelligence.” There are divisions between those who believe that intelligence if a unitary concept, and those that believe it is comprised of multiple elements. “A theory of intelligence is useful to educators and school counselors only if it leads to a better understanding of how children learn or if it assists in predicting future performance” (Esters & Ittenbach, 1999, p. 373). A theory of intelligence is also useful when designing intelligence assessments. In the past, intelligence assessments were developed without a clear construct of intelligence which they were intended to measure (Esters & Ittenbach, 1999). This presents an issue in determining whether or not a person’s score on one of the aforementioned assessments was truly representative of that person’s intelligence. For this reason, most contemporary intelligence assessments are based on a theory of intelligence.

Perhaps the most poignant piece I found in this week’s reading was Neisser’s exploration of the effects of various environmental factors on intelligence. There were many social justice issues that I found among his list. At the core of these issues was the central issue of poverty. Poverty affects the type of school a child will attend, how often the child attends school, what type of interventions a child may or may not have access to, the type of nutrition that a child has access to, exposure to lead poisoning, prenatal exposure to alcohol, and the type of social environment which a child develops in. All of these factors are interrelated and each one has the potential to negatively affect a child’s intelligence, as well as their score on an intelligence assessment. While reading about these things, I had a definite “life is not fair” moment. It really bothers me that children who are born into poverty are often at extreme disadvantages in almost every aspect of life – especially in education. I was surprised to learn that those children who participate in “Head Start” and other similar programs often experience only short-term gains on test scores and mental ability (Neisser et. al, 1996). However, I was pleased to learn that children who participated in such programs are less likely to be assigned to special education, less likely to be held back in grade, and more likely to finish high school than matched controls (Neisser et. al, 1996). Overall, I was reminded that as a school counselor, one of my duties will be to advocate for my students. This may mean investigating issues, such as those explored by Neisser, which may be affecting a student’s performance and experience at school. Being a school counselor will mean being an ambassador for justice in the educational environment. I know that this probably wasn't the takeaway intended within this week’s reading, but it is the one that impacted me the most.

References
Esters, I. & Ittenbach, R. (1999). Contemporary theories and assessments of intelligence: A primer. Professional School Counseling, 2 (5), 373-9.

Neisser, U. , Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T.J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S.J., Halpern, D.F., Loehlin,     J.C., Perloff, J.C., Sternberg, R., Urbina, S. (1999). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist. 51(2), 77-101.