Methods of Measuring Intelligence - Essay Example

Methods of Measuring Intelligence

Introduction

Measurement of intelligence can be traced back to the 21st century B.C. in the Chinese empire where emperors used aptitude to test public officials every three years. During his lifetime (around 500 B.C.), Pythagoras practiced physiognomy that was crucial in the evaluation of personality. Other philosophers who made significant contributions in intelligence measurement included Hippocrates and Plato. The scale used by the Chinese government was enhanced in 200 A.D. to include a more holistic assessment platform that considered the ability of the individual in writing, arithmetic, music, civil law, geography, and agriculture among others. Further development was halted until the 1200s A.D (Walker & Foley, 1973, 855). where the interest in studying the differences between individuals took centre stage. During the same period, the University of Bologna in Italy commenced oral tests for students before the award of academic degrees. In the 1400s, the Belgium Louvain University introduced written tests to measure academic proficiency, which were also introduced at St Ignatius of Lyola, Italy around 140 years later. The field of philosophy was reinvented in the Renaissance, which came with a stronger view on science. In the 1600s, Oxford University required that students sat for oral examinations to earn degrees. Philosophy was integrated in scholastic writing in Germany, France, and Britain in the 18th century, which was followed by the foundation of the Journal of Phrenology in 1823 A.D., which fostered sharing of work on human abilities and talents. Wilhelm Wundt founded the first psychology laboratory in Germany in 1879 followed by the launch of mental testing by James McKeen, his student, in 1895 A.D. Sigmund Freud’s The Interpretation of Dreams greatly influenced the advancements in personality for the better part of the 20th century (Boake, 2002, 394). Actual work relating to the measurement of intelligence was started by Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon in 1905 who published an intelligence scale that was used in the classification of schoolchildren. Psychological testing became even more crucial during the First World War in 1914 where recruits were tested for emotional and intellectual capacity followed by the introduction of a data sheet showing the officers who were susceptible to shell shock by Robert Woodworth in 1919. The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) was introduced in 1926. Carl Spearman published the two-factor model of intelligence that argued for a general intellectual ability influences in 1927 A.D. Later, David Wechsler published the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale for the measurement of adult intelligence in 1939 with the version of measuring intelligence for children being published in 1949. On the other hand, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory was introduced 1943. The Meyers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) was published in 1962 by Katherine and Isabel Briggs besides the first article on the Big Five Personality Factors by Warren Norman the same year. Finally, John Carroll proposed a hierarchical model using three levels - Three Stratum Theory in 1993 (Kaplan et al., 2000, 172). Two of the principle intelligence measurement methods that have emerged over time include the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale using the intelligence quotient and David Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale that extensively discussed in the subsequent section.

Intelligence Measurement Methods

This section will consider the definition and purpose of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, which is a descendent of the Binet-Simon scale introduced in 1905. The intelligence scale is a standardized test used in the measurement of the intelligence and cognitive capacities for both children and adults. The initial purpose for its introduction was to correctly place children in the appropriate educational level in Paris schools. After improvement in the Stanford University, the measure became essential in the diagnosis of the mental retardation, talent, developmental challenges, and learning disabilities. It is used in a broad variety of academic courses including research, educational planning, and neuropsychological evaluation (Coolican, Bryson, & Zwaigenbaum, 2007, 196). The scale is particularly important in the clinical and educational environments. The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale has undergone major revisions with the fifth edition being in use. Administering the test takes around 45 to 90 minutes although the time required may be longer depending on the number of subsets administered. The intelligence scale has different cognitive area assessment that include quantitative reasoning, verbal reasoning, short-term memory, and abstract reasoning (Canivez, 2008, 538). Quantitative reasoning tests assesses the knowledge and application of numerical reasoning. On the other hand, verbal reasoning measures the knowledge in verbal skills learnt within the individual’s environment; the measures include social judgement and word knowledge. The short-term memory score evaluates skills in number and sentence sequencing, and short-term memory tasks. Finally, abstract reasoning looks into the ability of the individual to perform numerical operations, visual and motor skills, and identify patterns. The score accumulated from the four categories is known as the composite score or the general reasoning ability “g” represents the capacity of the individual to solve problems. Considering that not all subsets can be administered to all ages, the subsets are categorised with regard to the assessment needs; there are 15 subsets (Dezoete, MacArthur, & Tuck, 2003, 369). The David Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) is critical in evaluating the cognitive capacity of adults. The fourth edition of the scale is the latest and most advanced and is extensively used in understanding the relationship between the memory and intellectual functions, which can be applied in educational planning for older adults, especially in higher learning levels such as the university (Benson, Hulac, & Kranzler, 2010, 125). Like the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, WAIS has various subsets for assessment that take around 60 to 90 minute to administer; however, it has 11 compared to 15 for the former. The scale has also been essential in the development of a connection between pathology and personality where mental illnesses are identified and addressed. For instance, the identification of major differences between the individual’s verbal and non-verbal may be indicative of a prevailing mental retardation and learning incapacitation. Wechsler’s scale has been important in assessing the intelligence capacity of IQ levels between 70 and 130 as explained by author. The WAIS test requires the presence of an administrator who guides in giving instructions (Hartman, 2009, 86). The test starts with the simpler to the more complex items where each of the subsets is administered separately, which allows the administrator the authority to end the test if it is evident that the test taker has reached his/her limit. There is not much difference between the aspects of intelligence measured by the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and WAIS. Some of the key measurements include vocabulary test, arithmetic problems, general knowledge, completion of missing elements in pictures, and assembly of objects. The scale has been extensively used in research, especially in psychology where there is a correlation between the IQ levels of the individual and their socioeconomic, environmental, and physiological characteristics. In addition, the scale has been proven to be a good measure of crystallized and fluid intelligence (Axelrod, Fichtenberg, Millis, & Wertheimer, 2006, 520). Crystallized intelligence represents the skills and know-how influenced by the socioeconomic and environmental factors while fluid intelligence are highly influenced by the biological and neurological factors such as the inductive and deductive reasoning. Some of the concepts held by the two measurement scales are also represented in the Howard Gardner theory as explained in the subsequent section.

The Howard Gardner Theory

The Howard Gardner Theory, also known as the Theory of Multiple Intelligences, is a model introduced by Howard Gardner that has been crucial in psychological evaluation and measurement of intelligence. In addition, the theory has been crucial in educational practice primarily in the United States besides the initial purpose of its development was as a contribution to the field of psychology. In the theory, Gardner identifies seven different intelligences. The theory explains the interaction between the individual’s intelligence and the learning such as the understanding of language, spatial representation, mathematical analysis, and musical thinking. The theory was first published in 1983 in the book, Frames of Mind by Gardner (Aronson, Fried, & Good, 2002, 113). The seven distinct types of intelligence are linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, bodily-kinaesthetic, spatial-visual, interpersonal and intrapersonal. Persons with a high linguistic intelligence can use word very effectively and has the potential to develop thoughts using words besides having excellent auditory skills. Due to the love for language, they love playing word games and developing stories and poems; basically everything to do with language and words and, as a result, learning should entail the seeing and saying words. On the other hand, logical-mathematical entails calculation and reasoning where individuals with high intelligence in this area have the capacity to think abstractly and conceptually. In addition, individuals can be able to easily identify patterns and develop relationships between such patterns. Learners love conducting experiments and solve mathematical puzzles and, thus, they can be taught using investigative and logical games. Musical intelligence illustrates the individual’s sensitivity to sound and rhythm. An individual in the groups is a music lover but is still sensitive to the sounds emanating from within his/her environment. Also, the person can comfortably study with some music in the background but can be distracted by composing tunes during lessons and rhythmic speaking. Bodily-kinaesthetic involves the effective use of the body as well as a strong body awareness. Persons in this group love bodily movement, constructing objects and touching. They can effectively communicate using body language, especially through the use of signs and gestures. Learning should largely involve role playing and physical activity. Visual-Spatial intellectuals have the capacity to think in consideration of physical space, which is the thinking approach applied by sailors and architects. The people in this group are highly sensitive and aware of their environment and love to read maps, day dream, draw zigzag puzzles. Learning should be characterized by drawing, physical, and verbal imagery. Considering the persons with high interpersonal intelligence, they have a strong character of interacting with people besides being able to understand or tolerate them. They mainly learn through interaction as they have a large number of friends, and have the empathy for others. Finally, intrapersonal intelligence involves deep understanding of their personal interests and goals. These persons tend to be shy but comprehensively in terms with their feelings; they are highly motivated besides being wise, confident, and have a strong will. Much of the application of the theory is in education as discussed in the following section (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007, 251).

Applications in Education

The two assessment scales and theory discussed have various applications in the field of education. One of the emergent applications is the identification of the level of intelligence of the learner, which is imperative in positioning the learners in the appropriate classes. In this regard, it is also possible to assign learners within the same gap of intelligence to the same class, which can facilitate better content delivery. Another application of the theories is educational planning, which is ardently mentioned in the discussion on the Howard Gardner Theory. It is clear that identifying the characteristics of the learner makes it possible to adopt the most appropriate approach to learning and instruction. For instance, the theory identifies the learning activities that the learner loves to integrate and, as a result, feeding him/her with content using a particular platform can make learning effective. Also, the identification of learning disabilities using the scales can help prevent the learner from focusing on learning content that they cannot comprehend. Besides the application within the classroom setting, the assessment scales and theory can be used in providing career advice to young students where their IQ level and class of intelligence can be used in identifying the most appropriate courses they can pursue (Aronson, Fried, & Good, 2002, 115). In addition, schools can administer the scales to select students for particular courses.

Conclusion

Over the years, different ways of measuring intelligence have emerged. Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon made a major contribution in the field through the introduction of the Binet-Simon scale, which was later revised to Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale at Stanford University. The scale has been crucial in the measurement of intelligence, identification of mental disorders, learning disabilities besides being crucial in the field of research, which are similar to the uses of the WAIS by David Wechsler. Both scales have different subtests used to measure different areas of intelligence and cannot be administered to all groups due to differences in the IQ level. On the other hand, the Howard Gardner Theory identifies seven distinct types of intelligence. According to the theory, an individual belonging to a particular group exudes a set of learning characteristics that are critical in the development of educational plans. The two scales and theory can also be used in the provision of educational guidance for learners pertaining the most appropriate careers they should pursue.

Reference List

Aronson, J., Fried, C. and Good, C., 2002. Reducing the Effects of Stereotype Threat on African American College Students by Shaping Theories of Intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(2), pp.113-125.

Axelrod, B., Fichtenberg, N., Millis, S. and Wertheimer, J., 2006. Detecting Incomplete Effort with Digit Span from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Third Edition. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 20(3), pp.513-523.

Benson, N., Hulac, D. and Kranzler, J., 2010. Independent examination of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV): What does the WAIS-IV measure? Psychological Assessment, 22(1), pp.121-130.

Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, K. and Dweck, C., 2007. Implicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement Across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention. Child Development, 78(1), pp.246-263.

Boake, C., 2002. From the Binet? Simon to the Wechsler? Bellevue: Tracing the History of Intelligence Testing. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology (Neuropsychology, Development and Cognition: Section A), 24(3), pp.383-405.

Canivez, G., 2008. Orthogonal higher order factor structure of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales--fifth edition for children and adolescents. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), pp.533-541.

Coolican, J., Bryson, S. and Zwaigenbaum, L., 2007. Brief Report: Data on the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed.) in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. J Autism Dev Disord, 38(1), pp.190-197.

Dezoete, J., MacArthur, B. and Tuck, B., 2003. Prediction of Bayley and Stanford-Binet Scores with a group of very low birth weight children. Child: Care, Health and Development, 29(5), pp.367-372.

Hartman, D., 2009. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale IV (WAIS IV): Return of the Gold Standard.Applied Neuropsychology, 16(1), pp.85-87.

Kaplan, H., Hill, K., Lancaster, J. and Hurtado, A., 2000. A theory of human life history evolution: Diet, intelligence, and longevity. Evol. Anthropol., 9(4), pp.156-185.

Walker, R. and Foley, J., 1973. Social Intelligence: Its History and Measurement. Psychological Reports, 33(3), pp.839-864.