Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Post 3, The Element:
Any thoughts about Sir Ken's discussion of intelligence beginning on page 35--"How intelligent are you?" vs "How are you intelligent?" This notion of a person's fixed amount of intelligence has certainly influenced public education in earlier generations. He brings up standardized testing in this section, including the SAT which was developed for the military and later disowned by its creator. Sir Ken says, "The SAT is in many ways the indicator for what is wrong with standardized tests: it only measures a certain kind of intelligence..." One of his arguments is that the SAT is not a good predictor of college potential for ALL students and that is certainly one of the arguments used today by the nearly 50 U.S. colleges and universities that no longer consider SAT scores for admissions. So what do you think--do individuals have a fixed amount of a single type of intelligence, or multiple intelligences such as those described by Howard Gardner on page 43, or intelligence as unique as a fingerprint? In your opinion, which of these concepts is most prevalent in US schools today?
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. Trevor LedfordJuly 22, 2009 at 6:00 PM

    I definitely feel inteligence is as unique as a fingerprint. And it's certainly very fluid. But most school assessments are not geared towards this type of belief. On the one hand, we can't realistically expect to develop individualized assessments for every student we teach. Furthermore, I think there are intelligences that can't really be assessed in schools by any method. On the other hand, we have to do better than the standardized tests we currently use.

    Some of the more sought after intelligences from employers are not even assessed on standardized tests, such as: interpersonal & intrapersonal intelligences.Also, creative problem-solving isn't assessed. The assessments that have been used in the past to measure intelligence are relevant to such a narrow range of human intelligence that it really makes them irrelavent. I think the complexity of human intelligence, and the fact that we all are so unique makes teaching one of the most challenging professions there is. But it also presents a lot of possibilities for us.

    I personally think some of my most accurate assessments of my students come from 2 sources: 1. plain observation of a student day-to-day. and 2. conversations with students one-on-one. But neither one of these can be easily quantified or put into tangible form. So it presents a difficult problem, especially when hard evidence is needed to communicate an assessment.

    Since intelligence, I believe, results from our experiences in life students are both bringing certain intelligences with them to school while they are forming new ones as a result of the work we create for them. I think we sometimes assume that if we're teaching everyone the same things that everyone will come away from the experience with the same results more or less. Well, I think an accurate assessment would show that some are just memorizing information for a short duration while others may be making entirely new connections creating a whole new genre of intelligence for themselves. But most of our assessments don't distinguish one from the other.

    I think we also need to be careful thinking about intelligences in such a heiarchical way, making one type seem more important than another. We need them all, and where we lack as individuals is where we begin to depend on others, which is why diversity is such a strenghth to an organization. But only if we realize our interdependence on one another.

    ReplyDelete
  2. cushmomJuly 22, 2009 at 9:00 PM

    I taught second grade for 9 years. I stayed home for a few years and got my gifted endorsement during that time. I have now been a Challenge teacher for the last 5 years.

    I believe that there are many types of intelligence. When I have students begin Challenge in my class, I explain to them (1st/2nd graders) that they come to my class because they think and learn in a different way. It isn't because they are "smarter" than everyone else. I tell them that everyone is "smart" in a different ways. Some may be better in reading than my students, some may be better athletically or musically.

    I think we, as teachers, should take in to account Gardner's ideas. I like to offer different ways for my kids to demonstrate their learning (book report, poster, video, etc.) I feel like the regular assessments don't really allow all kids to show what they know.

    I love the statement in the book by Robert Cooper "we shouldn't think of intelligence as happening only in the brain in our skulls." He talks about the "heart" brain and the "gut" brain.

    In April Edutopia magazine, I read about a neat Georgia school that is based on Gardner's multiple intelligencies. Here is the link...

    http://www.edutopia.org/multiple-intelligences-immersion-enota

    ReplyDelete
  3. Trevor LedfordJuly 23, 2009 at 11:35 AM

    I like that quote about not limiting intelligence to the brain. I believe that too, that intelligence goes beyond the brain. There's recently been research to support that. And much of Eastern philosophy has always promoted the belief that intelligence exists in other parts of our bodies as well. I think this is just one reason we must promote health and physical fitness in schools. If your body is out of balance you're not going to be able to fully utilize those other intelligences.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)