Teach English in Yinliu Zhen - Tianjin

Multiple Intelligences When Abigail Adams, the wife of one US president and the mother of a second, wrote that she felt that ?a person?s intelligence is directly reflected by the number of conflicting points of view he can entertain simultaneously on the same subject? she little knew she would be describing the controversy over the definition of ?intelligence?, being debated 200 years later. She would have had to conclude that if 21st century educationalists were one person, that person would be exceedingly intelligent! ?Intelligence? is a peculiar noun. Everyone uses it confidently knowing what it means, yet no one can agree a consistent definition. It many interpretations, from abstract thought to rational problem solving, seems to make any one definition almost meaningless. It can be argued the last time there was a single definition was in the 12th and 13th centuries when ?intellectus? was used to mean metaphysical understanding. However, by the 16th century, philosophers and academics, such as Francis Bacon, were advocating ?empirical science? as the only means of establishing a true understanding or ?truth?. Academic interest in ?intelligence? progressively declined until it was revived by educational psychologists in the early-20th century, seeking to understand why individuals performed similar tasks differently. For nearly 50 years, Intelligence Quotient (IQ) was the established measure of individual and collective intelligence. However, disagreement continued about which cognitive and behavioural factors comprised meaningful IQ measures. In particular, critics argued that most IQ testing focused almost exclusively on narrow cognitive abilities related to reading and writing. They argued that humans, being multi-sensory, must use a broader range of abilities to acquire and process information, which IQ did not explore. The controversial theory of Multiple Intelligences (MI) was proposed by the Harvard University education professor, Howard Earl Gardner in 1983, as an attempt to describe human learning and performance more broadly that IQ. MI describes nine individual intelligences. As well as logical and linguistic intelligence, those assessed by traditional IQ testing, the others include spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic and existential. And since its inception it has had many passionate educationalist adherents as well as opponents. Schools who have adopted MI as a framework demonstrate what are claimed to be significant learning improvements. Whereas, critics condemn MI as being ad hoc; lacking any empirical evidence in support, particularly the linkage of development of a given intelligence with success in a specific career; lacking a repeatable tests to ?prove? MI; or being merely a re-statement of received wisdom. It is interesting to note that in the business world, however, there has been a greater willingness to accept MI as a viable framework for developing human capital. Emotional Intelligence (EI) and Emotional Quotient (EQ) have also been adopted extensively by business as an assessment of a colleague?s potential, in many cases replacing IQ assessment. It is argued that it EQ can be demonstrated as a better predictor of longer term success than IQ; especially as innovative businesses become increasing knowledge and people based, rather than process and equipment based; and, as people increasingly work in often virtual teams rather than hierarchical, centrally located departments. Although EI is not one of Gardner?s MI, in 2006 Karl Albrecht rearranged the original inventory to form six new groupings, including EI. Supporters of this development of Gardner?s work claim to demonstrate correlation between MI and business success, and in particular, a strong correlation between EI and leadership effectiveness (Kerr et al, 2006). The academic debate over the influences of IQ, MI, EQ/EI on learning and development will continue. A pragmatic approach shows us people are more than there IQ score. I have known folk with ?low? IQ who have painted or played musical instruments beautifully. I have also known MENSA alumni whom I would not trust with sharp-bladed instruments or expensive electronics. My view is elegantly summarised by Professor Carl Sagan; ?Knowing a great deal is not the same as being smart; intelligence is not information alone but also judgement, the manner in which information is collected and used?. And I would argue he should know - because by anyone?s definition Carl Sagan was hugely intelligent !!