Memory Comparison and Contrast: Spearman

Memory

Comparison and Contrast: Spearman and Gardener's Theories of Intelligence

Both Charles Spearman, he of generalized intelligence fame, and Howard Gardener, the famed Harvard School of Education espouser of the multiple intelligences theory, have advocated controversial theories of intelligence over the courses of their respective and illustrious careers. Both had very different approaches, however, to the human cognitive framework known as 'intelligence.' Spearman attempted to simply isolate and define intelligence from a statistician's point-of-view. Gardner, in contrast, attempted to give educators a guide of how students could realize their maximum educational potential from a student's relative degree of intelligence. Spearman adopted a 'what is' query in approaching his subject matter, Gardner took a more pragmatic, 'what works, and how can we improve education,' attitude.

Spearman provided a unified view of intelligence. In contrast, Gardener took a much more individualized and specialized guide for instruction, suggesting that all individuals had particular innate abilities and tendencies to succeed in particular cognitive disciplines, but that these abilities were not uniform across the human spectrum. He advocated a seven-factor theory of intelligence. Although everyone had varying degrees of ability in all areas, and we "are all able to know the world through language, logical-mathematical analysis, spatial representation, musical thinking, the use of the body to solve problems or to make things, an understanding of other individuals and an understanding of ourselves," (Learning Skills, 2004) Gardner suggests that not all individuals are gifted in all areas equally. Thus the linguistic gifts of a Shakespeare are different, but a still very real and fundamental form of intelligence, in comparison to the kinesthetic or bodily abilities of a Michael Jordan. (Gardner, 1984)

In his earlier research at the turn of the century, Charles Spearman stated that he had noticed that people who did well on one type of intelligence test usually did as well on other tests. With a strong statistical background, Spearman set out to estimate the intelligence of twenty-four children at his local village school. (Plucker, "Charles Spearman," Human Intelligence, 2004) Using his correctional formula, gleaned from statistics, Spearman inferred that "General Intelligence" or "g" was in fact something real, and not merely an arbitrary mathematical abstraction. (Spearman, 1909) Howard Gardner was later to contend that such a g-factor does not exist. He stated that people are simply good at a variety of skills, although some individuals may have higher levels of specialized intelligences more in the spheres than others. ("Charles Spearman," Major Theories of Intelligence, 2004) in other words, a gifted musician can also be a gifted poet, but these are still different intelligences -- Spearman, in contrast, would suggest the two are interrelated.

Spearman also came up with another term known as the "s" factor. This he said was the factor devoted to "specific skills and information" needed to perform intellectual tasks. Thus, even Spearman allowed that there were multiple factors that went into an individuals' success in life and on intelligence tests. But he felt that overall scores on IQ tests, however specific were highly saturated with "g" an intelligence that pervades all tasks. Thus, the most important information to have about a person's intellectual ability is an estimate of their "g" rather than any knowledge of their particular an innate mastery of the flute of factoring an equation. (Plucker, 2004)