This paper examines two major interpretations of intelligence — the g-factor (general intelligence) and Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences — and evaluates how each shapes the design and interpretation of standardized tests. The paper compares the Stanford-Binet and Wechsler intelligence scales, traces their revisions over time, and discusses how shifting definitions of intelligence affect which children are identified as gifted. It also addresses cultural bias in IQ testing, contrasts intelligence tests with achievement tests such as the Iowa Tests and the SAT, and considers the real-world consequences these assessments have for students' academic trajectories.
Two major interpretations of intelligence exist: the concept of general intelligence, which is often contrasted with the concept of multiple intelligences. For many years, it was thought that only one kind of intelligence existed, known as the "g-factor," or general intelligence. "In recent decades, psychologists have devoted much effort to isolating that general factor, which is abbreviated g, from the other aspects of cognitive ability gauged in mental tests" (Gottfredson, 2010). However, some researchers — most notably Howard Gardner — have attempted to reframe the g-factor and argue that intelligence is a multi-faceted concept.
Intelligence tests are often contrasted with personality tests, in which different characteristics are viewed as unrelated to one another. For example, in a standard Myers-Briggs personality test, a person can be "extroverted" and a "judging" type, or "introverted" and a "judging" type — different personality characteristics do not necessarily link together. However, most theorists today believe that intelligence does possess a general component that can be extrapolated from the various tests used to assess individual ability: "This is true regardless of what specific ability a test is meant to assess, regardless of the test's manifest content (whether words, numbers, or figures) and regardless of the way the test is administered (in written or oral form, to an individual or to a group). Tests of specific mental abilities do measure those abilities, but they all reflect g to varying degrees as well. Hence, the g factor can be extracted from scores on any diverse battery of tests" (Gottfredson, 2010). In other words, although some people may perform better on tests of verbal intelligence and others on mathematical intelligence, people with high g quotients tend to excel overall across all types of intelligence tests, regardless of the test's specific emphasis.
Even Howard Gardner does not deny the presence of a g-factor measured across intelligence tests such as the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler. Instead, his contention is that current IQ tests overemphasize the academic components of intelligence — such as verbal and mathematical abilities — and thus present only an incomplete picture of the test-taker's potential. Gardner stresses the socially constructed nature of intelligence: "Intelligence is a bio-psychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture" (Gilman, 2001).
Creators of intelligence tests have not been insensible to criticisms that such tests are insufficiently comprehensive in their measurement of all forms of intelligence, and they have begun to include components that strive to assess a broader range of abilities. For example, the most recent edition of the Stanford-Binet introduced "several completely new subtests, such as Matrices and Equation Building... Besides the new and expanded tests, the Fourth Edition provided several factors (Verbal Reasoning, Abstract/Visual Reasoning, Quantitative Reasoning, and Short-Term Memory) in addition to IQ" (Becker, 2003). The test has also always included certain non-verbal components that draw upon elementary logic, such as identifying what is "wrong" in a particular picture.
Another widely used instrument, the Wechsler, also reflects recent criticisms that IQ tests give insufficient attention to the variety of factors that contribute to intelligence. For example, the Wechsler for children aged 4–6½ years "is divided into six verbal and five performance subtests. The eleven subtests are presented in the following order: information, animal house and animal house retest, vocabulary, picture completion, arithmetic, mazes, geometric design, similarities, block design, comprehension, and sentences" (Ford-Martin, 1999). Children are tested verbally, mathematically, spatially, and on questions that relate to general reasoning. "An example of questions on the subtest of similarities might be: 'Describe how the following pair of words is alike or the same — hamburger and pizza.' A correct response would be 'Both are things to eat'" (Ford-Martin, 1999).
Recent revisions to both the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler reveal the extent to which emphasizing certain sections and de-emphasizing others can produce very different results in terms of measured abilities. Children traditionally identified as gifted "show greater variability and lower overall performance on processing speed items such as those included on the WISC-IV (Wechsler, 1991) and on working memory items which are included in both tests (Roid, 2003); use of full-scale scores that place an increasing emphasis on these factors will likely exclude some children who would have been identified as gifted on earlier tests. The inclusion of items that are more dependent upon visual-spatial and nonverbal skills will increase scores for children with these strengths while lowering scores of children who have strengths in the verbal-abstract-reasoning area more traditionally emphasized by those who provide programs for the gifted" (Minton, 2006).
These changes in the definition of "intelligence" show the cultural variability of the concept, despite the fact that standard intelligence tests produce consistent (reliable) results. The implications of defining intelligence within a culture can have a tremendous influence on children's lives — a child's IQ score has an undeniable effect on the shape of his or her academic career, particularly as standardized testing grows more important. Given the questionable nature of arriving at a universally agreed-upon definition of intelligence, Gardner questions the validity of such tests and stresses that an "assessment of intelligence should encompass multiple measures. Relying on a single IQ score from a WISC-III (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children) without substantiating the findings through other data sources does the individual examinee a disservice and produces insufficient information for those who provide interventions" (Gilman, 2001).
"Explores cultural bias and limits of single IQ scores"
"Distinguishes achievement tests from intelligence assessments"
"Analyzes SAT validity, bias, and student consequences"
You’re 58% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.