Copyright Karen Clement, May 2004. Submitted at 6:30pm.

The nature of intelligence has been extensively debated in the 20th century, separating theorists into two contrasting schools of thought (Paik, 1998). One camp states that intelligence stems from a single general factor. The other camp argues that an individual possesses multiple intelligences. By comparing the theories proffered by Charles Spearman, R.J. Sternberg, and Howard Gardner, we analyze each school of thought and comment on society’s current acceptance of their notions of intelligence.

Charles Spearman was one of the early advocates of a single factor for intelligence. Through his work on intelligence testing, he observed positive correlations between cognitive test scores for a given student (Paik, 1998). For example, if a student obtained a high score on a verbal cognitive task, the student would similarly obtain a high score on a mathematical cognitive task (Paik). Further research on this positive manifold (Spearman, 1904, cited in Paik) led Spearman to develop his Two-Factor Theory of Intelligence (Plucker, 2003), which states that a student’s ability to perform a mental task can be predicted from the student’s level of general ability, or g (Plucker). While Spearman acknowledges that other factors, called specific abilities or s (Plucker), can influence performance on specific cognitive tasks, Spearman maintains that g is a much more significant indicator of intelligence than s (Plucker).

Howard Gardner’s views on intelligence contrast those of Spearman. His theory on Multiple Intelligences states that individuals possess at least eight distinct types of intelligence (Gilman, 2001; Woolfolk, A. E., Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E., 2003).

Evidence for Gardner’s claims are drawn from his work with gifted and brain-damaged students (Paik, 1998; Woolfolk et al, 2003; Gardner, quoted in President and Fellows of Harvard College, 1996-2003). In one finding, students with brain damage in one area demonstrated substandard performance on certain mental tasks, but did not display performance deterioration in tasks requiring other mental abilities (Gardner; Woolfolk et al). In fact, performance requiring other mental abilities did not seem to be hindered (Woolfolk et al). In his work on gifted students, Gardner observed students with genius-level talent in one cognitive area but mediocre ability in other areas (Woolfolk et al).

From his studies on the cultural impact on learner differences (Paik, 1998), Gardner proposed that intelligence is subjective and defined by cultural norms (Paik; Woolfolk et al, 2003). A culture that values logical-mathematical ability above others, as in Western societies, would classify “intelligent” persons differently than a culture that prizes naturalist ability. While Gardner acknowledges the existence of Spearman’s g, Gardner does not see it as a viable tool in tailoring teaching methods (Woolfolk et al).

In 1985 (Paik, 1998), R.J. Sternberg published a theory combining Spearman’s concept of g and Gardner’s views on multiple intelligence. Like Gardner’s theory, Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory of Intelligence is a proponent of multiple intelligences. Unlike Gardner, Sternberg named only three categories of intelligence (Woolfolk et al, 2003). In agreement with Spearman, Sternberg further explained that general ability is still a relevant predictor of performance, so much that the cognitive relationship of these abilities is hierarchical, with general ability of topmost significance and specific abilities underneath (Woolfolk et al).

Many agree that Sternberg’s work is currently the prevailing theory on intelligence (Paik 1998; Woolfolk et al, 2003). Standardized intelligence tests which utilize a general intelligence factor, like Spearman’s g, are still commonly seen in Canadian schools. Today’s society is becoming more culturally diverse, with all-inclusive, personalized schooling becoming more in demand. One can expect educational administrators to look to Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences approach for ways to create curricula that tailors to students’ varied cultural and learning mindsets.

REFERENCES

Gilman, Lynn (2001). The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Retrieved May 18, 2004 from http://www.indiana.edu/~intell, using search word “Gardner”.

Paik, Han S (August 1998). One Intelligence or Many?–Alternative Approaches to Cognitive Abilities. Retrieved May 18, 2004 from http://www.personalityresearch.org/ papers/paik.html.

Plucker, J. A. (Ed.). (2003). Human intelligence: Historical influences, current controversies, teaching resources. Retrieved May 16, 2004 from http://www.indiana.edu/~intell, using search words “Gardner” and “Spearman”.

President and Fellows of Harvard College (1996-2003). Howard Gardner. Retrieved May 16, 2004, from http://pzweb.harvard.edu/PIs/HG.htm.

Woolfolk, A. E., Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2003). Educational psychology (2nd. Canadian ed.). Scarborough: Allyn and Bacon Canada.