Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Topic Options
#504598 - 07/03/17 04:12 PM Re: What Is Intelligence?! [Re: LightAngel]
Baron Karza Offline

Registered: 06/20/17
Posts: 17
Loc: 39.1031� N, 84.5120� W
"Light Angel" posted: "Share your thoughts about this."

Okay, I certainly will:

"Gardner's definition of intelligence has been widely criticized in education circles as well as in the field of psychology. Perhaps the strongest and most enduring critique of his theory of "multiple intelligences" centers on its supposed lack of empirical evidence.

Gardner responds that his theory is based entirely on empirical evidence as opposed to experimental evidence, as he does not believe experimental evidence is appropriate for a theoretical synthesis."

Here are quotes from some of Gardner's peers:

Daniel T. Willingham, a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, wrote in the journal Education Next that Gardner's theory "is an inaccurate description of the mind" and that "the more closely an application draws on the theory, the less likely the application is to be effective."

Linda S. Gottfredson, professor of education at the University of Delaware, wrote in the Wilson Quarterly that "by denying the difficulties in accommodating intellectual difference, multiple intelligence theories may do little more than squander scarce learning time and significant opportunities for improvements in the quality of American schooling."

Mindy L. Kornhaber, assistant professor of education policy studies at Pennsylvania State University's College of Education, found that nearly 100 teachers in 11 school districts liked Gardner's ideas because they validated what they knew from experience about the power of teaching different children in different ways.

Kornhaber, responding to Willingham in a letter to Education Next, said, "It is exceedingly odd that he offers not a single example of good practice" stemming from the traditional view that intelligence is an interrelated hierarchy and that people who are smart in one category usually are smart in others.

In a letter to the Wilson Quarterly, Gardner wrote that the multiple intelligence theory "was developed as a theory of the mind, not as an educational intervention." But he supported the notion that the theory "holds out hope that students can be reached in different ways."

He added that "the standard psychologist's view of intelligence is a recipe for despair. It holds that there is but one intelligence and that intelligence is highly heritable."

Administrators who think children of different achievement levels will learn better if placed in the same classroom say teachers can use multiple intelligence theory to take different approaches with different students. Gottfredson quoted a textbook for future teachers used at her university: "Educators' thinking has progressively moved away from policies of exclusion and homogenous grouping toward an emphasis on the value of diversity, policies of inclusion and practices that meet the needs of all students."

In practice, Gottfredson said, "these instructional strategies for mixed-ability classes preclude precisely what helps the more able students most: accelerating their curriculum, allowing them to interact with their intellectual peers and making them work hard."

Sounds like the education system in America is resorting to the bullshit philosophy of egalitarianism doesn't it?

Gardner's 1983 book, "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences," arrived just as American educators were being pummeled in national reports for failing to teach reading, writing and mathematics adequately. SAT scores were dropping, and traditional educational theorists were arguing for longer school days, more homework and more testing.

Gardner's ideas appealed to many traditional teachers who extolled hard work but also had some students who did better on tests if multiplication tables were set to music or works of literature were acted out in class.

Since then, many psychologists have criticized the lack of scientific measures of Gardner's intelligences, and some educators say this leads to failed educational policies, such as ending ability grouping in schools.

Dax9 posted:

"What about mechanical/engineering intelligence? I think that type of aptitude should have a category of its own."

It seems as though an ordinary Satanist has already found a flaw in this esteemed professor's hypothesis. I suppose America doesn't need anyone with mechanical or engineering intelligence right? Perhaps the Chinese will do it all for us!

I spent 10 years as an educator, and the reason I got out of it is because I realized it was a worthless profession. The old quote really is true: "Those that can, DO those that can't, TEACH."

Edited by Baron Karza (07/03/17 04:17 PM)

"You create your own. If you can't figure that one out, you're not much of a magician."

- Anton Szandor LaVey

#504621 - 07/09/17 12:13 PM Re: What Is Intelligence?! [Re: Baron Karza]
Throne777 Offline

Registered: 07/09/17
Posts: 5
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: Baron Karza

I spent 10 years as an educator, and the reason I got out of it is because I realized it was a worthless profession. The old quote really is true: "Those that can, DO those that can't, TEACH."

Why do you think it was worthless?
"Ecce conclusionem vestram, nolite fieri inobedientes"

Page 2 of 2 < 1 2

Forum Stats
13166 Members
73 Forums
44443 Topics
407324 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 04:49 AM