Theoretical Approaches to Intelligence

Assignment 04
PYC480-7

Unique assignment number: 666361

Marcelle Labuschagne
3443-055-5

Group Tests of Intelligence 3 Different Theoretical Approaches to Intelligence 3 Theories Underlying Types of Testing 4 Measuring Learning Potential 5 Dynamic Assessment 6 Different Approaches to Dynamic Assessment and the Measurement of Learning Potential 7 Dynamic Assessment: The Psychometric Approach 7 Deciding on an Experimental Design 8 Bibliography 9

Group Tests of Intelligence
Annually vast numbers of students who have just finished school submit an application for admission to tertiary institutions, as funding by government is determined by the quantity of students who pass; the institutions have a preference to admit students who will be successful and therefore admission testing programmes are often used [ (Foxtrot & Roodt, 2009, pp. 138,139) ]. Group tests are intended to access cognitive aptitudes that are applicable to academic accomplishment. Generally amalgamations of verbal and non-verbal subtests offer a total ability score. Yet some group measures comprise only of verbal or non-verbal content. The development of culture fair measures for instance concentrates on non-verbal measures of general intelligence [ (Foxtrot & Roodt, 2009, p. 139) ].
Different Theoretical Approaches to Intelligence
Defining Intelligence
To define intelligence has posed to be a problem as many theorists have their own definition and haven’t come to an agreement on how to define cognitive intelligence [ (Foxtrot & Roodt, 2009, p. 129) ] . The word intelligence comes from the Latin verb intelligere which is obtained from inter-legere implying to pick out or discriminate [ (Wikipedia) ]. A form of this verb, intellectus, became the medieval scientific name for understanding [ (Wikipedia) ].
Intelligence is unconstrained by particular training and customs which have been regarded as vital for human intelligence testing since the beginning of the 1900s. Charles Spearman suggested that there might be a general intelligence aspect related to all intellectual tasks, but its nature was never very apparent [ (Wolfram, 2002, p. 1178) ].
Intelligence includes culturally defined ways of thinking [ (Psychology Today) ], but is not limited to: * Abstract thought * Understanding * Self-awareness * Communication * Reasoning * Learning * Having emotional knowledge * Retaining * Planning * Problem solving [ (Wikipedia) ].
Theories Underlying Types of Testing

Psychometric approach
A range of methods to test human intelligence have been adapted, the psychometric approach is particularly well-known, in addition to being the most studied and certainly the most commonly used in practical settings.
Each of the theories has its origin in the differential; the main crux of this approach is the study and measurement of individual distinctions in psychological traits [ (2013, p. 48) ]. Statistical methods for instance correlational and particularly factor – analytic methods are intended to ascertain the fundamental basis of distinction among individuals. Research is focussed toward determining the formation of mental abilities, as interest is on unobservable traits [ (2013, p. 48) ]. Each theorist has contributed to the conclusions we make about the disposition of the underlying variables of intelligence [ (2013, p. 48) ].
Sternberg on the other hand takes to a great extent a wider opinion on the disposition of intelligence than most of his predecessors, in addition to suggesting certain mental mechanisms are necessary for intelligent behaviour, he furthermore stresses that intelligence requires an adaptation to the real-world setting [ (2013, p. 49) ].
For our group testing is taking place in a multicultural context Sternberg’s theory of triarchic theory of intelligence should be adequate as the theory comprises with three aspects of intelligence : * Componential intelligence * Experiential intelligence * Contextual intelligence
Each one of these have two or more subcomponents [ (2013, p. 49) ].
Componential intelligence
Componential intelligence comprises of three sub-sections: * Metacomponents or executive process ( Planning) * Performance components ( Syllogistic reasoning) * Knowledge – acquisition components (Ability to require vocabulary words)
Experiential intelligence
Experiential intelligence comprises of two sub – sections: * Ability to deal with novelty * Ability to automatize information processing
Contextual intelligence
Contextual intelligence comprises of three sub – sections: * Adaption to real-world environment * Selection of a suitable environment * Shaping of the environment
Sternberg’s theory has received a great deal of criticism from theorists such as Detterman who feels basic cognitive components of intelligence should be investigated before higher – order components of intelligence; Rogoff on the other hand questions whether the three sub- categories are adequately correlated [ (2013, p. 51) ]. Even so Sternberg’s theory is the most comprehensive and ambitious model yet, in a multicultural setting Sternberg’s triarchic theory can be adapted for the various cultures just as Sternberg insists that intelligence has several components and therefore can’t be measured by traditional tests [ (2013, p. 52) ].
Measuring Learning Potential

When individuals from diverse cultural, educational or socioeconomic conditions are tested together, unbiased and impartial analysis of test scores become particularly difficult [ (2013, p. 52) ]. Given unchanged circumstances, standard tests will in all probability carry on to project future performance relatively well for all groups, as they are strongly linked to educational achievement. The same cultural factors that influence test implementation are furthermore expected to have an influence on the wider behaviour sphere that the test is designed to sample. Using psychometric tests which mainly measures the results of previous educational exposure [ (2013, p. 52) ].

The mounting curiosity in learning potential assessment and dynamic testing implies a change in the manner that cognitive aptitude is observed for the sake of taking realistic actualities into account. By looking further than existing performance and recognizing the likely effect of other factors on performance, more realistic measures and descriptions of cognitive development can be attained [ (2013, p. 53) ].
Dynamic Assessment

Dynamic assessment is adjustable and is intimately associated with the methods used in tests of potential where learning possibilities are offered as part of the testing process [ (Foxtrot & Roodt, 2009, p. 218) ]. Dynamic assessment is a method that can be used in adjunction to presently existing methods and not as a substitute for those methods.
Vygotsky’s theory of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is commonly recognized as the hypothetical foundation upon which dynamic assessment has been formed. The way in which Vygotsky perceived the measurement of IQ testing is in a way indicative of Binet’s initial theory which furthermore made allowances for modifications in IQ test performance. Binet argued that we can enhance our IQ through education, and discarded the notion that intelligence is an irreversible inherited capacity [ (2013, p. 54) ]
Operational of Dynamic Assessment and Learning Potential
The crucial quality of dynamic assessment is the test-intervention-retest design. Measures vary significantly, even though in theory they are founded on particular analysis of Vygotsky’s theory. Quantitatively, three measures are inferred, two of which are used to express the cognitive development of the individual [ (2013, p. 56) ].
In their analysis of learning potential, many theorists have focused solely on the individual’s potential to promote gain from education as the principal variable. Existing intellectual aptitude has consequently assumed secondary significance [ (2013, p. 56) ].

Different Approaches to Dynamic Assessment and the Measurement of Learning Potential

The first method is the clinical or enrichment method, where the concentration is on the learning result of the individual. The intention of these methods is to adjust cognitive aptitude and accomplish structural modifications in the cognitive functioning. The enrichment theory makes use of remediation procedures. Mediation and enrichment of learning experiences are offered at individual level to prevail over sections of shortcoming and to develop thinking skills and cognitive functioning in the fields recognized as weak [ (2013, p. 57) ].
The second method is more psychometrically based, with the concentration on the measurement of the extent of learning potential. The intention of this method is not to produce lasting modifications in cognitive performance, but preferably to measure the ability for obtaining new skills or understanding when instruction is given [ (2013, p. 58) ].

Dynamic Assessment: The Psychometric Approach

Persistent endeavours to amalgamate assessment of learning potential or measurement of the ZDP with reliable psychometric theories, and the endeavour of additional quantitative psychometric – oriented methods is to acquire methods that are objective, valid, reliable and quantifiable processes of learning potential. These methods have been criticised since in their quantitative concentration, they fall short to focus on Vygotsky’s apprehension with qualitative assessment with the highlight on the social interaction fundamentals of learning. Nevertheless with standardisation as the focal point, this method adds to the improved psychometric properties of the assessment of the learning potential [ (2013, p. 58) ].
Vygotsky’s theory of the ZDP utilizes the authentic level of performance and the ZDP, undoubtedly directs to operationalisation by means of a pre-test, instruction and post-test design. The pre-test gives the actual developmental stage, whilst the variation between the post-test and the pre-test is taken as the ZDP measure [ (2013, p. 58) ].
Even though there are clearly diverse methods, a pre-test, instruction, post-test method using standard psychometric tests illustrates most of these. The different methods established on the psychometric method vary in the extent to which the tasks utilized are domain-specific, the extent of standardisation in the involvement and the quantity of prescriptive or diagnostic information gathered. The relationship is that generally they are task oriented [ (2013, p. 58) ].
Deciding on an Experimental Design

Exploratory factor analysis may possibly be utilized when developing an instrument for concurrent use amid the range of culture groups, when decentring translation methods have been ensued [ (Van Ede, 1996, p. 156) ] .
To confirm the factor arrangement of an instrument, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) must be used. CFA is a theory testing method in which an individual uses theoretical concepts concerning the nature of the structure and their associations to be observed, variables to identify an ideal predicting the aspect arrangement of a set of measures. In CFA studies sample size is a central issue in rejecting or accepting the model. In large samples, models are easily rejected, while in small samples resembling models may be just as adequate [ (Van Ede, 1996, p. 156) ].
Ways for shaping differential item functioning (item bias) entail the subsequent estimated sample sizes of 200 or more for the Mantel – Haenszel and logistic regression procedures. A great deal generously proportioned sample for an item response method [ (Van Ede, 1996, p. 157) ]. For the reason that structural equation modelling is involved in CFA, researchers must be conscious of the needs for it. These are: observations have to be self-regulating and identically dispersed, simple random sampling have to have been performed, associations with variables have to be linear, and sample sizes must be large [ (Van Ede, 1996, p. 159) ].
Furthermore researchers must be conscious of the difficulties concerned with multi-cultural assessment in addition to how to resolve them; therefore needless errors in adjusting measuring instruments for use among various groups can be evaded [ (Van Ede, 1996, p. 159) ].

Bibliography
Foxtrot, C., & Roodt, G. (2009). Introduction to Psychological Assessment in the South African Context. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
Psychological Assessment. (2013). Tutorial Letter 103/0/2013 .
Psychology Today. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2013, from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/exploring-intelligence/201105/defiing-intelligencestep2
Van Ede, D. M. (1996). How to adapt a measuring instrument for use with various culture groups: a practical step-by-step introduction. SAJHE/SATHO Vol 10 No2 .
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2013, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence
Wolfram, S. (2002). Wolfram Science. Retrieved July 02, 2013, from Stephan Wolfram, A New Kind of Science: http://www.wolframscience.com/reference/notes/1178a

Bibliography: Foxtrot, C., & Roodt, G. (2009). Introduction to Psychological Assessment in the South African Context. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Psychological Assessment. (2013). Tutorial Letter 103/0/2013 . Psychology Today. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2013, from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/exploring-intelligence/201105/defiing-intelligencestep2 Van Ede, D. M. (1996). How to adapt a measuring instrument for use with various culture groups: a practical step-by-step introduction. SAJHE/SATHO Vol 10 No2 . Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2013, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence Wolfram, S. (2002). Wolfram Science. Retrieved July 02, 2013, from Stephan Wolfram, A New Kind of Science: http://www.wolframscience.com/reference/notes/1178a