Pedagogical Possibilities for ICT

Testing abilities

Another approach to the nature, structure and functions of intelligence(s) has been proposed by Robert Sternberg, who suggests three kinds of intelligence:

1 componential, which is assessed by many traditional tests used today;

2 contextual, which is the source of creative insight, and

3 experiential, which is the street smarts of intelligence. (Sternberg 1985; 1988)

Sternberg’s latter two intelligences do not often show up on traditional tests, and are not always highly valued in the classroom, since curious and creative students and those who learn by doing tend to take up more of a teacher’s time and attention. Such students are later valued in the adult world, however, as creative thinkers and process-oriented employees who often affect the bottom line in productive ways.

Sternberg feels that some people’s major intelligence is in the traditionally tested/graded area of critical thinking (generating new innovative thought and connection), and that people who are able to make things really work for them out there in real life are contextual thinkers. Sternberg’s theory is too complex to be elaborated here in full detail. One of its outcomes is the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT), which is divided into nine multiple levels for different ages, and described as suitable for kindergarten through college, as well as for adults.

In contrast to conventional tests, STAT yields separate scores for componential information processing (analytical ability), coping with novelty (synthetic ability), and (as a separate score) automatization and practical-intellectual skills. Equally important, the test puts more emphasis on the ability to learn than on what has been learned, and verbal skill is measured by learning from context, not by vocabulary. The test also measures skills for coping with novelty, whereby the examinee must imagine a hypothetical state of the world (such as cats being magnetic) and then reason as though this state of the world were true. In yet another example, STAT measures practical abilities such as reasoning about advertisements and political slogans, not just decontextualized words or geometric forms.

In fact, as Sternberg himself admits, STAT is not immune to prior learning, and nor is it culture-free. It is hardly thinkable to design a test that would satisfy all the considered demands. Intelligence is always used in some particular, usually rather restricted context, though it is highly desirable to have this context as wide as possible.

Sternberg’s theory differs from Gardner’s. However, the two theories are also highly complementary. Sternberg makes us strongly believe that intelligence needs to be seen as a broader and more complex construct than both authors declare, and the field is open to any experienced, thoughtful, and enterprising teacher eager to make her or his own contribution to the common educational cauldron.

Division of Higher Education: ©UNESCO 2005