Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

his capacity to learn; and as far as administratively possible, pupils grouped together for purposes of instruction should be of about the same mental level (30,31,32,37,40, 42,46).

Intelligence is by no means the sole determiner of success. It is, however, a very important factor in one's equipment for success (31,35,36).

Tradition tells us that some of our brilliant adults were dullards in school. But in those days there were no objective measures of intelligence and people have never been able and never will be able to judge others subjectively with great accuracy. Superior adults were superior children (45, 47,48,52).

It is satisfying for parents to rationalize as to the cause of a child being unable to make normal progress in school. Physicians often suggest that adolescence will correct the difficulty or that normal brightness will result from the removal of adenoids and tonsils. Later investigations seem to show that such hopes are seldom realized (60).

1. Intelligence Defined

[PINTNER, Rudolph, Intelligence Testing, pp. 178–182. New York, Henry Holt & Co., 1923.]

1. Sociological. The best modern definition, not specifically influenced by the work in mental testing, is that formulated by the British Royal Commission on the Feeble-Minded in 1904: "A feeble-minded person is one who is capable of earning a living under favorable circumstances, but is incapable, from mental defect existing from birth, or from an early age, (a) of competing on equal terms with his normal fellows: or (b) of managing himself and his affairs with ordinary prudence. . .

2. Psychological.-The definitions given above may stand as samples of the best type of modern definition that has not been influenced by the mental test. The advent of scales for measuring intelligence naturally gave rise to a type of definition that referred to achievement on the scale as a criterion of feeblemindedness, and this type of definition we may regard as psychological.... . . . Ability to adapt oneself to one's environment cannot be measured as accurately as general intelligence can be measured by means of a scale or tests. Therefore, the psy

chological criterion of feeble-mindedness by its objectivity and greater degree of exactness makes an appeal to the scientist which is lacking in the sociological criterion (pp. 179-180).

3. Statistical. . . . If intelligence is distributed normally among the population at large and if feeble-mindedness is to be regarded simply as the possession of a limited amount of intelligence, we might agree to regard as feeble-minded a certain definite percentage at the lower end of our distribution curve. The percentage to be regarded as feeble-minded will depend very largely upon whether we wish to limit the term to those conservatively termed feeble-minded at the present time, or whether we wish to enlarge the concept and include within the term the highest grade cases about which there is now much difference of opinion.

A conservative estimate of the number of feeble-minded, by which is meant, in the main, institution cases, would be less than one per cent of the population. A more liberal estimate, including high grade cases which at present society cannot see its way to segregate in institutions, would amount to two or three per cent of the population.

2. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[THORNDIKE, E. L., "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, March, 1921, Vol. 12, pp. 124; 126.]

We may then define intellect in general as the power of good responses from the point of view of truth or fact. . . . We know that taking people as we find them, the ability measured by verbal tests is not the same as the ability measured by nonverbal tests; and there is reason to expect other similar specializations.

3. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[TERMAN, L. M., "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, March, 1921, Vol. 12, pp. 127-128.]

It is well known that a moron may be able to see, hear, taste or smell, react to a signal, balance a bicycle, steer an automobile, or cancel A's about as well as an intellectual genius. The latter would . . . outclass him hopelessly in the ability to distill meanings from the raw products of sensation and memory. The essential difference, therefore, is in the capacity to form concepts, to relate in diverse ways, and to grasp their

significance. An individual is intelligent in proportion as he is able to carry on abstract thinking. . . . It cannot be disputed, however, that in the long run it is the races which excel in abstract thinking that eat while others starve, survive epidemics, master new continents, conquer time and space, and substitute religion for magic, science for taboos and justice for revenge. ... Any given society is ruled, led or at least molded by five or ten per cent of its members whose behavior is governed by ideas.

4. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[COLVIN, Stephen S., "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, March, 1921, Vol. 12, pp. 136-137.] General intelligence has been defined as "general mental adaptability to new problems and conditions of life." . . . In a very true sense intelligence is mental adaptability to environment. . . . An individual possesses intelligence in so far as he has learned, or can learn to adjust himself to his environment.

...

It must be remembered that even the ability to think in a sustained and logical manner is based on having learned how to think.

5. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[PINTNER, Rudolph, "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, March, 1921, Vol. 12, p. 139.]

I have always thought of intelligence as the ability of the individual to adapt himself adequately to relatively new situations in life. It seems to include the capacity for getting along well in all sorts of situations. This implies ease and rapidity in making adjustments, and hence, ease in breaking old habits and in forming new ones. Fundamentally this leads us back to the general modifiability of the nervous system.

6. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[WOODROW, Herbert, "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, April, 1921, Vol. 12, pp. 207–209.]

... Intelligence is acquiring-capacity. It is the capacity to acquire capacity. Intelligence, except for being a growing thing, is fixed partly by heredity and partly by environmental factors acting before the age of five. . . . Growth of intelligence is neither produced nor appreciably accelerated, by learning. .

Intelligence cannot be defined in purely mental terms, because the capacity for acquiring valuable modes of mental functioning is itself not mental; it is certainly in part, a matter of the condition of the brain. . . . Intelligence cannot be satisfactorily described in purely behavioristic terms, because while the degree to which behavior is intelligent is simply the degree to which it attains success, success has no real meaning except by performance of some want, desire, intention, plan or purpose.

7. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[HAGGERTY, M. E., "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, March, 1921, Vol. 12, pp. 212–215.]

The word intelligence does not denote a single mental process capable of exact analytic definition. . . . Intelligence is descriptive of behavior, and not of static components of the "mind." ... Because of original differences in intelligence or native capacity the same environment affects differently different persons. . . . Intelligence is not merely a qualitative concept. It may be quantitatively considered.

The time will probably come when all progressive schools will record the intelligence score of a pupil with the same care that it records his chronological age. For educational purposes, it is more important.

8. The Measurement of Intelligence

[HENMON, V. A. C., "The Measurement of Intelligence," School and Society, February 5, 1921, Vol. 13, pp. 153-155.]

...

We have made more progress in the determination of intelligence as a capacity than in the analysis of the nature of intelligence as a mental phenomenon. . . . One psychologist holds that education is primarily concerned with the development or training of intelligence while another holds that intelligence is a capacity that cannot be trained. Another finds intelligence indicated by the capacity to learn, while others find capacity to learn but loosely correlated with intelligence. While one regards intelligence as a summation of mental processes involved in adaptation, another regards it as a specific unit character.

That chronological age is no satisfactory basis of classification has often been pointed out. . .

Mental age, to be sure, is not the sole determinant of fitness for any grade, but it is a most important one. .

9. Intelligence and Its Measurement

[BUCKINGHAM, B. R., "Intelligence and Its Measurement," Journal of Educational Psychology, May, 1921, Vol. 12, pp. 271, 274.]

It seems to me that for practical purposes we may get along very well without a definition of the central quality in virtue of which behavior is effective or lacking in effectiveness.

It is generally agreed that intelligence among children and young people differs at different levels of development, not only in degree but also in kind.

10. The Nature of Intelligence

[BALLARD, P. B., Mental Tests, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1920.] (Adapted.)

It is not extravagant to say that hundreds of definitions of intelligence are offered in current literature nor that much more has been written in the field of mental measurement since the subject came into prominence than on any other phase of education.

Whatever the nature of intelligence is, the majority of theorists would probably subscribe to the following:

1. That intelligence is an innate mental ability which operates in many different ways.

2. That it is more fully manifested in the higher mental processes. 3. That it is especially active in dealing with novel situations. 4. That it is more concerned with dissecting, planning, and rearranging empirical data than with reception of impressions. 5. That it arrives at maturity when the subject is 16 years of age or younger.

11. What Is Intelligence?

[FREEMAN, F. N., "What Is Intelligence?" School Review, April, 1925, Vol. 33, pp. 253-263.]

Taking advantage of the previous attempts, we may formulate a descriptive definition of intelligence as follows:

Intelligence may be regarded as the capacity for successful adjustment by means of those traits which we ordinarily call intellectual. These traits involve such capacities as quickness of learning, quickness of apprehension, the ability to solve new problems, and the ability to perform tasks generally recognized as presenting intellectual difficulty because they involve ingenuity, originality, the grasp of complicated relationships, or the recognition of remote associations.

« AnteriorContinuar »