You support the bell curve of intelligence, right Terman?
Well, Sternberg, my research supports that children with high IQs usually perform well as adults.
What of your sample size? Could one not argue that 1500 children does not provide enough data for an accurate bell curve?
Oh, how I rue budget cuts! I knew I should have insisted on a larger sample size.
I will grant you that. However, the data still affirms that there is a correlation between high IQ and success in life.
It is certain your study helped put off the belief that high intelligence equaled maladjustment. What of other forms of intelligence?
Slide: 2
Do you? I would enjoy hearing your arguments against it.
I know my theory is foolproof, Terman!
My primary reservation is your stance on practical intelligence. If there is no way to realistically measure knowledge based on experience. How can it be considered intelligence without clear testing?
Intelligence is not simply data on a graph. Problem solving is a critical skill for a successful individual. One who performs well in the classroom may not have that same success out in a real world environment.
The same argument may be made for creative intelligence. We have yet to develop a test that encompasses those "intelligences"
Perhaps we need to rework our definition of intelligence. Is IQ testing too limiting?
Slide: 3
I think we both have been too limiting in our approaches.
I agree with you. We need to change the view on intelligence. The scholar and the working man have knowledge neither possess, and therefore, are intelligent in their own way.
My thoughts exactly. It will take time to change the view. But it is imperative all avenues of intelligence are pursued.
By the way, where are we going?
You are familiar with Plato's allegory of the cave, no? Let us shed our narrow perceptions.
Slide: 0
Other forms? Do you mean your triarchic theory of intelligence? I have my reservations.
It is simply our current method. But, perhaps you are right. Care for a walk?