Are We Interpreting Intelligence All Wrong?

'We're All Gifted'

With "IQ-stimulating" games and programs marketed to parents of children not even able to walk yet, and much talk about how screen time for children, or being unable to breastfeed, or being a working mother, or not being able to afford that Japanese immersion program can harm your sprout's IQ score, it's hardly surprising that there's a backlash.

While some parents may set out, subconsciously or quite in the open, to convince those in their social realm that Junior is "gifted", often after hot-housing said kid with videos, flashcards, and early academic programs, others have jumped on the "everyone is gifted" bandwagon. Referring to Harvard's Howard Gardener's theory of seven distinct intelligences, they hold that everyone is a special snowflake in their own way.

Gardener said:

"We are all able to know the world through language, logical-mathematical analysis, spatial representation, musical thinking, the use of the body to solve problems or to make things, an understanding of other individuals, and an understanding of ourselves. Where individuals differ is in the strength of these intelligences —  the so-called profile of intelligences — and in the ways in which such intelligences are invoked and combined to carry out different tasks, solve diverse problems, and progress in various domains."

He had a point. No matter where we start out, what our potential may be at birth, humans do tend to eventually find their niche, their thing that they are particularly good at or devoted to or interested in. These niches can easily fall outside of the spectrum of skills IQ tests look for, and can indeed be distinctly unacademic. Yet, these niches all represent things that society needs and that can offer individuals intellectual and personal fulfilment. While only a tiny percentage of the population will meet the narrow requirements we currently seek for academic giftedness, everyone can come closer to meeting their personal potential.

Growth Vs Fixed Mindsets

It has been a while now since Carol Dweck published her groundbreaking book, Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Dweck's theory holds that those children who believed that their intelligence was pretty much set in stone didn't do as well academically as those who believe that their abilities could always be improved on. These diverging approaches were term the fixed mindset and growth mindset respectively.

READ Parenting: Loving Limits

This particular, and very valid, school of thought led to a whole movement in which students were praised for "trying" rather than for their success, because being told "you did great, you are so smart" apparently led to students with a fixed mindset. Dweck herself later noted that the way in which people were applying her work was not what she had initially hoped for. Indeed, praising children for their effort (where they may not even have made any) could be just as bad for their personal development as praising them for their smarts.

Such a thing as innate, predetermined, fixed, native, or whatever you want to call it, intelligence or potential may exist. How many people truly reach their potential, truly make use of all the possibilities that reside within their brain, however? Is reaching your potential even possible? We don't yet know enough to answer these questions, which are ultimately still more philosophical than practical.

Yet, we can learn from Carol Dweck. Just as those who have practiced taking IQ tests tend to score better than those who have not, those who know that practice at life and learning may not make perfect but certainly makes better are likely to do better at learning. Better at least, at learning those things they want to learn.