IQ and the pressure to perform

Background Information

There is no universally agreed definition of ‘intelligence’. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word as ‘the faculty of understanding’. However, people differ in their abilities to understand, to employ and to retain knowledge. Individuals develop varied learning styles and rates of learning. Children have different learning needs at each stage of their development. Teachers are required to facilitate such needs and the ability for children to manage their own learning.

Setting a comparative ‘average intelligence’ against which any individual may be assessed is problematic. IQ (intelligence quotient) tests of a child’s general mental ability are limited and controversial, as human performance is complex and diverse. Various and conflicting studies have been produced to equate intelligence with either genetic inheritance or environmental influence.

In fact, through time, a complex mix of genetics and experience give each individual a unique arrangement of skills and intelligence. Of course, the potential that a person inherits through genes may be impaired by, for example, social deprivation in the early years. Most psychologists have long agreed that no matter how conducive the environment, potential that is not present genetically cannot be created.

Cognitive theory
Since the mid-twentieth century, neurologists and psychologists studying cognitive development have proposed various theories concerning language, concepts, perception, memory, problem solving, metacognition and social cognition. Cognitive-psychologists view intellectual ability as a process where people organise perceptions and develop insights.

Piaget
In 1952, Jean Piaget described four successive stages of cognitive development – sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operational – that a child must master before acquiring the capacity for abstract thought. Learning depends on the interaction between the individual child’s experience or instruction and the particular developmental stage. The teacher’s role is restricted to that of facilitator. Piaget assessed a child’s intellectual capacity not by age but by their personal developmental stage.

McLean
In the 1960s, neurologist Dr Paul McLean conceptualised the human brain in three segments: the reptilian brain stem controls bodily and survival functions. So if a learner feels anxious or threatened, because of fear of failure or authority for example, the reptilian brain takes control. The limbic system controls sensory information (emotions, long term memory); and higher-order cognitive processes and problem-solving functions are controlled by the neo cortex.

Vygotsky
In 1978, Liv Vygotsky stressed the fundamental role of the learning context in the development of cognition. Social interaction, between adult and learner, enables children to construct meaning by giving them the necessary tools - knowledge, skills and systems. Vygotsky emphasised: ‘Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relationships between individuals.’ Rather than require problem solving by a child working independently, greater achievement is facilitated by adult support (which Vygotsky termed a ‘zone of proximinal development’). This theory supports the pedagogy of working from ‘what the child can do’ and the idea of formative assessment.

Bruner
Social interaction in children’s learning also characterised the work of Jerome Bruner in the 1960s. Recognising a child’s needs, adults provide a ‘scaffold’ to enable children to achieve beyond the level that could be attained alone. Eventually, the higher level of understanding can be maintained by the child and the scaffolding support withdrawn. As Vygotsky said, ‘What a child can do in co-operation today, he can do alone tomorrow.’

Barsch
In 1980, Dr Jeffrey Barsch devised a ‘Learning Style Inventory’ to informally evaluate each individual’s preferred learning style. Using this to identify how learners process information revealed the degree to which any individual is a visual, auditory, tactile or kinesthetic learner.

The variety of learning styles among children has a significant bearing on classroom pedagogy. For example, inspirational affirmations or supportive posters need to be positioned sufficiently high for clear sight lines (for visual recall); resources or messages for pupils to discuss need to be displayed at the children’s eye level (for auditory mode); project work or collective mind-maps should be placed within reach (for the kinesthetic learner).

Gardner
In 1983, Professor Howard Gardner argued against the IQ test concept of a general ‘intelligence’. He redefined intelligence with a new framework, which identified three relatively independent types of intelligence, accounting for seven different ‘multiple intelligences’:

• personal-related: interpersonal (interacting with others), and intrapersonal (understanding oneself)
• language-related: verbal/linguistic (capacity to use language, read a book), and musical (singing, composing)
• object-related: bodily/kinesthetic (playing sport, dancing), logical/mathematical (problem solving), and visual/spatial (estimating possibilities).

Gardner argued that traditional teaching strategies address, almost exclusively, only the linguistic and logical/mathematical intelligences (probably due to the influence of Piaget). Such teaching fails to address other intelligences that individual learners possess. ‘If we treat everyone as if they are the same, we are catering for one profile of intelligence– the language logic profile. It's great if you have that profile, but it is not great for the vast majority of human beings who do not have that particular profile of intelligence,’ (Gardner, 1997).

Sternberg
Interpreting Howard’s intelligences as ‘talents’, Robert Sternberg published his own theory of Triarchic Intelligence (1985). Sternberg - professor of psychology at Yale University, a cognitive psychologist and theorist on human intelligence - argued that intelligence is comprised of three equal (and measurable) aspects: we use our ‘creative intelligence’ to reflect how we relate to our internal world (‘analytical intelligence’) and to external reality (‘practical intelligence’).

Horn
In 1989, John Horn theorised that intelligence comprised two principal, independent abilities: ‘Fluid intelligence’ to enable reasoning and problem solving, and ‘Crystallized intelligence’ as the ability to assimilate cultural knowledge and apply it during problem solving. Horn held that these are ‘distinct influences operating through development, brain function, genetic determination, and the adjustments, adaptations and achievements of school and work.’

MODERN BRAIN RESEARCH

On July 17, 1990, a US Presidential Proclamation designated 1990-2000 as the ‘Decade of the Brain’– ‘to enhance public awareness of the benefits to be derived from brain research.’ At the White House on April 17, 1997, Bill and Hilary Clinton proclaimed: ‘Fifteen years ago, we thought that a baby's brain structure was virtually complete at birth. Now, we understand that it is a work in progress, and that everything we do with a child has some kind of potential physical influence on that rapidly-forming brain…’

Most of our understanding of how (rather than what) we learn derives from brain research conducted since the mid-1980s.

Modern brain research has generated new insights about how the brain naturally learns best. Findings have revived interest in ‘hothousing’: an intensive method that claims to boost children’s IQ with dramatic results. The commercial market, too, has responded with training aids, specialist toys and self-help programmes promising parents that infant brainpower can be manipulated to produce a child of exceptional intelligence and ability.

‘There is an immense hunger amongst parents and teachers at the moment for information which will help children’s brains develop optimally…and there are lots of people around offering all kinds of responses, all kinds of advice to that hunger,’ says Professor Guy Claxton of Bristol University’s School of Education.

Three modern discoveries about early brain development are each prompting tantalising questions:

1. Given the rapid development of connections between brain cells in infancy, might early neural connections be saved from decay?

During infancy, billions of brain cells (neurons) form neural networks at a rate that will never be matched in later life. However, there is reputable evidence for the regeneration of brain cells throughout life.

In fact parental anxieties about maximising synaptic density have no basis. Put to the test, early rote learning of unconnected facts has been proven ineffectual in the long term. No academic research has equated intelligence with synaptic density.

Serious academics characterise hothousing of babies as ‘useless, at best’ and, at worst, neglectful of real learning needs that would be traditionally acquired informally in the home environment.

2. Might there be a ‘critical period’ for developing intelligence?

Learning is a continuous process from birth and the early years are a time of rapid development when young children are very receptive to new experiences. Neurology certainly recognises key periods when a child needs to be exposed to a certain skill to learn it. For example, linguistic capacity in infancy is dependent on stimulation.

There appear to exist several ‘windows of opportunity’ for developing language skills. A vocabulary of 10 to 20 words for most 18-month-old toddlers may expand to some 900 words during the following 18 months. The natural acquisition of syntax appears to run from about three to five or six years of age but the window for learning new words remains ever open.

Dr Silvana Montanaro of the Montessori school points to periods when a child's mind is particularly receptive to information: ‘There is a 'sensitive period' for naming things (age 14-24 months) and if adults respond to the hunger for words in an appropriate way, they can give their children a richness and precision of language that will last a lifetime.’

Of course, teachers, trained to appreciate child development, will be well aware that there are times when children are particularly able to learn specific things. They know too that children have individual differences and needs that must be met. They will be aware, also, that understanding evolves - that two-year-olds, for example, cannot meaningfully relate to abstract symbols. They will be very conscious of the emotional dimension in learning, aware of a child’s needs to be motivated and to experience a sense of achievement. Above all, their emphasis will be placed on how children learn rather than with any expedient preoccupation with what is to be learned.

Early Years is a critical stage when well-planned and varied opportunities for active and inquisitive play encourage the development of social, linguistic, creative, reasoning, motor and sensory skills. Both parents and teachers generally recognise that such opportunities should be inherently interesting, challenging and enjoyable. Children’s individual differences, needs and readiness need to be identified and valued.

The ‘Mozart Effect’
Commercial concerns are confidently insisting that certain types of classical music have been proven to help babies brains develop faster.

The argument that neural networks are primed by listening to Mozart, leading to enhanced intelligence, claims to be supported by modern neurophysiological research. Indeed, the US Music Intelligence Neural Development Institute tested college students’ ability to learn new material while listening to Mozart in 1997. Some of the behavioural experiments demonstrated a causal short-term enhancement of spatial-temporal reasoning.

However, Dr Mark Bodner from the University of California, Los Angeles, who was one of the scientific team involved in the original ‘Mozart effect’ experiments, has disowned the popular market distortion of the research. Another member of the team – Frances H Rauscher from the Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin – has responded: ‘Our results on the effects of listening to Mozart's ‘Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major’ on spatial-temporal task performance have generated much interest but several misconceptions, many of which are reflected in attempts to replicate the research. The comments by Chabris and Steele et al. echo the most common of these: that listening to Mozart enhances intelligence. We made no such claim.’ ‘Nature’, Vol. 400, 26 August 1999, p. 287.

Though it is widely accepted that critical periods apply for the acquisition of basic survival functions, such as vision, motor control and language, experts advise that there is no evidence that higher-order processes such as cognition and memory are similarly dependent.

3. Might young children’s brains grow larger in stimulating environments?

Advocates of intensive formal learning in early childhood claim environmental enrichment through high sensory stimulation creates a 25% increase in brain capacity. They cite the findings of the laboratory research of psychologists which show a 20-25% growth of synapses ‘in the part of the brain that is related to vision’. Such research relates to the observed growth of rodents’ brains when placed in complex stimulating environments.

However, academic experts urge caution in the interpretation and application of this research. Claims that enriched environments benefit only younger children in fact ignore that research findings have been unrelated to age.

‘The kind of environment that parents provide around the home is exactly what the child needs to develop normally. Learning things is something we’ll do throughout our lives. There is no need to cram flash cards early reading instruction into the first three years of life. You’ll do more harm than good!’

— John T. Bruer, ‘The Myth of The First Three Years’

Stimulating environments, of course, are good not only for children but also for people in general.

Conclusion
Childhood is both a stage in its own right and a critical foundation period for subsequent, more formal education. It is a time when individual differences, dispositions and needs should be recognised and respected. It is a period when enjoyable, high-quality learning situations should be designed to foster and accelerate a variety of skills through play. Informed pedagogy can help to lay valuable foundations for later learning.

A holistic curriculum requires equal focus on the child, the learning context and the knowledge and understanding which the child needs to develop. Mental, physical, emotional and social development must be recognised as being inter-dependant.

Young children need a variety of interesting learning activities, a choice of readily accessible and appropriate resources with safe opportunities for sustained engagement to work individually, in pairs and groups and with supportive adults who can shape the learning. Play should be a rich and valuable part of the learning process. Children need to observe, participate and discuss, at their own pace and in their own way. They need to be encouraged to explore and investigate, and to think imaginatively, to promote their intellectual, physical and social skills. Above all, each child needs to develop a positive image of himself or herself as a confident and competent learner.

The Early Years curriculum and pedagogical approach should be explained to parents and carers (in terms of process rather than outcome), both to encourage good home support for learning and to protect children from any misguided ‘hothousing’ activity.