[ot-caption title=”Cecilia Piza taking an IQ test to determine what her strongest area of intelligence is. (via Camilla Piza, freshman)”]

Is our current education system conducive to a certain type of learner, a certain type of thinker? According to Ken Robinson, it is designed for the children who are able to sit, pay attention, study, and retain information. While some students are more adept in listening to and immediately processing information, others benefit from more interactive learning styles; they want/need to understand the “why” and the “how.” Who is deemed more intelligent by society, the child who ponders a problem’s meaning, or the child who can understand and explain life’s concrete facts?

One of the problems with society is that starting from a young age, we seem to be taught to categorize things within all aspects of life; from political views to education styles, we are always grouping ideas and then forcing ourselves to “pick a side.” You are either a democrat or a republican; you are either good at math or you are good English, and if you are good at both you must be a super genius! In high school I often witness people classifying their peers in three different ways; they are exceptionally intelligent, they are average, or they are dumb. But what do we base these classifications off of? Dr. Howard Gardner, creator of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences, would claim that there are at least seven major areas of knowledge that could frame an intelligent person; you typically do not have all of them.

Everyone has that friend who always knows just what to say and when not to say anything at all; they can empathize with you and comfort you. Well, this friend is emotionally intelligent, according to Gardner. But how would this friend’s intelligence compare to that of his or her peer who is proficient in science or music?

We are exposed to different subjects, cultural experiences and learning styles here at Pine Crest, and this allows us to create a platform of knowledge that we will build upon as we progress in our lives. We are given the opportunity to learn in different ways; we sit through lectures, perform labs, and create our own presentations and projects. Psychology and Film teacher Ms. Alexanderson understands the importance of interactive learning; she states, “There is a reason why Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were successful in using lecture styles in teaching. Today’s education system encourages teachers to use such methods of presentations and conversations. It is crucial that we get the students involved and allow them to figure things out on their own.”

Even as society progresses, as we learn more about the human mind, and as we are presented with advancements in all aspects of life, Socrates’ techniques continue to be successful. As proven by his method, it is crucial for students to engage in divergent thinking, or understanding that there is more than one correct answer and more than one way of getting to these answers. Most tests are designed to assess one’s understanding of the topic at hand. While the results of these tests do allow teachers to gage the student’s understanding and knowledge, there is a plethora of ways in which a question can be interpreted and then answered. Of course there are concrete, indisputable facts, but there are also abstract ideas and comprehension. Ms. Alexanderson understands this dilemma and the importance of divergent thinking. She says, “Deductive reasoning is fantastic in the sense that it presents us with the hard facts. On the other hand, inductive reasoning is what forces us to broaden our horizons; it allows us to understand the world around us in a less concrete way.”

We see this philosophical and divergent thinking manifesting in children at a young age; the most quintessential example of this is when you ask a child what 1+1 equals, and they respond by telling you it forms a window. It seems like an insignificant joke, but, in reality, instead of responding with the sensible and concrete answer, the child is demonstrating his or her ability to think abstractly and divergently.  In my mind, this child is more intelligent than the child who responds with the, so-called, correct answer. Junior Chris Marzouca agrees with this idea and comments, “Thinking in this manner allows us to arrive at answers that we might not have been able to arrive at otherwise. Looking through history, most of the people who have made an impact were the people who were not afraid to think outside the box. Would we be where we are today if Newton had not pondered the dropping of an apple?” 

Mrs. Dailey, 11^th grade Lit/Lang teacher, feels that the most intelligent students are the ones that are the most versatile. She adds, “Maybe they do excel in a certain subject or style of learning, but they are able to adapt and still reap the same benefits in more difficult and uncomfortable learning environments.” She is a firm believer that offering multiple types of assessments allows for a better determination of one’s intelligence level and that standardized testing is not always an accurate gage. She has taught students who were extremely bright, in her eyes, but were not able to perform well on all of her assessments. Will these students’ future successes be hindered by their inability to demonstrate their knowledge in the typical fashion?

Interestingly enough, the opposite stance is taken by another Lit/Lang teacher Mr. Lemole. He defines intelligence as “the ability to solve problems.” But there are math problems to be solved; there is art that needs to be interpreted; and there are existential issues that need to be addressed. Which problem solver is the most intelligent? Mr. Lemole shares, “If you tell me you are an auditory learner and someone else tells me they are a visual learner, I am not in a position to say either one of you is less intelligent solely based on the learning mode. I need more data: performance, quickness to apprehend.” He also feels that efficiency plays a huge role in determining one’s intelligence. I, however, do not completely agree with this. I do not believe your intelligence level should be related to your ability to process quickly. If you are able to get to the correct answer, or perhaps an even better answer in a more complex way, you are just as smart, if not smarter, than the person who solves it immediately.

Everyone views intelligence in a different light. I know I personally wish I was more culturally sophisticated, as I think those types of people are the most intelligent. You might disagree. In the end, we typically obey the standards put into place by society when it comes to deciding who is smart and who is not.

Sources: Youtube, Sage Publications, Techweb