Essay on The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale

When comparing Alfred Binet and Lewis Terman on their approaches to intelligence testing there are some similarities amongst the two. One such similarity would be regarding content. Alfred Binet’s approach to intelligence testing consisted of tests that ranged in difficulty levels from easy to hard. These tests required one to demonstrate his or her own cognitive ability, decision making, and verbal skills. Lewis Terman’s approach to intelligence testing was an updated version of Binet’s. Terman also used cognitive ability, decision making, and verbal skills in his testing; however, he added mathematics, attention span, and processing skills. However, their purposes for intelligence testing were quite different from one another. Alfred

When one speaks of intelligence or how bright another person is, the often quoted figure is the IQ or intelligence quotient. It is the most often used standard of how smart a person is. This paper shall look at what intelligence tests measure, how the IQ tests measure intelligence and interrogate their history. It shall then apply the tests to school policy and hence evaluate their validity.

A further refinement of the Stanford-Binet scale and translation (for American culture) was published in 1916 by Lewis M. Terman, who adopted Stern’s proposal that an individual's intelligence level be measured as an intelligence quotient (I. Q.). The IQ score presumably represented an individual’s rate of mental development as a quotient, between "mental age" and actual "chronological age" times 100 (to remove the decimal). Terman's test, known colloquially as the Stanford-Binet test, formed the basis for modern intelligence

A major strength of this assessment is that this assessment has a Nonverbal Index. This is beneficial for students who are not yet proficient in the English language or struggle with language. Administering the Nonverbal Index allows the administrator to gain a better understanding of the child’s abilities because their language issues are not working against them with this test. Also, this assessment has two theories of intelligence that can be tested: the Luria neurological processing theory and Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of intelligence. With the Luria Model, you will obtain the Mental Processing Index of Learning Ability, Sequential Processing, Simultaneous Processing, and Planning Ability. With the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model, you will obtain the Fluid-Crystallized Index with the areas of long-term storage and retrieval, short-term memory, visual processing, fluid reasoning, and crystallized ability. This assessment is also more child-friendly because of the visuals throughout the test. A weakness of this assessment is the administrator will not be able to obtain a score for auditory processing and processing speed with this assessment, requiring the administrator to utilize another intelligence assessment. This assessment has two intelligence theories options to choose from: the Luria

whether intelligence has had a major increase over the past century. The data reviewed includes

Binet was involved in creating one of the more recent forms of intelligence test, referred to as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale. A similar test is that formulated by Wechsler (Neisser et al. 1996). These led to the measure of IQ (“intelligence quotient”) being founded, where an individual’s “mental age is divided by their chronological age and multiplied by 100” (Gardner 2006, p. 3). The tests measure intelligence through verbal and non-verbal tasks, assessing scholastic aptitude, school achievement and specific abilities (Neisser et al. 1996, p. 78).

Each theory of intelligence has not only a different method of testing intelligence, but also a different definition of intelligence, which each creator ascribes to. Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (Terman, 1916), or IQ tests as they are commonly referred to as, are currently one of the most widely used tools for intelligence measurement, however, research suggests they are a poor predictor of future academic success for particular cultural groups (Gardner, 1993). In one of the largest neurocognitive-based intelligence studies performed to date, it was revealed through the observation of neuroimaging data that IQ scores alone were not likely to indicate a fundamental intellectual ability because intelligence is composed of multiple anatomically distinct components (Hampshire, Highfield, Parkin, & Owen, 2012). Considering this development, it would appear that IQ tests are only measuring one subsection of intelligence, located in the frontoparietal cortex (Gray, Chabris, & Braver, 2003; Hampshire, Highfield, Parkin, & Owen, 2012). In order to provide analogous statistics to base research upon, it is vital to create multifaceted, culturally sensitive measurements because cultures differ greatly in the emphasis they place on certain aspects of intelligence (Sternberg, Grigorenko, & Kidd, 2005).

cognitive ability. This test can get students into gifted programs in schools and was used by the

In 1904, a French psychologist (Alfred Binet) created the first intelligence test in order to help the French Ministry of Education segregate children that may have difficulty learning in a regular classroom. At that time, he did not know that his test would be the basis for IQ tests administered over 100 years later. He has a Stanford University psychologist, Lewis Terman, to thank for expanding his work and creating the Stanford-Binet intelligence test that took root in the United States in 1916 and is still popular today. However, along with its popularity came criticism. Critics see the current version of the Stanford - Binet test and other intelligence tests, despite attempts to make them culturally fair, as limiting to individuals who are not from the major social norm. They claim that cultural bias in test questions is why certain races do not perform as well as others on the test.

There is a relationship between intelligence and culture because intelligence is culturally shaped and defined and some cultures support and identify it as very vital in the context of social and ecological aspects. In the early years, there was a bias towards intelligence tests because they used English language and culture. The formation of Wesler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fourth Addition (WAIS,IV) in 2008 by David Wesler was meant to minimise the bias. According to Westen, Burton and Kowalski (2006), intelligence assists human beings to take control of their lives and it varies cross culturally because the power dynamics differ in each society and this leads to differences in behaviour and line of thinking. These authors describe intelligence as multifaceted, functional and can be defined by culture because it is universal and studying intelligence using different culture as a sample that can be used to question Western ideas about intelligence with some emphasis on the assessment of skills and abilities using culturally appropriate methods (Benson, 2003)

special needs children). They wanted to devise a test to measure a variety of psychological abilities, which included imagery, attention, comprehension, imagination, judgments of visual space, and memory for various stimuli. Binet did not believe that simple sensory testing was a true and accurate way to determine a person’s intelligence. Binet never intended for his test to measure ones intelligence but to measure ones intelligence in regards to their behaviors.

His concept involved the idea that certain mental tasks are appropriate to certain ages, such as the ability to recite the names of the months: while expected of a ten year old, such ability would be rare in a three year old. Binet quantified intelligence as the Intelligence Quotient (IQ): the ratio of mental age to chronological age, multiplied by 100. Reasoning that low intelligence stemmed from improper development, Binet envisioned the test as a first step in treatment: a diagnostic instrument used to detect children with inadequate intelligence in order to treat them using "mental orthopedics."

Before the 1950s, most educators and school systems tended to follow Louis Terman’s example and based most decisions about gifted individuals on IQ and scholastic achievement scores. Standardized group intelligence tests, such as California Test of Mental Maturity, were often used to determine IQ. In these tests, educators were looking for exceptional ability in verbal or performance IQ, or a combination of the two. For the final identification, individual IQ tests such as the Wechsler scales and the Stanford Binet were used. Most school systems around this time considered an IQ of 130 or above to fall in the "gifted" range. This information comes from a book by Frederick B. Tuttle, Laurence A. Becker, and Joan A. Sousa (48).

When a person utters the word “intelligence,” people tend to think of a genius like Albert Einstein developing some obscure equation that the great majority of the population will never understand. The problem with the definition of intelligence is that people relate intelligence to words like “genius” which require intelligence but do not have the same definition as intelligence. Often, people try to use related words to define intelligence, but these words are unable to define intelligence since many are only different levels of intelligence. While many definitions try to encompass the meaning of intelligence and various definitions describe a small part of intelligence, no definition completely explains intelligence, because

Howard Gardner recognizes that intelligence is more than the single logical-mathematical processing of stored facts that intelligence tests assess. He views intelligence as problem-solving, problem-creating, and problem-finding across a range of situations. There are a total of eight Multiple Intelligences: Logical-Mathematical, Linguistic, Musical, Spatial, Bodily-Kinesthetic, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, and lastly, Naturalist Intelligence. These Intelligences allow educators to carefully integrate several content areas within a specific curricula.