Home | Contact Us

Successful Intelligence

Sternberg (2003) explains that the conventional notion of intelligence is 'generalised adaptation to the environment'. Some theorists propose that there is one underlying general intelligence factor, often referred to as 'g', which is the foundation of all adaptive behaviour. A well-accepted alternative perspective is that there is a hierarchy of mental abilities, which are nested under the general factor 'g', with each level of the hierarchy becoming more and more specific.

However, Sternberg (2003) questions whether such traditional, relatively narrow, academic definitions of intelligence adequately capture the whole story about intelligence. Instead Sternberg asks 'What is successful intelligence?' and provides the following definition.

The ability to achieve success in life in terms of one's personal standards, within one's sociocultural context.
One's ability to achieve success depends on capitalising on one's strengths and correcting or compensating for one's weaknesses.
A balancing of abilities is achieved in order to adapt to, shape and select environments.
Success is attained through a balance of analytical, creative and practical abilities.

(Sternberg, 2003, pp. 141-142)

Furthermore, Sternberg (2004) argued that intelligence must always be understood within its cultural context.

Behaviour that in one cultural context is smart may be, in another cultural context, stupid (Cole, Gay, Glick, & Sharp, 1971). Stating one's political views honestly and openly, for example, may win one the top political job, such as the presidency, in one culture and the gallows in another. (Sternberg, 2004 p. 325)

It is not difficult to extrapolate Sternberg's ideas to classrooms and staff rooms!

Sternberg (2000) wrote about practical intelligence, which recognises that people's ability to solve problems in daily activity is a type of knowledge, which in Sternberg's account is intelligence conceptualised as domain-specific expertise.

People have many practical, contextual resources for effective problem-solving, such as:

common sense
environmental and other cues that permit problem definition and representation
the opportunity to ask the opinion of another person
the opportunity to perceive and absorb all of the available information pertaining to a problem
the opportunity to have access to all of the relevant information during the problem-solving phase (rather than having to rely upon memory because relevant information is withdrawn under 'test' conditions)
the opportunity to learn through watching and listening to other people's responses to the problem (which is not cheating as it would be in a traditional school environment)
the opportunity to discuss formally (eg in class or with a teacher) and informally (eg over coffee) the problem, the issues surrounding it and potential avenues for further inquiry
the opportunity to compare one's own responses with those of other more and less experienced people, and with those of people trained in different disciplines
the opportunity to 'steal' knowledge
the opportunity to reflect upon one's own response to a problem
the incentive to become more involved in solutions because the problem really matters to someone else and/or yourself
the potential for the problem and its successful resolution to be interesting and rewarding.

(Collated from Brown & Duguid, 1993; Derry & Lesgold, 1996; Greeno, Collins, & Resnick, 1996; Lakomski, 1999; Lave, 1988; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Mayer & Wittrock, 1996; Wenger, 1998)

In sum, Sternberg's conception of intelligence provides a broader perspective for viewing the abilities that adults and children bring to schools.

Many fields of psychology … have viewed intelligence largely in terms of IQ and then have viewed other aspects of functioning as distinct from intelligence. The notion of successful intelligence brings within the fold of intelligence skills that are essentially for adapting to, shaping and selecting environments that are not part and parcel of intelligence, narrowly defined. But they need to be part of intelligence broadly considered, because they are the skills that so often make the difference between success and failure on the job and in life. (Sternberg, 2003, p. 152)

References
Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (1993). 'Stolen knowledge.' Educational Technology, 33(3), 10-15.

Derry, S. & Lesgold, A. (1996). 'Toward a situated social practice model for instructional design.' In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 787-806). New York: Macmillan.

Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). 'Cognition and learning.' In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15-46). New York: Macmillan.

Lakomski, G. (1999). 'Symbol processing, situated action, and social cognition: Implications for educational research and methodology.' In J. P. Keeves & G. Lakomski (Eds.), Issues in educational research (pp. 280-301). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E. & Wittrock, M. C. (1996). 'Problem-solving transfer.' In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 47-62). New York: Macmillan.

Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (2003). 'A broad view of intelligence: A theory of successful intelligence.' Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55, 139-154.

Sternberg, R. J. (2004). 'Culture and intelligence.' American Psychologist, 59, 325-338.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.