A completely definitive and accurate summary of intelligence is nearly impossible to achieve. However, it is vital to note that any effective definition of intelligence recognizes the diversity and various functionalities of the concept. As such, this report’s selected definition of intelligence is related to Robert Sternberg’s research (Sternberg, 2020). According to Sternberg, intelligence can be perceived as “mental activity directed toward purposive adaptation to, selection, and shaping of real-world environments relevant to one’s life.” Sternberg denotes analytical, creative, and practical intelligence to be of specific significance when coming to understanding the thought processes of others. These three areas inform adaptation, decision-making, and application of information to practical settings.
Analytical intelligence refers to the process that facilitates the evaluation of information and problem-solving. Sternberg defines intelligence as academic and can be measured by an IQ test. As it is also related to the componential subtheory, it is involved with retaining information, pattern recognition, and the application of theoretical information within practical issues (Mitana et al., 2019). The componential subtheory refers to a diverse set of mechanics that contribute to intelligence. These can include meta-components, performance components, and knowledge-acquisition components. As such, it can be seen as the more standard measure of intelligence that is based on academics, skills, and aptitudes. While it is vital and all individuals present varied levels of analytical intelligence, it is only one component of an individual’s general intelligence.
The creative intelligence element is primarily concerned with the formulation of novel and unique ideas. No ideas are entirely original, but certain individuals are more adept at the introduction of utilizing existing information in handling new issues or managing previously unfamiliar settings. Creative intelligence is driven by Sternberg’s experiential subtheory, a potential process through which experiences can range from novel to automated. This continuum, therefore, reflects the creative intelligence of an individual. The theoretical form of intelligence can be observed at the extremes of the theory’s spectrum (Sternberg & Chowkase, 2021). In the case that the individual is met with the completely novel end of the spectrum, their response becomes definitive of their creative intelligence. On the opposite end, in cases of familiar experiences, the individual responds to a task or situation with automation.
The final component includes practical intelligence. In Sternberg’s own words, it is a skill that allows for interaction with a daily and practical world. It can be visualized through successful interaction within the external environment. It also encompasses an individual’s adaptability to an environment that is susceptible to change. It relates to the contextual sub-theory which implies that intelligence is ingrained in an individual’s environment (Hedlund, 2020). As such, practical intelligence is a result of processes by which individuals function in everyday settings. This includes adaptability, the selection of an environment, and the shaping of space to fit one’s needs and desires.
There are some flaws in that theory that may damage its credibility. First, it is not based on any empirical data whatsoever. Second, it does not have any numerical means of measuring intelligence, as opposed to IQ and other ideas surrounding intelligence. Third, although analytical intelligence is perceived as something that helps people make decisions, there is a small issue. A connection between surviving, staying out of prison and analytical intelligence has been found. The capability of avoiding trouble and life threatening events are related to so-called “street smarts”, as opposed to “book smarts”. Moreover, this theory does not consider the diversity in behavioral and ethnic differences and how they affect the three intelligence elements. Nonetheless, modern research shows that these factors resonate with its functions, especially the creative and analytical ones. Creative and applied abilities play a rather significant role as valuable indicators of students who are academically successful (Sabbah & Aldin, 2022). This means that empirical data actually does demonstrate that there is a fluctuation in the dominance of the kind of intelligence that may be of great importance for victorious students.
However, there are some advantages in Sternberg’s theory as well. Primarily, it helped affect a new wave of intelligence theory with the help of unusual and new means of reviewing intelligence. It can serve as a reminder that academic achievement is not the sole definer of intelligence. Even if one does not have great analytical skills, it does not make one unintelligent (Forsythe, 2019). Finally, the basis of Sternberg’s theory is that intelligence is fluid and can change in the process of a lifetime. People can acquire intelligence as they become older, overcome problems and get used to new situations in their lives. Thus, in spite of the theory’s flaws, it has had a great influence on how intelligence is perceived and assessed.
References
Forsythe, F. (2019). Sternberg’s Triarchic theory of intelligence and what it reveals. Learning Mind.
Hedlund, J. (2020). Practical intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 736–755). Cambridge University Press.
Mitana, J. M., Muwagga, A. M., & Ssempala, C. (2019). Assessment for successful intelligence: A paradigm shift in classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 4(1), 106-115.
Sabbah, S. S., & Aldin, A. M. A. (2022). Distinctive behavioral characteristics of outstanding students in the light of Triarchic theory of intelligence from the point of view of students and their teachers. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(1), 8624–8639.
Sternberg, R. J. (2020). The augmented theory of successful intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 679–708). Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Chowkase, A. (2021). When we teach for positive creativity, what exactly do we teach for? Education Science, 11(5), 237.