Testing the theory of successful intelligence in teaching grade 4 language arts, mathematics, and science.

Abstract

This study addressed whether prior successes with educational interventions grounded in the theory of successful intelligence could be replicated on a larger scale as the primary basis for instruction in language arts, mathematics, and science. A total of 7,702 4th-grade students in the United States, drawn from 223 elementary school classrooms in 113 schools in 35 towns (14 school districts) located in 9 states, participated in the program. Students were assigned, by classroom, to receive units of instruction that were based either upon the theory of successful intelligence (SI; analytical, creative, and practical instruction) or upon teaching as usual (weak control), memory instruction (strong control), or critical-thinking instruction (strong control). The amount of instruction was the same across groups. In the 23 comparisons across 10 content units in 3 academic domains, there were only a small number of instances in which students in the SI instructional groups generally performed statistically better than students in other conditions. There were even fewer instances where the different control conditions outperformed the SI students. Implications for the future of SI theory and the scalability of research efforts in general are discussed.Throughout the first decade of the 21st century, educational re searchers and policymakers have placed an increased emphasis on the twin goals of (a) using experimental designs to evaluate educational interventions and (b) gaining a greater understanding of the issues related to the scalability of educational interventions. The value placed on interventions that have been experimentally tested is high lighted by repositories such as the U.S. Department of Education's "What Works" clearinghouse (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/). Projects related to issues of scalability were funded by the Department of Education in the early to mid-2000s, and the results of these projects This article was published O nline First April 7, 2014. R obert J. S ternberg, D epartm ent o f H um an D evelopm ent, Cornell U niversity; L in d a Jarvin, Paris C ollege o f Art; D am ian P. B irney, S chool o f Psychology, U niversity o f S ydney; A dam N aples, C hild D evelopm ent C enter, Y ale U niversity; Steven E. S tem ler, D epartm ent o f Psychology, W esleyan U niversity; T ina N ew m an, C enter fo r C h il dren W ith S pecial N eeds, G lastonbury, C onnecticut; R enate O tterbach, D epartm ent o f G eneral E ducation, U niversity o f San F rancisco; C aro lyn P arish, SRA In ternational, Fairfax, V irginia; Judy R andi, D epart m ent o f E ducation, U niversity o f N ew H aven; E lena L. G rigorenko, C hild S tudy C enter and D epartm ent o f P sychology, Y ale U niversity.

A Partnership Model for Integrating Technical Communication Habits Throughout Undergraduate Engineering Courses

“…The two students who had difficulty explaining the purpose of the lab in one sentence provided responses here that demonstrated understanding: "I'm faster than you" and "You're slow." This is consistent with other research that found that some students can demonstrate understanding through creative activities, even when they appear to lack understanding when tested in traditional ways [28]. Other examples of creative, yet meaningful responses include "Why do you take so long to change your temperature?"…”

Still Searching for the Zipperump‐a‐Zoo: A Reflection After 40 Years

“…We studied validating the theory of successful intelligence, particularly with regard to whether the theory could improve instruction. We found that teaching for successful intelligence improved school achievement (25); however, when we tried to upscale the work some years later, we were less successful (26). We lacked the resources to ensure fidelity of treatment, but the weak findings may have been the result of many possible causes.…”

Effectiveness of successful intelligence training program: A meta‐analysis

“…Upper primary was regarded as the middle-school level. Sternberg et al (2014) was a 5-year project and, as such, did not include weeks and months. Intervention duration was assumed as the duration of treatment between pretest and posttest.…”

“…Multiple encoding helps students to memorize for recall during test time. TSI training appears to be more effective in improving academic achievement than traditional instruction due to the three means of encoding method (analytical, creative, practical; Assink, 2017; Jeltova et al, 2011; Sternberg et al, 2014). We expect that TSI training is associated with greater improvement in academic achievement than in traditional instruction across all studies.…”