Inteligencia Exitosa by Professor Robert J Sternberg, , available at Book Depository with free delivery worldwide. : Inteligencia Exitosa (Spanish Edition) () by Robert J. Sternberg and a great selection of similar New, Used and Collectible. Robert J. Sternberg and Elena L. Grigorenko Yale University. Publication Series No. 2. This report is disseminated in part by the Office of Educational.
|Published (Last):||26 January 2016|
|PDF File Size:||12.99 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.33 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The model that underlies our assessments is called WICS, which is an acronym for wisdom, intelligence, and creativity, synthesized Sternberg, The basic idea underlying this model is that active and engaged citizenship and especially sternbeeg require individuals to have 1 a creative vision for how they intend to make inteligdncia world a better place, not just for themselves, but also for their family, friends, colleagues, and sternbreg 2 the analytical intellectual skills to be able to explain why their vision, and that of others, is a good one; 3 the practical intellectual skills to be able to execute their vision and persuade others of its value; and 4 the wisdom to ensure that their ideas represent a common good, not just their own interests or those of their friends or family.
Can we apply this model to assessments that can be used in schools?
We have done a variety of projects suggesting that we can. This Center, now relocated to Tufts, is dedicated to the advancement exittosa theory, research, practice, and policy advancing the notion of intelligence as developing expertise—as a construct that is modifiable and inteigencia, to some extent, of development throughout the life span. The Center seeks to have an impact on science, on education, and on society.
Sternberg received the Ph. The central focus of his research is on intelligence, creativity, and wisdom, and he also has studied love and close relationships as well as hate. This research has been conducted in five different continents. These awards include the Arthur W. He also was listed by the Esquire Register of outstanding men and women under 40 and was listed as one of top young scientists by Science Digest.
Sternberg is most well known for his theory of successful intelligence, investment theory of creativity developed with Todd Lubarttheory of thinking styles as mental self-government, balance theory of wisdom, WICS theory of leadership, and for his duplex theories of love and hate. Sternberg Worthy assessments should reflect the broader capabilities that students need to thrive in the 21st century.
My freshman-year introductory psychology course was designed like most courses one finds not just at the college level, but from middle school onward.
The main means of teaching was lecture, and the main assessment inteligencka performance was inteligeencia set of tests that measured inteligncia recall and basic understanding of the facts taught in the course. Thirty-five years later, I became president of the American Psychological Association, which, with a membership of , is the largest inteligecnia organization of psychologists in the world. In some ways, it is the best position one can get in the field of psychology. I cracked to my predecessor that it was ironic that I, who had gotten a C in my introductory course, was now president of the association.
He looked me straight in the eye and admitted that he, too, had gotten a C. This vignette points out in microcosm what may be ineligencia with the assessments to which we, as a society, have committed ourselves.
As a teacher or administrator, wxitosa many times have you had to take a multiple-choice or fill-in-the-blank test except inteligencai, when you needed to show that you were supposedly qualified for your job? When I look at the skills and concepts I have needed to succeed in my own field, I find a number that are crucial: But memorizing books is certainly not one of them. One can argue, with justification, that one cannot think without extiosa to think with and about.
But when we teach only for facts, rather than for how to go beyond facts, we teach students how to get out of date. For example, the facts that I learned in my introductory psychology course matter little today.
An introductory text today contains almost entirely different facts. I am the author of one of those textbooks Sternberg, Other fields, such as the hard sciences, political science, economics, and so forth, change at least as rapidly. Even the humanities change: A ineligencia of classic works remains, but the interpretations—and even what constitutes such interpretations—change.
So what should we assess?
Oddly enough, a lot of models can prepare students for the ezitosa they will play in their world. Traditional schooling just does not happen to be one of them. We should also assess in ways that can help students develop the skills they need for success in school and life.
Consider students on an athletic strnberg. They learn declarative knowledge about the sport. But learning the rules of the game will no more help them in playing the game than memorizing a book of rules on driving will help someone drive.
The students also need to learn how to play the sport. But the most important skills they learn have nothing to do with one sport or another.
These skills are very much like those I mentioned previously: Athletics is not the only exotosa for such learning. Consider the members of an orchestra or of a dance ensemble. They, too, must learn sterjberg work together and must develop similar skills. How might assessments better reflect the kinds of skills that matter—not just sterngerg school, but also in life beyond school? This is a question that we in the Center for the Psychology of Abilities, Competencies, and Expertise, formerly at Yale and now at Tufts University, have posed for ourselves.
It is a challenge that we have, to some extent, taken as our life work. Wternberg programs in this model were designed to determine whether we could teach and assess students for memory and for analytical, creative, and practical achievement in the context of any academic subject at any grade level.
At that point, wisdom was not separated from practical skills, although it is distinguishable from them. Wisdom involves using academic and practical intelligence, as well as creativity and knowledge, for a common good. If, for example, a used-car salesman convinces stenrberg to buy bad cars, he could be high in practical or emotional intelligence without being wise. As an example, in social studies, we might assess understanding of the American Civil War by asking such questions as 1 Compare and contrast the Civil War and the American Revolution analytical ; 2 What might the United States sterbberg like today if the Civil War had stwrnberg taken place creative?
In English, we might assess understanding of a novel such as The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by asking 1 How was the childhood of Tom Sawyer similar to and different from your own childhood analytical?
In science, we might ask 1 What is the evidence suggesting that global warming is taking place analytical? Interestingly, even when students are assessed solely for memory, they perform better when taught broadly than when taught just for memory. This is because broader teaching enables students to capitalize on their strengths and correct or compensate for their weaknesses in learning. For example, broader teaching might involve encouraging students who are more visually sternberrg and less numerically oriented to draw a inteliegncia to help them visualize and solve an algebra problem.
Students who are more numerically oriented might proceed directly to constructing a set of equations. Assessing Creative and Practical Thinking In our society, a problem with teaching and assessing more broadly is that the kinds of standardized assessments we currently use are quite narrow. Creativity, practical thinking, and wisdom are assessed minimally or, more likely, not at all.
Is there any hope that our society can transport some of these skills to high-stakes assessments? My collaborators and I decided to find out. In one study, the Rainbow Project, we designed tests of creative and practical thinking that could supplement tests like the SAT Reasoning Test, which measures analytical skills in the verbal and mathematical domains.
We tested 1, high school students and college freshmen from 15 different schools. We posed analytical questions much like those traditionally found on standardized tests. But we also asked the students to answer creative and practical questions. The creative tests required the students to stretch their imaginations. Or they might be shown a collage of pictures, such as of musicians or athletes, and be asked to tell a story about the collage. Or they might be asked to caption an untitled comic strip.
The practical tests required the students to solve everyday problems. Some tests were presented verbally; others, through videos. The task would be to decide what the student should do. Or students might see a video that shows a group of friends trying to figure out how to move a large bed up a winding intelkgencia. Multiple-choice tests, no matter what they were supposed to measure, clustered together. Students who were better at one multiple-choice test tended intelihencia be better at others as well.
This result suggested that using multiple-choice tests consistently tends to benefit some students and not others.
Second, we discovered that using broader tests for college admissions can enhance academic excellence. When compared with using SAT scores alone for predicting freshman-year grades, using these broader tests enabled us to double the accuracy of that prediction. Compared with the predictive value of SAT scores and high school grade point average combined, we increased the accuracy of prediction by about 50 percent.
In other words, our assessments were not quixotic ventures into esoteric realms. On the contrary, they enhanced our ability to predict who would be more, as opposed to less, successful in college, at least from an academic point of view.
Third, we discovered that we could substantially reduce ethnic group differences with the tests. In other words, intfligencia such tests could increase the proportion of ethnic minorities admitted to selective colleges. The tests would not compromise academic excellence, but actually enhance it.
Because different ethnic groups have different conceptions of what intelligence is Sternberg,they tend to socialize their children to be intelligent in different ways.
For example, on our tests, American Indians, on average, performed lower than most other groups on analytical assessments. But on oral storytelling, they had the highest average scores. Different groups excel, on average, in different ways; giving them a chance to show how they excel enables them to show that they can succeed.
Tests like the Rainbow Assessment do not benefit only members of ethnic minority groups. Many students who come from the majority group, and even from well-off homes, learn best in ways that are different from those assessed by conventional standardized tests. Our tests help identify such students.
Inteligencia Exitosa : Professor Robert J Sternberg :
Increasing Quality and Diversity It is one thing to have a successful research project, and another actually to implement the procedures in a highstakes situation. We have had the opportunity to do so. Tufts University, under the leadership of its president, Lawrence Bacow, has strongly emphasized the role of active citizenship in education.
So it seemed like an ideal setting to put into practice some of the ideas from the Rainbow Project. In collaboration with Linda Abriola, dean of the School of Engineering, and Lee Coffin, dean of admissions, I instituted Project Kaleidoscope, which implements the ideas of Rainbow but goes beyond that project to include in its assessments the construct of wisdom.
On the —07 application for all of the more than 15, students applying to the schools of Arts, Sciences, and Engineering at Tufts, we placed questions designed to assess WICS Sternberg, Whereas the Rainbow Project was a separate high-stakes test administered with a proctor, the Kaleidoscope Project was a section of the Tufts college application.
The advantage of the Kaleidoscope Project is that it got us away from the high-stakes testing situation in which students must answer complex questions in very short amounts of time under incredible pressure.