There are several theories of intelligence. One of the earliest theories was Charles
Spearman’s two-factor theory. According to Plotnik and Kouyoumjian (2010), “Spearman’s two-factor theory says that intelligence has two factors: a general mental ability factor, g, which represents what different cognitive tasks have in common, plus many specific factors, s, which include specific mental abilities (mathematical, mechanical, or verbal skills)” (p. 282). Howard
Gardner’s theory is the multiple-intelligence theory. This theory believes that intelligence should be split over nine different categories, such as musical intelligence or logicalmathematical intelligence. Most standard IQ tests focus only on the verbal and logicalmathematical intelligences which is too narrow according to Gardner’s theory. Finally, is Robert
Sternberg’s triarchic theory. This theory is based on testing a person’s reasoning by using three types of reasoning processes, which are analytical thinking skills, problem solving and practical skills.
The theory that I believe is the best theory for determining intelligence would be Howard
Gardner’s multiple-intelligence theory. According to Sigelman and Rider (2009), “He argues that there are many intelligences, most of which have been ignored by the developers of standardized intelligence tests. Instead of asking, ‘How smart are you?’ researchers should be asking, ‘How are you smart?’…” (p. 247). Not every individual has the same type of intelligence, as seen with savants, which means that using an average intelligence test may be missing the mark when it comes to a person’s true potential. Understanding all aspects of a person’s intelligence would be a more rounded way to go about determining intelligence rather than trying to fit very unique people into small pegs when they may not necessary fit into that peg.

I believe that my strongest abilities lie in the verbal or linguistic intelligence and interpersonal intelligence. I feel that these intelligences do go well together as a person that is usually good with other people is able to verbally communicate well. I feel that I am able to express myself in a manner that gets my thoughts across to my audience without having to really struggle for the words that I need. I would rather pick up a pencil or have a live conversation than pick up a musical instrument or work out a math problem because I am not as skilled with those types of tasks.
The pro of using Charles Spearman’s two-factor theory is that it gives a very definable answer to what intelligence is when it comes to mental abilities that are easy to test such as math skills. The con of using the two-factor theory is that it ignores those portions of intelligence that are not as easily tested for such as bodily-kinetic intelligence. The pro of using Gardner’s multiple-intelligence theory is that it allows for individuals that may not fall under a type of intelligence that is normally recognized. The con of using this theory is that some of the types of intelligence are not very easy to test for using a standardized test. The pro of using Sternberg’s triarchic theory is that it takes into account people that may be more “street smart” than “book smart”. The cons of triarchic theory are that it is not as thoroughly proven as the other theories and that it also does not take some of the different intelligences that Gardner’s theory expresses into account.
Assessing a child’s intelligence is important to a certain extent. It is important to gauge where a child is at as some may need more assistance than others, such as those with a learning disability, and those that are above average intelligence that may need more challenging tasks to keep their attention. According to Bornstein, Vandell and Rook (2010), “On average, IQ scores tend to be relatively consistent over time (that is, reliable), and the scores are related to measure

of school performance (an indication of validity)” (p. 278). However, this should not be the end all be all for how a child is dealt with during their development. A child’s intelligence level as assessed through a test should only be used as a guide, but other aspects should be used to determine what type of school opportunities that they are exposed to during their day. For instance, just because a child scores a high IQ on a test does not mean that they should be placed in a higher grade as they may still be too immature socially, but could be challenged in other ways scholastically. Intelligence assessment should just be one piece of the puzzle for dealing with children as some children may be prodigies in other types of intelligence than what is usually tested through an IQ test.

References
Bornstein, M. H., Vandell, D. L., & Rook, K. S. (2010). Life-span development . Belmont, Calif.:
Wadsworth.
Plotnik, R., & Kouyoumjian, H. (2010). Introduction to psychology (9th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Sigelman, C. K., & Rider, E. A. (2009). Life-span human development (6th ed.). Australia:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning.