Psychology

Human intelligence is an entity though complex in nature creates a basis for understanding human capacities. Over the years, curiosity on what entails intelligence has prompted numerous studies leading to a variety of theories and conceptual frameworks. These theories depict different perceptions on what constitutes intelligence and its role in achievement capabilities of individuals. Intelligence has also created a lot of furor in the education sector. Education is often an instrument of heightening peoples mental capacities and in developing skills which will guide them in life (Sternberg 1985). As such, intelligence is used in analyzing a learners levels of achievement and their potential to perform better.

IQ tests have often been used to determine a learners intelligence levels and thus indicate whether there exist any learning difficulties. These tests are normally inclusive of many measurement variables as seen in the Stanford Binet IQ test and the Wechsler IQ tests. Although these tests have been used for a long time in determining learning difficulties, they are not credible methods. Researchers in this field have identified numerous limitations which reduce the credibility of IQ tests. In fact, the IQ Achievement Discrepancy model which has been used in identifying learning difficulties is seen as unreliable in impacting early identification (Gadner 1993). Most learners have fallen victims to a wrong diagnosis of learning difficulties due to the use of IQ tests. It is in this light that the working memory has been suggested to be a better determinant of learning difficulties.

This paper will present an analytical study of intelligence and its implications in education especially its influence on identification of learning difficulties. The discussion will scrutinize intelligence theories proposed by Thurstone, Spearman, Sternberg and Gardner. Furthermore, both Stanford Binet and Wechsler IQ tests will be assessed and the role they play in identifying reading difficulties. The limitations of the IQ Achievement Discrepancy model will be highlighted. As such, a countering argument will be placed with respect to the working memory and its role in doing the same.

There is no distinct definition of intelligence but most theorists have helped advance specific knowledge on what intelligence entails. Although they differ in approach these theories showcase somewhat similar characteristics. This view relates intelligence to be a combination of the abilities to learn, pose problems and solve problems. This view is uniquely optimistic as it foresees the possibility of high capacities through the use of appropriate tools, study and practice. Gadner advanced the theory of multiple intelligence in which he posited that individuals possessed certain capabilities and either lacked others or had low capabilities in some fields. The eight intelligences included linguistics, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, spatial, naturalistic, logical- mathematical, interpersonal and intrapersonal (Gadner 1993). According to this theory, learners are experts in certain fields while they experience difficulties in others (Gadner 1993, p. 107). This theory did not draw from any psychometric analysis but has been quite influential in education today.

On the other hand, Sternbergs theory of intelligence comprises of three concepts. First is componential intelligence which basically entails an individuals ability to process information correctly and effectively. Structures which steer the cognitive processes include performance, metacognitive and knowledge acquisition elements. Then there is experiential intelligence which incorporates the ability for novel thinking and through experience developing interpretation of other situations. Lastly is practical intelligence which entails the ability to adapt well in both formal and informal environments. Also known as the contextual sub theory, intelligence is seen as a construct of a social cultural context. Sternbergs theory takes on a general approach to intelligence and has mostly been used in explaining giftedness and retardation in children. In the study of analogies and reasoning Sternberg explains that children unlike adults are unable to create specific analogies because they have not yet developed the capacities to understand highly intelligent relations (Sternberg, 1985, p.153).

Spearman developed an intelligence theory which explained the correlations he had identified after measuring the aggregate indices of both discrimination and intellectual abilities. From this he depicted the existence of a common intellectual ability which explained the positive correlation. This common intellectual ability is what Spearman identified to be general intelligence. Any deviations of intellectual capabilities are attributed to how specific measures relate to general intelligence. Later on Thurstone attempted to measure intelligence without relating to general intelligence. His theory emphasizes the present of both strengths and weaknesses in every individuals abilities. He made the assumption that there were primary abilities which included memory, verbal comprehension, spatial reasoning and deduction abilities (Sternberg, 2000, p. 20). These theories were quite controversial and it is not until later that the theorists came into an understanding of what intelligence really entailed. Intelligence would then be measured in the context of specific abilities with general ability at the top of the correlation matrix. All these theories have been useful in the development of intelligence tests which are used in modern education settings for the determination of learners capabilities. Regardless of this, both Gadner and Sternbergs theories have been the most influential in the development of intelligence tests.

Intelligence testing dates back in the 1900s when Alfred Binet developed the first IQ test. His test was generally aimed at determining which learners were most likely to encounter learning difficulties while in school. As such these children would be recommended for special education. Testing was done on the basis of a childs average abilities in relation to their age group. Quite interesting, Binet was skeptical of the ability of psychometric instruments in measuring levels of intelligence. According to him, it was impossible to quantify such an expansive concept and also noted that intelligence was subject to various factors which not only changed over time but were also different in all children. This was the basis of the modern IQ tests like the modified Stanford-Binet IQ test.

The Stanford Binet IQ test has been the standard form of intelligence measurement which quantifies intelligence into a single measurement referred to as intelligence quotient. This score is derived by relating the mental age with the chronological age and the division multiplied by a hundred. The tests reliability has often been validated by the presence of low variation on multiple tests carried out on an individual. The current modifications of this test have seen the analyses of capabilities in such content areas like visual, quantitative and verbal reasoning together with short term memory. Moreover the factors assessed include working memory, knowledge, spatial reasoning, quantitative and fluid reasoning. Exceptional scores on this test labels individuals as highly gifted, bright while the contrary indicates low intelligence and may regard individuals as mentally retarded or in need of special education. Critics of this test point out Alfred Binets initial reason for creating this test and argue that it is not reliable in assessing future intelligence capacities. In this light achievement tests as opposed to intelligence tests have become utilized in identifying learners performances.

David Wechsler is credited for the other commonly used intelligence tests referred to as the Wechsler intelligence scales for both children and adults. His tests were as a result of his dissatisfaction with the limitations of the Stanford- Binet test. These tests are administered with the aim of establishing scores for composite IQ, verbal IQ and performance IQ. The subtests used in these tests are normally used in identifying learning difficulties in particular areas. Low scores indicate that the learner experiences difficulties in certain fields like mathematics, language or reading. Unlike in the Binet scale, these tests compare an individuals scores with others of similar age groups. This test is far more credible than the Stanford- Binet IQ test and is used in the modification of the former.

Intelligence tests have over the years created numerous debates over their reliability in identifying learners with difficulties. Learning difficulties refers to specific academic areas in which learners experience problems. As part of a general evaluation all learners undergo intelligence tests coupled with other types of tests like achievement, emotional and language tests (Suzuki  Valencia, 2001, p. 194). There are instances when learners with specific learning difficulties have found themselves receiving special education due to low scores in their IQ tests. Actually most schools demand basic cut off IQ scores, achievement discrepancies and abilities in the identification of learning difficulties. IQ achievement discrepancy has been used as measure for identifying these learning difficulties. Even though such learners are tested in the areas where they have problems and thus obtain low scores in their IQ tests it is not a true indicator of their intelligence. In essence intelligence should encompass such skills of critical thinking, reasoning and problem solving. However, IQ tests which are designed to measure performance and verbal capabilities which alienates critical elements of intelligence. Learners are basically tested on learned materials which discredits IQ tests as true measurements of an individuals potentials. Another factor which makes IQ tests ineffective in the identification of learning difficulties is the paradox which exists in the administering of the tests. While learners with learning difficulties are expected to undergo intelligence tests, they are bound to fall short of the desired IQ levels especially because these tests include variables in areas where these learners are deficient (Siegel, 1989, p.477). Such learners may end up ranking lowest in IQ test scores even when they have similar reasoning skills. Therefore, it becomes plausible for educators to underestimate the intelligence of learners with learning difficulties.

The IQ achievement discrepancy also fails in the prospects of early identification of learning difficulties. This is mostly because learners have to get to a certain level of education in order for discrepancies between intelligence and achievement to be detected. One other unreliable assumption created by IQ test scores is their ability to determine reading capacities in learners. Following this, poor reading is seen as an anticipated consequence of possessing a low IQ. Aaron et al (2008, p.69) reviewed this model of learning disabilities identification in respect to learners with reading difficulties. His conclusions argued that IQ was not reliable in indicating reading potential in learners. With regard to his findings, the IQ achievement discrepancy model is best abandoned and other pragmatic approaches adapted. These approaches should focus on establishing the causation factors of reading difficulties in all kinds of learners. Empirical studies have suggested that at different levels of IQ, poor readers exhibit similar deficits in reading, memory, spelling and language. Thus in a logical perspective, IQ tests are not an obligatory in identifying learning difficulties.

Although the IQ achievement discrepancy is not reliable in identifying learning disabilities, the IQ tests may be used in areas where educators may find them useful. For instance, the assessment of certain abilities like in non verbal areas may be detected by the use of IQ tests. This identification may assist learners in understanding their potentials in terms of both strengths and individual limitations. However, caution is given in regard to gifted learners who may possess learning difficulties. High IQ test scores normally mask the learning difficulty.

With respect to the above discussion on the role of IQ tests in determining learning difficulties, it is precedent to establish a more reliable indicator of reading difficulties. The working memory has been identified as a better indicator of present and potential reading difficulties. Working memory refers to the capacity system which enables individuals to maintain and control information temporarily during cognitive activities (Baddeley, 1998, p.524). In essence working memory is highly related to such cognitive abilities like reasoning, learning and problem solving abilities. Working memory impairments cause learners to struggle while learning because they are unable to grasp and retain the information taught. They tend to forget instructions given, the content being studied and often fail to understand where they need to shift their intellectual abilities. This deficiency in working memory capacities puts a strain on learners academic achievements and often, cases of learning difficulties have been accompanied by the presence of an impaired working memory.

Fletcher (2007, p.189.) asserts that working memory is a vital skill in the identification of reading difficulties. Learners with poor comprehension capabilities in both reading and listening have a working memory which is inadequate. Reading skills make demands on the working memory as it is meant to store on a temporary basis words and sentences. It is also in this storage that these words and sentences are subjected to extensive processing and incorporation with other formerly acquired knowledge. As learners engage in the reading process, the working memory creates a working space where they are able to review previously learnt information with the present information. In the learning of new vocabulary, learners with reading and comprehension deficits experience problems in learning new words when they are not adjacent to the context. The inference of vocabulary meanings is credited to the working memory capacity as opposed to an individuals immediate memory. Byrant et al (2004, p.33) concluded from a sentence span test, that working memory contributed specific variances to inference making, comprehension and knowledge of text structures. This was when such variables like IQ, coding ability and vocabulary remained constant.

Reading skills encompass both reading decoding and comprehension. All these forms of reading capacities have been known to draw from short, long term and working memory at different levels. On one hand reading decoding which is generally related to verbal working memory and short term especially phonological memory. Reading comprehension is at a highly complex level involving verbal, working memory and long term memory (Dehn, 2008, p. 100). Consequently a high correlation is observed between verbal working memory and reading abilities of different learners. During the reading process, it is important for learners to establish their own pace of reading. However, students with learning difficulties may have no control over this. Byrant et al (2004, p.32) emphasizes that working memory is a resource that affects an individuals ability to carry out many of the processes associated with the construction of the text presentation. This explains why learners with difficulties have poor comprehension capabilities especially due to their slow paces.

Working memory models often support phonological working memory which is the basic cause of reading disabilities (Siegel 1989, p. 471-475). At the core of learners reading difficulties is the factor of their inability to gain optimum phonological understanding. Reading difficulties are indicative of deficits in phonological processing in almost all individuals experiencing reading difficulties. However, there are those who have no phonological processing deficits yet they have reading difficulties. For such learners they demonstrate poor phonological short term memory and limited verbal working memory. Difficulties with grasping basic reading decoding skills are directly influenced by poor retention of phonological data like digits. Children who are experiencing reading difficulties can be identified through short term memory tests where they often perform dismally. Alternatively, learners with reading difficulties also perform poorly in digit span tasks which imply that these learners fail to use phonological short term memory efficiently due to their inadequate articulatory speed. This inefficient ability to temporarily retain phonological memory codes reduces the learners capacity for recall and impairs their reading decoding skills.

Alloway (2009, p.96) established in a detailed research study that the working memory as opposed to the IQ was the best indicator of learning difficulties. In the study learners working memory capacities were measured prior to them being subjected to reading lessons and later retested when the research was over. The reading achievements of learners was predicted according to the baseline working memory scores and after the administering of controlled reading, learners who had better working memories were found to be better readers. In this study performance IQ was not an important predictor of the reading abilities. As a result of such studies, it is evident that verbal working memory is a reliable predictor of reading achievements. In addition, it accounts for improved reading abilities over time. Nevertheless, it is important to understand that these results do not necessarily indicate that intelligence is irrelevant in academic achievement. On the contrary, it could simply imply that the IQ capacity of learners may have been already captured prior to the research. There has also been research suggesting that IQ could be the link between a learners working memory and their academic achievement. Some argue that working memory is not capable of determining academic achievement without the consideration of the IQ. However, research has shown that the IQ is not always necessary.

Simple memory span tasks are often used in the measurement of working memory as illustrated by Alonzo et al (2006, p.87). In analyzing of learners phonological comprehension memory capacities learners can be administered with a letter span memory task. Learners are presented with consonant letters and asked to recall and write them down in order of appearance. This procedure continues until learners fail to recall and thus identifying their levels of phonological working memory storage capacities. One limitation which the working memory has as opposed to the IQ is the lack of standardized forms of measurements. This instills a possibility of irregularities in various working memory research studies. Moreover, there has not been adequate research to provide concrete evidence of their optimum reliability.

According to Oberauer et al (2005, p.61), there has been profound research aiming at establishing the relationship between working memory and intelligence. Most theories on intelligence have been tested on the basis of working memory, achievement tests and standardized abilities. In essence these measurements should show substantial relations to the working memory although not direct correlations. Working memory should not be assumed to be similar with general intelligence as their measurements are not similar in both concept and implications. Nonetheless it is logical to consider the working memory as a vital element of the intelligence and abilities hierarchy. Since working memory is the best indicator of reasoning ability and general intelligence, then it should be a crucial component of current studies on understanding intelligence. Lohman (2001, p.5) asserts that many differences in learning and learning tasks undertaken by individuals rely on the amount of information a learner can store in their working memory. Working memory has been absent in majority of conceptual models and it was surprising for most researchers when  reasoning ability and working memory were seen to correlate perfectly in studies (Kyllonen  Christal, 1990,p.414).

Individual learning differences amongst learners are a direct reflection of individual differences in the learners working memories. Recent theories on the working memory have moved from the emphasis on short term memory to the processing and retention of information. In such models both the storage and transformation capacities of an individual are taken into consideration and the deficit of either may be a reflection of learning difficulties. In this sense, reading tasks where reasoning abilities are required may become a burden to the learners working memory. This is because they are not only expected to recall but also to transform the given information. Therefore they must pay keen attention, monitor any memory which might be fading and instantly refresh them. This perspective implies that it is crucial for learners to have clearly outlined plans during the reading process in order to achieve maximum results. If not, a lack of planning of reading items and content may lead to a gradual development of reading difficulties due to the overwhelming of the working memory.

Masoura (2006, p.32) reflects that working memory deficits vary in different learners and will often present different levels of learning difficulties. Because the working memory is important in all kinds of learning and abilities, it also becomes a major component of determining the overall academic achievement capacities of learners. Most academic fields require high capabilities in language comprehension skills which are often determined by a learners phonological processing abilities. As such, they are bound to have low academic achievement capacities. In the new working memory models there are new components which are assumed to account for temporary retention of prose and especially in heightening reading skills. It also has the ability to integrate multiple code information and the long term memory. Among different groups of children with learning disabilities from those with severe, moderate or even mild learning difficulties there are reflections of poor performances in memory tasks. The same case applies to learners with impaired verbal abilities, language and general mental abilities. An analysis of all groups is likely to indicate that the exact deficit related to these dismal learning abilities is located in the working memory system. Alonzo et al, (2007, p.86) claims that researchers endorse the storage and control function of working memory but differ as to how the control function is realized.

Apart from the letter memory span task used in analyzing the working memory capacities there is the backward digit span task which is often used to detect children with special learning needs. These tasks are reliable in their capacity to effectively discriminate on the relations of the central cognitive systems. Moreover, learners with learning difficulties do not reflect any changes in their working memory tasks as opposed to learners who have normal learning capabilities. The explanation for this lack of change is the impairment of retrieval systems in the learners with difficulties working memory. In respect to general intelligence and the overall performance of learners in such working memory tasks there is a reflection of intelligence being a componential element. Even though there has not been vast research carried out in regard to this concept it still remains logical to assume the crucial role played by intelligence in academic achievement.

As the above discussion indicates there is no clear definition of intelligence although numerous theories have been developed in this respect. However, it is observed that intelligence involves the mental capacities of individuals to reason, propose and solve problems. Intelligence holds a vital place in the realm of education and the theories discussed have been instrumental in deriving intelligence capabilities for all kinds of learners. Gardners theory of multiple intelligences and Sternbergs intelligence theory have been used in the deriving of measurement methods of intelligence. In addition, the multiple intelligences theory details an aspect which can be observed in most school settings. Learners are seen to possess high intellectual abilities in specific fields and less in others. Gardners theory can also be used in accounting for reading difficulties especially in learners who do not possess the linguistic intelligence outline by the multiple intelligences theory.

IQ tests discussed in the paper include the Stanford  Binet IQ test and the Wechsler IQ scales. These tests have valid capacities in detecting learners overall intelligence and their capabilities in academic achievements. However, there are identifiable limitations in their capacity to determine reading difficulties among other learning difficulties. IQ tests may be able to detect a learners past comprehension capacities but they fail in detecting potential reading abilities of learners. So, while the IQ test labels learners as poor readers they fail to incorporate the gradual development component of reading abilities. They have also shown great discrepancies across various studies which has contributed to its reduced validity and reliability. Results of IQ tests also vary across different cultural backgrounds. These limitations in no way dismiss IQ tests as they are still important in analyzing general intelligence among individuals.

The working memory has been identified as a better predictor of reading difficulties. Unlike the IQ tests, working memory tests are able to detect potential reading abilities in learners (Sternberg, 1985, p. 203). Research supports this claim as seen in the above discussion where learners with poor working memory have reflected poor reading abilities. Moreover, the role of phonological processing abilities in respect to the working memory has been illustrated and conclusions made on the direct relationship which exists between working memory deficits and reading difficulties. Teaching strategies for reading are often directed at enhancing retention capacities of learners in order to affect their working memory potentials in mastering various reading and language rules.

In conclusion, it is logical to present the use of working memory tests as a viable measurement for intelligence in relation to reading difficulties. The argument in favor of the working memory promotes practical and effective methods of determining learning difficulties amongst all kinds of learners. Intelligence is indeed a complex subject and there is still more room for advanced research in order to develop a better understanding of intelligence. However, present research serves a firm basis for future research especially on the impact of the working memory in determining learning disabilities.