General intelligence has served as the major representation of intellectual ability during most of the twentieth century. Beginning with the work of Binet (1902) in France, Spearman (1927) in England, and Terman (1916) in the United States, the metaphor of intelligence as the nexus of mental abilities grew to be the salient psychological construct representing human cognition. While the factor analyses of Thurstone (1938) and Guilford (1967) began to identify componentsor factors of intelligence, the concept of general intelligence represented by the IQ continued and still continues to hold sway in much of psychology and education as well as the practical worlds of business and industry The course of development in most scientific fields is from broad to ever finer and more detailed analyses. After decades of medical research we now delineate many specific forms of cancer and in clinical psychological research many specific types of mental illness. We can better understand, control, and minister to phenomena by addressing components, as for example blood cells in the cancer condition called leukemia or specific areas of the brain in mental illness. Beginning with the extensive work of Thurstone (1938), Cattell (1971), Guilford (1967), and others in factor analyzing intelligence tests, a new conception of human abilities began to emerge, identifying specific factors of intelligence.
Methods of factor analysis changed over time so that while Thurstone's analyses yielded a parsimonious set of six or seven major factors of intelligence, Guilford's analyses seemed to reveal over a hundred and possibly several hundred factors. Both Thurstone and Guilford also brought creativity factors into the realm of intelligence: Thurstone with 'fluency' and Guilford with an extensive set of divergent thinking factors. The history of gifted education has witnessed extensive efforts in both theoretical and empirical areas to define the construct giftedness Yet, there is little agreement among researchers and educators on a precise definition and measurement of giftedness (Horowitz & O'Brien, 1985; Janos & Robinson, 1985). The widespread disagreement is a result of varying and conflicting conceptions about the relationships among and definitions of giftedness, intelligence, and talent (Gagnr, 1985; Feldhusen & Hoover, 1986). Hallahan and Kauffman (1982), however, argued that the reasons for disagreement are mainly due to differences regarding four issues: the range of skills and behaviors to which the term giftedness should be applied, the measurement of giftedness, the cutoff point above which a child is considered gifted, and the nature of the comparison group. In an insightful analysis of the term and the conception of giftedness Gallagher (1991) concluded that it is time to change our terminology because the term 'gifted' connotes unearned privilege and creates problems for students who are so designated. Recent research and theory development by Can'oll, Sternberg, Gardner, Gagnr, and others show the way to new and better terms and conceptions of superior ability.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment