One of the examples given about the effects of cultural differences in the definition of intelligence is between the Taiwanese and the Americans. The definition of intelligence based on speed of thinking and acting varies between these two cultures. The Taiwanese, unlike the Americans have to meditate about the right time to demonstrate their intelligence, something which is barely considered by the Americans. Another example is illustrated by the performance of children sharing the same culture with their teachers. The different ethnic communities living in America perceive intelligent differently, and in circumstances when the teacher’s cultures coincide with that of a student, performance ranking becomes biased. Another example on the effects of cultures on intelligence is the definition of intelligence based on verbal and non verbal communication. Communities having similar interpretations on the best ways of communication perform better, than when introduced to a totally different cultural interpretation of intelligence.
The reason that makes Sternberg to argue that his test is not culturally fair is because definition of intelligence can only be performed within a certain context (Sternberg, 1999). Defining intelligence must be performed as understood by different cultures, rather than by a balanced standard as this approach makes some assumptions on the background, exposure rate and beliefs pertaining to certain concepts being tested. In order to make the process fair, examiners must consider the various demographical differences before issuing the tests to the students (Shaffer, & Kipp, 2007). Only then can the cultures be fairly examined without favoring some at the expense of others. Tests on intelligence should be administered according to individual beliefs in order to make sure that upon selection, the students will be equally qualified. Otherwise, a lot of bright students are left out by the STAT evaluation method and less intelligent students in the same standard chosen as intelligent.
The difference between IQ tests and STAT and CAS is that IQ tests are conducted based on ones beliefs while the rest are standardized tests that ask generalized questions (Sternberg, 1999). The IQ test bases the evaluation questions on the beliefs and the surroundings of the child. A child is therefore expected to develop independent thinking in order to answer the question. The STAT and CAS however use a standardized method that is oriented towards a specific direction. In addition, the child’s IQ tests are barely affected by culture. This is because children are evaluated while still oblivious of the cultural expectations.
Analytical test
Reading a context from a book and applying the behaviors with a certain geographical location
Cognitive tests
Computing the average school going age in the region
Practical intelligence
Asking for the appropriate drills in case someone is drowning and the student has no swimming skills
Cultural influence when developing the test was immense. Firstly, I had to make my own conclusion of how I perceived intelligence as well as the expected answers from the students. From the questions, I intended to get answers that were at per with my interpretation of intelligence and any student who deviated from my own expectations would be regarded as a failure.
ABC Interview
From the interview, Harris’ definition of a relationship system meant that upbringing was mainly influenced by the bonds established between individuals. Hereditary is one such linkage that transfers certain traits from the parents to the offspring and for this reason, there is barely anything to do pertaining the developed behavior (Lehrer, 2009). Once a character trait is transferred from parent to the child, the ensuing behavior is automatically a replica of the parent. The socialization system also affects the character and behavior of developing children. The shared activities lead an individual to develop a different way of carrying it out. Through social learning, individuals share and emulate certain behaviors from the rest of the group. Despite the hitherto held beliefs, social influences are stronger, especially if subjected for a prolonged duration of time. The status system makes use of the experiences and exposure one has as compared to the others in the society. Being exposed to certain things at a given age, there is a possibility of developing unique characteristics than those held by children from other social classes. This difference in social class influences the behavior that develops in a certain child during the development stages.
As children grow along with their peers, the different characteristics are exposed and the weaker ones emulate those that seem better (Lehrer, 2009). Children learn that they are different in character, reasoning and action. They start to compare the behaviors from others to their own and are thus subjected to either stick with their won, or copy what their peers are doing.
While parents are considered as the ones responsible for shaping up good behaviors, Harris claims that parenting should not be stressing factor. This is because parent’s role should be to offer guidance and leave the rest to the children, who would obviously take up after them in character, as well as learn new things from the society. Being too concerned barely changes a thing as children would still be exposed to varying behaviors and it’s only through proper guidance on decision making that the child can be responsible.
The assertion by Harris that parents should worry less and enjoy their children is appropriate. This is because external factors have great influence on child’s behavior and since the parent spends minimal time with the child, worrying about behavioral developments would be inappropriate. It’s only through guidance on decision making that children can learn to make responsible decisions. Otherwise, they would emulate their friends and subsequently inherit character traits from parents.
Bullying in Schools
In the Root programs, a baby is introduced into a classroom and children told to try and understand the feelings of the baby. The program which runs in three sessions involves the pre-visit, the baby visit and the post visit. As the children sit around the baby, they develop certain feelings and minimize their arrogance, and rude behaviors.
By application of developmental psychology, Schonert-Reichl, realized that empathy played its part in this experiment (Bornstein, 2010). In addition, children seemed to develop an understanding of the feelings after positioning themselves into the situation of the child. From her assertion that empathy and understanding are developed in the children, her theory helps in strengthening the perspective on increased bullying due to harsh environments. The long-term goal of this program is to ensure that the children grow to be responsible adults, with empathically based approaches in order to avid conflicts and emphasize on peace.
References
Bornstein, D. (2010).Fighting Bullying With Babies. New York Times. Web.
Lehrer, J. (2009). Do Parents Matter? A researcher argues that peers are much more important than parents, that psychologists underestimate the power of genetics, and that we have a lot to learn from Asian classrooms. Web.
Shaffer, D. R., & Kipp, K. (2007). Developmental Psychology: Childhood and Adolescence. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999).A Triarchic Approach to the Understanding and Assessment of Intelligence in Multicultural Populations. Journal of School Psychology, 37 (2), 145–159.