ISP Experiences

Hi, this is srujana. my child is 3yrs and we started reading cards from 4month onwards....now he almost knows 2000 n may be more words and reads 200 etc books himself...he is now learning chemical elements ...reading is jst fun for him coz i hvnt layd any rules jst enjoyed....when ur in tune with ur child u know how much is req and when to stop just like food...we found out sm fun ways also like hide n seek with cards, put the cards in different rooms like kitchen words ...bathroom ,,,even under his pillow...pillow card...bt still he luvs to sit with books more thn 45 mins...its grt exp...looking for more....hv fun Hi, this is srujana..may be this cld be of some help....my child is 3yrs and we started reading cards from 4month onwards.
-- Srujana, Bangalore

Hi, This is pranita. I am writing my experience about the reading cards . I did this course 3 years back but never showed any reading cards to my child till now partly because of my laziness and partly because of the disbelieve that it would work.

But now when my child started going to school at the age of 3 yrs, suddenly I felt like shoing flashing cards. It really worked like a razor. In 3 days ,he is able to identify 10 words and reading a book which i made using these words. now this has become his favorite game. and he is loving to read. In just 2 months, he covered reading 70- 80 words.

Thanks to isp and special thanks to raviji who guided on how to make flashing cards.

-- Pranita

Matching IQ with Classroom Performance

A number of young children who possess IQ values on the higher side may experience extreme difficulties in their formal classrooms. Most children with high IQs (read gifted children) display a number of internal differences that show a sign of increased pronouncement, when they enter their classrooms. These children's apparent deviation from the normal may make them different-lot in their classroom, when compared to other average to intelligent children. These children also exhibit a number of unique learning behaviors that seem to be entirely different from others.

Children with extraordinary intelligence and talent always need a progressive, conducive and encouraging environment in their classroom. In absence of these parameters, they may show signs of declining learning attitude eventually leading to frustration and disappointments. Although, these children are extremely empowered with rare talents and abilities, their classroom performance may still remain sub-standard and average. If high IQ, giftedness and brilliance do not match our children's day-to-day classroom performance, what would we do?

Teaching and training extremely endowed children is very challenging and complex. Teachers in the classrooms have a lot of responsibility in integrating such children in their classrooms. Strong observational skills apart from fine-tuned teaching methods can help a teacher and parent to tutor children with very high IQ. A strong will to help these children can assist them to gel and work with peers and score better marks.

Now the time for a bad news: "all the children" have extra-odrinary intelligence, often in many different ways. That makes a teacher's job extremely difficult. We need to explore and find out this most prominent ones and then take an approach to nurture it. It takes time and one needs to be patient and observant.

Many parents are bugged with one child at home. But, they expect the teachers to take of their child along with other children in much better ways than them. Next time before complaining about a teacher, please think about this aspect and then provide your comment. If possible, provide support for them to do better and better. Don't forget to acknowledge the fact that they are taking care of children besides their own children.

It is possible to match high IQ with classroom performance provided parents and teachers work in this direction, Together. Parents must enhance their skills by learning newer ways to be with children creatively.

Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

Overview of Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence (1977, 1985, 1995) subsumes both Spearman’s g and underlying information processing components. His triarchic theory includes three facets or subtheories:

• Analytical (componential)
• Creative (experiential)
• Practical (contextual)

Sternberg's theory builds on his earlier componential approach to reasoning. His theory is mostly based on observing Yale graduate students. Sternberg believes that if intelligence is properly defined & measured it will translate to real-life success.

Sternberg's Triarchic Theory is an important effort to synthesize the various theories of intelligence.

Analytical (componential) Facet (or Subtheory)

Analytical Intelligence similar to the standard psychometric definition of intelligence e.g. as measured by Academic problem solving: analogies and puzzles, and corresponds to his earlier componential intelligence. Sternberg considers this reflects how an individual relates to his internal world.

Sternberg believes that Analytical Intelligence (Academic problem-solving skills) is based on the joint operations of metacomponents and performance components and knowledge acquisition components of intelligence

Metacomponents: control, monitor and evaluate cognitive processing. These are the executive functions to order and organise performance and knowledge acquisition components. They are the higher-order processes that order and organise the performance components. Used to analyze problems and pick a strategy for solving them. They decide what to do and the performance components actually do it.

Performance Components: execute strategies assembled by the metacomponents. They are the basic operations involved in any cognitive act. They are the cognitive processes that enable us to encode stimuli, hold information in short-term memory, make calculations, perform mental calculations, mentally compare different stimuli, retrieve information from long-term memory.

Knowledge acquisition components: are the processes used in gaining and storing new knowledge - i.e. capacity for learning. The strategies you use to help memorize things exemplify the processes that fall into this category.

Sternberg feels that IDs in intelligence are related to IDs in the use of these cognitive processes. He feels that people with better reasoning ability generally spend more time understanding the problem but reach their solution faster than those who are less skilled at the task.

Creative (experiential) Facet (or Subtheory)

Creative Intelligence: this involves insights, synthesis and the ability to react to novel situations and stimuli. This he considers the Experiential aspect of intelligence and reflects how an individual connects the internal world to external reality.

Sternberg considers the Creative facet to consist of the ability which allows people to think creatively and that which allows people to adjust creatively and effectively to new situations.

Sternberg believes that more intelligent individuals will also move from consciously learning in a novel situation to automating the new learning so that they can attend to other tasks.

Two-Facet Subtheory (Novelty & Automatization)

Basic assumption: That there are two broad classes of abilities associated with intelligence: novelty skills and automatization skills. A task measures intelligence if it requires the ability to deal with novel demands or the ability to automatize information processing (two ends of a continuum).

Novel tasks or situations are good measures of intellectual ability because they assess an individual's ability to apply existing knowledge to new problems.

Practical (contextual) Facet (or Subtheory)

Practical Intelligence: this involves the ability to grasp, understand and deal with everyday tasks. This is the Contextual aspect of intelligence and reflects how the individual relates to the external world about him or her.

Sternberg states that Intelligence is: "Purposive adaptation to, shaping of, and selection of real-world environments relevant to one's life" (Sternberg, 1984, p.271)

Purposive means that intelligence is directed towards goals, however vague or subconscious they may be. This means that intelligence is indicated by one's attempts to adapt to one's environment.

Practical Intelligence can be said to be intelligence that operates in the real world. People with this type of intelligence can adapt to, or shape their environment. It might also be called “Street-smarts”. In measuring this facet, not only mental skills but attitudes and emotional factors that can influence intelligence are measured.

So this practical intelligence is a combination of:

(a) adaptation to the environment in order to have goals met

(b) changing the environment in order to have goals met

(c) or, if (a) and (b) don't work moving to a new environment in which goals can be met

Sternberg believes that individuals considered intelligent in one culture may be looked on as unintelligent in another.

An important asset of this theory is to avoid defining intelligence in terms of intelligence tests rather than performance in the everyday world (which is, after all, what intelligence tests try to predict!).

Measuring practical intelligence:

• Sternberg Multidimensional Abilities Test measures all 3 intelligences, on separate scales
• Sternberg and Wagner’s test of Practical Managerial Intelligence measures:
• ability to write effective memos
• ability to motivate people
• knowledge of when to delegate
• ability to “read” people

When measuring practical intelligence Sternberg looks at things such as how people decode nonverbal messages e.g. can you tell who are the real couples?

Why? - how to handle your kid's endless "why"s

“Mommy, why do stars twinkle? Daddy, why do fingers look funny in a bathtub? Mommy, why do we need to go to bed? Daddy, why?…Why?..” Do you have a “why-attack” in your home? I love those questions. I think it exposes kids curiosity. I think it shows is their thirst for knowledge. I think it is fun to learn about things, I haven’t even thought of myself! And I think that by answering them, we show our kids how much we respect them, their desire to learn, how much we encourage getting to know about this world.

Nevertheless, whenever any kid asks another “why?” - I try not to answer. It’s easier to answer, but I strongly try to resist this (besides, my answer will just result in thousand more whys, without my kid even concentrating on answers). Why not? Why to withhold the answer? What do YOU think? Right, because I want him to try to come up with his own answer. Sometimes he already knows the answer. Sometimes he is really clueless, but guesses it correctly. Sometimes he doesn’t want to guess and just asks “why” to keep the conversation going.

So, I usually pay lots of attention to those “whys” and jump back with “What do you think?” He either gives his own logical explanation (which doesn’t always sound all that logical to me), or says that he doesn’t know. Now it’s my turn to insist on his “why”: “I would love to answer your question, and I definitely will, AFTER you give me your best hypothesis! It’s a good question - I’d love to know what you think!” Eventually I’ll hear some theory. Most often - surprisingly, quite close to the truth! At least I’ll try to find some truth and encourage it: “You are right, the stars do shine from far-far-away… and they do look like lights of the cars… ”

And I still don’t give out the answer. WHY NOT? I would love to encourage kid’s autonomy. I would love to teach my kid self-reliance, foster his independence. I would love them to know, that they CAN (and should) do their research, they should learn to ENJOY it. I am here to help them, if they need it. I am here to join in this fun quest (I am curious too!). So I use this as an opportunity to dig in the encyclopedia (child’s version or real one), to open wikipedia.org online or search for some images and explanations on google.com. It turns out educational for both of us, and lots of fun.

If we have a knowledgeable friend - that’s a great resource! People usually feel very honored. It feels good to know more and to enlighten someone with your wisdom. So, I think that a good question wouldn’t “bother” other people, it would actually make them feel good about themselves.

Once we were calling our friend’s father, a policemen, to find out what happens with the guns that police takes away from criminals (I’ve never wondered about this in my entire life, and my husband wisely kept silent). It turned out to be exciting (though very surprising to our friend’s father).