Constructions of "Smartness"

The notion of a singular “general intelligence” has been repeatedly disproven: human abilities are multidimensional and cannot be reduced to a single score or measure. Yet systems built around standardized assessments continue to treat intelligence as a one-dimensional concept, often reducing it to a single score like a GPA. So where did this limited view of intelligence or “smartness” originate, and how can we move past it?

The History of “Smartness”: A Critical Analysis

Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, many scientists subscribed to the belief that individuals possessed a fixed, innate level of “general intelligence”. This concept was measured using tools like the Stanford-Binet intelligence test above, created in the early 20th century by Stanford psychologist Lewis Terman. This test is still in use today, albeit in revised form. These early IQ tests were shaped by racist and eugenic ideologies. The early testing movement’s legacy continues to frame intelligence in narrow, culturally biased terms, privileging those whose experiences align with the dominant culture.

As Ibram X. Kendi argues in Why the Academic Achievement Gap Is a Racist Idea, standardized tests have functioned as tools of exclusion, favoring those from privileged backgrounds while dismissing the intellectual richness of marginalized communities. In this context, the “achievement” gap refers to the persistent disparity in educational outcomes between Black, Hispanic and Indigenous students compared to their White and Asian peers.

The dominant, narrow framing of intelligence doesn’t just marginalize—it overlooks the multiplicity of literacies, languages, and ways of knowing that exist across cultures. What if, as Kendi suggests, the “achievement gap” isn’t about levels of intelligence but different kinds of achievement, shaped by unique environments, experiences, values and worldviews?

My Insights: Confronting My Own Bias

This research challenges me to reflect on my own biases. Growing up, I thrived in standardized testing environments because they were designed within the cultural framework I inhabited. I instinctively feel that performance-based assessments, which are assessments that provide students with multiple avenues to demonstrate mastery, are less rigorous, but is this simply my cultural bias at play? What if performance assessments—rooted in real-world application—allow for a more equitable celebration of diverse strengths?

What would education look like if we built on students’ cultural resources and experiences, not as deficits but as strengths? If students were seen as participants in constructing knowledge rather than observers, could we create a more inclusive and dynamic system of learning?

Key Takeaways for NABU and Beyond

1. Reimagine Assessment

• Develop assessments that measure a range of skills and intelligences beyond traditional metrics. The Universal Design for Learning Framework and Performance Assessments, and can help in this effort.

• Emphasize performance-based and portfolio assessments that allow students to demonstrate learning in context.

2. Celebrate Diverse Experiences

• Draw on students’ social and cultural backgrounds as assets in the classroom.

• Encourage students to bring their lived experiences into their learning, enriching the collective educational environment.

3. Empower Student Agency

• Shift authority to students by fostering environments where they actively construct knowledge.

• Implement learning strategies that build on students’ unique strengths and perspectives.

As educator Carolyn Street writes, "Becoming literate means taking full advantage of social and cultural resources in the service of academic goals." Acknowledging and leveraging these resources not only engages students but also enriches teaching practices.

Engage with Me

I would love to hear your thoughts on this topic! Here’s how you can get involved:

• Schedule a Meeting: Put time in my calendar here to discuss any topics further 

• Group Zoom Meetings: Interested in a deeper dive? Let me know, and we can organize a group discussion.

• Email Suggestions: Email me with questions, thoughts, or a topic you want me to cover in future newsletters.

• Please take 30 seconds to respond to this poll: that way I can keep improving the newsletter for you.

Join Us on This Journey

This exploration of topics in early childhood goes beyond the NABU team; it's for anyone with a deep interest in development, education, technology, and media. Whether you're a donor, educator, partner, or practitioner, there’s valuable insight here for you. Together, we can collaborate, learn, and make a lasting impact.

Thank you for being an integral part of this journey. I’m excited to continue this exploration with you.

Tanyella Allison Leta