I’ve taught statistics, math courses and what I’ve found is that often if you teach them algebraically the formulas, you’ll have one group of kids doing well.

Well, first of all, we did lots of studies where we show practical intelligence doesn’t correlate with G. We have probably two dozen studies that practical intelligence better predicts job success than IQ.

If you’re not adapting to the very rapidly changing environment, if you can’t think creatively, you lose big in this society because there are very few jobs for you left.

If there’s going to be an SAT, it’s probably practical to invest in a book or perhaps in a course, but I’m sorry to say, I went to some classes that my kids took and it was clear in school that what they were doing was just SAT training.

But in any case, I did poorly on the tests and so, in the first three years of school, I had teachers who thought I was stupid and when people think you’re stupid, they have low expectations for you.

In other words, if a teacher only teaches in one way, then they conclude that the kids who can’t learn well that way don’t have the ability, when, in fact, it may be that the way the teacher’s teaching is not a particularly good match to the way those kids learn.

There is no recipe to be a great teacher, that’s what is unique about them.

The essence of intelligence would seem to be in knowing when to think and act quickly, and knowing when to think and act slowly.

There was already a famous Sternberg in psychology and it was obvious there would not be another.

Success in life does not necessarily originate with academic success.