Cognitive Neurology and Educational Psychology

2) interaction of censored systems - for example, unexpected sound, which arouse reflexive turn of the head: so focus of vision and hearing systems reaches and shows the whole picture of outworld;

3) allochthonic afference - auter factors, concrete atmosphere influence on the organism; here is fatefully, that for the reproduction of learned material is simply enough familiar conditions;

4) outgo reflection - influence on the intussusceptions of former experience: figuratively speaking, we feel what we expect; for example - we experience a rootless feeling and fluctuation while we try to go along stopper escalator in metro: escalator is always moving! - that is muddle our muscular system;

5) multisensory convergence - impulses from different censored systems are meeting on one neuron - one of the most important neuron's mechanisms of education.

So, if idea form is a unit of record in cerebrum, we have a question - where and how it records.

In distinction from computer, man's cerebrum does not have “processor”. It is impossible to define the structure of the cerebrum, if it would not only work as “processing”. Alike work stands with “storage medium” - people's brains do not have “hard disk drive”. Well-known researcher of memory S. Rose admitted that it is tendency of the whole cerebrum and even organism. This idea in neurophysiology is explained as distributed neuron nets take place in memorizing and recording. Carrier of memory could be just synapse, because every neuron net is forming due to formation new synapses and changing the structure of already formed synapses. Idea form is recording in synapse chemically: every idea form is cording by unique combination and concentration of neuromediators. Dail's classical principle, according to which only one mediator could be revealed in one synapse, is now reviewed. It turned out that in synaptic ends are operating different combinations of mediators and peptides. In this context “neuronet” is a formation of “synapse-twins” on different levels of cerebrum, theirs synchronized activation leads to extraction needed idea form from the memory. It is important to recognize due to what physiologic mechanisms it happens.

In classical understanding of neuronet, it is not correct to consider it reliable. If neuronet is hierarchic electric wiring, it shall be enough of dying several interim neurons - and the rest cells shall die too or switch over to another neuron nets or chains. Thus, there is necessarily to review ties between neurons, which support theirs synchronous activation. According to hypothesis of Professor M. Karpenko, the record of idea form is based not on “facilitation of realization” in the net, but on the resonant phenomena. These phenomena could immediately and effectively activate allocated “synapse-twins”. Advantages of such mechanism could be compared with cellular phone.

Neuron is getting unique code-address, while the idea form is recording, for example, narrowband range of electric activity. At that, diffusive waves of total electric activity of the cerebrum could play role of “scanner”, which checks and filters the addresses of neurons and synapses.

Mechanism of synchronized activation could be also tied with resonant phenomena in albominous molecules of nerve, receptor and other membranes of cells, which are forming unique functional system.

In view of that, researchers should control all biologically significant signals, which are registered in the cerebrum. For example, composite electromagnetic signals and also signals, which generate in megaherzian range of EEG, are still not studied.

One of possible ways to decide this question is to open method of EEG static analyze, which was provided by MUH together with laboratory of academician N. Behtereva (Institute of Man's Cerebrum RAS).

Parameters of EEG were compared in experiment, which was recorded in two situations: by learning and by reproduction of verbal information (pairs of words on russian and latin languages, modification of CNS methodic). As would be expected, power of EEG alpha-rhythm notably went down during remembering and reproduction of words. But it was otherwise with others, more fast rhythms of brains: theirs power was coming up, at that more strongly while reproducing already learned words. In this way, neurophysiologic marker of process extraction information from brain was found. That is high-frequency electric activity of the cerebrum.

In the same conditions was analyzed another index of EEG - coherence (index of synchronism of work different parts of cerebral cortex). It turned out, that when information comes out from memory; different parts of cortex are working more synchronized, rather than remembering. Functional connections are forming not only between different parts of cortex in one hemisphere, but also between cerebral hemispheres.

During remembering, cerebrum is working as a single whole - its rhythms are synchronizing in different parts.

So, we could intend, that the record of memory's steps is carried out “biochemically”, and for theirs search, the cerebrum is using its electric and resonant qualities. This hypothesis has the right on existence, but for it examination we need detailed researches on cerebra's levels - molecular, neuronic and systematic. Also complex researches are needed for elaboration of optimal learning information.

To this very day, it is too little known about individual differences. It is much easier to succeed in studying different kinds of deflections - mental diseases, visa versa and some kind of “exceptional ability”. Brain is staying “in norm” while it does not disturbed by neuron studying, and what exactly makes successes in learning in general or in particular with one person - meanwhile is not known. Future trends are directed on continuation in studying of nonspecific systems of the cerebrum. On the base of MUH work, EEG-markers of nonspecific activation could be used as an instrument of progress forecast.

What should be the environment of education and how it influences on mental learning? It was already proved, that synaptic connections are forming during whole life, and growth of synaptic contacts in many respects depends on informational richness of the environment. But does it mean, that “the more synapses - so much the better?” We do not have direct proof that potential to education somehow is up to consistence of synapses in mental tissue. There are facts, that neuronet is “editing” on definite step of education, viz “surplus” synaptic contacts are eliminated. It would be useful to install investigations to clarify the consequences of informational load on different structural levels of brain. Such data could lead to fantastic idea - it is how to judge by mental morphology about the level of man's erudition.

The theory of education is based on principle of functional skewness of the cerebrum (distinction between left and right hemispheres). The cerebrum - is highly integrated system, not one of its part does not work isolated, that is why dominance - is probably cooperation of hemispheres. At the same time, lefthander and right-hander people should learn separately. But not in such a way, that one would learn mainly figurative and the other - abstractive exposition of material. It is a question of feature perception and work of censored and motor systems. We hope, that after a time we could offer multimedia training aids, written in two variants: for “lefthanders” and “right-handers”.

It is very important to understand the nature of relearning, especially after the first graduation and their education in elderly groups. Relearning - is the destruction of settled neuron nets. Is it making sense to destruct it “totally”, or to use fragments of old interneuronic unification? Where we have to stop?

What is happening with brains during man's life? It is considered, that when cerebrum growing old it is suffering unavoidable losses - of neurons and interneuronic connections, speed of intellectual operations is coming down. It is hard to contest the advantages of rich life experience, which people acquire. That is why morphologists and physiologists should pay their attention on age-specific reorganization of the cerebrum.

It is necessary to continue researches of individual and typological differences in mental organization. What's the difference between men's and women's brains? There was separate education both for boys and girls. And what is the difference between people of different nationalities? Usually all these talks come to “who is smarter or wiser”. The differences - are not a cause for debates, but wasted instrument of adaptation by evolution, we ought to know how to use it. And that is why we must to study it.

The problem of emotion-motivational component of education needs to study it. Emotional context of education - is not only “pleasant background”, on which we have our knowledge that is powerful entering of management in interaction of two basic systems: cognitive cerebrum. Researches, which help to find “instrument of balancing” emotions in learning process, are needed to provide. Besides, why we need only pleasant emotions? It is known, that negative emotional background could produce practically indelible scent in memory. Thus, the resolving such a problem is capable to rich the practice of education - as far as it would allow ethnic side of this question.

Of course, there is a long list of problems. Analyzing requirements of educational sphere, we could find problems, which would stay none formulated in neuroscience for a long time, if only it would be medic-biological discipline.

It is obvious, that neurologists and specialists in education must contact with each other and to control together hypothesis and statements. Only in this case we could hope that mysteries of cerebrum would be solved. The nature of memory and intellect would clear up and didactics would get effective scientific base.

2. Intellectual faculties as predicates of successful education

2.1 Primary questions of intellectual psychology

The problem of intellectual faculties of people is one of the most significant for practice of education. First of all, it is connected with the result of learning and is depending on intellectual faculties at least, although many scientists are putting forward next factors: motivation, the level of previous practice, practical skills etc. Besides, last decades many scientists and pedagogues have repeated that the educational environment should be build including individual and intellectual abilities of students and only in this case we could reach significant results in learning.

In spite of long history of studying the nature of intellect, it still remains debatable.

First of all, scientists could not admit the definition of intellect, and still there is no one standard determination, with witch everybody could agree. For example, some scientists consider intellect as an ability to acquire new knowledge; others research social aspects of intellect. Many psychologists note, that intellect has many-sided structure. As an example, Ch. Snow emphasizes six aspects of intellect: thinking based on knowledge; understanding; adapted purposeful fight; analytic reasoning; cognitive activity; idiosyncratic teaching.

Modern concepts of intellect, witch include many levels and definitions, are really complicated.

Analysis of correlation of definitions “thinking” and “intellect” are interesting from the point of view of terminology. Thinking and intellect - are similar to content of these terms. Better to say, intellect corresponds with the word “mind”. When we say “intelligent person”, we say about individual faculties of intellect. Term “thinking” is more complied with the word “cogitation”. The word “mind” expresses property, ability, and the word “cogitation” - the process. Thus, both terms express different sides of the very same phenomenon. People, who have intellect, are capable to realize the processes of thinking. Intellect - is faculty for thinking and thinking - is the process of intellect development. Thinking and intellect are considered to be the most distinctive traits of people. For the determination of contemporary man is used the term Homo sapiens. Intellect in the wide sense - is the totality of all individual's cognitive functions: from sensation and perception to thinking and imagination; in the narrow sense - it is thinking. Intellect is the main form of the perception the reality.

M. Holodnaya took an attempt to put in order information, which was collected in the area of experimentally-psychological theories of intellect. She emphasized eight main approaches, for each of them is defined certain conception line in interpretation of intellect nature.

1. Sociocultural intellect is the result of process of socialization and influence of culture (G. Brunner, L. Levi-Brule, A. Luria, L. Vigotsky etc.).

2. Genetic intellect is defined as consequence of complicated adaptation to demands of environment in natural conditions of coordination man with outward things (U.R. Charlswort, J. Piaje etc.).

3. Processual-enerjetic intellect is a particular form of man activity (S. Rubinstein, A. Venger, A. Brushlinsky, K. Abulhanova-Slavskaya etc).

4. Informative intellect is the product of purposeful education (A. Staats, K. Fisher, R. Feuerstein etc.).

5. Informational intellect is the totality of elementary processes of remaking the information (G. Aizenk, A. Hunt, Stenberg etc.).

6. Phenomenological intellect is a particular form of gaining consciousness (V. Keller, K. Dunker, M. Wertgamer, J. Campion etc.).

7. Level-structurally intellect is the system of various levels of cognitive processes (B. Ananiev, E. Stepanova, M. Velichkovsky etc.).

8. Regulation intellect is the form of self regulation of mental activity (L. Terstown etc.).

From the point of view of V. Drujinin, these classifications of intellect are substantive, i.e. to a great extent - theoretical. He suggested an operational approach, which is oriented on getting knowledge by experimental way. In area of intellect, it is so-called factorial models of intellect. Common ideology of factorial approach, as V. Drujinin was thinking, is leading to the next basic suppositions: 1) intellect, as any mental reality, is cryptic, i.e. it is given to scientist only through different indirect manifestations during resolving vital problems; 2) intellect is cryptic of some mental structure (of functional system); it could be measured, i.e. intellect is cryptic property (one-dimensional or many-dimensional); 3) there is multitude of behavioral manifestations of intellect more than multitude of properties, i.e. we can devise a plenty of intellectual sums for expositing only one property; 4) intellectual sums are distinguished from each other by the level of difficulty; 5) resolving sums could be right or not (or near to right); 6) any sum could be resolved rightly for extremely long time.

Consequence of these suppositions is the principle of quasimeasuring procedure: the more difficult sum, the more high level of intellect development is needed for its sound decision.

Let's examine more fully popular models of intellect in modern psychology.

The model of K. Spirmen is reviewing intellect as a common factor, which is represented on all levels of intellectual functioning. It is based on positive correlation connection between results of intellectual tests: as a rule, people, who carry out IQ tests successfully, in the same way they do it with other cognitive tests. Spirmen said that there was one beginning in each test, which was then called common factor of intellect - factor G. G-factor is a common quantity of “mental energy”. Besides G-factor, Spirmen picked out factor S, which is characterizing the specificity of each test. In this way, Spirmen's model could be characterized as a two-factored model of intellect. Later, Spirmen suggested another three interim factors of intellect between common G-factor and particular S: numerical; spatial; verbal.

In that way, from the point of view of Spirmen, each person is characterized by definite level of common intellect, witch depends on how this person is adapting to the environment. Besides, all people to variable degree have developed specific abilities, which are become apparent in resolving concrete problems of such adaptation.

The main opponent of Spirmen has become L. Terstown, who rejected G-factor. It is Terstown's opinion that there is a raw of independent faculties, which are defining the success of intellectual work and he called it - primary mental potentials. Terstown conducted the correlation of 60-ty test results, which were intended for revealing different sides of intellectual work and he displayed 12 factors, 7 of them were called “primary mentalfaculties”: S (spatial), P (perception), N (calculating), V (verbal understanding), F (fluency of speech, M (memory), R (logical reasoning).

He came to a conclusion that there should not be used only one index, but corresponding profile of mental faculties, each of them must be independent answer only for one definite group of intellectual operations. However further researches showed, that marked factors could not be fully independent. They correlate with each other, and this decides in G-factor's favour.

Approach of L. Terstown about plurality of intellectual faculties was developed in works of American psychologist G. Gilford, who suggested a model for the description of different types of intellectual faculties. Gilford's multidimensional structural model is based on three criterions, which describe different sides of intellectual work:

1) type of performed mental operation (estimation, convergence, divergence, remembering, perception);

2) content of material of intellectual work (object, symbolic, semantic, behavioral);

3) sort of end product (units, classes, relations, systems, transformations, argumentations).

Thus, each estimated factor of intellect is characterized by combination of categories from each measuring.

Each problem has one or other type of content and realizing definite operation, which leads to proper product. For example, the problem, where we need to put in vowels (for example, P-R-M-D (pyramid)); it is connected with the operation of cognition and leads to the element as product. If we need to continue the raw “ball - robe, boob - book, son - none etc.”, in G. Gilford's opinion, this would be a sum on convergent thinking, which should find relations on symbolic content.

In all, there are 4×5×6=120 types of sums (in later version of theory - 150), each of them corresponds with definite ability. That is why, there are 120 factors in Gilford's classification scheme. In Gilford's researches, achievements in one group were not necessarily connected with other group, it was concluded, that the intellect could not be viewed as only one faculty.

In present time, Gilford's mathematician methods were subjected to criticism, drawback of the model - results did not correspond to majority of factor-analytical researches. It is showed, how his data could be explained, reasoning from another factor model of R. Sternberg, which would be viewed below.

Hierarchical theories of intellect exist in psychology, for example the theory of D Vernon, in which there are three hierarchical levels. On the top of it there is common intellect then follows two main group factors: verbal-numerical and practice-mechanically spatial. On the third level, there factors, which answer for special abilities: technical thinking, arithmetical ability etc; beneath of hierarchical tree there are more private subfactors.

It is necessary to mention the model of intellect, which was suggested by R. Kettel. He marked out two factors - “free” (or “fluid”) and “concerned”. Factor of “concerned” intellect is distinguished by person's knowledge, which is acquired since childhood till the end of the life. This factor shows, as far as person is mastering common culture of the country he lives. Factor of “free” intellect defines primary accumulation of knowledge and from the point of view of R. Kettel does not depend on junction to culture.

New specific factors constantly appear during factor-analytical researches, which describe the work of intellect. The more wide diapason of used tests, the more clearly G-factor is revealed. Besides factor approach, V. Drujinin marks out mono-metric approach to the understanding of intellect's nature. The brighter representative of one-metric approach to intellect is G. Aisenk. He revealed three types of intellect, which are germane with approaches how to explain its nature:

- biological intellect, which explains physiological, neurological, biochemical and hormone bases of cognitive behavior, mainly connected with structures and functions of cerebral cortex;

- psychometric intellect, which is defined by standard tests of dimension of IQ;

- sociologic (or practical) intellect as a demonstration of socially useful adaptation, also intellect is researched as argumentation, task solution, memory, studying, understanding, information collation, policy definition, adaptation to environment.

Let's view this classification more detail.

Psychometric intellect - is what we can measure with the help of tests. In spite of tautology of this determination (intellect - is defined by standard tests). Factor analyze of tests, which determine special abilities, shows that there is some fundamental factor of man's mentality, which organize mental experience and answer for affectivity of received information.

As for biological intellect, since F. Galton time, it was known, that great intelligence distinguished people, who had any nature or physiological superiority, for example, more fast conductivity of irritant from receptors to cerebrum, or more high speed of information processing, or more low (or high) threshold of sensitivity to the level of irritation.

There was offered a hypothesis, which say that the level of mental abilities depends on the quantity of mistakes, which appears during processing and transmission of information in cerebral cortex on the synapse's level: the more such mistakes, the lower factor of intellect. Even there is no direct dependency of psychometric intellect from biological and such physiologic indexes as the level of censored distinguishing, time of reaction and also the level of ear distinguishing.

In the concept of “biological intellect” lays peculiarities of functioning of cerebra's structures, which answer for mental activity. They determine individual distinctions of intellect and connect them inheritance. Psychometric intellect is measured by IQ tests and by G. Aisenk, it is determined by genotype influence on 70 % and by surrounding factors on 30% (culture, upbringing, education, socioeconomic status).

Social intellect is determined as a faculty of person to use psychometric intellect in an effort to adapt to requirements of society. He supposes, that only measuring of level of biological intellect is answering to modern scientific paradigm, as all other kinds of intellect - social and psychometric - sequent, outer manifestation of biologic intellect, which is its main determinant.

But, as it would be showed later, in modern science the determination of manifestations of intellect rather more complicated in understanding, than the scheme “biology (inheritance)” - “intellect”.

R. Stenberg's conception of intellect was far-famed in the end of 80-th - beginning of 90-th years of the XX century. He raised a question, how the meaning of “intellect” is represented in ordinary public consciousness, due to expert's roll and to the results of factor analyze. As a result, he picked out three forms of intellectual behavior:

- verbal intellect (vocabulary, erudition, an ability to understand delivered);

- an ability to crack a problem;

- practical intellect (an ability to reach a goal)

Also R. Stenberg allotted three types of intellect's components, which are answering for remaking information:

1) met component - the processes of management, which are regulating concrete processes for remaking information. Among these are: to recognize the existence of the problem; to realize problems and select processes, which are suitable for its solution; to choose strategies, to choose mental representations; to allot “mental resources”; to control solution of problems; to estimate the affectivity of solutions;

2) executive components - processes of low level hierarchy. Particularly, the process of “inductive thinking” (its success is determined by G-factor) includes: coding; to reveal relations; to bring into accord; to apply comparison; bases; answer;

3) components of knowledge acquisition are necessarily so that the subject learned what met components and executive components do. Among these are: election coding; election rearrangement; election comparison.

In the course of cognition, person should detach relevant information from irrelevant, should form consistent whole from selected information. By Sternberg, there is an ability to learn and resolve problems at this conjuncture. The main in this conception - is to learn mental representations of information during solving problems. The type of preferred representation of knowledge does not depend on problem's contents, but on individual structure of basic intellect's factors.

Scientist opened an interesting fact during experiments: probationers solve sums better, because they spent more time on planning, choosing strategies and coding problem situation, than on its solving. R. Sternberg is concentrated more on outer intellect's factors, so he brings to the forefront selectivity, resource of attention, control etc.

Such manifestations as practical and social intellect belong to the sphere of interaction of intellect with environment. By Sternberg, intellect provides relation of a person with environment. He marked out three types of such relations: adaptation, inside choose and design. But Sternberg's conception makes an impression on conservative scientist as conception, which is incomplete and with shortcoming.

R. Sternberg's opponent is H. Garner. He (as R. Sternberg) criticizes hard way, which was offered by G Aisenk and psycho-physiologic approach in whole and interpreted intellect very abstractly. H. Garner asserts that the intellect is not just a phenomenon, which consists of different abilities, but there are many types of intellect, each of them very important and independent from others. Scientist allotted seven kinds of intellect: linguistically-verbal; logically-mathematician; spatial; musician; somatically-kinetic; interpersonal; inside personal.

Sternberg's and Garner's models - are system points of view, which see an intellect as complicated and complete system.

Almost all followers of cognitive approach widen the theory of intellect at the expense of attracting out of intellectual components (regulation of attention, motivation, “met cognition” etc). As for structure of intellectual abilities, it includes: 1) convergent ability - intellect in narrow meaning of the term (level-sensitive, combinatorial and processual characteristics); 2) creativity (fluency, originality, receptivity, metaphor); 3) learning (implicit, explicit); 4) cognitive styles (cognitive, intellectual, epistemological).

It is rather questionable to include cognitive styles into structure of intellectual faculties. Concept of “cognitive style” characterizes individual differences in ways of getting, processing and applying information. Different scientists have different lists of cognitive styles, but more researched are: malty dependency - non malty dependency; impetuosity - reflexivity; rigidity - flexibility of cognitive control; cognitive simplicity - cognitive complicacy.

Thus, totality of person's cognitive processes determines intellect.

Psyche work is viewed as uniform system, which working information. Here could be picked out: acquiring, application, transformation and conservation of knowledge. An ability to apply knowledge could be identified with intellect as an ability to solve sums on the base of received knowledge (test intellect). Learning is an ability to acquire knowledge and creativity (common creative ability) - is an ability to reorganize knowledge (among these are imagination, fantasy, hypothesis etc). Each of them corresponds with specific motivation and specific form of activity: creativity - is a motivation of self actualization (by A. Maslow) and creative activity; intellect - is a motivation of achievements and adaptive behavior; learning - cognitive motivation.

Works of A. Demetrio, A. Afklidis and M. Placida became an attempt of synthesis of factor and cognitive approaches. Authors are followers of many factored personality theory of Terstown. Basically they took three main aspects of reality, reflecting by man's psyche: physical, spatial and symbolic. As a result was made six-factored model of abilities: the 1-st factor - an ability to operate with quantitative relations; 2-nd factor - an ability to provide qualitative analyze and to form categories and classifications; 3-d factor - spatial ability; 4-th factor - an ability to estimate cause-effect relations; 5-th factor -verbal; 6-th factor - meta cognitive (“worldly wisdom”). Factors are not orthogonal, though, in author's opinion, they develop over the time simultaneously and rather independently from each other.

Today, researches do not yield results, which A Demetriu had and do not deny this model. In Russian psychology, the problem of intellect is not as popular as the problem of thinking. First of all it was connected with ban on using tests in scientific researches and practical work, which became a result of paedology's persecution. Nevertheless, many researches and theories of native psychologists are original and help to look at nature of intellectual abilities in a new fashion.

B. Teplov considered practical mind, which acts from abstract thinking to practice, from common principles - to concrete circumstances in contrast to theoretical mind, which acts from vivid contemplation to abstract thinking. According to B. Teplov, knowledge and skills, which man acquires and is also determinate easiness and quickness of acquisition. He considered that abilities could not be inherent. Inherited abilities could be only inclinations - anatomic and physiologic peculiarities of nervous system.

M. Akimova analyzes practical intellect in two ways: studying peculiarities of person's thinking, who are performing separate kinds of practical activity and analyze of wisdom, for example, an ability to orient oneself in socially-practical situations.

The problem of faculties in native psychology is rather well researched. V. Shadrikov notes that during explorations formed a phenomenological picture of faculty's problem, while its ontological component is not introduced practically.

In V. Shadrikov's opinion, intellectual and other faculties have a complicated structure, reflecting systematic organization of the cerebrum, interfunctional relations and energetic character of psyche functions. He determines abilities as a functional system, which realizes separate psyche functions, which have individual intensity, developing in success and in qualitative originality of mastering and realization of activity.

Scientist suggests a list of abilities, picking out more informative: quality, productivity and reliability. Thanks to such approach, he marked out nine main types of psycho processes, each of them could be turned into faculties: these are faculties of sensation (censored processes), of perception (perceptive processes), memory (mnemonic processes), ideas (idea as a separate psycho process), imagination (imaginative processes), thinking (thought processes), attention (attention processes) and psychomotor abilities (psychomotor processes).

Analyzing the problem of intellect, V. Shdrikov said, that main difficulty in this area is the absence of common theoretical opinion of essence of intellect. Intellect is understood as common faculty, which determines all aspects of intellectual activity and is connected with nature possibilities of people (natural intellect). Scientists have chosen special faculties parallel with common faculties. V. Shadrikov thinks that intellect is an integral demonstration of abilities, knowledge and skills. Already in abilities there is an element of learning in the form of forming operational mechanisms and operating actions, which are directed on material processing. Operating mechanisms are manifestation (expression) of main mental (intellectual) operations, which are suitable for sums of concrete cognitive function. Operating actions of abilities in intellect are amplified with more common operating schemes, plans, programs of behavior and also information about external material world, about other people and oneself.

Resting upon works of M. Sechenov and A. Luria, author drew a conclusion that the intellect of individual is realizing by systematic work of different sections of the cerebrum. Common factor, which providing nature basis of intellect, must be viewed as tactlessly formulated sum. Systematic activity of the cerebrum is this common factor.

V. Shadrikov determines intellect as a systematic manifestation of cognition, for which mental faculties stand as common factor (common faculty) and influences on other faculties. But for all that, intellect is a congenital quality of individual and property of cerebra's super system. In common intellect he marks out: extra-censored; physically-effective; notionally-conceptual.

V. Shadrikov and his learners (M. Kniazev, R. Pashkova, O. Tallina) determined earlier unknown and not expected patterns - in process of education, to its beginning, individual abilities are developed independently from how the education was build. At that this development is the result of efficiency, which is acquired by common abilities under the influence of demands of professional (not educative) activity. This dependency was showed on examples of different special abilities, which were presuppositions of success in concrete professional activity (sense of time, stop characteristics of high sounded perception, psychomotor, mnemonic and other professional abilities). All that is saying about revealed common regularity of forming possibilities. Especially interested in this way are conclusions, which were made by M. Kniazev, who showed more effective method of the development of professionally significant qualities and abilities which was consisted in special exercises before the activity, building on its separate actions. Thereby, commonly psychological bases of affectivity of training system with using modern informational-communicative technologies were revealed. Specific gravity of training computer programs is really high in training system.

Besides, it was proved, that psyche is so versatile and strong instrument, which indamines many drawbacks and develops necessary for man abilities, if only he possesses enough biochemical energy. In the light of these facts, we can call in question the necessity and methods of competitive selection for entrance university, for professional activity etc.

In Russian psychology the more interesting conception of intellect as common ability is the conception of mental experience of M. Holodnaya, in which intellect adds up to peculiarities of individual experience. She determines it so: intellect by its ontological status - is a special form of organization of individual mental (intellectual) experience by way of mental structures, which forecast mental area and within the limits of it are built mental representations of existent. Concept content of “mental experience” corresponds to concept of “glacial intellect” by R. Kettell.

M. Holodnaya included in the structure of intellect the substructure of cognitive experience, metacognitive experience and group of intellectual faculties. As R. Sternberg did, she emphasizes the minimum base faculties of intellect:

1) level faculties, which characterize achieved level of the development of single cognitive functions (as verbal and non-verbal), and the presentations of reality, which lay in base of processes (censored difference, on-line storage and long-term memory, volume and distribution of attention, knowledge in definite pithy sphere etc);

2) combinatorial faculties, which characterize ability to form different kinds of connections and relations in the wide sense - an ability to combine components of experience (spatially-temporal, causal-investigatory and categorical-pithy) in different combinations;

3) processual faculties, which characterize operational structure, ways and reflection of intellectual activity right up to the level of elementary informational processes;

4) regulatory faculties, which characterize intellect's affects of coordination, management and control of psyche activity.

M. Holodnaya understands intellect as totality of mental experience - the system of psyche formation, which activates psyche states laying in base of cognitive relation between people and world and causing concrete faculties of its intellectual activity”. Mental experience is divided into three main forms: mental structures, mental space and mental presentations. Person's intellectual level of development is connected with that how man assimilates, understands and explains the reality.

Arguing against her, V. Drujinin says, that there is common organizing factor, which serves as mechanism for mental experience and is a common ability for mental activity. In other words - it is a common intellect, which possesses some psycho system, which is not identical with mental experience. Chief task in researching intellect is this determination of psycho system and studying its functioning with different individuals. V. Drujinin understands intellect as mental faculty. Common faculties in psychology are individually-psychological peculiarities of a person, which are deposit of success of performing one or other productive activity.

For today studying the intellect all over the world is beyond the scope of academic psychology with its primary interest to inside nature of intellect's phenomenon. Interdisciplinary studies of intellect's development are occurring and also intellect's bonds of people of one country (national intellect) and economical success of the country etc.

Measurement of national intellect opens new epoch in studying intellect as psychological phenomenon and springs from works of irish scientist R. Linn. He built rating of coefficients of national intellects (IQ) for 185 countries. Work is an ambitious project, the aim of which is to get data on IQ in different countries. There were used forms of different years and got reliable data in aggregation for the whole country. Average value for Great Britain was taken for 100 (standard deflection is 15) and average value on IQ for other countries was calculated relatively this value. Scientist confronts these data with indexes of GDP of economical growth, with index of development of human potential (IDHP) and with Annual Rate of Inflation. IDHP is viewed as more accurate index (measure) than GDP or GDP per head, but these indexes are usually used as indicates of country's development and are restricted, as they are evidence of economic prosperity of the country. He found interesting but not doubtless information about level bonds of intellect and criminality, of intellect and economic prosperity etc.

Measuring of intellect as a combined characteristic for lager human community is the most significant. Intellect was researched and measured only as individual human characteristic after all, that is why the question of researching national (ethnic) intellect as a special psychological reality is still open. One could say that the methodological and systematic problems are still open to question, just as term “national intellect”. Investigations in this area are put under a ban by ideological purpose on researching international differences, due to which any comparative measuring of intellect of different nationalities are explained racist.

That is why researching ethnic intellect in Russia is the most significant scientific and practical aim. Researching of national intellect would allow planning national politics in area of education, social support, help to national communities in the development of theirs intellectual faculties etc. The problem of measuring ethnic intellect for developing scientific knowledge elaborates methodological apparatus, creates fundamentally new systematic methods of its estimation etc that in itself is a complicated scientific problem.

Such a dimensioned research of ethnic intellect was hold in Russia in Modern Academy of the Humanities. There is no analogue of such work in Russia.

In center of research was set up a term “intellectual potential”, which is totality of human intellectual faculties. These faculties form socially-demographical group and which affect on socially-economic status of members of this group.

More elaborately the results of national intellect researches in Russia would be displayed in separate monograph, but in present chapter we would briefly talk about its results in corresponding parts.

2.2 The problem of measuring intellect in modern psychology

Method of measurement of human faculties was known since ancient times. It was tests. For example, in Ancient Egypt, the one, who wanted to become a pagan, must overcame the system of tests.

The question of measurement mental faculties was for the first time raised in the end of XIX century. Sir Francis Galton (1822 - 1911) was the first, who became an initiator of empirical treatment to the resolving problems of intellect, endowments and talent. He was the first, who claimed, that the intellect could be measured and tried to do it through the faculty to censored difference.

F. Galton considered that people of high social levels had greater intelligence. He suggested about ten thousand visitors of London's exhibition to be measured (height, head circumference etc) and to pass tests (different kind of tests on vision difference and muscle strength). To his great surprise, the results he got, showed that eminent persons, men of science were not distinguished themselves from mere mortals.

F. Galton's ideas were further developed by American psychologist G. Kettell. He thought out several psychological (so-called mental) tests, which determined quickness of reflexes, time of reaction, time of perception of certain irritants, pain barrier by pushing on skin, number of letters after audition letter's rows etc. Thanks to these tests, scientist determined the parameters of reactions on irritants of different power. The main result was that the majority of people had something about middle level; reaction time of others was greater than of others or conversely. He showed these results graphically and found bell-shaped curve, which is similar with curves of distribution of some physical and chemical indexes.

G. Kettell's bell-shaped distribution of results was used to estimate intellect with the help of different tests and to clarify how the level of intellect was distributed among population.

At the same time on one side from middle level were “others” and on other side were - gifted.

Authors critically reacted toward F. Galton and G. Kettell's researches by “measurement of intellect”. For example, the drawback of those tests was that they were counted on elementary psycho processes and as a result, these tests measured wrongly high psycho functions, which lied in the base of intellect.

A. Bene and T. Simon, who made first tests on intellect, examined this faculty more widely and included in theirs intellectual scale, which was oriented on measurement level children's development, more complicated cognitive functions (remembering, possession of information, understanding etc). They considered, that intellectual person, was that who understood and meditated rightly and could adapt oneself to standard of living due to its common sense and initiative.

Concrete chief task for scientists - was to determine, what children would learn good and what - wrong. In the upshot, they got system, in which indexes of mental development highly correlated with school studies. Then the first scale repeatedly was revised by authors, who wanted to seize all tasks, which needed special education.

In contrast to F. Galton, who considered intellect as totality of innate psycho physiological functions, A. Bene admitted influence of environment on cognitive features of development. That is why he estimated intellectual features not only as innately formed cognitive functions, but on the level of social experience: possession of information, knowledge of vocabulary, possession of some social skills, ability to moral estimations etc. Conception of “intellect” turned out to be expanded as from the point of view of list of its manifestations and as factors of its formation.

A. Bene made (in test's variants of 1908 and 1911) system of age-specific scales for children's diagnostics. He grouped test tasks by age-specific groups, in which “normal” children passed them on 50-90%. If definite task passed about 75% children of one age, it became indicative for this age. The number of passed tasks showed age and intellectual development of children. As a rule, tasks recognized how person possessed logical, logically-perceptive and arithmetical knowledge; his common possession of information; how he oriented himself in practical situations; his arbitrary memory etc. Thus, series of tests were made for each age group.

In Bene-Simon's scales, index of mental development is on the top. It is equal to chronological age with addition of months for rightly passed tasks. In that way they defined what person was: retarded or gifted.

This scale is organized in such a way, that on each child's age are given six tests. Each test is considered for two months. First, a person gets tasks, which correspond with one age less then the person is. And he should give right answers on five tasks without distinction. So mental “based age” is fixed. Then it is necessarily to the number of tests of “based age” added a number of all right answers. For example, if six-year old child solves all tasks of his age and three tests for elder children, his mental age will be six years and six months.

In 1912 V. Stern offered a concept “intelligence quotient” and determined it as relation of mental age to chronological, which is multiplied on 100

Intelligence quotient (IQ) =Mental age ÷ Chronological age = 100.

Scientist paid his attention on some drawbacks of mental age as an index in scales offered by A. Bene. The main drawback was that the same difference in mental age of two persons for different age levels had unequal meaning. The less chronological age of a child, the more improvement in his mental development during each year of his life. Therefore V. Stern offered to determine not absolute measure of intellect (difference between MA and CA), but comparative (quotient, which is getting by division MA on CA). To get integers, we have to multiply received quantity on 100. Quantity, which is equalized to 100, conformed to coincidence of intellectual development age and of life age and signified mean level of mental development. English psychologist S. Bert and American scientist L. Termen tried to improve this system. Thus, scales Bene-Bert and Bene-Termen were called in honor of them.

L. Termen acquainted with the term “test norm”. In that way occurred new position of static selection of test tasks and substantiation of its validity. This position for IQ tests is determinative to present day.

But there was a drawback in applying Bene's scale, as it was impossible to calculate mental age upwards 16 years, because there were no tasks, which could reveal progress of intellectual development in this age. In consequence of this, it was impossible to calculate coefficient of intellect for adults.

D. Veksler in 1939 calculated standards for this test, which were gotten by calculated deflection from average of concrete adult group. Thereby he rejected completely from definition of age intellectual development and it division on age of life. In this way “mental coefficient” was not conformed to the received quantity, but was saved, due to its popularity.

In modern psychodiagnostics the measurement of coefficient of intellect (IQ) is the confrontation of results of this probationer with test norms. Test norms - are the most significant statistic characteristics of normative working of probationers (for example, middle, median, percentile). Working, on which test norms are determined, are called working standardization. Its quantity, as a rule, is no less than 200 people. Test norms determine limits of high, middle and low meanings of any psycho features, including intellect.

Natural sciences consider human features - from growth and weight to abilities and features of personality - are close to normal curve, characteristics of which are described by law of Gauss-Laplace. By the law of normal distribution, the most number of cases are concentrated round center of curve and gradually fall to its sides.

Distribution in interval scale has its parameters, i.e. numerical characteristic indicating where on average are situated the meaning of property, as far as these meanings are unsteady and how reveal definite meanings of property. The most significant parameters are average of distribution, dispersion and indexes of asymmetry and excess.

Estimation of average of distribution is the calculation of simple mean of texts meanings. Dispersion shows the degree of mutability of property. Square root from dispersion is called standard deviation (identified as y - sigma), which allows to estimate how the received meanings differ from mean.