Testing the Theory of Successful Intelligence in Teaching Grade 4 Language Arts, Mathematics, and Science Robert J. Sternberg Cornell University Linda Jarvin Paris College of Art Damian P. Birney University of Sydney Adam Naples Yale University Steven E. Stemler Wesleyan University Tina Newman Center for Children With Special Needs, Glastonbury, Connecticut Renate Otterbach University of San Francisco Carolyn Parish SRA International, Fairfax, Virginia Judy Randi University of New Haven Elena L. Grigorenko Yale University This study addressed whether prior successes with educational interventions grounded in the theory of successful intelligence could be replicated on a larger scale as the primary basis for instruction in language arts, mathematics, and science. A total of 7,702 4th-grade students in the United States, drawn from 223 elementary school classrooms in 113 schools in 35 towns (14 school districts) located in 9 states, participated in the program. Students were assigned, by classroom, to receive units of instruction that were based either upon the theory of successful intelligence (SI; analytical, creative, and practical instruction) or upon teaching as usual (weak control), memory instruction (strong control), or critical-thinking instruction (strong control). The amount of instruction was the same across groups. In the 23 comparisons across 10 content units in 3 academic domains, there were only a small number of instances in which students in the SI instructional groups generally performed statistically better than students in other conditions. There were even fewer instances where the different control conditions outperformed the SI students. Implications for the future of SI theory and the scalability of research efforts in general are discussed. Keywords: successful intelligence, critical thinking, memory, instruction, scalability Throughout the first decade of the 21st century, educational re- searchers and policymakers have placed an increased emphasis on the twin goals of (a) using experimental designs to evaluate educational interventions and (b) gaining a greater understanding of the issues related to the scalability of educational interventions. The value placed on interventions that have been experimentally tested is high- lighted by repositories such as the U.S. Department of Education’s “What Works” clearinghouse (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/). Projects related to issues of scalability were funded by the Department of Education in the early to mid-2000s, and the results of these projects This article was published Online First April 7, 2014. Robert J. Sternberg, Department of Human Development, Cornell University; Linda Jarvin, Paris College of Art; Damian P. Birney, School of Psychology, University of Sydney; Adam Naples, Child Development Center, Yale University; Steven E. Stemler, Department of Psychology, Wesleyan University; Tina Newman, Center for Chil- dren With Special Needs, Glastonbury, Connecticut; Renate Otterbach, Department of General Education, University of San Francisco; Caro- lyn Parish, SRA International, Fairfax, Virginia; Judy Randi, Depart- ment of Education, University of New Haven; Elena L. Grigorenko, Child Study Center and Department of Psychology, Yale University. This research was supported primarily by National Science Foundation Grant REC-9979843 with additional support from the Javits Act Program (Grant No. R206R000001). We are grateful to Sig Abeles, Jill Citron-Pousty, William Disch, Tona Donlon, Sarah Duman, Rebecca Felton, PJ Henry, Alex Isgut, Steve Leinwand, Delci Lev, Donna Macomber, Mari Muri, Nefeli Misuraca, Paul O’Keefe, Alina Reznitskaya, Robyn Rissman, Morgan Reynolds, Christina Schwarz, Emma Seppala, Gregory Snortheim, Heidi Soxman, Cheri Stahl, and Olga Stepanossova for their invaluable assistance on this project. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Robert J. Sternberg, Department of Human Development, Cornell University, B44 MVR Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853. E-mail: robert.sternberg@cornell.edu This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Journal of Educational Psychology © 2014 American Psychological Association 2014, Vol. 106, No. 3, 881– 899 0022-0663/14/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0035833 881