Multiple Intelligence Review

Every teacher, at one point or another, dreams of being able to create that perfect classroom environment that produces a rich atmosphere in which all students are learning, questioning what they are learning, building upon what they have learned, working together, with little or no discipline problems, and everybody wants to come back and do it again tomorrow. This type of class would be identified as a constructivists’ classroom. The teacher who dreams of this and goes forth and makes it a reality will have become the master of constructivism.

Constructivism is the opportunities given to “students to experience the world’s richness, empower them to ask their own questions and seek their own answers, and challenge them to understand the world’s complexities (Brooks & Brooks, 1999).” The constructive classroom offers varied ways to achieving this, it has to. Every single student in that classroom is absolutely and completely different, gifted in his or her own way, understands concepts in different perspectives and learns by way of different experiences.

One facet of creating a constructive learning environment is through the Multiple Intelligences (MI). Howard Gardner has made it his life long career, the study of the multiple intelligences. The multiple intelligences include, linguistic; ability with words and language, logical-mathematical perception of logic and numbers, musical ability to learn through music, sound and rhythm, bodily-kinesthetic/body movement control, spatial-visual/images and space, interpersonal/other people’s feelings, intrapersonal/self-awareness. The multiple intelligence caters to the individual students own way of learning and creates a meaningful way of learning.

Leslie Owen Wilson, an assistant professor of education at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, points out why some teachers are attracted to the multiple intelligence way of teaching. Many teachers are drawn to MI because students become motivated through “natural talents,” which in turn helps teachers build “self-motivating educational experiences.” The MI method of teaching also encourages teachers to empower the learner through higher order thinking. Wilson also believes that Gardner’s theory helps create a better lesson plan that is diversified and supportive of those students who have a difficult time reaching their level of potential.

Amy Forester, a learning specialist, researcher and consultant wrote an article titled, The Learners’ Way: Time-Tested and True. Forester writes that, “Setting learning into meaningful contexts brings that integrative function into full play activating many parts of the brain at once…” She further states that learning isn’t just the storage of information, but rather the “special abilities and confidence that is built” through class projects, stations learning, field trips etc…. The multiple intelligences help enhance “the child’s whole brain and its functioning (Forester, 2001).” The multiple intelligences method of creating the constructive classroom is ideal because it helps remove the teacher centered syndrome, which at times occurs in the classroom and this is what Forester is trying to relay to all teachers.

Many other supporters of the multiple intelligences have written articles to help promote and create a better understanding of the constructive classroom by way of the multiple intelligences, such as Thomas Hoerr. Hoerr is director of New City School in St. Louis which is an MI school. Hoerr, like Forester, agrees that the multiple intelligences help more students succeed in the classroom and the teacher’s role changes. According to Hoerr, in his article titled, Applying MI in Schools, the approach to MI is “child-centered,” this is a big difference from teacher centered. The child centered approach begins with the knowledge of how our student learns and understands and changing the role of the teacher to facilitator of a classroom (Hoerr, 2002). According to Hoerr, the student will find learning fun and discipline problems “tend to disappear when students are excited about learning and finding success (2002).”

Like everything else, barriers appear or are created. Hoerr goes on to write that some of the barriers to a successful MI class are the parent’s lack of knowledge on how teaching to varied intelligences creates success. Parents lack of knowledge is only one barrier, another barrier lies within the school; administrators. Administrators “have a clear goal: success on standardized tests,” and this within itself is a curriculum centered objective in which “educators bend the students to fit the curriculum (Hoerr, 2002).” Multiple Intelligence theory is not about standardized tests; it’s about creating experiences and producing lifelong learners. A standardized test does not recognize student’s strengths or natural approaches to learning, and this is what Hoerr tries to educate parents about.

Another article, written by Nelly Ribot, a teacher of English as a second language in Argentina, writes about her experiences utilizing the MI approach. Ribot, like other teachers have heard of the multiple intelligence theory by Howard Gardner, and have dared to become a constructivist teacher. Ribot, like Hoerr, have encountered mind boggled parents whom at first may question the method of interactive learning with students of different learning abilities, but as Ribot describes, “each student draws from his or her own strengths…” Ribot goes on to describe her objective was to “provide an active context that would invite” her fourteen and fifteen year old students to use English.

The Multiple Intelligence theory is not about worksheets, books and tests; Ribot describes it as an “awareness of the fact that education needs to be transformed.” Forester supports this idea by describing “the shift from highly structured teacher-centered work to learner-centered work” These particular authors are trying to help others understand that the way teachers are teaching now is not focusing on the student’s own individual talents, based on the intelligences Howard Gardner has identified. Wilson further supports this notion by stating that Gardner’s theory “allows users to view themselves and others differently, often from deeper, multiple perspectives (1998).” In other words, what these authors are describing is students gain confidence and begin to create authentic meaning to their learning. This is what the goal should be for all students; their personal success.

Ellen Weber, director of the MITA Brain Based Renewal Center in New York, wrote an article in 1992, titled, Curriculum Success. This article provides an example that is more typical than not, of an academically poor student, whom the school system fails. Weber describes a 17 year old boy who failed the tenth grade twice. Weber provides details of how the student’s life on a farm taught him strong values toward hard work, had an easy going nature, and always volunteered to help out. This young man as a student whom everyone loved to hang out with, including teachers, and had to learned to improvise his way of thinking in order to grasp concepts. His IQ was 100 and had not acquired any standardized thinking skills, and failed continuously on every test and came to dread test days. His self esteem was low enough to eventually cause him to drop out of high school. According to Weber, what the school failed to recognize and understand, was that this young man was able to play any tune he heard on the piano, and even though he couldn’t read music, he composed music, had excellent intercommunication skills, and could orally describe and create a story on marine life accurately.

Weber is illustrating for the reader the misunderstood student, whom the principal suggests, “came to school with the ‘wrong abilities’ and the science and music teacher acknowledge the school is giving the student the ‘wrong test.’ Weber concurs with Gardner’s argument that Western civilization limits the student’s abilities, growth, and only linguistic and logical/mathematical intelligences are held in high regard in the U.S. (Weber, 1992). Weber further strikes a note on research continuously proving that schools definition of intelligence is “too narrow to describe most students (1992).” This holds very true to this day, especially since students are becoming much more computer and technology literate than their own teachers. Schools continue to place road blocks before the students versus encouraging student creativity and multiple intelligence awareness.

Aside from encouraging student creativity, Dee Dickinson, CEO of New Horizons for Learning and coauthor of Teaching and Learning Through Multiple Intelligences, wrote an interesting article on Humor and the Multiple Intelligences. Although, many teachers desire a well disciplined classroom with little goofing around, Dickinson, writes that a good sense of humor is what students sometimes need when it seems their little world is crumbling around them. Without a sense of humor some challenges can become unbearable.

Dickinson provides examples of how the seven multiple intelligences can be embellished with humor to help “enliven any subject.” Dickinson believes the linguistic intelligence can use a bit of laughter to help what may otherwise be boring literatures “come to life with puns, funny stories and anecdotes (2001).” Mathematical intelligence is difficult for most students and can be challenging and stressful, Dickinson believes humor can help diffuse anxieties and create a better math learning environment. The visual-spatial learner can also benefit from witty posters, cartoons, and funny pictures when presenting a lesson. Some teachers may not agree to this due to the possible stir of discipline problems, but it would be another good way of presenting tough concepts. Dickinson further writes that humor also works great for kinesthetic learners. Learners can participate in funny actions, action sentences, role plays etc…( 2001). Student’ are very social people and if students are relaxed in their environment and work well with others kinesthetic learning is productive tool. Musically inclined students would do well, according to Dickinson, by listening to music with math facts, geographical areas, or historical events in funny rhythms students stand a better chance of learning new information. Furthermore, group work with diverse humors helps student develop confidence and communication skills with others. Dickinson concludes her article by pointing out that humor helps the learner survive when they make mistakes (2001). Through intrapersonal intelligence the student is able to reflect on him or herself and learn about themselves and be able to laugh at their own blunders “with greater self-understanding (Dickinson, 2001).”

A final article was reviewed in which Walter McKenzie an educational consultant and author of the Multiple Intelligences and Instructional Technology: A Manual for Every Mind, argues through a case scenario description of a young student named Jamie that stakeholders cannot have an “all or nothing at all” approach to learning. McKenzie proves through the use of a “constructivist theory students can meet expectations of local, state and national standards.”

The article describes the collaboration of two teachers, McKenzie and Donohue, willing to swim against the current and approach their teaching methods from a different perspective in order to assist all their students, but in particular Jamie. Jamie did not have the same material advantages or experiences as the other students and simply “hated school.” Jamie struggled and had low grades and was fast approaching state test day. With Jamie in mind a multiple intelligence curriculum was implemented with hopes only for the best.

McKenzie further describes the drill and kill methods, and pencil and paper assessments other teachers were approaching, while he and Ms. Donohue approached the plethora of material that needed to be covered before the state exam using the students intelligences. Many interactive activities that included music, games, art, reading, role plays etc… were performed to build knowledge and skills till day of the exam. Jamie had bloomed into a better reader, active participant and confident young boy, but this was not indication enough if he had mastered the learning objectives till the day of the test. McKenzie further describes the anxieties of not knowing until test results in May came in, if they had made the right choice in teaching to the intelligences. Of the five classes who participated in the SOL state exam only two classes passed with above 70% scores and those two classes were McKenzie and Ms. Donohues MI classes.

In conclusion, Brookes & Brooks state it best, “Teachers who operate without awareness of their students’ points of view often doom students to dull, irrelevant experiences, and even failure (1999). As Dickinson, Forester, McKenzie, Hoerr, McKenzie, Ribot, Weber and Wilson have demonstrated, the multiple intelligences is a way of providing students with constructive teaching opportunities for all types of learners that will help them reflect and question what they have learned. Through these experiences and acquired knowledge students of all ages will be able to build on that knowledge and implement it accordingly while acquiring more new knowledge; and the cycle of learning never ends.

>

Reference:

Brooks J. G. & Brooks, M.G., (1999) In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms.

Dickinson, D. (2001) Humor and the multiple intelligences. Retrieve April 28, 2009. New Horizons for Learning. http://www.newhorizons.org

Forester, A. (April, 2001). The learners’ way: Time-tested and true. Retrieve April 28, 2009. New Horizons for Learning. http://www.newhorizons.org

Hoerr, T. (2002). Applying MI in schools. Retrieved April 26, 2009. New Horizons for Learning: http//www.newhorizons.org

McKenzie, W. (2002) MI, IT and standards: The Story of Jamie. Retrieved April 30, 2009. Horizons for Learning: http//www.newhorizons.org

Ribot, N. (2004) My experience using the multiple intelligences. Retrieved April 25, 2009. New Horizons for Learning: http//www.newhorizons.org

Weber, E. (Jan. 1992). Curriculum for Success. New Horizons for Learning “On the Beam” Vol. XII No.3 p.4-3:339-40. Retrieved April 25, 2009.

Wilson, L. O. (1998). What’s the big attraction? Why teacher are drawn to using multiple intelligences theory in their classroom. Retrieved April 30, 2009. Horizons for Learning: http//www.newhorizons.org