Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

This essay discusses the status of multiple intelligences (MI) theory as a scientific theory by addressing three issues: the empirical evidence Gardner used to establish MI theory, the methodology he employed to validate MI theory, and the purpose or function of MI theory.

This essay discusses the status of multiple intelligences (MI) theory as a scientific theory by addressing three issues: the empirical evidence Gardner used to establish MI theory, the methodology he employed to validate MI theory, and the purpose or function of MI theory.

Howard Garner's book Multiple Intelligences was important in psychology because it sought to relate a neuropsychological theory of common mental processes with a view of individual differences implicit in the term intelligences. New developments in imaging and genetics may make these connections more realistic.

Howard Garner's book Multiple Intelligences was important in psychology because it sought to relate a neuropsychological theory of common mental processes with a view of individual differences implicit in the term intelligences. New developments in imaging and genetics may make these connections more realistic.

This article explores the tensions between Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences and current educational policies emphasizing standardized and predictable outcomes. The article situates Gardner's theory within the historical interests among psychometricians in identifying those core processes that constitute human intelligence. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences provides a significant contrast to the models of mind that have traditionally been used to understand how people think and make intelligent choices. The pursuit of a single G factor is contrasted with an array of specific intelligences in Gardner's conception. The implications of Gardner's view for education pertain to the cultivation of the various ways in which humans reflect intelligently and the implicit recommendation that individual proclivities, interests, and intelligences be cultivated. Such an approach to schooling would yield differences among the outcomes for children whose intelligences differed. It is this orientation to the aims of education that conflicts dramatically with a standards-driven approach to school improvement.

This article explores the tensions between Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences and current educational policies emphasizing standardized and predictable outcomes. The article situates Gardner's theory within the historical interests among psychometricians in identifying those core processes that constitute human intelligence. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences provides a significant contrast to the models of mind that have traditionally been used to understand how people think and make intelligent choices. The pursuit of a single G factor is contrasted with an array of specific intelligences in Gardner's conception. The implications of Gardner's view for education pertain to the cultivation of the various ways in which humans reflect intelligently and the implicit recommendation that individual proclivities, interests, and intelligences be cultivated. Such an approach to schooling would yield differences among the outcomes for children whose intelligences differed. It is this orientation to the aims of education that conflicts dramatically with a standards-driven approach to school improvement.

This paper captures the use of the theory of multiple intelligences (MI) at the New City School. The implementation began in 1988 and has been characterized by a focus on student assessment and the personal intelligences. Enhanced faculty collegiality has been a product of the MI journey.

This paper captures the use of the theory of multiple intelligences (MI) at the New City School. The implementation began in 1988 and has been characterized by a focus on student assessment and the personal intelligences. Enhanced faculty collegiality has been a product of the MI journey.

Too many of our brightest and most capable students are sometimes caught in a system that places too much emphasis on linguistic, word smart intelligence or mathematical, number smart intelligence. Students at all levels of academic readiness—from developmental to honors—are affected by the rigidity of this way of thinking. Focusing solely on these types of learning strategies has in some cases encouraged rote memory teaching strategies that may foster little or no connection to material, low motivation, and poor performance. Memorization-regurgitation is the name of the game for many students; not much value is placed on learning or remembering the material, let alone understanding it. The Multiple Intelligences/Learning for Understanding (MI/LfU) initiative at Glendale Community College is one approach to learning and creative assessment a dedicated group of faculty, administrators, and students have been involved in for the past 9 years. Incorporating MI theory across the curriculum, provided students with a variety of creative, imaginative learning options. Students became miniexperts and cofacilitators of learning as they gave “performances of understanding” of the academic content studied. Assessment for understanding was completed using a creative grading/diagnostic rubric. Reflective student and faculty evaluation provided invaluable insight into the learning and teaching process. Providing a forum for the exchange and dialogue of ideas, innovations, perceptions, and pedagogies is essential in the transformation of education and crucial in the dynamics and evolution of change.

Too many of our brightest and most capable students are sometimes caught in a system that places too much emphasis on linguistic, word smart intelligence or mathematical, number smart intelligence. Students at all levels of academic readiness—from developmental to honors—are affected by the rigidity of this way of thinking. Focusing solely on these types of learning strategies has in some cases encouraged rote memory teaching strategies that may foster little or no connection to material, low motivation, and poor performance. Memorization-regurgitation is the name of the game for many students; not much value is placed on learning or remembering the material, let alone understanding it. The Multiple Intelligences/Learning for Understanding (MI/LfU) initiative at Glendale Community College is one approach to learning and creative assessment a dedicated group of faculty, administrators, and students have been involved in for the past 9 years. Incorporating MI theory across the curriculum, provided students with a variety of creative, imaginative learning options. Students became miniexperts and cofacilitators of learning as they gave “performances of understanding” of the academic content studied. Assessment for understanding was completed using a creative grading/diagnostic rubric. Reflective student and faculty evaluation provided invaluable insight into the learning and teaching process. Providing a forum for the exchange and dialogue of ideas, innovations, perceptions, and pedagogies is essential in the transformation of education and crucial in the dynamics and evolution of change.

This paper discusses how adult literacy educators chose to apply multiple intelligences (MI) theory. The findings fall into two categories of teachers’ interpretation, MI-inspired instruction, and MI reflections. The resulting findings were that these Mi-inspired teaching approaches helped to reduce teacher directedness and increase student control and initiative; to increase the authenticity of the learning experiences; and to make learning meaningful or relevant to students. Having Mi-based learning choices made adult learners more confident about taking greater control of their own learning, and it pushed teachers to allow that to happen. Choice-based activities were instrumental in increasing the relevance and meaning of lessons and in reducing teacher directedness. Understanding the link between students’ perceptions of their abilities and their actual academic performance, AMI teachers set out to create opportunities for students to reflect about their strengths, weaknesses, and interests connecting them to the MI framework. Our data suggest that this, and other forms of MI reflections, prompted adult learners to see themselves as learners in a more positive light after identifying and reflecting on their own abilities. This was particularly the case when they were able to apply their abilities to successful learning strategies in the classroom.

This paper discusses how adult literacy educators chose to apply multiple intelligences (MI) theory. The findings fall into two categories of teachers’ interpretation, MI-inspired instruction, and MI reflections. The resulting findings were that these Mi-inspired teaching approaches helped to reduce teacher directedness and increase student control and initiative; to increase the authenticity of the learning experiences; and to make learning meaningful or relevant to students. Having Mi-based learning choices made adult learners more confident about taking greater control of their own learning, and it pushed teachers to allow that to happen. Choice-based activities were instrumental in increasing the relevance and meaning of lessons and in reducing teacher directedness. Understanding the link between students’ perceptions of their abilities and their actual academic performance, AMI teachers set out to create opportunities for students to reflect about their strengths, weaknesses, and interests connecting them to the MI framework. Our data suggest that this, and other forms of MI reflections, prompted adult learners to see themselves as learners in a more positive light after identifying and reflecting on their own abilities. This was particularly the case when they were able to apply their abilities to successful learning strategies in the classroom.

This article draws on research conducted over a 10-year period in an attempt to answer three central questions about the widespread adoption of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (MI): Why do educators adopt MI? Once MI is adopted, does anything really change in practice? When educators claim MI is working, what is happening in practice ?

This article draws on research conducted over a 10-year period in an attempt to answer three central questions about the widespread adoption of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (MI): Why do educators adopt MI? Once MI is adopted, does anything really change in practice? When educators claim MI is working, what is happening in practice ?

Five middle grades teachers developed and implemented Mi-based units of instruction. Participants experienced varying levels of collegial support for Mi-based instruction, found students both embraced and avoided learning choices, noted importance of students’ realizing their own personal learning strength(s), and reported motivation for continued MI use in instructional planning.

Five middle grades teachers developed and implemented Mi-based units of instruction. Participants experienced varying levels of collegial support for Mi-based instruction, found students both embraced and avoided learning choices, noted importance of students’ realizing their own personal learning strength(s), and reported motivation for continued MI use in instructional planning.

Broadly based, mindful curriculum leadership encompasses a way of leading toward school improvement by taking into consideration student intelligences as an at-promise phenomenon. This research paper provides an example of how elementary school curriculum leaders can be mindful of student intelligences and use the strengths of their student populations.

Broadly based, mindful curriculum leadership encompasses a way of leading toward school improvement by taking into consideration student intelligences as an at-promise phenomenon. This research paper provides an example of how elementary school curriculum leaders can be mindful of student intelligences and use the strengths of their student populations.

This paper compares the theories of multiple intelligences and learning styles to suggest ways that teachers using a combination of both theories may be able to improve student learning over the range of intelligences. The author proposes a research format for the benefit of future research.

This paper compares the theories of multiple intelligences and learning styles to suggest ways that teachers using a combination of both theories may be able to improve student learning over the range of intelligences. The author proposes a research format for the benefit of future research.

This instrumental collective case study provides an in-depth description of the change that transpired in two multiple intelligence (MI)–based graduate-level teacher preparation courses. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed. Implications for MI in teacher education are discussed.

This instrumental collective case study provides an in-depth description of the change that transpired in two multiple intelligence (MI)–based graduate-level teacher preparation courses. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed. Implications for MI in teacher education are discussed.

The article analyzes one claim that I make about Howard Gardner's work on MI: Multiple intelligences has had the greatest influence on educators’ beliefs and talk about differences in children's intelligence, moderate to high influence on the formal curriculum and instructional materials, and least influence on mainstream teaching and assessment practices. Based on that analysis, I ask and answer one question: Why has the influence of MI been highest on educators’ beliefs and language and least on classrooms practices ?

The article analyzes one claim that I make about Howard Gardner's work on MI: Multiple intelligences has had the greatest influence on educators’ beliefs and talk about differences in children's intelligence, moderate to high influence on the formal curriculum and instructional materials, and least influence on mainstream teaching and assessment practices. Based on that analysis, I ask and answer one question: Why has the influence of MI been highest on educators’ beliefs and language and least on classrooms practices ?

This article addresses three interrelated propositions. First, a valid and reliable assessment for the multiple intelligences (MI) can be created. Second, teachers can use this MI profile to better understand, accept and create Mi-inspired instruction and curriculum. Third, an MI profile can be used by both teachers and students to promote the use of strength-based learning activities to enhance instructional practice as well as personal development. Evidence gathered during two phases of research over a period of 7 years is supportive of these three propositions.

In contrast to a “testing society”, I think that the assessment approach and the individual-centered school constitute a more noble educational vision. I define assessment as the obtaining of information about the skills and potentials of individuals, with the dual goals of providing useful feedback to the individuals and useful data to the surrounding community. Gardner (1993, p. 183)

This article addresses three interrelated propositions. First, a valid and reliable assessment for the multiple intelligences (MI) can be created. Second, teachers can use this MI profile to better understand, accept and create Mi-inspired instruction and curriculum. Third, an MI profile can be used by both teachers and students to promote the use of strength-based learning activities to enhance instructional practice as well as personal development. Evidence gathered during two phases of research over a period of 7 years is supportive of these three propositions.

In contrast to a “testing society”, I think that the assessment approach and the individual-centered school constitute a more noble educational vision. I define assessment as the obtaining of information about the skills and potentials of individuals, with the dual goals of providing useful feedback to the individuals and useful data to the surrounding community. Gardner (1993, p. 183)

In an effort to understand learner-centered instruction from the perspective of multiple intelligences (MI), the purpose of this second teacher action research study was to further investigate the use of MI theory in shaping and informing instructional strategies, curricula development, and alternative forms of assessment with second language learners. My premise was that given what we know about the educational needs of second language learners, all teachers must be better equipped to widen their pedagogical repertoire to accommodate linguistically, culturally, and cognitively diverse students. Results of the study indicated that students did achieve greater success rates when the MI theory was implemented.

In an effort to understand learner-centered instruction from the perspective of multiple intelligences (MI), the purpose of this second teacher action research study was to further investigate the use of MI theory in shaping and informing instructional strategies, curricula development, and alternative forms of assessment with second language learners. My premise was that given what we know about the educational needs of second language learners, all teachers must be better equipped to widen their pedagogical repertoire to accommodate linguistically, culturally, and cognitively diverse students. Results of the study indicated that students did achieve greater success rates when the MI theory was implemented.

This article addresses the meaning and application of multiple intelligences theory in Taiwan in the light of educational reform. Specifically, a 4-year joint research project (1999–2003) titled “The Development of Multiple Talents (DMT),” sponsored by the National Science Council, R.O.C. (Taiwan), will be introduced. A 3-dimensional construct is proposed for the DMT: form of talents (10 forms, mainly based on Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences), function of talents (three functions, based on Sternberg's conception of successful intelligence), and developmental stage (four stages, from preschool to senior high). This article highlights some of the research findings.

Both the special education and gifted education literature call for a differentiated curriculum to cater for the wide range of student differences in any classroom. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences was integrated with the revised Bloom's taxonomy to provide a planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Teachers’ progress in using the tool to plan and implement units of work through learning centers was documented over 18 months in two small elementary schools. They reported greater confidence in their ability to broaden their curriculum and cater for different students’ strengths across the multiple intelligences and intellectually challenge their students using first the original and then the revised taxonomy. The teachers saw their students as more successful learners as a result of this curriculum differentiation.

Both the special education and gifted education literature call for a differentiated curriculum to cater for the wide range of student differences in any classroom. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences was integrated with the revised Bloom's taxonomy to provide a planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Teachers’ progress in using the tool to plan and implement units of work through learning centers was documented over 18 months in two small elementary schools. They reported greater confidence in their ability to broaden their curriculum and cater for different students’ strengths across the multiple intelligences and intellectually challenge their students using first the original and then the revised taxonomy. The teachers saw their students as more successful learners as a result of this curriculum differentiation.

In his closing comments, Howard Gardner discusses the various audiences that have emerged over the years for the theory of multiple intelligences. Under that rubric, he places the various papers in this issue and speculates about future lines of work on MI theory.

In his closing comments, Howard Gardner discusses the various audiences that have emerged over the years for the theory of multiple intelligences. Under that rubric, he places the various papers in this issue and speculates about future lines of work on MI theory.