Group+7

Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences Margaret Mitchell, Matthew Mitchell, Daniel Patrylak, Ben Shrewbridge

__INTRODUCTION __ __** Gardner **__

Howard Gardner has become one of the most famous cognitive scientists in the world. His ground breaking seven intelligences, published under the title //Frames of Mind// in 1983, has shaped educational policy for nearly three decades. In his publication //Intelligence Reframed// published in 1999 Gardner added another theory to his original seven and posited an idea for one beyond that. Gardner "belongs to numerous honorary societies and has wonvarious awards, including a MacArthur Prize Fellowship in 1981 (the first year of the Fellowship), the Grawemeyer Award in Education (first American to win this award) in 1990, and the Guggenheim Fellowship (2000). He is alsothe recipient of 20 honorary degrees including degrees from universities in Italy,Ireland, Israel, and Canada." He continues his work at Harvard University where he is a professor and co-creator of project zero. Often times the best source for biographical information stems not from the author as a mediator but directly from the person of interest. On his website Howard Gardner has three different biographies. There is one written by his wife Ellen Winner, a Harvard profile page, and one written by Gardner himself, where he delves into how he became interested in the psychological process of learning and the development of his theories. To read about Gardner in his own words, or from those who have known him best click [].

__**Main Points. **__
 * Founder of theory is Howard Gardner, Ph.d, a professor at Harvard University.
 * Emerged as a theory in 1983, when Gardner published his book //Frames of Mind.// Augmented and advances with subsequent publications by Gardner in 1991 and again in 1993 after the theory received almost immediate popularity upon its emergence.
 * The theory is focused more on education and practice than neuroscience or development.
 * It is based on a rejection of psychometrics to determine intelligence or cognitive aptitude (such as the standard IQ test, which evaluated solely logical and linguistic intelligence) (Ryan, et al. 54).
 * There are seven original "types" of intelligences (see links at the bottom of this page), with several more types added since 1983.
 * There is a bit of criticism surrounding the theory. Critics assert that there is a lack of empirical evidence in Gardner's findings, and that the separate intelligences represent a person's talents, abilities, and personality more than their true mental abilities and intelligence. The theory, not surprisingly, finds its most supportive community among educators. Psychologists are harder to win over.
 * Requires educators to be extremely sensitive to and aware of individual differences among students and to plan and assess according to those differences (Ryan et al., 55).

__**Stengths **__

Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences challenges traditional, narrower views of intelligence. Specifically his theory challenges the belief that intelligence is a uniform cognitive capability (comprised of logical and linguistic skills) that can be tested in a standardized multiple choice test. Instead Gardner’s theory states everyone has unique abilities which reflect different ways of interacting with the world. His theory suggests that intelligence encompasses the ability to create and solve problems, create products or provide services that are valued within a culture or society. In this theory every person has all of the intelligences, but each person has a unique combination.

Within the classroom, multiple intelligences allows all forms of intelligence to be equally celebrated. It allows a sense of increased self-worth as students build on their strengths and work towards becoming an expert in certain areas. It also allows students to develop strong problem solving skills that they can use real life situations.

__**Weaknesses **__

Although Multiple Intelligence theory attempts to replace IQ and the "g factor," some studies have shown that the two may actually be related. Visser, Ashton and Vernon (2006), proposed that the g factor often correlates to Gardner's scales of multiple intelligences. They argue that the core of these intelligences is still the g factor. They say that they rest of the intelligence is really a combination of "non-cognitive abilities or of personality characteristics." Essentially, this study claims that intelligence (g factor) is the most important factor, and the other portions are cultivated from the outside environment (athletics, music, math, etc. are talents, rather than intelligence). The intelligences, then, would not be purely unique to the individual, but environmental, meaning they are able to shift if a person’s personality changes. This is further supported by Waterhouse (2006), who writes, "examination of individual adapted cognition modules and cognitive systems revealed that their specific behavioral components aligned with more than one multiple intelligence thus cutting across the boundaries of Gardner’s intelligences" (p. 248). Again, she disproves multiple intelligence theory by showing there are basic skills and factors that are found at the core of all of the intelligences (what Visser would call the g factor). It is that core which is intelligence, not the extraneous talents that supplement it, meaning there are no multiple intelligences.

This same study also attacks the science behind multiple intelligences. It claims that Gardner's theories are "unfalsifiable" and thus unable to be tested (Visser et al., 2006). They request "Gardner to provide “intelligence-fair” measures for his eight “intelligences” – tasks involving no extraneous personality, emotional, or sensory acuity content – so that MI theory can again be put to the test." Technically, there is no way to prove the theory wrong, so falsifiable tests are needed to truly prove the validity of multiple intelligences. Again, Waterhouse (2006) makes a similar conclusion, saying that Gardner has refused to assign and design testable psychological subcomponents of these intelligences, and without those, scientists, with the exception of Gardner, are unable to test its validity whatsoever. Waterhouse goes as far as to say "MI theory has accrued no such validating empirical evidence in the 23 years since it was proposed" (p 249). Unless other researchers, independent of Gardner's team, are allowed to conduct their own studies into multiple intelligences, the theory will be flawed by the fact that only one man alive truly knows the complete definitions and characteristics of these intelligence types.

Another important criticism of Gardner's theory is the vagueness and cyclical way in which he defines his concepts. Klein, Ph.d (1998) points this out through Gardner's definition of bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, and its subset, domain of physical activity (p. 103). He points out that Gardner states bodily-kinesthetic intelligence as "the ability to use one's body". He then points out that the domain of physical activity, which Gardner considers a separate term, is defined as "activities that use one's body." Thus, Klein writes that ""the ability to use one's body" explains "the ability to use one's body." It is essentially the same as explaining a vocabulary word by using that word within the definition. The terminology is unclear. Additionally, Gardner himself states an unwillingness to lock down his definitions. In one of his earliest books, considering the criteria needed to determine intelligence, he writes "At present, however, it must be admitted that the selection (or rejection) of a candidate's intelligence is reminiscent more of an artistic judgment than of a scientific assessment" (Gardner, 1993, p. 63).

__**In Conjunction with Constructivism **__

Multiple intelligences theory coincides perfectly with constructivist theory. Ryan, Cooper, Tauer, (2008) write that, “According to constructivists, knowledge is not simply passed from teacher to learner. Instead, learners have to take this new information, make sense of it, and then attach it in some way to what they already know” (p 73). That is exactly what multiple intelligences does. It attempts to teach the student with a background in music by bringing music into the classroom. It attempts to teach the athlete by bringing physical activity into the classroom. Through multiple intelligence theory, we strive to teach students by using the background and skills of which they are familiar with and show strength in.

Multiple intelligences theory also complements constructivism in that it encourages less lecture and more student discovery. Constructivists believe that we need to “move instruction away from the tradition in which knowledge is viewed as discrete, hierarchical, sequential, and fixed and toward a classroom in which knowledge is viewed as an individual construction created by the learner as he or she interacts with people and things in the environment” (Draper, 2002). In multiple intelligences, a variety of activities are brought into the classroom to encourage students to explore and find knowledge for themselves, as well as work with others. Instead of lecturing, teachers have their students develop music videos, assign blogs for students to interact with each other’s thoughts, or bring in clay so students can build models. These types of activities force students to think more critically and creatively about topics and help them to build, or “construct,” knowledge based on their own skills and their collaboration with peers.

media type="custom" key="8428044"

Click here to assess your intelligence type now!

Types of Intelligence Visual-spatial (Margaret) Bodily-Kinesthetic (Matt) Musical (Dan) Interpersonal (Matt) Intrapersonal (Margaret) Linguistic (Dan) Logical-Mathematical (Ben) Other Possible Intelligences (Ben)

__Work Cited__

Draper, R. J. (2002, March). School mathematics reform, constructivism, and literacy: A case for literacy instruction in the reform-oriented math classroom. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literature, 45(6), 520-529.

Visser, B. A., Ashton, M. C., & Vernon, P. A. (2006, September). g and the measurement of Multiple Intelligences: A response to Gardner. //Intelligence//. pp. 507-510. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.04.006.

Klein, P. D. (1998). A response to Howard Gardner: Falsifiability, empirical evidence, and pedagogical usefulness in educational psychologies. Canadian Journal of Education, 23(1), 103-112. doi:10.2307/1585969

Waterhouse, L. (2006). Inadequate Evidence for Multiple Intelligences, Mozart Effect, and Emotional Intelligence Theories. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 247-255. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4104_5

Ryan, K., Cooper, J.M., Tauer, S. 2008. //Teaching for Student Learning: Becoming a Master Teacher//. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.