Multiple Intelligence Theory

I am familiar with his theory - it is still well known in education circles. I believe I had a question or two about Gardner when I took the FL Art K-12 teaching test - so the multiple intelligences are still around! I would consider them more about inclusion than exclusion. I think it is a lot more descriptive and varied than the overemphasized "right brain/left brain" theory (although I think the "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" books are excellent).

I scored highest for Linguistics, logic, and naturalistic. code whfqw5d48529jp.

Pretty interesting ! Thanks!

Naturalistic and intrapersonal stood out a bit more on mine. Code was csv1ym5x48721.

Interesting Rapunzel.

.

I'm visual/spatial and interpersonal.

Reading this, though...it really struck me that mini-kurt is a naturalistic genius.

Multiple intelligences is pervasive in educational theory around here. In fact, the city's elementary schools are now called "multiple intelligence academies." One elementary school is heavy on fine arts, another on mathematics/sciences, and another in linguistic intelligences.

One of my professors this semester is buddies with Gardner, and he told us quite a bit about how the theory is still being tweaked.

One of my professors this semester is buddies with Gardner, and he told us quite a bit about how the theory is still being tweaked.

Please, elaborate on this later.

Please, elaborate on this later.

Wow--I promise that I will as soon as I can. It's like your view on health care, though. It's long and elaborate and can't be spouted off in a jiffy.

But I will. My research project from last semester (which will become my capstone project in the fall, and hopefully my doctoral thesis one day) is on how gender and hemisphericity impacts learning styles in music, so I've done a LOT of research that brings me back to Gardner...

Meanwhile, I have a show this week. But I'll get to it...

Multiple intelligences is pervasive in educational theory around here. In fact, the city's elementary schools are now called "multiple intelligence academies." One elementary school is heavy on fine arts, another on mathematics/sciences, and another in linguistic intelligences.

One of my professors this semester is buddies with Gardner, and he told us quite a bit about how the theory is still being tweaked.

This should be explored with preschoolers, don't ya think? How beautiful it would be if children could be taught tailored to the way they think. Reading Writing and Arithmatic are basics and all other learning should reflect the genuine interest of the child. If my child is fascinated with bugs or flowers or motorcycles, or whatever it may be, her primary education should lean in that direction, right? But I also think school should be a full time job for a kid...year round. Just my opinion.

I don't think we should use the test as a way to channel a kid's interest or education. We miss a lot because of how overly focused and directed our schools & colleges are becoming.

For example, I am abysmal at music - tone deaf, no sense of rhythm, can't sing etc. Doesn't mean that I didn't have a great time during my years of band and piano lessons, or didn't enjoy all of the symphony concerts, musicals, and music oriented events in my life.

hk1gvk5x49024v

This should be explored with preschoolers, don't ya think? How beautiful it would be if children could be taught tailored to the way they think. Reading Writing and Arithmatic are basics and all other learning should reflect the genuine interest of the child. If my child is fascinated with bugs or flowers or motorcycles, or whatever it may be, her primary education should lean in that direction, right? But I also think school should be a full time job for a kid...year round. Just my opinion.

Actually, I have an opposite view. Although children should be encouraged to excel in what they have interests in, I think it is dangerous to use this methodology with young minds in school. Gardners chart IMO is just plain ole common sense and realistically that info could be garnered from parents. I think it may be useful in some respects to chart how one's mind is wired to learn more about a child or person if that communication doesn't exist.

But, let's take children on the spectrum for example. It's been proven that "autistic", and that term is not used anymore, but "on the spectrum" is, which would include social disorders like Aspergers Syndrome, so in short, I will abbrev. and use OTS. These children, and I believe many adults, if not everybody really falls on the spectrum to some degree, but let's use a true autistic like Rain Man (everybody knows that movie) Initially tools used for vocal and social skills are in essence to re-wire the mind, since Rain Man really doesn't understand all the social graces some do, ( or according to Gardners chart would most likely be very low in Intrapersonal and Extrapersonal, but high in categories that require memorization skills, like music. Some high functioning autistics can hear a song once, and play or write the music backwards.

So now, if re-training or re-wiring the mind works with those on the spectrum, (and it has been proven scientifically that autistics minds are developed differently) how does Gardner's MI in education benefit a child when you are teaching a child in an environment that they are comfortable with? It doesn't help to re-train thinking, and what you don't use, you lose. I can see it benefitting children OTS in extrapersonal skills where they might be exposed to music and have to learn teamwork in a choir, but after that, what about getting along in class outside of the auditorium?

I have to laugh because it looks like from his papers these studies from so called intellectuals that take them years, and spend time writing papers think they are so intelligent, are telling me something I learned by just sitting and watching people.

I'm visual/spatial and interpersonal.

Reading this, though...it really struck me that mini-kurt is a naturalistic genius.

huh? how so? mama wanna know. oh, I gotcha. his intense interest in paleontology since toddling age.

also punzy, how can this theory of intelligence be racist? I've heard of intelligence theories that are definitely racist. but this one looks like a model to describe various characteristics within overall intelligence.

I was not surprised that logical (number smart) was my lowest score...


my top 3 were

1. visual/spatial (picture smart)
2. musical
3. naturalistic

fyi -I am left handed....

code - nz1wcd5hww49813jp

I was not surprised that logical (number smart) was my lowest score...

my top 3 were

1. visual/spatial (picture smart)
2. musical
3. naturalistic

fyi -I am left handed....

If you ever wondered if you had an opposite, , and I am right handed

If you ever wondered if you had an opposite, , and I am right handed

opposites attract!!

opposites attract!!

Aww, is it haiku time?

Opposites attract
Sowal our gathering place
Dysfunction Junction

I've heard of Gardner's multiple intelligence theory and personally I like it. I've never heard it called racist (the people who wrote "The Bell Curve" were often accused as promoting a racist theory and I tend to agree). He seems to be well-respected, especially in education.

My favorite researcher on intelligence is Robert Sternberg who has studied the impact of IQ on success (professional success - getting results, promotions, salaries - though not necessarily happiness and I think happiness is a big part of success) and his research suggests that as long as a person is in the normal range of intelligence, IQ predicts on average only about 9% of a person's success and 25% at the high end. Many other characteristics predict success such as: conscientiousness (this is a pretty signifcant predictor of success at work, as well as longevity - hard work, organized, dependable and other things), creativity, practical intelligence, proactivity (can-do attitude), mindfulness, resilience (successful people fail a lot and bounce back), emotional intelligence (self-awareness, interpersonal skills/empathy, emotional stability/appropriateness), positive emotions (especially optimism, gratitude and forgiveness), a learning orientation (willing to take risks and try new things for the learning rather than just the outcome) and deliberate practice (e.g., Tiger Woods may or may not be the most 'naturally' talented golfer, but he's been practicing since he was 2 years old). Also, successful people (according to Sternberg) find environments that bring out the best in them, adapt environments to bring out the best in them, or they leave to find environments that bring out the best in them.

IQ tests also don't assess ethics or happiness or wealth (though they predict income to some degree - but even though income goes up a bit with each IQ point, people with higher IQs don't have higher wealth because they don't necessarily manage their money well after they make it).

I'm teaching this stuff this Friday morning... I have a lot of fun with this. And now you got me in the mood to teach which is a good thing...

now who would possibly benefit from categorizing athletics as intelligence? are we not stretching things a bit?

Highest to Lowest for me:

Musical
Visual/Spatial
Linguistic
Kinaesthetic/Body
Interpersonal
Intrapersonal
Naturalistic
Logical/Mathematical

All of mine ranged within five points of each other, though.
jpb1t550418

You can also look at the results for the entire "class."
If you put in all the codes everyone has put in, it gives you everyone's averages. For the group so far, all of the intelligences are really close. I guess we're a pretty well-rounded group, huh?
Group Results

It'll probably make you type in all the codes. Here's ours so far:
kxr1n548128, whfqw5d48529jp, csv1ym5x48721, hk1gvk5x49024v, nz1wcd5hww49813jp, jpb1t550418

I am
1. Kinaestheic (body) smart
2. Interpersonal (people smart)
3. Intrapersonal (myself smart)
4. Visual (picture) smart

I am not musical or word smart at all.....

now who would possibly benefit from categorizing athletics as intelligence? are we not stretching things a bit?

Do you watch football/baseball/basketball? Or do you just hang with the ladies when you go to parties?

The criteria of an intelligence is that it is an attribute valued by and beneficial to the society. Obviously, men really value this trait because they talk about sports a bit more often than they discuss philosophy -- at least in my circles. As for the beneficial, well I think historically those with kinesthetic intelligence would have been among the most valuable -- hunting, defense.

When I first learned this theory, I'd just met Tiger Woods at a golf tournament where I volunteered. I remember that instantly he jumped to mind because I remember just being fascinated by watching him move -- walk, swing a club, anything -- he was so fluid, he appeared to literally flow. Like a ballet dancer, but more graceful and gentle. I'm always bruised and can rarely tell you how it happened, it struck me at the time -- I bet he's never tripped or bumped into a door frame in his life. I'd say that's an intelligence, and it's made him quite successful.

And for it's practical application -- I have a good friend who has a reputation as one of the best early intervention autism special educators. I visited her about a year ago and went to observe her class one day. I was blown away by one of the techniques she used with a little 3 year old boy who had pretty severe autism. He would get all worked up and start grunting and flailing. She asked me to put him on a balance ball (lying on his back, draped over it) and rock it. After 30 seconds, he suddenly gained control of his body and started balancing himself, rocking back until his hands touched the floor, pushing off and ouching his feet. It looked impossible, but he could do it back and forth, with no side to side movement. He calmed, and while he had total focus on his body, she had me read the day's words to him. He could say them back, and understood them when I asked questions back about them. Frustration can be overcome when you find your strengths.

now who would possibly benefit from categorizing athletics as intelligence? are we not stretching things a bit?

not at all. just from my education experience and study, and observation of individuals with unique talents, a person can excel in creativity (music, art, etc) or athletic ability, and may be considered gifted and talented in unique ways.

Do you watch football/baseball/basketball? Or do you just hang with the ladies when you go to parties?

The criteria of an intelligence is that it is an attribute valued by and beneficial to the society. Obviously, men really value this trait because they talk about sports a bit more often than they discuss philosophy -- at least in my circles. As for the beneficial, well I think historically those with kinesthetic intelligence would have been among the most valuable -- hunting, defense.

When I first learned this theory, I'd just met Tiger Woods at a golf tournament where I volunteered. I remember that instantly he jumped to mind because I remember just being fascinated by watching him move -- walk, swing a club, anything -- he was so fluid, he appeared to literally flow. Like a ballet dancer, but more graceful and gentle. I'm always bruised and can rarely tell you how it happened, it struck me at the time -- I bet he's never tripped or bumped into a door frame in his life. I'd say that's an intelligence, and it's made him quite successful.

And for it's practical application -- I have a good friend who has a reputation as one of the best early intervention autism special educators. I visited her about a year ago and went to observe her class one day. I was blown away by one of the techniques she used with a little 3 year old boy who had pretty severe autism. He would get all worked up and start grunting and flailing. She asked me to put him on a balance ball (lying on his back, draped over it) and rock it. After 30 seconds, he suddenly gained control of his body and started balancing himself, rocking back until his hands touched the floor, pushing off and ouching his feet. It looked impossible, but he could do it back and forth, with no side to side movement. He calmed, and while he had total focus on his body, she had me read the day's words to him. He could say them back, and understood them when I asked questions back about them. Frustration can be overcome when you find your strengths.

a baseball scholarship financed my undergrad degree....and I can get a golf ball around 18 holes better than 90 percent of hackers....but I would be the last person to characterize the ability to steal a base or hit the long ball as "intelligence". I had a high school buddy who played basketball for Auburn, played several years in the NBA and Europe, but would copy my work in class because he was either lazy intellectually or could not do the work. I'll never know why, but I would guess it's a combination of both. I would not partition his abilities to say innate athletic prowess was intelligence, and give him a total pass on his failure to educate himself traditionally.

Auburn jokes please!

I love learning about learning and the different points of view by you all. Now I'm going to have to dig out the Psychology books and start reading again.

Is it agreed that these talents or abilities are exhibited at a very young age? How young?


I think my child is extremely smart, ( doesn't every parent feel that way) ...
But, I don't really know how smart she is because It's difficult to find an intelligence "test" for under three years old. Any ideas?