http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/viewArticle.aspx?contentId=12738
ttrb.ac.uk
Mike Blamires and Sue Field

What the resource is.
This is a paper by Professor John White in the viewpoint series published by the Institute of Education University of London.

The aims of the resource
The resource aims to provide a critique of the multiple intelligence theory of Howard Gardner.

Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences has wide spread currency in education. This is due to the appeal of its suggestion that there are a range of intelligences rather a single IQ that is based on abstract mathematic/logical deductive thinking. The multiple intelligences set out by Gardner represent a broad range of culturally valued achievement recognised in the outcomes of schooling. These include musicality, interpersonal skills and kinaesthetic skills that are valued in Physical Education and dance.

Gardner’s multiple intelligences have therefore been utilised to justify the development of broader curriculum opportunities and increased differentiation in teaching. The theory has also been aligned with learning styles. This paper raises serious concerns regarding the empirical basis for the theory of multiple intelligences and suggests that it has confused the social basis of intellectual activity with a proposed set of biologically based characteristics.

The quality, authority and credibility of the resource

Gardner’s approach is criticised by John White who suggests that he has confused a range of culturally valued domains with notions of fixed aptitudes within individuals that are in turn developed through education. White argues that Gardner has replaced the rigidity of a single criterion for educational success, i.e. IQ has been replaced by judgements across a number of intellectual areas. White questions the rigour by which Gardner’s set of criteria for intelligences is employed so that the validity of what constitutes a distinct intelligence may be open to question.

Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory could also be considered to be based on a traditional liberal curriculum.  It is suggested that he added two further intelligences at a later stage because there were two subject areas  that he had omitted, i.e. biology and religious studies.

The implications for ITE tutors/mentors – when and how it could have best impact.

The current government’s specialist school and academy programme might be seen as a revamp of the 11-plus idea for the multiple intelligences, with the intention of providing a range of specialist schools for the different intelligences rather than one for those with a high scoring IQ.

White cites the philosopher Gilbert Ryle (1948) who recognised that the application of intelligence can be attributed to many areas of human activity, in order to argue that the complexity of intellect should not be confined to a small number of domains. In the accompanying Guardian article, he expands his critique of intelligence testing as an artefact of a Calvinist tradition in which life outcomes are assumed to be pre-ordained.

From our own reflections on our experience in schools, we know that learners are capable of achievements across a range of knowledge domains. Some learners excel in some subjects but do less well in others. The reasons for this are not simply due to our genes, family environment or community, otherwise schooling would be irrelevant.

The US research review ‘How People Learn” (Bransford et al, 1999)  states that experts organise and use their knowledge in different ways from novices, and that experts are not always the best people to describe what they do. To enable learners to develop the intellectual skills required within a subject, educators need to model and demonstrate expertise and provide opportunities to develop and practise expertise. This is a more difficult challenge than waiting for talents to unfold.

The following questions may help in exploring these issues in relation to teaching and learning:

Does the school system recognise and value a wide range of achievements and performance through the curriculum it offers?

Do staff have high expectations of what the school can do for pupils?

Does the school encourage and teach learners in areas where they appear to have little aptitude initially?

Sources:

The following might be useful to read in conjunction with this resource:

White,. J. (2005) Howard Gardner: The Myth of Multiple Intelligence ViewPoint No. 16 Oct Institute of Education University of London

John Crace interviews John White in the Education Guardian Tuesday February 28, 2006
http://education.guardian.co.uk/academicexperts/story/0,,1719359,00.html

Books:

Bransford, J.D.,  Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R.R. (1999) How People Learn National Academy of Sciences
http://newton.nap.edu/html/howpeople1/

Gardner, H. (1983) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences
London Heinemann

Ryle, G. (1949) The Concept of Mind
London: Hutchinson

White, J. (2006) Intelligence Destiny and Education: The ideological roots of intelligence testing London Routledge

http://www.hltmag.co.uk/nov07/sart10.htm
hltmag.co.uk
Claudio de Paiva Franco, Brazil

Different Intelligences

Simply put, Gardner (1993a) in Frames of Mind claims that all human beings possess not just one single intelligence (often called “g” for general intelligence), but a set of relatively autonomous intelligences. Consequently, individuals differ substantially for both genetic and experiential reasons in their respective profiles of intellectual strengths and weaknesses. According to him, no two people – not even identical twins – possess exactly the same profile of intelligences. Such intelligences can, however, be developed once the opportunity is given.

“At the time that MI theory was introduced, it was very important to make the case that human brains and human minds are highly differentiated entities. It is fundamentally misleading to think about a single mind, a single intelligence, a single problem-solving capacity. And so, along with many others, I tried to make the argument that the mind/brain consists of many modules / organs / intelligences, each of which operates according to its own rules in relative autonomy from the others.” (Gardner, 2003, p.13)

Professor Howard Gardner proposes eight discrete intelligences: verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, visual-spatial, bodily-kinaesthetic, musical-rhythmic, interpersonal-social, intrapersonal-emotional and naturalistic (although there is a ninth intelligence being mentioned – existential).
Problems in traditional classroom in accommodating MIs

Many people, mainly educationalists, are well acquainted with the multiple intelligences. However, is society as well as our educational system prepared to accept such intelligences?

School has long privileged one or two forms of human intelligence – those involving language and logic – while ignoring the other powerful ways in which we can come to know the world. (GARDNER, 2000, p. 32)

How many times has a teacher frowned upon a student drawing on the desk? Probably the answer is most often. Historically speaking, a greater focus is given to linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences. On the one hand, if a student succeeds in mathematics s/he is regarded as intelligent. On the other hand, individuals who have other intelligences more developed are to be excluded from the learning environment and labelled as less capable.

With a view to enabling students to actively take part in the learning process, teachers should motivate all learners by designing tasks, which cater for their learning styles/needs. Therefore, respecting their individual intelligence.

Teachers should fashion teaching and learning so that all students have the chance to learn and to demonstrate what they have learned – not just those students who happen to be gifted with words and numbers. (GARDNER, 2000, p. 32)

It goes without saying that in any class, students with different strengths and different ways of learning coexist, so when the principles of MI theory are applied to teaching, the advantages are easily noticeable. These principles can help us cater for different needs and learning styles insofar as they provide a pedagogically sound framework for devising activities which will eventually reach all of our learners.
The advent of e-learning

Internet and the World Wide Web have never been in the spotlight as they are nowadays and they have brought with them e-learning:

Also called CBT, Computer Based Training, e-learning is a general term that relates to all training that is delivered with the assistance of a computer. Delivery of e-learning can be via CD, the Internet, or shared files on a network. Generally, CBT and e-learning are synonymous, but CBT is the older term, dating from the 1980s. The term E-learning evolved from CBT along with the maturation of the Internet, CDs, and DVDs. E-learning also includes Internet-based Learning, Web-based Learning, and Online Learning. (www.wikipedia.org)

As the Internet and the Web have become more widely available and individuals have become quite accustomed to using them as a means of communication, their use as educational tools has become increasingly widespread. At the same time, learners are more time-poor than they were as well as in desperate need of continual skills upgrading. Accordingly, these factors are bound to have led many people to resort to distance learning, especially e-learning. Many people have the common misconception that distance learning is part of a new trend, but it has, in reality, existed for more than a century. Correspondence courses in Europe were the earliest form of distance learning, also known as open learning or flexible learning.

Considering the traditional face to face [F2F] classroom, a great many students cannot profit from the teaching offered as their learning style is not compatible with the prevalent approaches on offer. Some other students who fail become demotivated to take part in the proposed activities.

Nowadays more and more universities are rapidly adopting Blended Learning [BL], i.e. a mix of face to face and online approaches. According to Carrier:

“Blended Learning assumes an active role of ‘blending”, that is the teacher actively selecting, sequencing, integrating with the classroom learning experience in order to achieve a more optimum learning experience for the learners (and very specifically focused on the individual needs of individual learners).” (CARRIER, 2006, p. 11)

Advantages of e-learning in accommodating intelligence diversity

The relationship between e-learning and MI theory is far too strong to go completely unnoticed. In practical terms, this means that the WWW may support and encourage collaborative task work, and given the wide range of different types of activities online, it can help some way towards supporting learner’s very individual learning styles.

One can truly claim that the Multiple Intelligences [MI] theory has helped many educators to take stock of their teaching practice and e-learning is definitely an invaluable source to help them/students cope with different learning styles. There is a vast array of tools one can make good use of if internet is taken into consideration.

Sometimes a task available may serve different learners, which also enables them to experiment with new ways of dealing with new knowledge. Therefore, it proves to be a great opportunity to enhance other intelligences.

Undoubtedly one of the most crucial issues in e-learning is that it effectively grants the learner independence and autonomy. Fostering autonomous learning is of paramount importance when it comes to education.

Autonomy is perhaps best described as a capacity … because various kinds of abilities can be involved in control over learning. Researchers generally agree that the most important abilities are those that allow learners to plan their own learning activities, monitor their progress and evaluate their outcomes. (BENSON, 2003 p. 290)

In order to achieve autonomy, learners should be able to learn in their own way and pace, having their talents/intelligences privileged and whenever possible, the others developed. Fortunately, this is possible with the advent of e-learning.
E-learning opportunities

In the case of e-learning, students might well plan, create their own tasks by making them more meaningful, relevant to their needs and experience, more motivating.

The implementation of blogs and wikis to improve traditional F2F classroom, for instance, appeals to a great many students. On top of that, they can communicate and convey meaning through different ways. Learners with well-developed interpersonal-social intelligence, say, will profit by exchanging ideas via instant-messaging programmes such as MSN, ICQ or SKYPE. They may prefer to communicate with others using audio, video or simply text depending on their talent.

The level of motivation and interest is easily increased and they get actively involved. Not to mention the fact that a wide range of intelligences is reached.

Learners may download podcasts recorded by their classmates or teacher. Podcasts are all over the WWW and they allow people to deliver and gain knowledge through audio, an invaluable source for musical-rhythmic learners. In contrast, a verbal-linguistic learner may benefit by reading e-books or making a great effort to hand in a thorough essay to her/his instructor.
Conclusion

Most e-learning now promotes interaction and is very largely based upon the constructivist model as it is completely learner-centred. The focus is firmly on the learners rather than the teacher. Students have the chance to interact with co-learners from various places and together actively build up new knowledge and understanding from authentic experience. Palloff & Pratt (1999) believe it is the relationships and interactions among people in the online classroom that primarily generate knowledge.

Contrary to the behaviourist classroom, where the primary role of the learner is as a relatively passive recipient of the knowledge transmitted by the teacher, e-learning allows students to negotiate meaning, solve problems, try out hypotheses and eventually, come up with a plausible answer or solution within their real-life context. In practical terms, e-learning allows learners to be the agent of their own learning.

“Human learning is constructed not only by interacting with the content but also by working together with colleagues and instructors.” (ALONSO, 2005)

We should offer individuals the opportunity to learn in various ways in addition to enabling them to show their understanding by means of representations that make sense to them. The appearance of e-learning has, by all means, contributed to helping learners acquire and convey knowledge through many forms.

New multimedia work may enable ordinary students to gain an understanding that may have been accessible only in the extraordinary classroom in years past. (GARDNER, 1996, p.72)

The belief that applications of the new technologies should provide ways for a variety of minds to gain access to knowledge has gathered considerable strength over time.

Last but not least, one should take into account the fact that learning is what matters and the World Wide Web has come to offer an array of tools so as to enable learners to become autonomous, not to mention to take part in the learning community.
References

Alfonso, F. (2005) An instrumental model for e-learning education. British Journal of Education technology. Vol. 36, 2 pp 217-235.

Benson, P. (2003) Learner autonomy in the classroom. New York: McGraw Hill.

Carrier, M. (2006) Technology in the future language classroom. Modern English Teacher, Vol. 15, 4 pp 5-15.

Gardner, H. (1993a) Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books. New Editions.

Gardner, H. (1993b) Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1996) Multimedia and Multiple Intelligences. The American Prospect, n. 3 pp 69-75.

Gardner, H. (2000) Can technology exploit our many ways of knowing?

Gardner, H. (2003) Multiple Intelligences After Twenty Years. Invited Address, American Educational Research Association.

Nunan, D. (1999) Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heilne & Heinle.

Nunan, D. (1999) A foot in the world of ideas: graduate study through the Internet. Language Learning & Technology, 3 (1), July, pp.52-74.

Palloff, R and Pratt, K Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Tavares, K.C.A. (2000) O papel do professor – do contexto presencial para o ambiente online e vice-versa. Revista Conect@, n. 3.
—

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/66235/howard_gardners_theory_of_multiple.html?cat=4
associatedcontent.com
by Penelope

Learn How to Apply Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences into Every Day Lesson Planning and Teaching
12 X
Howard Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences offers a breath of fresh air to educators and students alike. Read about each intelligence and how to incorporate each one into the classroom.
Credit: www.theatreinmotion.com  |  © www.theatreinmotion.com
The Multiple Intelligence Theory was developed by Howard Gardner in the early 1980’s and further developed in the early 1990’s. Gardner had experience working with gifted children as well as brain-injured adults and he discovered that intelligence manifests itself through
several different areas. Gardner defines intelligence as the capacity to solve problems and create products that would be valued in a cultural setting. By this definition, Gardner composed seven different areas of intelligence which are as follows; Verbal/Linguistic, Visual, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, Logical/mathematical, Bodily kinesthetic and he later added Naturalistic. Gardner also noted that while everyone is capable of performing within each intelligence area, most people are more gifted in certain areas than in others.

Claudia Cornett’s Creating Meaning through Literature and the Arts describes each intelligence area thoroughly. I will describe each intelligence area using Cornett’s text as a guide. Beginning with Verbal, this area involves the love of words. Verbal learners typically enjoy
discussing, reading, writing, memorizing, and using humor. The next area is visual, which includes learners who enjoy drawing, designing, and the use of visual images. These learners typically do well with picture representations and are also gifted with mazes, puzzles, and maps. The next area is Musical. Musical learners love to sing and hum and are typically able to remember songs and melodies. People who are musical also often respond to music well and notice pitches and rhythms. The fourth area is Interpersonal, which involves learners who like working with others and are gifted in resolving conflicts and relating to others. Interpersonal learners also make good leaders and are able to cooperate well. The fifth area of intelligence, Intrapersonal, involves those who enjoy personal space and do well with reflecting on feelings, intentions and dreams. The sixth area of intelligence, Logical, includes learners who like to think and solve problems with their minds. People who are strong in this area are typically able to discover patterns, categorize and classify, and are usually gifted in math as well. The seventh area is Bodily Kinesthetic, which includes those who enjoy using gestures to communicate. These learners also typically enjoy hands-on learning, sports, drama, and dance. The final area of intelligence is Naturalistic. These learners typically enjoy studying animals and nature and being outside. Each area is important for teachers and learners to understand and be aware of. It is also important for teachers to address each learning style within their classroom so that all students not only get a chance to exercise their strengths, but also to develop their weaknesses.

I believe that individuals may gain strengths in other areas as time goes by. Personally, I have always been the strongest in verbal and intrapersonal. In school I always enjoyed reading literature and writing poetry. I also loved to hear stories and have always appreciated humor. Several teachers have also told me that I have a gift for expressing myself through words. I believe that this reflects the Verbal and Intrapersonal branches of intelligence. Also, I enjoy working alone and at my own pace. Oddly enough, I also enjoy group work and am a little Interpersonal as well. However, I prefer a balance between the two and usually come up with a better product when I work by myself. Also, I feel that the Naturalistic branch of intelligence is a developing strength for me. I believe that this strength was first developed after I worked at a summer camp and spent a lot of time outdoors. I was hooked, and now I enjoy spending time outside and learning more about nature than I had before. Overall, I believe that certain strengths are innate, while others can be gained through experience.

Lastly, I would like to mention a few ways to apply this theory in the classroom as well as examples for these applications. One way to apply this theory is by testing your students to see where their strengths and weaknesses lie. A simple test may be found on-line, or you could develop a
sort of interest survey of your own. Once a teacher has this knowledge, it is important to develop lessons in which your students can not only polish their strengths, but also improve their weaknesses. For example, you may develop a lesson where students work in groups to write a poem about a topic you are studying. This lesson would allow Intrapersonal learners as well as Interpersonal learners to excel individually and learn from each other at the same time. Another example of how to apply this theory is to give your students options. For example, they may choose between writing a paper, a song, or leading a discussion about a certain topic or piece of literature. I had the opportunity to watch a video of a similar lesson and the students really enjoyed having the freedom to express themselves. One student wrote a song, another drew a picture, and a third wrote a skit. This is a way for all of your students to express their individuality and intelligence.

Gardner’s theory is very important for teacher’s to understand and apply. I will do my best as a teacher to reach all types of learners and give everyone the chance to learn from one another.

http://www.catskillcenter.org/programs/edu/csp/H20/Lesson3/edpsych.htm
catskillcenter.org
by Cindy Ybos and Patty Watts

A different kind of smart – that’s the hottest topic of discussion in classrooms across the country today. For many years, educators believed that “intelligence” was fixed and, therefore, individuals die with the same intelligence with which they were born. Another misconception was that there was only one way to define and measure intelligence. Modern research has seriously challenged those ideas, however. The currently accepted theory of multiple intelligences, which is based on research about how people learn, has changed how teachers facilitate and assess learning. Educators no longer focus on “how smart students are” but on “how students are smart.”

The theory of multiple intelligences, developed by Howard Gardner and his associates, holds that every individual possesses several different and independent capacities for solving problems and creating products. Gardner has named these capacities “intelligences” and has scientifically identified eight of them. To facilitate understanding and implementing them, Gardner has grouped some of these intelligences into three categories.

The language-related intelligences, verbal/linguistic and musical/rhythmic, reflect the structures of individual languages. These two intelligences are “object free”, meaning that thoughts are represented through sound-based communication and symbolic representations of those sounds. Yes, car salesmen do have this intelligence. There’s a frightening thought.

The second category, personal relationships, consists of interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences. These are the people-centered intelligences. They reflect the personal vision of self, expectations of others, accepted norms of thinking and acting, and the cultural pressures that shape behavior.

The third category is object-related intelligences. These include bodily/kinesthetic, visual/spatial, and logical/mathematical. The designation of object-related means that the basic concepts and procedures are rooted in physical manipulation of concrete objects that results in a defined product. These intelligences are subject to the “rules of the game” for using the objects to solve a problem or make a product.

The newest intelligence to be identified is naturalist intelligence. This is the ability to differentiate the patterns and characteristics among natural objects in the environment. Charles Darwin and Project Learning Tree (PLT) facilitators are often cited as examples of people who have naturalist intelligence.

Researchers say that each of us is born with all eight intelligences and no one intelligence is superior to another. Every individual possesses a unique blend of the seven intelligences that was determined by the environment in which the intelligences developed. It, therefore, becomes the responsibility of the educator to provide students the means for developing and using all eight intelligences to build knowledge. As with other instructional strategies, PLT has already incorporated many of the key aspects of multiple intelligences theory into its activities.

One of the simplest ways to include multiple intelligences in your workshop is to ask participants to “represent” the data they have collected during a PLT activity, such as Water Wonders, using one of the eight intelligences. Each group can be invited to use the intelligence with which they are most comfortable or you can assign an intelligence to each group. By doing this, you encourage them to really let their personalities shine! We have found that groups will dance, sing, draw pictures, make models, create graphs, or do calisthenics to report their findings from PLT activities. Using the multiple intelligence techniques such as this not only helps educators focus on the individuality of their students, it also provides an excellent opportunity to really have a fun workshop.

While all of this information about Multiple Intelligence Theory may seem overwhelming, the main idea we would like for you to get from this article is that PLT activities already incorporate a great deal of this theory. Just by doing the activities, you are modeling some aspects of Multiple Intelligence Theory in your workshops and with some small modifications, you can model all aspects of it. It also is important that you think about how combinations of activities will address all of the intelligences when planning your workshop.

In future articles, we will examine each category of intelligence, share specific tips and strategies for livening up your workshops using multiple intelligences, and suggest activities that highlight each intelligence.

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/newton/articles/2008/12/22/he_conceived_of_multiple_intelligences/
boston.com
By Billy Baker

Harvard professor Howard Gardner said his theory was an attempt to explain why human cognitive profiles were so ”jagged.” (Pat Greenhouse/Globe Staff)
No one would be talking about it 25 years later, Howard Gardner says, if he had used another word to describe his theory on the different kinds of minds. “Faculties,” might have worked, he says, but he chose “intelligences.” His 1973 book “Frames of Mind,” announced his “theory of multiple intelligences.”

At the time, Gardner was a respected though far-from-famous 40-year-old Harvard psychologist, and he thought the book might be of interest to other psychologists. But by using that very complex and powerful word – intelligence – Gardner says he inadvertently picked a fight “with people who think they know what intelligence is and how to measure it.”

In the process, he established himself as a hugely influential thinker in a field he hadn’t, until then, given much thought to – education.

Gardner’s theory contradicted the idea that there was a single intelligence, and instead argued that there were seven core intelligences, which he identified as: linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, and intrapersonal (in 1997, he added an eighth, naturalist, for people with environmental aptitude.)

“Most people think there is a single computer in the mind,” Gardner said recently while sitting in his office at Harvard, where he’s been “a lifer” since arriving as an undergraduate in 1961. “I think we have several relatively independent computers in the mind, and I’ve done the research to back it up.”

Gardner said the theory was his attempt to explain why human cognitive profiles were so “jagged” – people who excelled in one area could falter in another. But when it made its way into pedagogical discussions, it became “the most important thing since chalk”, according to NYU globalization and education professor Marcelo Suarez-Orozco.

“It articulated and gave a persuasive narrative to something parents and teachers intuitively know about their children – that kids engage learning through multiple intelligences – and his theory gave them permission to engage different learners in different ways,” Suarez-Orozco said. “Globally, the breadth of his impact at every cardinal point is breathtaking . . . The sun never sets on the theory of multiple intelligences.”

Gardner describes his scholarly approach: “When I study something, I like to make taxonomies, or grids,” he said, while sitting in an office where paperwork was divided onto chairs whose backs he’d labeled “high priority,” “medium priority” and “low priority.”

The theory of multiple intelligences was simply his attempt to divvy up the mind, and he believes it achieved wide success specifically because he offered it without an agenda attached. “Multiple intelligences is just a meme, or idea unit,” he said. “And any meme can be put to wide use.”

While MI, as multiple intelligence is known, has had effects on academic curriculums, student tracking and so-called “gifted” programs, Gardner believes that, a quarter-of-a-century later, his theory has had two major implications for education.

“Individualize education as much as you can . . .” he said. “And when you want to teach something important, teach it in many different ways because people learn in different ways.”

In the 25 years since “Frames of Mind,” Gardner has written more books; he served for many years as codirector of Project Zero – a long-term Harvard endeavor that investigates learning processes, particularly in the arts; and he helped found the GoodWork Project, which looks in to “how to be creative and responsible at the same time.”

But no matter what he does, “my happy frustration is that I’m the MI guy,” Gardner said with a can’t-complain smile. “I cannot count the number of people all over the world who said ‘I feel affirmed thinking about your work.’ ”

And being the “MI guy” is a title that has its privileges; several times, he’s had the rare honor of having a school named after him in his lifetime.

Not long ago, he was back in his hometown of Scranton, Penn., visiting one of those schools, when a 7-year-old pointed him out.

“He said, ‘That’s the guy who was named after our school,’ ” Gardner said. “How do you top that?”

Hometown: Scranton, Penn.; lives in Cambridge.

Education: At Harvard, he received a bachelor’s in social relations in 1965, and a doctorate in social psychology in 1971.

Family: Wife, Ellen Winner, is a psychology professor at Boston College. They have four kids: Kerith, 39, an administrator at Columbia University Business School; Jay, 37, a photographer and editor; Andrew, 32, an education technologist at The School at Columbia University; Benjamin, 23, a worker in marketing.

Hobbies: Playing piano and serving on the board of the Museum of Modern Art.

http://www.articlesbase.com/childhood-education-articles/multiple-intelligences-and-homeschooling-1459460.html
articlesbase.com
Tehira Hasan

Multiple Intelligences first came up through the name of Howard Gardner. His theory was introduced to all when his ground breaking book Frames of Mind were published in 1983. The stunning theory from this great man opened the door to a greater understanding of individual talents which included spatial, logical (mathematical), musical, kinesthetic, and verbal. For example the best time or a kinesthetic child to learn when he actively takes part in some action or participating on a physical level rather than competing with paper and pencil sitting in the classroom. In spite of being so talented

A kinesthetic child is often being leveled as a problem student where as the only problem remains upon the teaching method. The basic theme of home schooling is to let the children grow according to their own style. Countries like China and Japan makes their children self dependent right from the very beginning. The first word that a Japanese child learns is “Do it yourself” that reflects the approach of Japanese towards the children.  An ancient Chinese proverb gives a clue its like. “Let me do it myself, I understand, Show me, I remember, Tell me, I forget” one can see this proverb in action watching children play. Kids absorb information at an incredible rate and learn through the senses. They question and explore everything around them because their curiosity is boundless.

The intention of Chinese and the Japanese towards their children is that they let their children explore in their own way without the interruption of any body. Chinese and the Japanese people are being motivated in doing so because of the two remarks stated above about the natural tendency of the children. They give highest priority to the self growing of the child. Every child has his own way of learning. It might not match the expected way of the parents. But they should not loose their temper. Rather they should hold their patience and let the child grow in his way. This attitude of the parents will increase the opportunity for the child to explore his own talent which is the main objective of the method of home schooling.

If the child gets complete freedom to learn whatever he or she likes, the tendency to find the most comfortable way to grow up will increase. When the students get freed up of the restraints of traditional schools, children are enthusiastic active learner stains and ranks for all students nation-wide. In 1983 the Theory of Multiple Intelligences by Howard Gardner was proposed in his famous book of Frames of Mind. Gardner’s proposal said that to create a unique person, there are seven and more recently eight, distinct intelligences works together.

Gardner expressed his requirement of two basic principles at its core to establish the ideal school for the future. Firstly he asked for the authority under which people would be able to explore them completely along with having unique and varied abilities, and interests. Secondly, people should be given informed choices as part of their educational experiences as it’s not possible for one person to learn all. Gardner states that “in assessment of individual abilities and proclivities, an individual-centered school would be rich. It would look to match not only to curricular areas of individuals, but also particular ways of teaching those subjects. And the school would seek to match individuals with the various kinds of life work options which have availability in their culture after the first few grades” The theory of Dr. Gardner can be key element in terms of nursing every child and build them up for the future.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=multimedia_and_multiple_intelligences
prospect.org
Shirley Veenema and Howard Gardner

Technology does not necessarily improve education. Take a simple innovation like the pencil: One can use it to write a superlative essay, to drum away the time, or to poke out someone’s eye. The best television has educated thousands, while the daily network offerings dull the sensibilities of millions.

The same is true of interactive technology, which is getting so much ink these days: It could become a valuable education tool, but only if we use it to capitalize on our new understanding of how the human mind works. In this essay, we examine one particular example of interactive media, a CD-ROM about a Civil War battle, and how it takes advantage of the more complex view of intelligence that has emerged in recent decades.

THE COGNITIVE REVOLUTION

Just 40 years ago, a new movement in science began to coalesce. Now termed cognitive science, this field seeks to integrate insights from several disciplines (including psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and neuroscience) in order to put forth a more comprehensive understanding of the human mind. The approach fostered by the cognitive revolution has enormous, if not yet widely appreciated, implications for educational practice.

Even in science, one cannot have a revolution without an enemy. In the case of the cognitive revolution, there were two separate, though related, foes. The behaviorist perspective, as epitomized in the work of B.F. Skinner, disdained any concern with the mind and its contents: All that mattered, from the behaviorist perspective, was that an organism perceived a stimulus and responded to it or that the organism acted in some way and was positively or negatively rewarded for so acting. In education, the apotheosis of the behaviorist perspective was the teaching machine, which remains central in computer-assisted instruction today.

The second antagonist, from the perspective of cognitivists, was the view that what the mind contains is intelligence—more or less of it. Individuals, according to this perspective, are born with a certain amount of intelligence, which for better or worse is essentially fixed. Few asked just what intelligence was or how it could be improved, increased, or transformed—indeed, the not entirely whimsical definition put forth by psychologists was that “intelligence is what the tests test.” The IQ test and its descendants, in such measures as the Scholastic Aptitude (now Assessment) Test, are the contemporary monument to this way of thinking.

In direct response to these entrenched perspectives, cognitivists argue that individuals do not just react to or perform in the world; they possess minds, and these minds contain mental representations—images, schemes, pictures, frames, languages, ideas, and the like. Some of the mental representations that individuals are born with or form at an early age prove enduring, but many other representations are created, transformed, or dissolved over time as the result of experiences and reflections upon those experiences. The mind, like a computer, processes and transforms information, and it is vital to understand the nature of this computing machinery—or, perhaps more aptly, these types of computing machinery.

While nearly all cognitivists would agree with this rough portrait, disputes abound about the nature of mental representations—about what they consist of, how they are expressed, how they relate to brain structures, and dozens of other issues. Fortunately, those of us interested in educational progress do not have to follow, let alone take sides, in these disputes. But two central ideas in the cognitivist’s arsenal do have important implications for education.

TWO KEY COGNITIVE IDEAS

First of all, the mind is not comprised of a single representation or even a single language of representations. Rather, all individuals harbor numerous internal representations in their minds/brains. Some scholars speak of “modules of mind,” some of a “society of mind.” In our own work, we speak of the possession of multiple intelligences, which span the range from linguistic and logical intelligences (the usual foci of school work) to musical, naturalist, and personal intelligences.

According to multiple intelligences theory, not only do all individuals possess numerous mental representations and intellectual languages, but individuals also differ from one another in the forms of these representations, their relative strengths, and the ways in which (and ease with which) these representations can be changed. There are at least eight discrete intelligences, and these intelligences constitute the ways in which individuals take in information, retain and manipulate that information, and demonstrate their understandings (and misunderstandings) to themselves and others. For example, in their understanding of the American Civil War, some individuals would favor a linguistic or narrative approach; others can be most easily reached through an artistic depiction; and still others might resonate to the personal dimension-how an internecine struggle affects neighbors and relatives and even generates ambivalence within one’s own self. While most individuals can use and appreciate these different perspectives and intelligences, over time each of us constructs our own amalgam of intelligences. Surprisingly (and counter to the claims of classical intelligence theory), strength or weakness in one area does not predict strength or weakness in other areas. And it is here that we encounter a seminal educational enigma.

Until now, most schools all over the world have been selection devices. These institutions have honored a certain kind of mind—ideally, one that combines language and logic—and tried to select individuals who excel in these forms. In most schools individuals who favor other mental representations have received little honor.

The cognitivist’s acknowledgment of different kinds of minds opens up enormous educational opportunities. If individuals do differ from one another and if we want to reach as many of them as possible, it makes little sense to treat everyone in a one-size-fits-all manner. Rather, we need to understand the specific minds involved in an educational encounter; and insofar as possible, we should base our education, including choices of technology, on that knowledge. And so, whether the course be history or physics or dance, we should try to teach individuals in ways that are consonant with, or that stretch, their current mental representations. Equally, we should give individuals the opportunity to exhibit their understandings by means of media and representations that make sense to them.
Subscribe to The American Prospect

A second, quite surprising finding from cognitive research is that many early representations are extremely powerful and prove very difficult to change. It is as if, in the first years of life, the mind/brain becomes engraved with a certain scheme or frame by which it apprehends parts of experience. Often this scheme is seen as inadequate, and so educators inside and outside of school seek to transform the initial engraving. They may well feel that they have been successful in bringing about this transformation because the student has acquired more information, especially more facts. Yet, in a majority of cases, even good students at good schools do not really alter their representations. Indeed, when students are examined outside the scholastic context, they often give the same answers as students who have not even studied the subject matter or discipline in question. It is as if school consists of layers of powder that obscure rather than alter the initial engraving; and once that powder has blown away, the original representations have changed very little.

The “smoking gun” demonstration of robust mental representations occurs in physics. Even college students who have done well in written tests of mechanics actually hold on to understandings that are close to those offered by young school children. Their mental representations remain unschooled. Far from being restricted to physics, however, such misconceptions prove to be the rule across the curriculum. Whether the discipline is another science, mathematics, social studies, the humanities, or the arts, the first mental representations formed early in life turn out to be quite enduring. Only in those cases where students have been deeply involved with a topic over the course of months, or even years, is there convincing evidence that a new, better, and more adequate mental representation has come about.

If one wants to educate for genuine understanding, then, it is important to identify these early representations, appreciate their power, and confront them directly and repeatedly. Only then is it possible, in a reliable manner, to construct more adequate mental representations that themselves become robust and enduring.

As we have already emphasized, technologies alone cannot identify—let alone achieve—central educational goals. That is the task of the community, and it is hardly an easy or idle one. Stimulated by reflections on the cognitive revolution, we propose here two important educational goals:

* the encouragement of deeper forms of understanding within and across the disciplines; and
* the “opening up” of the educational process to the widest spectrum of children, especially those who do not stand out in the traditionally canonical intelligences of language and logic.

WHY STUDY ANY PARTICULAR DISCIPLINE OR CONTENT?

Why study anything we teach in school? That is a question we must ask of all schooling, whether or not technologically enhanced. Some disciplines we readily deem worthy of attention. History, for example, offers us a laboratory for the study of past human experience in which to anchor our perceptions of contemporary life and the future. Why study the American Civil War or any particular battle? If, for example, we believe that knowledge of the American Civil War helps students to understand many of the tensions in our nation today, then particular battles warrant inclusion insofar as they advance understanding of specific aspects of the war or the study of history in general.

Traditionally, American history curricula include the battle fought at Sharpsburg, Maryland, on September 17, 1862, on account of its military and political significance. (Revealing the still charged nature of the encounter, even today northerners call this battle Antietam, while to southerners it remains the battle of Sharpsburg.) The facts are these: the Union army, under the command of George B. McClellan, stalked Robert E. Lee’s Confederate army as it moved to invade the North to get food and supplies. Both armies converged just outside the town of Sharpsburg and engaged in what turned out to be the worst one day of slaughter in American history. Although neither side could claim a decisive victory, Lee’s first invasion of the North had failed, and no longer did it seem possible that England would recognize the Confederacy. Indeed, the very goals of the conflict changed when Lincoln seized the occasion to announce the Emancipation Proclamation, linking freedom for the slaves to the war goals.

Most textbooks present this material in such straightforward form. They may well provide an illustration or two. They generally convey the impression that there is a single, authoritative view of the battle, and, depending upon the background of the authors, often relate the battle from the perspective of either the North or the South. Assessments generally ask students to give back this information in factual form. Such a style of presentation and assessment is particularly appropriate for individuals who favor linguistic modes of learning. And such presentations rarely challenge the widespread assumption among students that there is a single objective account of a battle and that the Civil War featured a battle between Right and Wrong.

In what follows, we describe a CD-ROM design, Antietam/Sharpsburg, that transcends the usual textbook account. (Full disclosure: One of us, Shirley Veenema, co-designed the CD with James Sheldon.) First, Antietam/Sharpsburg recognizes and allows us to take advantage of the fact that intelligences of one student can differ from intelligences of other students in significant ways. And, second, it strives to inculcate deeper forms of understanding and attempts to deal directly with misconceptions and stereotypical habits of thought.

Our example reflects our belief that applications of the new technologies should provide ways for a variety of minds to gain access to knowledge, but in no way are we jettisoning the major rationale for including history in a liberal education. Indeed, effective use of the technology reinforces both senses of the word discipline: Students should apprehend the major focus of thinking involved in a discipline like history and should do so in a steady, cumulative, and inherently disciplined way. Our example suggests ways in which new media might help students to approach an important historical event and to achieve deeper forms of understanding of that event.

CAN TECHNOLOGY ENHANCE UNDERSTANDING?

The CD-ROM Antietam/Sharpsburg uses accounts and representations from eyewitnesses to tell the story of the battle and offers a close-up view of the physical site and artifacts. Carefully selected primary source material in a variety of media highlights the idea that our knowledge of this battle comes from the representations left us by observers who encoded their impressions in specific symbolic forms, such as the written journalism of the time, photographs, drawings, and telegraph and signal reports.

Different observers saw particular aspects of the battle. George W. Smalley, correspondent for the New York Tribune, started the day near a cornfield where the fighting started and then moved on to several other sites, including General McClellan’s headquarters. Felix Gregory de Fountaine, the correspondent for the Charleston Courier, identified his position as “upon the centre” where he could see little or nothing of the fight upon the left. Our contemporary narrative is constructed from the physical representations left us by observers like these. No single observer could see the whole battle and tell us the comprehensive story or give us one authoritative interpretation of what happened.

The idea that there exists a singular perspective is surprisingly hard to change. In fact, too often the seductive idea that there is a “right” view leads students to readily embrace the perspective of any perceived authority—teacher, textbook, or “expert”-instead of realizing that students themselves need to weigh the evidence, evaluate sources, and come up with interpretations and justifications. In Antietam/Sharpsburg, an emphasis on multiple observers counters head-on the idea that there is a single interpretation and one “right” dramatic narrative.

Technologies like CD-ROM that are capable of presenting both pictorial and textual renderings of a battle from several perspectives can help to dissolve single-dimensional perspectives; they counter the bias toward a single narrative for history and good guy versus bad guy roles in a conflict. As we noted earlier in our discussion of cognitive representations, such stereotypical ways of thinking impede deeper understandings and prove hard to change. Consequently, they need to be addressed directly. The variety of approaches and media now available may, in fact, provide fertile opportunities to eradicate these and other common misconceptions that are formed early in a student’s life.

The reality of a battle is also far more complex than what we typically see in the movies, or what nineteenth-century audiences saw in paintings and prints that showed orderly ranks of soldiers responding to the directions of their leader. Often on horseback, the leader apparently knew exactly where they were to go and gallantly led forward his obedient and patriotic forces. In reality, battles are typically chaotic, life-and-death situations, fought by individuals pumped high with adrenaline. It is a rare post-battle account that can capture this complexity.

As in any battle, geography played a role at Sharpsburg: Cornfields offered no cover for troops battling back and forth; hills offered advantageous positions for Southern troops holding off Northern troops attempting to cross a stream; and an old roadway sunken from erosion and the weight of wagons provided a natural trench from which Confederates could train their rifles on Union troops. Moreover, troops on both sides had yet to accommodate their maneuvers to opponents’ newly advanced weaponry. Most strategic information was communicated by word of mouth or notes; signal flags and the telegraph carried news of the smoke-enshrouded conflict to George McClellan and the Union troops.

The multiple media of a technology like CD-ROM make possible complex renderings of an event, but particular understandings need to be a design priority. For example, photographic sequences and text that “walk” the battlefield in Antietam/Sharpsburg are designed to help students understand the relationship of the geographic terrain to strategies and course of the battle. In decoding telegraph reports that convey a sense of just how hard it was to know what was going on during the battle, students may realize how difficult it was to communicate under fire, and why there were so many missteps and conflicting messages.

CAN TECHNOLOGY OPEN UP EDUCATION TO MORE STUDENTS?

What observers reported at Sharpsburg went far beyond sheer physical location. While we can’t know what any observer actually thought, the form of representation and symbol system used by each witness profiles a characteristic way of thinking. Reporters from the New York Tribune and the Charleston Courier used words to fashion strikingly different descriptions of events, actions, and personalities. Alfred Waud, the artist who did pencil and chalk sketches for Harper’s Weekly, drew aspects of the conflict in which he paid careful attention to the nuances of soldiers’ positions and facial expressions. The signal officers did more than just wave flags to encode messages; by the force and speed of their motions, they conveyed to those far away the pace and tension of the battle.

If we believe that the mind is neither singular nor revealed in a single language of representation, our use of technologies should reflect that understanding. Technologies like CD-ROM that include a variety of media may well be able to help more students form rich representations of an event and cultivate deeper understandings. However, it is unrealistic to expect this to happen by simply adding more information and more media. Instead, our authoring has to have the explicit goal of greater access for more students, and we need ways to assess what and how they have learned.

The guided paths in Antietam/Sharpsburg provide one example of what such authoring might be like. There are four paths, ranging from structured to exploratory, for learning about the battle: map, observers, battlefield walk, and archives and activities. None relies exclusively on language, and each instead provides several means of representing the battle. The “map” path uses a collage presentation of photographs, historical images, text, and audio to present an overarching narrative of the battle and suggests some of the reasons why the battle was important in the war.

The “observers” path uses physical representations left by the eyewitnesses to convey details of events from multiple perspectives. At any point it is possible to leave both the map and observers paths in order to browse additional related material and then return to the presentation.

Some people may find the ebb and flow of battle to be incomprehensible without a walk through the landscape to trace out the movements of troops at each site. By means of virtual reality movies, the “battlefield walk” path in Antietam/Sharpsburg allows one to “walk” the sites and learn things about the battle that can be understood only by experiencing the landscape. Through photographs assembled as motion sequences, it is possible to feel what it was like to fight in the dense tangle of trees in the North Woods or what it was like to look over the hill at the approaching enemy from the Sunken Road.

Like the other paths, the “archive and activities” path provides different modes of interacting with the material—this time with only one’s own direction. There are options to browse the image, text, or reference archives. Here, too, the goal is to help more students know an event in its complexity, in ways that encourage richer mental representations and forms of understanding. For unless students have opportunities to learn in ways compatible with their variety of minds, school will continue to benefit only students who are strong in traditional linguistic and logical ways of thinking.

HOW CAN WE KNOW WHAT STUDENTS LEARN?

Students who understand the battle at Sharpsburg should be able to show this understanding in several ways. Some students might use language to argue, question, and make connections to other battles, other units of study, and their own lives. Others might explain the course of the battle and thereby show that they have worked out a narrative story. Students might also display their understandings by means other than words. They might put on a play, make a series of sketches or a short video, compose martial or funereal music, or portray the battle in signal or Morse code. They could even use several media to publish a page on the World Wide Web.

As more students use virtual environments like CD-ROM, we must be resourceful in providing ways for students to demonstrate what they have learned. We cannot assume that these new media are better-or, for that matter, worse-than more traditional modes. Rather, we must search for direct evidence that students more fully appreciate the need to take into account multiple perspectives, the partially subjective nature of interpretation, and the risks of a simplistic “good/bad” interpretation of complex events. New technologies provide avenues for demonstrating these understandings; but producing assessments that differentiate genuine from surface understanding constitutes a significant challenge.

We also need to think critically about the risks and benefits of products like Antietam/Sharpsburg. For example, students might seem engaged but understand little because their response reflects more an attraction to the medium than an understanding of the battle. Interpretation may become overly subjective and relativistic in the absence of canonical text. Additionally, working extensively with one battle requires time, which means sacrificing coverage of other relevant aspects of the war.

On the other hand, such mediated experiences may enable students to engage rich, textured material in ways that give a more rounded understanding. They may also be encouraged to think more creatively and critically by encountering material and mastery that goes beyond summary text. Structures like guided walks can minimize media meanderings or cul-de-sacs. In fact, an experience that encourages understanding in a closed environment like a CD-ROM may ultimately benefit students more than unlimited access to unstructured information on the Internet. The CD-ROM might help students develop a search strategy for the Internet, one based on information needed to further their understanding of some particular aspect of the battle or war. One student might use the American Memory collections at the Library of Congress, for example, to see how Alexander Gardner’s photographs of the battlefield at Sharpsburg compared with his earlier work; another might want to read soldiers’ letters from the battlefield.

But beyond a specific technology like CD-ROM, we need to think about any technology in relationship to our educational goals. For how we use our technology is but one way students will learn to value deeper forms of understanding and find ways to use their own abilities. For example, how we use an application like Antietam/Sharpsburg will depend on whether our goals are to teach historical reasoning, to allow individuals to make sense of original sources, to sensitize students to the radically different perspectives of various observers and various participants, to appreciate analogies for the battle of Antietam (for example, contemporary Bosnian battlefields), or to explore the relationship of traditional historical texts to a television series such as The Civil War by Ken Burns and fictional works like Gone With the Wind. Unless educators are clear about these goals and their own priorities, the technology will becoming a tool of obfuscation rather than clarification.

Unlike some spheres of society, few ideas in education are wholly new. There have always been educators who have sought to enhance student understanding, educators who have tried to understand the minds of all of their students, and educators who have exploited the latest technology. By the same token, none of the aims we have outlined depend specifically on CD-ROM technology. The ingenious teacher of times past could make available different perspectives of an event, use various media of representation, and even lead students through a real or imagined trek across the battlefield.

Yet sometimes a series of quantitative differences can yield a qualitative difference. New multimedia work, such as the CD-ROM we have described, may enable ordinary students to gain an understanding that may have been accessible only in the extraordinary classroom in years past. Moreover, the actual procedures used in such a mediated presentation—for example, the guided walk, the ready shift across perspectives—may stimulate the development of new mental representations that can be used in the study of other topics, even when a CD-ROM may not be available.

To be sure, the technology in itself cannot spawn a revolution in educational approaches or results. Even as it was possible in earlier days to have a rounded understanding of the Sharpsburg battle, it would be possible tomorrow to use the CD-ROM to pursue quite banal goals, such as a comparison of the facts that are provided in the different written reports. Here teachers’ favored forms of assessment give away the game: It matters enormously whether a well-crafted unit on the battle of Antietam culminates in an objective multiple-choice test, a straightforward request to recite or narrate the principal events of the battle, or the posing of a provocative comparison to be discussed in essay form. It is even possible to fashion more ambitious and adventurous forms of assessment, such as the creation of a multimedia work of art that captures the response to Alexander Gardner’s photographs, or a teaching lesson for younger students using Antietam/Sharpsburg. These more adventurous forms give maximum opportunities for students to draw on their own distinctive blend of intelligences, thereby both giving them new venues for demonstrating their understandings and broadening the ensemble of possibilities for their peers and their teachers.

Nearly every serious student of contemporary education agrees that we need to make concerted efforts to reach a greater proportion of youngsters with a variety of intellectual strengths and styles, and that the education we offer them should proceed from the mastery of facts to the capacity to understand and interpret. These more ambitious goals do not themselves depend upon the cognitive revolution, but the cognitive revolution has stimulated a better understanding of how students learn as well as the production of more effective educational materials.

European and Asian countries routinely surpass the United States in educational accomplishments, not because their technology is more glitzy, but because the educational enterprise is taken more seriously. Technology in itself cannot alter our scholastic trade deficit. But by reorienting our educational mission and judiciously designing and using technology that meshes with that mission, the United States—and other nations—can achieve far more success with much larger numbers of students. The approach we have described represents one of a growing number of promising innovations that can be readily put into practice and rigorously assessed—and even enjoyed for their intellectual and sensory pleasures.

http://www.nobleednews.com/what_is_the_theory_of_multiple_i.htm
nobleednews.com

Biological Basis

Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences is based

on the premise that each individual’s intelligence is composed of multiple “intelligences,” each of which has its own independent operating system within the brain. These intelligences include: verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist.

The verbal-linguistic intelligence is the use of both written and spoken language for the purpose of communication. Those possessing the verbal-linguistic intelligence are sensitive to the meanings, sounds, and rhythms of words. They love reading, poetry, tongue twisters, puns, humor, puzzles, and riddles.

The logical-mathematical intelligence is the use of abstract

relationships presented in terms of either numbers or symbols. It also includes the use of logic and analysis in the sense of logically organizing an essay or analyzing poetry. Those possessing the logical-mathematical intelligence enjoy number games, problem solving, pattern games, and experimenting. They also do well with writing that involves exposition, argumentation, definition, classification, and analysis.

The spatial intelligence is the manipulation of objects within a given space, whether that space is the size of a piece of paper, a room, a building, or a town. Those possessing the spatial intelligence respond to visual cues and they like to invent and design.

The bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is the ability to use the body effectively to solve problems. Those possessing the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence enjoy dramatics, role-playing, dancing, and physical _expression.

The musical intelligence is the ability to make use of the relationship between pitch, rhythm, and timbre. Those

possessing the musical intelligence enjoy playing instruments, singing, and drumming, and they like the sounds of the human voice, environmental sounds, and instrumental sounds. It has been described as hearing patterns.

The interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand the thoughts, beliefs, and intents of others and the ability to respond appropriately. Those possessing the interpersonal intelligence are social and are in tune with the feelings of others. They make excellent leaders, can help their peers and work cooperatively with others.

The intrapersonal intelligence is a sense of self-awareness used to guide individual behavior. Those possessing the intrapersonal intelligence like to work independently. They are self-motivated and self-aware.

The naturalist intelligence is an understanding of the natural world and the ability to use that understanding productively. Those possessing the naturalist intelligence can recognize and classify elements from the natural world (e.g. farming or biological science).

The exact combination of intelligences varies from person to person. For example, one person might be strong in the verbal-linguistic and interpersonal intelligences with secondary strengths in the intrapersonal, spatial, and musical intelligences and weaknesses in the logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, and naturalist intelligences. Another person could have an entirely different combination of intelligences. Each person’s makeup of intelligences is very similar to DNA; no one has exactly the same combination of intelligences.

Gardner’s criteria for selecting these particular abilities as intelligences include: independence from other intelligences (within the brain); having a central set of information-processing operations; having a distinct developmental history; having roots in evolutionary history; and having a cultural basis. When Gardner says that intelligences are independent, he is referring to separate sections of the brain that control each intelligence and have distinct methods of processing information. According to an article by Tina Blythe and Gardner, each intelligence has its own “distinct mode of thinking.”

Gardner’s research with brain-injured adults and with autistic children has indicated that the human brain has separate areas that control separate functions. For example, Gardner described a woman who suffered a brain injury and lost the ability to speak, yet she maintained her ability to sing. This example shows that the verbal-linguistic intelligence functions separately from the musical intelligence.

Gardner makes a distinction between the isolation of each

intelligence within the structure of the human brain and the

isolation of the intelligences when called upon to complete real-world operations. Intelligences do not work independently of one another in a real-world setting.  According to the theory, most tasks require the simultaneous use of several intelligences in order to be completed successfully. Bruce Torff offers the example of a chess player who must use logic and spatial skills to plan ahead and figure out moves and must also use interpersonal skills to figure out the opponent’s defense and plan of action. The intelligences are separate entities which operate in conjunction with each other to create the whole of each individual’s ability.

Learn more about the multiple Intelligences –

http://www.TheWritingTutor.biz/articles/MI-intro-prob.php

References

Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple intelligences: Seven ways to approach curriculum. Expanded Academic ASAP [on-line
database]. Original Publication: Educational Leadership, 52
(3).

Blythe, T., & Gardner, H. (1990). A school for all
intelligences. Educational Leadership, 47 (7), 33-37.

Campbell, L., Campbell, B., & Dickinson, D. (1992). Teaching and learning through multiple intelligences. Stanwood, WA: New Horizons for Learning.

Checkley, K. (1997). The first seven … and the eighth: A
conversation with Howard Gardner. Expanded Academic ASAP [on-line database]. Original Publication: Education, 116.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple
intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1995a). Multiple intelligences as a catalyst.
English Journal, 84 (8), 16-18.

Gardner, H. (1995b). Reflections on multiple intelligences:
Myths and messages. Expanded Academic ASAP [on-line
database]. Original Publication: Phi Delta Kappan, 77 (3).

Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1990). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences (Tech. Rep. No. 4). New York: Center for Technology in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 324 366).

Gray, J. H., & Viens, J. T. (1994). The theory of multiple
intelligences: Understanding cognitive diversity in school.
Expanded Academic ASAP [on-line database]. Original
Publication: National Forum, 74 (1).

Meyer, M. (1997). The GREENing of learning: using the eighth intelligence. Wilson Select [on-line database]. Original Publication: Educational Leadership, 55.

Moll, A. (n.d.). Kentucky Department of Education. Multiple intelligences self profile [WWW]. URL:
www.kde.state.ky.us/MI/misurvey.html  (Accessed September 29, 1998).

Reiff, J. C. (1996). Bridging home and school through multiple intelligences. Expanded Academic ASAP [on-line database]. Original Publication: Childhood Education, 72 (3).

Smagorinsky, P. (1991). Expressions: Multiple intelligences in the English class. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Smagorinsky, P. (1995b). Multiple intelligences in the
English class: An overview. English Journal, 84 (8), 19-26.

Torff, B. (1996). How are you smart?: Multiple intelligences
and classroom practices. The NAMTA Journal, 21 (2), 31-43.

Michele R. Acosta is a writer, a former English teacher, and the mother of three boys. She spends her time writing and teaching others to write. Visit http://www.TheWritingTutor.biz/articles   for more articles,
http://www.TheWritingTutor.biz/writing_editing_service  for
professional writing and editing services, or
http://www.TheWritingTutor.biz   for writing and educational resources for young authors, teachers, and parents.
Copyright (c) 2004-2005 The Writing Tutor & Michele R. Acosta. All rights reserved.

http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/howard-gardner-more-than-multiple-intelligences-1678
teachingexpertise.com

Howard Gardner will forever be associated with his theory of multiple intelligences. Charles Dietz discovers that the Hobbs professor in cognition and education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education has a lot more to say on the nature of giftedness.

Howard Gardner has mixed news for the would-be genius: we can’t all be exceptional – but we can still learn a lot from those who are. Indeed, he believes it is the duty of educators to draw their students’ attention to the lives of exceptional individuals. In his book Extraordinary Minds he examines the lives of four such individuals, seeking to understand the nature of genius and draw lessons for the rest of us.

A science of extraordinariness

Over the last 30 years Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences or MI has gained great influence in the education community.

Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences

*Bodily kinaesthetic: used for touch and reflex.
*Interpersonal: used for communicating with others.
*Intrapersonal: used for self-discovery and analysis.
*Linguistic: used for reading, writing and speech.
*Logical mathematical: used for maths, logic and systems.
*Musical: used for rhythm, music and lyrics.
*Visual spatial: used for visualisation and art.>
*Naturalistic: for classifying and making sense of the natural world.

Some believe that this championing of non-academic forms of intelligence has helped create the delusion that everyone is a genius.

But this is to misrepresent his approach. With MI theory he is egalitarian, seeking to broaden our concept of talent, so that all students are given an opportunity to excel. At the same time he has devoted much time to case studies of exceptional individuals. He has been motivated partly by a fascination with the small percentage of individuals who stand out from their peers and have a profound affect on the world. But he also has the aim of establishing rules from which everyone can learn – a science of extraordinariness. In doing so he attempts to steer a middle course between two opposing points of view: that geniuses are a species apart or that they are completely indistinguishable from the rest of us.

The development of genius

Gardner argues that we must see genius as a dynamic relationship between three factors:

*the individual, with his or her talents
*the domain – a discipline, with its particular rules, within which individuals express their talents
*the field, or the persons who judge the individual’s work

He recognises that nature, environment and luck all contribute to genius. Mozart was clearly neurologically well equipped to learn music, but he would not have become so exceptional without the support of his music-loving parents and a receptive cultural environment. Einstein had the luck to be around at the right time – if he had been born 50 years before, the state of scientific knowledge would not have allowed him to make his revolutionary breakthroughs.

Gardner finds that most geniuses come from backgrounds where parents encourage work and discipline. Genius normally requires hard work over a long period, with at least 10 years spent mastering a domain and another ten spent working on the problems that will establish a person’s exceptionality.

However, there are exceptions to this rule. Prodigies usually appear in domains such as music, maths or chess, which contain definite rules and where the development of subtle personality skills is unnecessary. The opportunities provided by the emergence of new domains, such as software or the internet, are another exception. However, Gardner rejects the idea that genius is merely the product of hard work, arguing that ‘only those with talent are likely to practice for thousands of hours’.

Gardner stresses the importance of role models, the company of equally talented individuals and contact with the domain in which an individual’s talent lies: ‘Extraordinariness is most likely to emerge if aspiring individuals are exposed to extraordinary models; ponder the lessons embodied in those models; and have the opportunity to enact critical practices in a relatively protected setting.’

Lessons for the non-genius

Gardner is suspicious of courses that claim to teach genius, especially in the space of a weekend. He is also critical of the attempt to emulate the surface characteristics of exceptional persons, such as the ability to do with little sleep. However, he does have advice to offer us. We can’t all have the creative genius of Mozart or the insight of Virginia Woolf but we can make changes that positively affect our own and other people’s lives – and if we want to do this we can learn from three habits of mind common to the extraordinary individuals he has studied:

*Reflecting: taking time for ‘regular, conscious consideration of the events of daily life, in the light of longer-term ambitions’
*Leveraging: extraordinary people are characterised by an ability to recognise their strengths and make use of them. All of us can make breakthroughs based on making use of our unique strengths.
*Framing: ‘the capacity to construe experiences in a way that is positive in a way that allows one to draw out lessons’. Here the idea is not to look on the bright side of a setback but to learn how to proceed differently in future. Gardner invites us to reflect on the effect that making one such discovery a week could have over the course of a few years.

Humane extraordinariness

Gardner admits that extraordinariness may not be completely desirable. The focus that geniuses bring to bear on their work may have negative consequences for those who are close to them. Furthermore, genius may not necessarily be used for the good, as the examples of Hitler, Stalin and Mao should remind us. In light of this, another of Gardner’s principle aims in studying exceptional individuals is to learn how we can unite talent and a sense of responsibility to create ‘humane extraordinariness’.

The extraordinary minds that Gardner focuses on in his book epitomise four basic areas of human activity:

*Mozart – the master: a creator who produced brilliant work in his chosen domain
*Freud – the maker: an innovator who created a completely new domain
*Virginia Woolf – the introspector: a writer who brilliantly explored the inner life
*Gandhi – the influencer: a man whose words and deeds continue to inspire many other individuals long after his death.

These individuals, despite their flaws (eg Freud’s tyrannising of his followers and Gandhi’s cold treatment of his wife), all stand as examples of ‘human extraordinariness’. Gardner calls upon educators to bring such examples to the attention of students, and ends with the wish that, despite his aim to ‘describe rather than prescribe’, the stories of these lives can also inspire.

Extraordinary Minds: Portraits of Exceptional Individuals and an Examination of Our Extraordinariness, Phoenix, 1998, ISBN 0465021255

http://www.earlychildhoodnews.com/earlychildhood/article_view.aspx?ArticleID=251
earlychildhoodnews.com
By Connie Hine

Current research on the brain, learning and human intelligence from a variety of disciplines, including medicine, cognitive sciences, and education has provided information with profound implications to education. This research is challenging and stretches the traditional approaches to education and teaching, particularly with regard to the ability to learn, human intelligence, and how efficient learning occurs.

Intelligence—What Is It?
The traditional theory of intelligence has two fundamental assumptions:

1.       that human cognition is unitary; and

2.       that individuals can be adequately described as having a single, quantifiable intelligence.

The traditional theory of intelligence has helped create a mindset or paradigm as to what “smart” or “intelligent” is, who has potential or ability to be smart, and how we can or cannot become smart. This has clearly influenced current educational practices. It is still common educational practice to use the score from standardized intelligence tests to qualify children for various special programs. It is assumed these tests measure intelligence accurately and meaningfully.

Current research indicates that the only limit to one’s intelligence is what the individual believes is possible and how his or her behaviors either foster or limit his or her intelligence. Research also indicates that intelligence is not a static structure that can be measured and meaningfully quantified, but an open, dynamic system that can continue to develop throughout life. Through his work and studies, Reuven Feuerstein, an Israeli psychologist and educator, has developed a theory of the “Modifiability of Intelligence.” He has linked the importance of how teachers, through facilitating learning experiences, impact the quality of learning and influence the potential intelligence of each student. Feuerstein’s educational approach focuses on the quality of interaction between the teacher and the learner, which he calls Mediated Learning Experiences (MLE). He has successfully demonstrated how, through systematic and planned enrichment, intelligence can be modified, expanded, and developed. (Feuerstein, 1988).

Marian Diamond, a neuropsychologist at the University of California-Berkeley, has discovered that the human brain can change and improve with use. Diamond’s theory of the “Plasticity of the Brain” implies that environmental conditions, interpersonal stimulation, and the way in which individuals think and behave actually change the body, brain, and intelligence. (Diamond, 1988).

The Theory of Multiple Intelligences
Supporting the new paradigm of intelligence, Howard Gardner of Project Zero at Harvard University has determined that intelligence is a pluralistic phenomenon, rather than a static structure with a single type of intelligence. Gardner defines intelligence as:

* the ability to solve problems that one encounters in real life;
* the ability to generate new problems to solve;
* the ability to make something or offer a service that is valued within one’s culture. In his cross-cultural exploration of the ways in which people are intelligent, he has identified seven distinct types of intelligences:
o Verbal/Linguistic
o Logical/Mathematical
o Musical
o Visual/Spatial
o Body/Kinesthetic
o Interpersonal
o Intrapersonal

According to Gardner’s theory, one form of intelligence is not better than another; they are equally valuable and viable (Gardner, 1983). Yet, he discovered that different cultures are biased towards and against certain types of intelligences. Our western, North American culture, for instance, favors verbal/linguistic and logical/mathematical intelligences and tends to undervalue others, such as body/kinesthetic intelligence. These biases, added to the traditional theory of intelligence, have limited our development of curricula, instructional strategies, and current methods of assessment-including how we measure intelligence.

Recent brain/mind research and new theories of human intelligence redirect our attention in three specific areas-first, on the environmental conditions and messages we provide children; second, on the kind of support and relationships we develop between caregivers, educators, and children; and third, on the need to match what we know about the ways kids are intelligent and learn with teaching strategies designed to maximize the full development of each individual child.

A Useful Model
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences theory is a very useful model for developing a systematic approach to nurturing and teaching children and honoring their individual needs and strengths within a classroom setting. The theory of Multiple Intelligences includes the notion that each person is smart in all seven types of intelligence. Every person is smart to varying degrees of expertise in each of the intelligences, stronger in some ways and less developed in others. Heredity and genetics influence the way the brain is neurologically “wired” before birth and are contributing factors that determine the strongest and/or most favored types of intelligence. This is often seen in children with very strong and overt talents demonstrated at very young ages, such as Mozart, who had started to play and compose music by age five.

Because research now shows that we can become more intelligent in more ways, both students and teachers can become more adept in all seven intelligences. This is possible by providing a planned cycle of experiences and opportunities which foster each and every intelligence, and by making these opportunities available to every child in our classrooms. By broadening our view of intelligence, and valuing and nurturing abilities other than mathematics and reading, we can open doors by using the strengths of children as a means of complementing their less developed areas.

Characteristics of Multiple Intelligences
The following descriptions can be helpful to identify basic personal characteristics, traits, behaviors, and preferences for each of the seven intelligences. Remember, we are all intelligent to varying degrees in all seven ways. Each person has a unique profile. You may be very strong in one or two intelligences, medium in a few, and perhaps weak or empty (not yet filled) in one or two. Consequently, you may have four or five intelligences that are equally developed and two that are less developed. The important thing is to identify and build on one’s strengths to modify and increase the less developed intelligences in ourselves and in children.

1) Verbal/Linguistic Intelligence—”The Writer/Orator/Attorney”
People with high verbal/linguistic intelligence love words. They prefer to process information through words and language versus pictures. They may prefer oral or written methods, or excel in both. Additional characteristics include the following:

* Sensitive to the meaning, order, and sound of words
* Uses varied language
* Avid talkers; good speakers
* Likes to explain, convince, and persuade through words
* Enjoys and excels at word games
* Enjoys listening to, telling, and reading stories
* Enjoys rhymes and poetry
* Has good memory recall for names and dates

2) Logical/Mathematical Intelligence—”The Scientist/Philosopher”
People with high logical/mathematical intelligence create order out of chaos by analyzing, grouping, and categorizing. They recognize relationships, connections, and patterns more easily than people with less logical intelligence. Additional characteristics include the following:

* Ability to handle long chains of reasoning
* Likes reasons for doing things
* Possesses good inductive and deductive reasoning
* Quick to learn equivalencies
* Asks “why” and “how” questions
* Solves problems rapidly
* Likes to predict, analyze, and theorize
* Enjoys dealing with abstraction
* Strong at math and problem solving skills
* Sequential thinker
* Enjoys board games and games with rules

3) Musical Intelligence—”The Entertainer/Musician”
People with high musical intelligence learn best through sound, rhythm, and music. These people learn better when music is playing and through musical metaphors. Additional characteristics include the following:

* Ability to perceive pitch, tone, and rhythmic pattern
* Well developed auditory sense and discrimination
* Ability to create, organize rhythmically, and compose music
* Picks up and creates melodies/rhythm easily
* Remembers songs easily
* Ability to sing or play instruments
* Sensitive and drawn to sounds
* Possesses “schemas” for hearing music
* Constantly humming, tapping, and singing

4) Visual/Spatial Intelligence—”The Architect/Engineer/ Sculptor”
People with high visual intelligence process information best using pictures, visuals, and imagery. They have a sense of direction and an ability to think and plan in three dimensions. Additional characteristics include the following:

* Ability to create complex mental images
* Active imagination
* Ability to find their way mentally and physically around environment
* Ability to see the physical world accurately and translate it into new forms
* Ability to see things in relationship to others
* Ability to use “mind maps”
* Uses imagery and guided visualizations
* Likes visual support-video, pictures, photos, charts, posters
* Organizes space, objects, and areas
* Enjoys designing and decorating

5) Body/Kinesthetic Intelligence—”The Athlete/ Dancer/Actor/Surgeon”
People with high kinesthetic intelligence process information through their bodies-through muscle, sensation, and movement. Their bodies are their avenue to learning and understanding any content or subject and is also their preferred form of self-expression. Additional characteristics include the following:

* A fine-tuned ability to use the body and handle objects (fine and gross motor)
* Ability to express emotions through bodily movement
* Enjoys physical movement and dance
* Constant movement-likes to get up and move around
* Commitment to comfort
* Uses body to accomplish a task
* Experiences a strong mind/body connection
* Expands awareness through the body
* Experiences a total physical response
* Often good at creative drama

6) Interpersonal Intelligence—”The Counselor/Minister/Teacher”
People with high interpersonal intelligence process information through relatedness to others. They are “people” people. It is in relationship to and with other people that they best understand themselves and the world. Additional characteristics include the following:

* Ability to notice and discern subtleties among others, such as moods, temperaments, and feelings
* Discerns underlying intentions, behavior, and perspectives
* Easily makes friends and enjoys the company of others
* Ability to get into the perspective of another
* Responds to verbal and nonverbal communications-facial cues and body movements
* Recognizes and empathizes with others’ feelings
* Ability to negotiate and handle conflict resolution
* Works cooperatively in a group
* Works well with a diverse group of people
* Good communication skills
* Loves to talk and influence

7) Intrapersonal Intelligence—”The Poet/Efficiency Expert”
People with high intrapersonal intelligence have a strong sense of themselves, their wants, and needs. They are self reflective and in touch with themselves. They may be the nonconformist individuals who march to their own drummer. Additional characteristics include the following:

* Well developed sense of self
* Awareness and expression of different feelings
* Self reflection and mindfulness
* Ability to think about thinking (i.e., metacognition)
* Transpersonal sense of self. Asks big questions—”Why are we here?” and “What happens when we die?”
* Often is a daydreamer
* Often writes introspectively including prose, poetry, or journal writing
* Excellent self planners and good at goal setting
* Enjoys solitude and likes to think alone
* Good understanding of strengths and weaknesses
* Enjoys self discovery

Teaching Tools and Strategies
Reflect on and identify your own strengths and intelligences which are less developed. Identify the strengths and “empties” of the children, too. You may begin to notice patterns and correlations between the strengths you enjoy or are less comfortable with in the children and your own strengths and empties. Are the children’s strengths the same as yours or are they most intelligent in a way you are least intelligent? We naturally rely on and use teaching strategies that match our strongest intelligences. Our strengths, therefore, create unconscious teaching biases. When we identify our own less developed intelligences, we may notice that we are untrained in or have avoided using the teaching strategies best designed for developing that intelligence in children. Therefore, it becomes our responsibility first to identify our own strengths and weaknesses and then to stretch and continue our lifelong learning process by developing our own intelligences. Only then can we incorporate teaching strategies which support all seven intelligences and meet the needs of all children.

Environmental Strategies to Support Multiple Intelligences
Because circle time and whole group instruction activities dictate that we do the same thing with all or most of the children at the same time, these activities are among the least effective strategies for meeting the diverse needs and intelligences of young children. Group activities often favor a teacher’s strengths while meeting the strengths of only a few of the children. The most significant modification we can make to meet diverse needs is to reduce the use of circle time and replace it by incorporating and using well-planned learning stations or centers where children can spend most of their day. Learning stations are temporary activity locations where materials are put out and later put away, usually by an adult. Learning centers are permanent locations, visually and spatially defined areas, ideally three-sided, where materials are organized by subject and available for children to select independently.

Active Learning Centers for Multiple Intelligences

The following suggested learning centers foster the development of each intelligence and allow children opportunities to build on and expand their strengths.

Verbal/Linguistic
Library or book-nook

Story time

Writing center

Listening center

Flannel board station

Publishing center

Logical/Mathematical
Math center

Science center

Take-apart center

Puzzle center

Recycling center

Weather station

Computer center (e.g., logical thinking, sequential software)

Cooking center

Musical
Music center

Instrument center

Singing circle

Listening center

Background music

Nature sounds

Visual/Spatial
Art center (e.g., sculpting dough, collage, painting, drawing)

Manipulatives (e.g., 3-D manipulatives, visual puzzles)

Block center, Media center (e.g., videos, slides, photos, charts)

Computer center (e.g., visual design and layout software)

Kinesthetic
Gross motor center (e.g., open space for creative movement, climbing structure, mini-trampoline) Dance circle

Woodworking center

Manipulative center

Take-apart center

Imaginative-play center

Playground/outdoor play

Tactile-learning center (e.g., sandpaper letters, sample textures and cloth)

Interpersonal
Puppet theater

Dramatic play center

Sharing/social area

Group discussion area

Small group area

Cooking center

Intrapersonal
Lofts

One-person centers & stations

Life skills/self-help center

Computer center (e.g., self-paced software)

Conclusion
Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences honors and promotes the development of all seven avenues of intelligence in young children. This approach provides a framework to identify how children learn; to build on their strongest assets; to help them become more intelligent by exposing them to a variety of ways of learning; to better individualize for their interests and needs; and to use teaching strategies that make learning more efficient, successful, and enjoyable for all children. We can foster meaningful learning experiences by using multiple teaching tools and strategies and by building positive, supportive relationships with children. Through environments that offer a variety of stimulating, hands-on materials that children individually select, and by creating learning centers that provide natural opportunities to move, be active, and fully engaged in either solo or small group experiences, we better serve and meet the needs of more children.

Connie Hine is an educational consultant, professional speaker, trainer, and author of Engaging Young Learners: The Teacher’s Role in Early Childhood Classrooms. She can be reached at 800-565-3707.

References
Armstrong, T. (1993). Seven kinds of smart. Los Angeles: Jeremy Tarcher, Inc.

Campbell, B. (1994). The multiple intelligence handbook. Stanwood WA: Campbell & Associates, Inc.

Campbell, L., Campbell, B.; Dickenson, D. (1992).Teaching and learning through multiple intelligences. Seattle: New Horizons in Learning.

Diamond, M. (1988). Enriching heredity: The impact of the environment on the anatomy of the brain. New York: The Free Press.

Feuerstein, Reuven, Rand & Rynders (1988). Don’t accept me as I am: Helping “retarded” people to excel. New York: Plenum Press.

Feuerstein, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Lazear, D. (1994). Multiple intelligence approach to assessment: Solving the assessment conundrum. Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press.

Lazear, D. (1994). Seven pathways of learning. Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press.

Sternberg, R. (1988). The triarchic mind. New York: Viking.

Teaching Tools and Strategies

The following are activities and strategies that can help us strengthen and support the development of each of our intelligences. When we begin systematically to implement these multiple strategies to teach any subject, concept, or activity, we will naturally meet the individual needs of more children. As Colin Rose states, “The more ways you teach, the more people you reach.”

Verbal/Linguistic Activities
Reading, Improving vocabulary, Emergent /creative writing, Writing and reading reports/essays, Taking and giving dictation, Giving and listening to verbal instructions (oral and/or written), Lecturing o Impromptu speaking, Story telling, Dialogue and discussion, Debate, Publishing, Telling jokes, Listening to tapes, Doing crossword puzzles, Keeping a diary or journal

Logical/Mathematical Activities
Sorting and classifying objects or ideas, Taking apart or fixing things, Solving math problems, Solving mysteries, riddles, puzzles, and word problems, Exploring, Outlining, Grouping and calculating activities, Creating timelines and sequences, Comparing and contrasting, Experiences that demonstrate change over time (e.g., before/after), Using symbols and formulas, Playing pattern games, Socratic questioning-especially open-ended and “what if” questions

Musical Activities
Listening to background, instrumental, or environmental music, Unison recall activities, Giving or listening to musical performances, Singing, Clapping and slapping memory games, Rhythm, chants, and rap, Setting new ideas to familiar tunes, Using musical instruments, Composing music

Body/Kinesthetic Activities
Role playing/drama, Playing sports, Playing physical games such as Pictionary™ or Charades, Dancing, Miming, Using physical gestures, Physical exercise, “Hands-on” activities, Changing seats and moving to different learning stations/centers, Creating new room rearrangements, Standing or moving while listening, Learning a topic or idea with a physical gesture associated, Taking things apart and tinkering, Finger writing on palms or back

Visual/Spatial Activities
Using guided imagery, Playing with patterns and designs, Mind-mapping, Taking pictures/photos, Drawing/painting/sculpting, Watching and making videos, Creating charts and graphs, Using color cues and organizers, Circle/line dancing, Changing teaching locations, Rearranging the room to suit the subject or project, Giving or taking visual/spatial instructions

Interpersonal Activities
Cooperative learning, Working with a partner, Group projects and games, Creative drama/role playing, Simulation, Practicing empathy, Win/win competition, Peer teaching and buddy systems, Subject drills with partners, Quizzing each other, Discussion, Getting and giving feedback

Intrapersonal Activities
Guided imagery, Thinking about how to solve a task/problem, Meditation, Journal writing, Self assessment, Personal contracts and goal-setting, Silent reflection and review time for recall or thinking about what has been learned, Emotional processing, Focusing/concentrating, Higher-order reasoning tasks, Time to be alone, Providing choices