Multiple Intelligences

The theory of multiple intelligences was developed in 1983 by Dr. Howard Gardner, professor of education
at Harvard University. It suggests that the traditional notion of intelligence, based on I.Q. testing, is far too
limited. Instead, Dr. Gardner proposes eight different intelligences to account for a broader range of human
potential in children and adults. These intelligences are:

Linguistic intelligence ("word smart")

Logical-mathematical intelligence ("number/reasoning smart")
Spatial intelligence ("picture smart")
Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence ("body smart")
Musical intelligence ("music smart")
Interpersonal intelligence ("people smart")
Intrapersonal intelligence ("self smart")
Naturalist intelligence ("nature smart")

Dr. Gardner says that our schools and culture focus most of their attention on linguistic and logical-
mathematical intelligence. We esteem the highly articulate or logical people of our culture. However, Dr.
Gardner says that we should also place equal attention on individuals who show gifts in the other
intelligences: the artists, architects, musicians, naturalists, designers, dancers, therapists, entrepreneurs,
and others who enrich the world in which we live. Unfortunately, many children who have these gifts dont
receive much reinforcement for them in school. Many of these kids, in fact, end up being labeled "learning
disabled," "ADD (attention deficit disorder," or simply underachievers, when their unique ways of thinking
and learning arent addressed by a heavily linguistic or logical-mathematical classroom. The theory of
multiple intelligences proposes a major transformation in the way our schools are run. It suggests that
teachers be trained to present their lessons in a wide variety of ways using music, cooperative learning, art
activities, role play, multimedia, field trips, inner reflection, and much more (see Multiple Intelligences in the
Classroom). The good news is that the theory of multiple intelligences has grabbed the attention of many
educators around the country, and hundreds of schools are currently using its philosophy to redesign the
way it educates children. The bad news is that there are thousands of schools still out there that teach in
the same old dull way, through dry lectures, and boring worksheets and textbooks. The challenge is to get
this information out to many more teachers, school administrators, and others who work with children, so
that each child has the opportunity to learn in ways harmonious with their unique minds (see In Their Own
Way).

The theory of multiple intelligences also has strong implications for adult learning and development. Many
adults find themselves in jobs that do not make optimal use of their most highly developed intelligences (for
example, the highly bodily-kinesthetic individual who is stuck in a linguistic or logical desk-job when he or
she would be much happier in a job where they could move around, such as a recreational leader, a forest
ranger, or physical therapist). The theory of multiple intelligences gives adults a whole new way to look at
their lives, examining potentials that they left behind in their childhood (such as a love for art or drama) but
now have the opportunity to develop through courses, hobbies, or other programs of self-development
(see 7 Kinds of Smart).

How to Teach or Learn Anything 8 Different Ways

One of the most remarkable features of the theory of multiple intelligences is how it provides eight different
potential pathways to learning. If a teacher is having difficulty reaching a student in the more traditional
linguistic or logical ways of instruction, the theory of multiple intelligences suggests several other ways in
which the material might be presented to facilitate effective learning. Whether you are a kindergarten
teacher, a graduate school instructor, or an adult learner seeking better ways of pursuing self-study on any
subject of interest, the same basic guidelines apply. Whatever you are teaching or learning, see how you
might connect it with

words (linguistic intelligence)

numbers or logic (logical-mathematical intelligence)
 pictures (spatial intelligence)
music (musical intelligence)
self-reflection (intrapersonal intelligence)
a physical experience (bodily-kinesthetic intelligence)
a social experience (interpersonal intelligence), and/or
an experience in the natural world. (naturalist intelligence)

For example, if youre teaching or learning about the law of supply and demand in economics, you might
read about it (linguistic), study mathematical formulas that express it (logical-mathematical), examine a
graphic chart that illustrates the principle (spatial), observe the law in the natural world (naturalist) or in the
human world of commerce (interpersonal); examine the law in terms of your own body [e.g. when you
supply your body with lots of food, the hunger demand goes down; when there's very little supply, your
stomach's demand for food goes way up and you get hungry] (bodily-kinesthetic and intrapersonal); and/or
write a song (or find an existing song) that demonstrates the law (perhaps Dylan's "Too Much of Nothing?").

You dont have to teach or learn something in all eight ways, just see what the possibilities are, and then
decide which particular pathways interest you the most, or seem to be the most effective teaching or
learning tools. The theory of multiple intelligences is so intriguing because it expands our horizon of
available teaching/learning tools beyond the conventional linguistic and logical methods used in most
schools (e.g. lecture, textbooks, writing assignments, formulas, etc.). To get started, put the topic of
whatever youre interested in teaching or learning about in the center of a blank sheet of paper, and draw
eight straight lines or "spokes" radiating out from this topic. Label each line with a different intelligence.
Then start brainstorming ideas for teaching or learning that topic and write down ideas next to each
intelligence (this is a spatial-linguistic approach of brainstorming; you might want to do this in other ways
as well, using a tape-recorder, having a group brainstorming session, etc.). Have fun!

Use in education[edit]
Gardner defines an intelligence as "biopsychological potential to process information that can be
activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a
culture."[44] According to Gardner, there are more ways to do this than just through logical and
linguistic intelligence. Gardner believes that the purpose of schooling "should be to develop
intelligences and to help people reach vocational and avocational goals that are appropriate to their
particular spectrum of intelligences. People who are helped to do so, [he] believe[s], feel more
engaged and competent and therefore more inclined to serve society in a constructive way."[a]
Gardner contends that IQ tests focus mostly on logical and linguistic intelligence. Upon doing well on
these tests, the chances of attending a prestigious college or university increase, which in turn
creates contributing members of society.[45]While many students function well in this environment,
there are those who do not. Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader
vision of education, wherein teachers use different methodologies, exercises and activities to reach
all students, not just those who excel at linguistic and logical intelligence. It challenges educators to
find "ways that will work for this student learning this topic".[46]
James Traub's article in The New Republic notes that Gardner's system has not been accepted by
most academics in intelligence or teaching.[47] Gardner states that "while Multiple Intelligences theory
is consistent with much empirical evidence, it has not been subjected to strong experimental tests ...
Within the area of education, the applications of the theory are currently being examined in many
projects. Our hunches will have to be revised many times in light of actual classroom experience."[48]
Jerome Bruner agreed with Gardner that the intelligences were "useful fictions," and went on to state
that "his approach is so far beyond the data-crunching of mental testers that it deserves to be
cheered."[49]
George Miller, a prominent cognitive psychologist, wrote in The New York Times Book Review that
Gardner's argument consisted of "hunch and opinion" and Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein
in The Bell Curve (1994) called Gardner's theory "uniquely devoid of psychometric or other
quantitative evidence."[50]
In spite of its lack of general acceptance in the psychological community, Gardner's theory has been
adopted by many schools, where it is often conflated with learning styles,[51] and hundreds of books
have been written about its applications in education.[52] Some of the applications of Gardner's theory
have been described as "simplistic" and Gardner himself has said he is "uneasy" with the way his
theory has been used in schools.[53] Gardner has denied that multiple intelligences are learning styles
and agrees that the idea of learning styles is incoherent and lacking in empirical evidence.[54] Gardner
summarizes his approach with three recommendations for educators: individualize the teaching style
(to suit the most effective method for each student), pluralize the teaching (teach important materials
in multiple ways), and avoid the term "styles" as being confusing.[55]
Educational pedagogies, including Purpose Driven Education, have begun to tap into multiple
intelligence as a way to better understand the uniqueness and specific abilities of each individual.
These draw from the idea that each student is capable, and has a purpose.

Definition of intelligence[edit]
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of
the word "intelligence", but rather denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood,
and instead uses the word "intelligence" where other people have traditionally used words like
"ability" and "aptitude". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg,[22][23] Eysenck,[24] and
Scarr.[25] White (2006) points out that Gardner's selection and application of criteria for his
"intelligences" is subjective and arbitrary, and that a different researcher would likely have come up
with different criteria.[26]
Defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus a
broader definition more accurately reflects the differing ways in which humans think and learn.[27]
Some criticisms arise from the fact that Gardner has not provided a test of his multiple intelligences.
He originally defined it as the ability to solve problems that have value in at least one culture, or as
something that a student is interested in. He then added a disclaimer that he has no fixed definition,
and his classification is more of an artistic judgment than fact:
Ultimately, it would certainly be desirable to have an algorithm for the selection of an intelligence,
such that any trained researcher could determine whether a candidate's intelligence met the
appropriate criteria. At present, however, it must be admitted that the selection (or rejection) of a
candidate's intelligence is reminiscent more of an artistic judgment than of a scientific assessment.[28]
Generally, linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities are called intelligences, but artistic, musical,
athletic, etc. abilities are not. Gardner argues this causes the former to be needlessly aggrandized.
Certain critics are wary of this widening of the definition, saying that it ignores "the connotation of
intelligence ... [which] has always connoted the kind of thinking skills that makes one successful in
school."[29]
Gardner writes "I balk at the unwarranted assumption that certain human abilities can be arbitrarily
singled out as intelligence while others cannot."[30] Critics hold that given this statement, any interest
or ability can be redefined as "intelligence". Thus, studying intelligence becomes difficult, because it
diffuses into the broader concept of ability or talent. Gardner's addition of the naturalistic intelligence
and conceptions of the existential and moral intelligences are seen as the fruits of this diffusion.
Defenders of the MI theory would argue that this is simply a recognition of the broad scope of
inherent mental abilities, and that such an exhaustive scope by nature defies a one-dimensional
classification such as an IQ value.
The theory and definitions have been critiqued by Perry D. Klein as being so unclear as to
be tautologous and thus unfalsifiable. Having a high musical ability means being good at music while
at the same time being good at music is explained by having a high musical ability.[31]

IQ tests[edit]
Gardner argues that IQ tests only measure linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. He argues
the importance of assessing in an "intelligence-fair" manner. While traditional paper-and-pen
examinations favour linguistic and logical skills, there is a need for intelligence-fair measures that
value the distinct modalities of thinking and learning that uniquely define each intelligence.[8]
Psychologist Alan S. Kaufman points out that IQ tests have measured spatial abilities for 70
years.[38] Modern IQ tests are greatly influenced by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory which incorporates
a general intelligence but also many more narrow abilities. While IQ tests do give an overall IQ
score, they now also give scores for many more narrow abilities.[38]