Multiple Intelligences
Dr. Tuçe ÖZTÜRK KARATAŞ
Introduction
• A feature of language learning classrooms is the diversity of
learners who are often studying in the same class.
• Diversity refers to the many ways in which learners may differ
from one another.
• differ in their motivations for learning English, their beliefs
about how best to learn a language, the kinds of strategies
they favor, and their preference for different kinds of teaching
methods and classroom activities.
• “one size fits all,”
• Learners are viewed as possessing individual learning styles,
preferences, and strategies
• these influence how they approach classroom learning and
the kinds of learning activities they favor or learn most
effectively from.
• Pedagogy is hence assumed to be more successful when
these learner differences are acknowledged, analyzed for
particular groups of learners, and accommodated in
teaching.
• movements or approaches as individualized instruction,
autonomous learning, learner training, and learner strategies
• Gardner (1993) proposed a view of natural human talents
that is labeled the “Multiple Intelligences Model.”
• Multiple Intelligences (MI) refers to a learner-based
philosophy that characterizes human intelligence as having
multiple dimensions that must be acknowledged and
developed in education.
• Gardner notes that traditional IQ tests measure only logic
and language, yet the brain has other equally important
types of intelligence.
• Gardner argues that all humans have these intelligences, but
people differ in the strengths and combinations of
intelligences.
• All of them can be enhanced through training and practice.
• MI thus belongs to a group of instructional
perspectives that focus on differences
between learners and the need to
recognize learner differences in teaching.
Gardner originally posited eight native “intelligences,” which are
described as follows:
1. Linguistic: the ability to use language in special and creative ways,
which is something lawyers, writers, editors, and interpreters are
strong in.
2. Logical/mathematical: the ability to think rationally, often found
with doctors, engineers, programmers, and scientists.
3. Spatial: the ability to form mental models of the world, something
architects, decorators, sculptors, and painters are good at.
4. Musical: having a good ear for music, as is strong in singers and
composers.
5. Bodily/kinesthetic: having a well-coordinated body, something
found in athletes and craftspersons.
6. Interpersonal: the ability to be able to work well with people, which
is strong in salespeople, politicians, and teachers.
7. Intrapersonal: the ability to understand oneself and apply one’s
talent successfully, which leads to happy and well-adjusted people in
all areas of life.
8. Naturalist: the ability to understand and organize the patterns of
• He later suggested a ninth intelligence —
existential intelligence - “a concern with
philosophical issues such as the status of
mankind in relation to universal existence.
Armstrong (1999) introduced the following convenient memory
tags for each intelligence:
1. Linguistic intelligence: “word smart”
2. Logical/mathematical intelligence: “number/reasoning smart”
3. Visual/spatial intelligence: “picture smart”
4. Bodily/kinesthetic intelligence: “body smart”
5. Musical intelligence: “music smart”
6. Interpersonal intelligence: “people smart”
7. Intrapersonal intelligence: “self smart”
8. Naturalist intelligence: “nature smart”
9. Existentialist intelligence: “existence smart”
• All learners are believed to have personal
intelligence profiles - so-called “MI profiles” -
that consist of combinations of different
intelligence types and for some intelligences to
be more highly developed than others, hence
favoring a particular approach to learning.
Approach
1. Theory of language
• MI theory was originally proposed by Gardner (1993)
as a contribution to cognitive science.
• a framework for rethinking school education.
• Applications of MI in language teaching have been
more recent,
• MI theory lacks some of the basic elements that
might link it more directly to language education.
• One issue is the lack of a concrete view of how MI
theory relates to any existing language and/or
language learning theories, though attempts have
been made to establish such links (e.g., Reid 1997;
Christison 1998).
• MI proposals look at the language of an individual, including
one or more second languages, not as an “added on” and
somewhat peripheral skill but as central to the whole life of
the language learner and user.
• In this sense, language is held to be integrated with music,
bodily activity, interpersonal relationships, and so on.
• Language is not seen as limited to a “linguistics” perspective
but encompasses all aspects of communication.
2. Theory of learning
• Language learning and use are obviously closely linked to what
MI theorists label “Linguistic Intelligence.”
• However, MI proponents believe there is more to language
than what is usually subsumed under the rubric linguistics.
• There are aspects of language such as rhythm, tone, volume,
and pitch that are more closely linked, say, to a theory of music
than to a theory of linguistics.
• Other intelligences enrich the tapestry of communication we call
“language.”
• In addition, language has its ties to life through the senses.
• The senses provide the accompaniment and context for the
linguistic message that give it meaning and purpose.
• A multisensory view of language is necessary, it seems, to construct
an adequate theory of language as well as an effective design for
language learning.
• Therefore, the theory of learning might be termed holistic, since we
learn through all of our senses.
• One way of looking at the learning theoretical argument is to
apply the logic of the single factor (g) model to the Multiple
Intelligences model.
• The single factor model correlates higher intelligence (+g) with
greater speed and efficiency of neural processing;
• The higher the g factor in the individual, the greater the speed and
efficiency of that individual's brain in performing cognitive
operations (Gottfredson 1998: 3).
• If there is not just one I (that is, not one “intelligence”) but several
I’s, then one can assume that the speed and efficiency of neural
processing will be greatest when a particular I is most fully
exercised;
• If a language learner has a high musical intelligence, that person
will learn most quickly (e.g., a new language) when that content is
embedded in a musical frame.
Design
Objectives
• There are no goals stated for MI instruction in linguistic
terms.
• MI pedagogy focuses on the language class as the
setting for a series of educational support systems
aimed at making the language learner a better
designer of his or her own learning experiences.
• Such a learner is both better empowered and more
fulfilled than a learner in traditional classrooms.
• A more goal-directed learner and happier person is
held to be a likely candidate for being a better second
language learner and user.
The Syllabus
• Also, there is no syllabus respecting to MI-based language teaching, although
an MI perspective can combine with virtually any approach or method.
• However, there is a basic developmental sequence that has been proposed
(Lazear 1991) as an alternative to what we have elsewhere considered as a
type of “syllabus” design.
• The sequence consists of four stages:
1. Stage 1: Awaken the Intelligence. Through multisensory experiences -
touching, smelling, tasting, seeing, and so on ~ learners can be sensitized to
the many-faceted properties of objects and events in the world that
surrounds them.
2. Stage 2: Amplify the Intelligence. Students strengthen and improve the
intelligence by volunteering objects and events of their own choosing and
defining with others the properties and contexts of experience of these
objects and events.
3. Stage 3: Teach with/for the Intelligence. At this stage the intelligence is
linked to the focus of the class, that is, to some aspect of language learning.
This is done via worksheets and small-group projects and discussion.
4. Stage 4: Transfer of the Intelligence. Students reflect on the learning
experiences of the previous three stages and relate these to issues and
challenges in the out-of-class world.
Types of learning and teaching
activities
• MI has been applied in many different types of classrooms.
• There are eight self-access activity corners, each corner built around one of
the eight or nine intelligences.
• Students work alone or in pairs on intelligence foci of their own choosing.
• NicholsonNelson (1988: 73) describes how MI can be used to individualize
learning through project work, and lists five types of projects:
1. Multiple intelligence projects. These are based on one or more of the
intelligences and are designed to stimulate particular intelligences.
2. Curriculum-based projects. These are based on curriculum content areas
but are categorized according to the particular intelligences they make
use of.
3. Thematic-based projects. These are based on a theme from the
curriculum or classroom but are divided into different intelligences.
4. Resource-based projects. These are designed to provide students with
opportunities to research a topic using multiple intelligences.
5. Student-choice projects. These are designed by students and draw on
particular intelligences.
• Some suggest that the use of MI profiles enables teachers to
select activities that match learners’ profiles. For example
(Berman 2002):
1. Linguistic intelligence: word-building games
2. Logical/mathematical intelligence: logical-sequential
presentations
3. Visual/spatial intelligence: mind maps –
4. Bodily/kinesthetic intelligence: relaxation exercises
5. Musical intelligence: jazz chants
6. Interpersonal intelligence: brainstorming
7. Intrapersonal intelligence: learner diaries
8. Naturalist intelligence: background music in the form of sounds
created in the natural world
Learner roles
• Learners should engaged in a process of personality development
above and beyond that of being successful language learners.
• The MI classroom is one designed to support development of the
“whole person,’
• become more well-rounded individuals and more successful
learners in general.
• Learners are encouraged to see their goals in these broader terms.
• Learners are typically expected to take an MI inventory and to
develop their own MI profiles based on the inventory.
• “The more awareness students have of their own intelligences and
how they work, the more they will know how to use that intelligence
[sic] to access the necessary information and knowledge from a
lesson” (Christison 1997: 9).
• All of this is to enable learners to benefit from instructional
approaches by reflecting on their own learning.
Teacher roles
• Teachers construct curriculum and improve themselves as
educators.”
• Teachers are expected to understand, master, and be
committed to the MI model.
• Teachers then become curriculum developers, lesson
designers and analysts, activity finders or inventors, and,
most critically, orchestrators of a rich array of multisensory
activities within the realistic constraints of time, space, and
resources of the classroom.
• Teachers are encouraged not to think of themselves merely
as language teachers.
• They have a role that is not only to improve the second
language abilities of their students but also to become major
“contributors to the overall development of students’
intelligences” (Christison 1999: 12).
The role of instructional materials
• Where MI is richest is in proposals for lesson
organization, multisensory activity planning, and in
using realia.
• MI requires significant creativity on the part of the
teacher
• It may not always be possible to find appropriate
activities in published materials.
• Thus, one of the challenges of MI is extensive
planning and the time necessary to prepare
appropriate classroom activities.
Procedure
Conclusion
• Multiple Intelligences was one of a number of learner-centered initiatives
• learners are unique and to developing instruction to respond to this uniqueness.
• MI is one of a set of such perspectives dealing with learner differences and
borrows heavily from these in its recommendations and designs for lesson
planning.
• It offers a new rationale both for the selection of existing language teaching
activities and for the design of activities to reflect particular intelligences in the
MI inventory.
• The literature on MI provides a rich source of classroom ideas regardless of
one’s theoretical perspective and can help teachers think about instruction in
their classes in unique ways.
• Some teachers may see the assumptions of identifying and responding to the
variety of ways in which students differ to be unrealistic in their own settings
and antithetical to the expectations of their students and administrators.
• There have been, however, entire schools as well as language programs that
were restructured around the MI perspective.
• In order to justify the claims of MI in education and in second language
teaching, the success of these innovations will need to be more fully evaluated.
