MI

Multiple Intelligences Theory

?
with regard to Special Education

Chondra Malson, cohort 2005

Donna Robinson-Daughtery,
cohort January 2006
Caroline Tham, cohort 2005
Tara Van Geons, cohort 2007

Research Problem

The emergence of Multiple Intelligence

(MI) Theory is being promoted as an
effective intervention in the classroom, yet
there is little empirical evidence to support
the theorys efficacy.

What is the status of your

research?

Many journal articles were found supporting MI

theory as an intervention.

There are several school districts (Chicago and

Arlington) that are implementing the theory
directly in their curriculum and pedagogy.

However, there was a lack of empirically based

research.

What the non-empirical

articles say

Particularly with special education:

If MI theory is implemented on a large scale in both regular and special

education, it is likely to have some of the following effects:

Fewer referrals to special education

A greater emphasis on identifying strengths and perhaps try to supplant
standardized diagnostic measures
Increase student self-esteem
Increase understanding and appreciation of students (making sense of
individual differences, tolerance, understanding, and appreciation of
special needs students)

Modified from The Theory of Multiple Intelligences

http://spannj.org/publications/theory_of_multiple_intelligences.htm

What the empirical

research stated

Noble, T. (2004, January). Integrating the revised Bloom's

taxonomy with multiple intelligences: A planning tool for
curriculum differentiation. Teachers College Record,
106(1), 193-211.

16 teachers from kindergarten to 6th

grade employed a Multiple
Intelligence/Revised Blooms Taxonomy
matrix to plan curriculum units for work
for learning centers.

Both Quantitative and

Qualitative Methods Were
Employed
Whole staff focus group discussions conducted each

school term QUALITATIVE

Teaching team interviews QUALITATIVE

Two open-ended principal questionnaire plus interviews

QUALITATIVE

Anonymous open ended teacher questionnaire completed

by all teachers QUALITATIVE

Researchers field diary QUALITATIVE

Results of Qualitative Study

73% of teachers perceived that MI theory

provided them with a tool for catering for
different students intellectual strengths or ways
of learning.

55% of teachers on the questionnaire commented

on how MI theory facilitated the students
awareness of how they learn best.

91% of the teachers wrote comments on the

questionnaire that indicated they perceived that
MI theory broadened their conceptualization of
how their students could be successful.

Summary

In summary teacher feedback on the

benefits of MI theory fell into three
interrelated categories. The teachers
perceived that, if they were catering for
different intelligences or strengths and
helping their students become more aware
of how best they and their classmates
learn, then they were providing more
opportunities for their students to achieve
and be successful.

 In Cobbs multi-site case study using four

Miami-Dade County elementary public schools
to discover the effect of MI theory in teaching
strategies on the reading achievement of fourth
grade students, the results showed significant
gains in their reading and behavioral skills
(2002).
However, the study sample only involved 12
students.

 A qualitative study using the action

research approach in the field of science to
prove the merit of making science teaching
more meaningful, engage teachers in
critical self-reflection, and to study the
action research approach, brought positive
results (Goodnough, 2000).
However, the study sample only involved 5
people, including the author.

Topics for Debate

What

type of research can be done

to support MI legitimately?
Is it a political issue?
Is it just great packaging?
Are they just Good Ideas?
Is it testable?

more Topics for Debate

How

do you measure the intelligences? Can

they even be measured?

Does

Gardners definition of intelligence

coincide with the historically accepted
definition of intelligence?

What

is intelligence? Why is it important? Are

Gardners intelligences even intelligences?

Research Plan?

There is not enough empirical research to

support the theory of multiple
intelligences.

Is MI theory testable?

What is the true definition of Multiple

Intelligences as related to the historically
acceptable definition of intelligence?

What is INTELLIGENCE
according to Howard Gardner?

According to Gardner (1999a), intelligence

is much more than IQ because a high IQ in
the absence of productivity does not equate
to intelligence.

In his definition, Intelligence is a

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
(Gilman, 2001, p.34).

The American Heritage Dictionary,

Standard Edition, offers the following
definitions of "intelligence."
1. a. The capacity to acquire and apply
knowledge. b. The faculty of thought and
reason. c. Superior powers of mind.

2. a. Theology. An intelligent, incorporeal

being, especially an angel. b. Intelligence.
Christian Science. The primal, eternal
quality of God.

American Psychological
Association (1995)

Individuals differ from one another in their

ability:
to
to
to
to
to

understand complex ideas;

adapt effectively to the environment;
learn from experience;
engage in various forms of reasoning; and
overcome obstacles by taking thought.

How is the intervention of MI being tested,

if at all?

Student achievement is being compared in before

and after methods with standardized tests
(particularly in Virginia).

The Teele Inventory of Multiple Intelligences is

used in many schools in Illinois.

Multiple Intelligence/Revised Blooms Taxonomy

matrix

Action research (qualitative)

Issues with the testing of

MI interventions

Classroom dynamic does not allow for MI strategies to

be implemented consistently

Students may not respond to the implementation

Diversity of students, teachers, and circumstances

No reliable tool for measurement and little empirical

evidence for validity

Does the Gardner definition have social

implications (either in the realm of special
education or social justice)?

In the article Be Careful of How You

Define Intelligence, Robert Sternberg of
Yale University explores the cultural
underpinnings of intelligence stating:
We cant assume that the cognitive skills we
value or label as intelligence are those valued
or labeled in another culture.

What educators and researchers are

saying about MI, Special Education,
and Social Justice

Multiple Intelligences theory is seen to be the best

answer to Social Justice issues. It provides a
framework to extend children who are talented and
gifted and also for children requiring assistance.
- Judy Perry, 1996

Conclusions

Gardner's examples of high levels of development in

the intelligences reflect his own value judgments.

He has in mind the achievements of selected poets,

composers, religious leaders, politicians, scientists,
novelists and so on.

It is Gardners value judgments, not his empirical

discoveries as a scientist, that are his starting point.
White, J. (2004)

Blamire and Fields (2006)

state that Gardners approach:

confuses a range of culturally valued

domains,

has replaced the rigidity of a single

criterion for educational success, i.e. IQ
has been replaced by judgments across a
number of intellectual areas, and

reflects that of a liberal curriculum.

Areas for Future Research

Gardner (1999a) favors gathering ethnographic

data and cross-cultural information to see
intelligence in action and in context (Gilman,
2001).

Other researchers suggest the need for valid and

reliable tools to measure MI interventions,

as well as the need for empirically based

research.

The Solution!

Without

g
There is no
INTELLIGENCE
Kavale, 2007

References
Azar, B. (n.d.) Be careful of how you define intelligence. APA Monitor. Retrieved July 10, 2007,
from http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/~reingold/courses/intelligence/cache/define.html
Blamires, M. & Field, S. (2006). Howard Gardner: The myth of Multiple Intelligence. Retrieved
July 10, 2007, from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/viewarticle2.aspx?contentId=12738
Cobb, B. (2002). The effect of multiple intelligences teaching strategies on the reading
achievement of elementary school students. Retrieved July 11, 2007 from www.lib.umi.com
/dissertations
Kavale, K. (2007). Interview regarding Multiple Intelligence Theory. Regent University. July 11,
2007.
Kolata, K. (2003) Increasing students' efficacy through the multiple intelligences: Promoting
diversity in the classroom. Indiana University South Bend. Retrieved July 10, 2007, from
http://www.iusb.edu/~journal/2001/kolata.html
Gardner, H. (1999a). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York:
Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999b, February). Who owns intelligence? Atlantic Monthly, 67-76.

continued.
Gilman, L. (2001). The theory of multiple intelligence. Human Intelligence. Retrieved July 10, 2007, from
http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/mitheory.shtml#definition
Goodnough, K. (2000). Exploring multiple intelligences theory in the context of science education: an action
research approach. Retrieved July 11, 2007 from www.questia.com
Leo D. Carl, International Dictionary of Intelligence (McLean, VA: Maven Books, 1990).
Mosert, M. (2007). Interview regarding Multiple Intelligence Theory. Regent University. July 11, 2007.
Noble, T. (2004, January). Integrating the revised Bloom's
taxonomy with multiple intelligences: A planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Teachers College
Record, 106(1), 193-211.
Perry, J. (1996). Multiple intelligence theory. Retrieved July 10, 2007, from http://cookps.act.edu.au/mi.htm
Vialle, W., Perry, J. "Nurturing Multiple Intelligence in Australian Classrooms" 1995.
White, J. (2004). Howard Gardner : The myth of Multiple Intelligences Lecture at Institute of Education
University of London, November 17 2004.
Wikipedia (n.d.). Intelligence. Retrieved July 11, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_(trait).