The theory of multiple intelligenceswas proposed by American Psychologist Howard Gardner in 1983. It describes nine types of intelligence: Spatial, Linguistic, Logical-mathematical, Bodily-kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, Naturalistic, and Existential.
Of the schools implementing Gardner’s theory, the most well-known is New City School, in St. Louis, Missouri, which has been using the theory since 1988. Traditionally, schools have emphasized the development of logical intelligence and linguistic intelligence (mainly reading and writing). IQ tests focus mostly on those areas as well.
Gardner argues that there is a wide range of cognitive abilities, and that there are only very weak correlations among them. For example, the theory predicts that a child who learns to multiply easily is not necessarily generally more intelligent than a child who has more difficulty on this task. The child who takes more time to master simple multiplication 1) may best learn to multiply through a different approach, 2) may excel in a field outside of mathematics, or 3) may even be looking at and understanding the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level, or perhaps as an entirely different process. Such a fundamental understanding can result in what looks like slowness and can hide a mathematical intelligence potentially higher than that of a child who quickly memorizes the multiplication table despite possessing a less detailed understanding of the process of multiplication.
The theory has been met with mixed responses. Traditional intelligence tests and psychometrics have generally found high correlations between different tasks and aspects of intelligence, rather than the low correlations which Gardner’s theory predicts. Nevertheless many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.
The Logical-mathematical area has to do with logic, abstractions, reasoning and numbers and critical thinking. While it is often assumed that those with this intelligence naturally excel in mathematics, chess, computer programming and other logical or numerical activities, a more accurate definition places less emphasis on traditional mathematical ability and more on reasoning capabilities, recognizing abstract patterns, scientific thinking and investigation and the ability to perform complex calculations.
Spatial intelligence deals with spatial judgement and the ability to visualize with the mind’s eye. Careers which suit those with this type of intelligence include artists, designers and architects. A spatial person is also good with puzzles. The Linguistic area has to do with words, spoken or written. People with high verbal-linguistic intelligence display a facility with words and languages. They are typically good at reading, writing, telling stories and memorizing words along with dates. They tend to learn best by reading, taking notes, listening to lectures, and by discussing and debating about what they have learned. Those with verbal-linguistic intelligence learn foreign languages very easily as they have high verbal memory and recall, and an ability to understand and manipulate syntax and structure.
The core elements of the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are control of one’s bodily motions and the capacity to handle objects skillfully. Gardner elaborates to say that this intelligence also includes a sense of timing, a clear sense of the goal of a physical action, along with the ability to train responses so they become like reflexes. In theory, people who have bodily-kinesthetic intelligence should learn better by involving muscular movement (e.g. getting up and moving around into the learning experience), and are generally good at physical activities such as sports or dance. They may enjoy acting or performing, and in general they are good at building and making things.
They often learn best by doing something physically, rather than by reading or hearing about it. Those with strong bodily-kinesthetic intelligence seem to use what might be termed ‘muscle memory,’ drawing on it to supplement or in extreme cases even substitute for other skills such as verbal memory. Careers that suit those with this intelligence include: athletes, pilots, dancers, musicians, actors, surgeons, builders, police officers, and soldiers. Although these careers can be duplicated through virtual simulation, they will not produce the actual physical learning that is needed in this intelligence.
The Musical area has to do with sensitivity to sounds, rhythms, tones, and music. People with a high musical intelligence normally have good pitch and may even have absolute pitch, and are able to sing, play musical instruments, and compose music. Since there is a strong auditory component to this intelligence, those who are strongest in it may learn best via lecture. Language skills are typically highly developed in those whose base intelligence is musical. In addition, they will sometimes use songs or rhythms to learn. They have sensitivity to rhythm, pitch, meter, tone, melody or timbre.
The Interpersonal area has to do with interaction with others. Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand others. In theory, individuals who have high interpersonal intelligence are characterized by their sensitivity to others’ moods, feelings, temperaments and motivations, and their ability to cooperate in order to work as part of a group. According to Gardner, ‘Inter- and Intra- personal intelligence is often misunderstood with being extroverted or liking other people…’ Interpersonal intelligence means that one understands what people need to work well. Individuals with this intelligence communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and may be either leaders or followers. They typically learn best by working with others and often enjoy discussion and debate. Careers that suit those with this intelligence include sales, politicians, managers, teachers, counselors and social workers.
The Intrapersonal area has to do with introspective and self-reflective capacities. This refers to having a deep understanding of the self; what your strengths/ weaknesses are, what makes you unique, being able to predict your own reactions/emotions. Philosophical and critical thinking is common with this intelligence. Many people with this intelligence are authors, psychologists, counselors, philosophers, and members of the clergy. This area has to do with nurturing and relating information to one’s natural surroundings. Examples include classifying natural forms such as animal and plant species and rocks and mountain types; and the applied knowledge of nature in farming, mining, etc. Careers which suit those with this intelligence include naturalists, farmers and gardeners.
Some proponents of multiple intelligence theory proposed spiritual or religious intelligence as a possible additional type. Gardner did not want to commit to a spiritual intelligence, but suggested that an ‘existential’ intelligence may be a useful construct. The hypothesis of an existential intelligence has been further explored by educational researchers. The skills of such a person would include the ability to contemplate phenomena or questions beyond sensory data, such as the infinite and infinitesimal. Careers or callings which suit those with this intelligence include shamans, priests, mathematicians, physicists, scientists, cosmologists, psychologists and philosophers.
Gardner (1999) 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.’ 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.’
Traditionally, schools have emphasized the development of logical intelligence and linguistic intelligence (mainly reading and writing). Upon doing well on these tests, chances of attending a prestigious college or university increase, which in turn creates contributing members of society. While many students function well in this environment, there are those who do not.
George Miller, the psychologist credited with discovering the mechanisms by which short-term memory operates, wrote in ‘The New York Times Book Review’ that Gardner’s argument boiled down to ‘hunch and opinion.’ Gardner’s subsequent work has done very little to shift the balance of opinion. A recent issue of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law devoted to the study of intelligence contained virtually no reference to Gardner’s work. Most people who study intelligence view M.I. theory as rhetoric rather than science, and they are divided on the virtues of the rhetoric.
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word ‘intelligence’; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word ‘intelligence’ whenever other people have traditionally used words like ‘ability.’ Defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus broader definition more accurately reflects the differing ways in which humans think and learn. They would state that the traditional interpretation of intelligence collapses under the weight of its own logic and definition, noting that intelligence is usually defined as the cognitive or mental capacity of an individual, which by logical necessity would include all forms of mental qualities, not simply the ones most transparent to standardized I.Q. tests.
Some of these 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. However, he added a disclaimer that he has no fixed definition, and his classification is more of an artistic judgment than fact. Gardner argues that by calling linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities intelligences, but not artistic, musical, athletic, etc. abilities, the former are needlessly aggrandized. Certain critics balk at 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.’
Andreas Demetriou suggests that theories which overemphasize the autonomy of the domains are as simplistic as the theories that overemphasize the role of general intelligence and ignore the domains. He agrees with Gardner that there indeed are domains of intelligence that are relevantly autonomous of each other. In fact, some of the domains, such as verbal, spatial, mathematical, and social intelligence are identified by most lines of research in psychology. However, in Demetriou’s theory, one of the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, Gardner is criticized for underestimating the effects exerted on the various domains of intelligences by processes that define general processing efficiency, such as speed of processing, executive functions, working memory, and meta-cognitive processes underlying self-awareness and self-regulation. All of these processes are integral components of general intelligence that regulate the functioning and development of different domains of intelligence.
Thus, it is argued that the domains are to a large extent expressions of the condition of the general processes. At the same time, the domains may vary because of their constitutional differences but also differences in individual preferences and inclinations. Moreover, their functioning both channels and influences the operation of the general processes. Thus, one cannot satisfactorily specify the intelligence of an individual or design effective interventions programs unless both the general processes and the domains of interest are evaluated.
The Daily Omnivore 
Leave a Reply