MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCE EBOOK

adminComment(0)

Howard Gardner's brilliant conception of individual competence, known as Multiple Intelligences theory, has changed the face of education. Multiple Intelligences distills nearly three decades of research on Multiple Intelligences theory and practice, covering its central arguments. Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences. [Howard Gardner] -- A revolutionary challenge to the widely held notion that intelligence is a single general. Editorial Reviews. Review. "Whenever Howard Gardner focuses his synthesizing mind and vast eBook features: Highlight, take notes, and search in the book; In this edition, page numbers are just like the physical edition; Length: pages; Word Wise.


Multiple Intelligence Ebook

Author:KATHE DEFORREST
Language:English, Portuguese, Dutch
Country:Samoa
Genre:Business & Career
Pages:689
Published (Last):29.01.2016
ISBN:668-8-62976-809-6
ePub File Size:24.62 MB
PDF File Size:11.44 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Downloads:24761
Uploaded by: JANA

The most complete account of the theory and application of Multiple Intelligences available anywhereHoward Gardner's brilliant conception of. Among them is the theory of multiple intelligences, developed by Howard Gardner, Ph.D., Professor of Education at Harvard. University. Gardner's early work in. A Parent's Guide to Multiple Intelligences" Free from July 22 to July 31 Grab it now! Multiple IntelligencesFree EbooksParenting StylesParenting PlanParenting .

Read reviews that mention multiple intelligences musical intelligence frames of mind howard gardner different kinds kinds of intelligence theory of multiple logical-mathematical intelligence subject matter linguistic intelligence spatial and bodily-kinesthetic biological foundations melody or rhythm years ago exhaustive list anyone who wants different types gardners book read this book idea of multiple. Showing of 69 reviews. Top Reviews Most recent Top Reviews.

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later. Paperback Verified download. This book describes the theory of Multiple Intelligences MI and was written in by its developer: According to him, there is no such concept as 'intelligence' but many fields in which you can be more or less intelligent.

These 'intelligences' are basically seven: Each of them is developed to a certain degree in all human beings, except in those who are impaired due to an accident or a genetic disease. And these are particularly the cases that Gardner uses to prove his theory, by gathering data of individuals that, for example, in spite of being autistic, show an incredible musical talent or those individuals with meager abilities in most areas but display from early childhood an ability to calculate very rapidly and accurately.

Of course that this approach challenges the widely accepted in the US mostly IQ scores, because it shows that these tests focus only in one of the multiple intelligences,logical-mathematical in this case, and not all. So, they reach to a wrong conclusion of the individual's potential. This book does a great job of not only presenting the idea of intelligence transcending the IQ barrier, but also of presenting Gardner's concepts of intelligence, I would, however, expand the feild and add more intelligence types myself.

Though a bit of a technical read this is definitely worth the time. Everyone is a genius, Einstein taught us. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its life feeling defeated. That's the second half. And that's the essence of this work. These insights not only liberate us to our best gifts - it also teaches us how to create space for others to do the same.

Kindle Edition Verified download. A pretty clear exposition of the theory that time is but a human artifact and that we need to move beyond the concept to hope to understand the universe. Not dense but does require close reading. One person found this helpful. I started reading this book looking for ideas on an MS thesis. The original plan was to look at using Multiple Intelligence Theory to modify a classroom setting and improve student engagement. While I do not think this is practical for a Masters thesis after reading the book, it has provided me with great ideas and lead me to a much better research project than the original one.

Not really for the layman just wanting some good info. But interesting none the less. Excellent read that hits home on the important things in life. For several years I thought of things that are studied by the howard gardner " Frames of Mind" So far the book has been more than I expected, and makes parents think about what they have to teach their kids at home, and how to realize the different types of perspectives towards dealing with children.

A very important trait is the defenition of theory and hypothesis, intresting that the MI is known as a theory with so many people antagonizing with it. When you read the book you realize and understand a lot of reactions and the effect of your knoledge over their learning skills.

The book is oriented to teachers, but who could better teach our own children than us. See all 69 reviews. site Giveaway allows you to run promotional giveaways in order to create buzz, reward your audience, and attract new followers and customers.

Learn more about site Giveaway. This item: Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Set up a giveaway. Customers who bought this item also bought.

Page 1 of 1 Start over Page 1 of 1. New Horizons in Theory and Practice. The Unschooled Mind: Five Minds for the Future. Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. The Laws of Human Nature. Mind in Society. Customers who viewed this item also viewed. The Courage to Write: How Writers Transcend Fear.

Ralph Keyes. A Million Years in a Day: Greg Jenner. This Will Make You Smarter: John Brockman. There's a problem loading this menu right now. Learn more about site Prime. Get fast, free shipping with site Prime. Back to top. Get to Know Us. In Gardners Myths and Messages article, he went on to address messages that have been sent out concerning use of MI Theory in curriculum and real classroom environments that have bothered him.

The attempt to teach all concepts or subjects using all the intelligences. The belief that it suffices, in and of itself, just to go through the motions of exercising an intelligence. Multiple Intelligences 19 3.

The use of materials associated with an intelligence in the background. The use of intelligences primarily as mnemonic devices. The conflating of intelligences with other desiderata. The direct evaluation or even grading of intelligences, without regard to context or content.

MI Theory cannot always be used in every classroom, and if it is being used in all classrooms, it is probably not being used correctly. Educators realized that all their students learn differently and that we must consider that some of our students will be able to perform better in some areas than in others.

However, equality of Multiple Intelligences in the curriculum could be more harmful than good. If we go through a closer examination of what has been considered an equal application of intelligences, we discover that equal means diluting the intelligences to application of their lowest common denominator, then we must continue to evaluate, revise and seek other interpretations and solutions and not content ourselves with quick fixes or panaceas. Kassell, , p. Not long after Howard Gardner released his MI theory, people began to attack him because the intelligences could not be proven, and they could not be assessed.

In a response to Gardners criticizing critique of one of his papers, Robert. Sternberg addressed the unproven theory. Sternbergs studies related mostly to general intelligence and cognition. As mentioned previously Gardner felt that most people were proficient in one area or another and that intelligence was not general. One IQ score should not determine a childs educational future.

Multiple Intelligences for New Teachers

Educators have often attempted to account for the discrepancies between the abilities we see in students and end results such as grades or standardized test scores McClaskey, , p. Gardner does not disagree that there are some skills or traits that can be accurately measurable, but he also felt that these skills are only skimming the top of the full range of intelligence. There is a lot more to cognition than a few basic skills.

Gardner went on to say about cognition it is more concerned with a range of kinds of information, or, more precisely, separate contents, that simply cannot be collapsed into one intellectual heap p.

Thomas Armstrong thinks much the same as Sternberg and in his book Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom he said No test can accurately determine the nature or quality of a persons intelligence p. However, Armstrong does believe testing intelligence through paper and pencil tests would only be tapping into the logical and linguistic intelligences. Armstrong went on to describe what he thought to be the best method to determine intelligence, The best way to assess your own multiple intelligences, therefore, is through a realistic appraisal of your performance in the many kinds of tasks, activities, and experiences associated with each intelligence p.

He felt intelligences could only be fostered through real life experiences, and he suggested three factors that would influence intelligence development.

Gardner has also said on many occasions that all people possess all of the intelligences, but life events will determine which ones are nurtured. There has been significant research done in determination of which hemisphere of the brain is responsible for all life functioning. When the corpus callosum, or bundle of nerves connecting the two hemispheres, is severed the left hemisphere responds better to verbal, sequential, and linear processing while the right hemisphere is inclined toward nonverbal, spatial-visual, and simultaneous processing Campbell and Scott-Kassner, , p.

The authors of this previous passage do not find fault with Gardners theory and say that it could stand on its own, but that there may be some truth to intelligences falling in one hemisphere or another. Left-hemisphere processes are emphasized in linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences, while spatial intelligences reflects right-hemisphere excellence.

Musical intelligence is balanced by processes of both hemispheres, for it allows sequential left-brained processing through its perception of durational and pitch patterns and phrases, and simultaneous right-brain processing through its perception of various polyphonic textures, including harmony. The bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is the only emphasis that appears to stem more from the motor and sensory parts of the cortex than from either hemisphere in particular.

It would not go the extra step in showing if that person has a heightened ability in certain intelligences. So, it is apparent that even though individuals may show heightened acuity in one intelligence or another, it is close to impossible to determine which of Gardners intelligences they actually have.

Musical Intelligence In and Outside the Music Classroom When Gardner published his theory in the early eighties, music educators were very excited. To this day, those who teach music know there are students who perform exceptionally well in music, but may struggle in math, science, or even reading. It is, however, possible today that Gardners original theory of the musical intelligence is not being held true to form in classrooms, both musical and non-musical. Many schools are incorporating MI Theory into their curriculums and that has left many music educators wondering how they will incorporate all seven into their class, let alone foster the students who are musically intelligent.

In an article for the Music Educators Journal, Cathy Kassell said Music educators need to stop and reflect critically before applying the Multiple Intelligences theory and consider the integrity of music and learning in general p.

As educators we know that we can only make decisions that are best for our students when we have clear goals for their achievement. Gardner didnt think any less than this.

Kassell went on to say Armed with a philosophy of music education, music educators will then be better equipped to answer demands that are made on them by the public and administrators to include MI activities in their music programs p. Music tends to be used in several types of activities closely associated with MI Theory.

These activities usually tend to lessen the value of a proper music education. Simply singing a song to learn prepositions, multiplication tables, or the capitals of the states, is not an efficient use of the musical intelligence. In this case music is simply a tool for enhancing memory p. It is using music in a logical and or linguistic function.

As musicians we realizethat the material is not being taught through an application of musical intelligence p. Students are not learning the true meaning of the notes, the pitches, or patterns of the music. Kassell addressed the next activity, Writing the lyrics to songs to demonstrate ones understanding of the content of a lesson is a consistent suggestion from many sources for integrating the intelligences into the lessons , p.

Again, are students really fostering their musical intelligence, or just using music as an aide to foster linguistic intelligence? Students are not learning much about actual music, but examining patterns and writing new words. Music teachers for years have had students spell out words to help learn the names of the lines and spaces, but Kassell , p.

She said teachers think that students will be able to match the pitch patterns and then be able to spell the world back. Kassell said This is blatantly unmusical for several reasons. Labeling the keyboard using the entire alphabet can not only be confusing to students who are already familiar with the musical alphabet, but it is simply not an authentic musical experience , p.

There are too many questions and loopholes with this activity, and it would not only hurt the integrity of the musical intelligence, but could be harmful in fostering other intelligences as well. Kassell suggested that because of this that educators may need to look closely at whether some specific skills, whether they be music or something else, may not be able to be taught in a unit based on MI Theory. It is possible, however, that music educators can create units based on MI Theory.

Kassell said that links can be made that make use of music as a discipline and as a way of knowing, rather than making superficial connections that compromise integrity of a music program p.

Music educators can do this by simply going beyond teaching students how to play the music, but by really starting to have students examine the meaning behind the music, how and why the music was composed, and the theoretical components of compositions.

Many high school band and choral students leave high school with a limited knowledge of music, and only know how to sing, or to play there instruments. Many choral students leave high school not knowing how to read music.

Kassell also said that it was possible to have connections across the curriculum in which music was involved. She suggested activities in which students are asked to actively experience music through listening, creating, and improvising, or performing p. One example would be to have students examine music from different time periods and discuss how the music of the time period influenced the culture and social climate, and vice versa.

Another example would be to have students listen to music; examine the dynamics, the texture, as well as other elements and have them write a story to accompany the music. Students should be able to explain why their story goes with the song. This is reaching across curriculum and across MI Theory as well, fostering both students with musical and linguistic intelligences. It has been praised and attacked by educators, psychologists, and curricularlists since its inception.

Needless to say, most people cannot doubt the possibility of its existence, however, most will argue with the lack of assessment tools, it would be hard to apply in the classroom. I feel, however, as educators we take the possibility of MI Theory into account more often than not, even if it is not in the way Gardner would see fit. It helps us to see that all people are capable of success, even though they may not have made the best grades in high school, or they attended a vocational school.

All humans wish to be loved, feel accepted, and feel they are worthwhile. Thanks to Gardner, these individuals can have this feeling.

Multiple Intelligences 26 Chapter 3 Introduction It is apparent from the research that has been done that using Multiple Intelligence MI Theory in the classroom is a viable option for teachers looking for solutions to everyday classroom problems. Even though there are not tried and true assessments available that a determine the intelligences of students and b assess students based on their identified intelligence, there are things that teachers can do to help foster the intelligences of the students in their classrooms.

This study will examine the role MI Theory plays in getting students to perform better on everyday classroom assignments. When students either dont complete assignments, or do so poorly, this results in lowered scores, thus affecting their overall grade point average. Many excellent students have passed through my music class, a class that is not well loved by many, and try to squeak by, but end up with a bad grade. Another negative is that the student sometimes displays poor conduct when they are not interested or motivated to do daily assignments.

This in turn could distract other students who normally would have good behavior. Audience for Research The results of this study could appeal to a wide number of audiences.

First will be teachers in all subjects. If teachers can see results from even one small study, they may be willing to try out some MI techniques in their classrooms. In talking with colleagues it is apparent that motivation and achievement issues are being seen in all subjects. If teachers can see that by tweaking assignments just a little, this will improve achievement, then hopefully this study has done its job.

Another audience will be school administrators. By presenting the results to the administrators that will be either be a catalyst to help implement school wide MI Theory curriculum, or if the results dont show a positive correlation in favor of MI Theory, the administrators can continue to look for more ideas to help teachers.

I hope that at the end of this study that other teachers and administrators will be interested in trying out the MI Theory techniques in their schools and classrooms. Lastly, both students and their parents can benefit from the results of this study.

In the end, this study will be showing students where their intelligences are. This may guide students who may be undecided on a career path to start making decisions about their future, and it may guide parents in finding sources of motivation and encouragement for their child.

All individuals can benefit from knowing how Multiple Intelligences affect their overall learning and functioning. Significance of Multiple Intelligence Study This study is significant because it will help teachers see that all students are not the same and that they could learn the same material by doing different assignments or using different instructional techniques rather than everyone doing the same thing or using the same instructional techniques in all classes.

It is more how we think, than how we learn. If teachers can find ways to identify the intelligences of their students, it will help them in building a repertoire of activities and assignments to suit the needs of all students in the class. It is important to note that it would be near impossible to come up with a paper and pencil test for each of the intelligences, because by doing that you are limiting that to students that have strong linguistic skills.

At the end of this study I hope to be more aware of the intelligences of my students and will use that in planning activities and assignments.

It may require more work, but it will benefit the students in the long run. Students could benefit from the results of the study. If students are aware of their intelligences it may assist them in being able to complete assignments more efficiently. They can learn techniques that stimulate their intelligence domain and hopefully find ways to connect the techniques across the curriculum. Another significance of the study is that schools could use the information to see if further research could be conducted by implementing MI curriculums.

The results of this study should not be the sole basis for starting an MI curriculum based education, but it could be used as a basis for looking into the possibility of it. Teachers in schools that decided that MI curriculum is not the best fit for them could still use some of the ideas in their day to day classroom activities.

Research Methods and Design This study will use quantitative research methods. Seventy-three percent of the schools population participates in the free and reduced lunch program. I will be the only researcher conducting the study. The initial research will start with making students aware of the research that will be conducted. Students will be made aware that at no time will their names be used in the final draft of the research results. After making students fully aware of their participation, an intelligence survey Appendix A will be administered to all participating students.

The survey will consist of thirty-five statements in which students will identify whether a statement describes them or not. Because these students are still considered elementary age and to accommodate all IEPs I will read each statement to the class and clarify the meaning if needed.

Also the general population in each class, those that do not receive special education services, does contain a significant number of students who receive reading intervention through Response to Intervention services at the school. To ensure validity and reliability students will not score their own surveys.

The results will be reviewed to see how high students scored in what I will call the Big Five intelligence domains. The results will be documented and filed to be used to relate further data results to. I made the decision to re-teach a topic covered earlier in the year to help students prepare for upcoming school common assessments.

Both classes will receive a teacher designed lesson on rhythmic notation. Topics that will be covered in the lesson will be definitions of rhythm, beat, and time signature; values and symbols for whole, half, quarter, and eighth notes and rests; dotted rhythms; and, writing and performing rhythms. In the control class I will only be using the lecture method of instruction. I will be changing my instructional delivery method for the experimental class, using techniques that will appeal to the various Multiple Intelligences present in the class.

These students will receive a guide sheet that will help pace the instruction Appendix B. The visual students in the class will also be drawn to being able to see the note and rest symbols and the breakdown of the note tree. I will also be going over the sheet orally, which will appeal to the students with verbal intelligences in the class.

These students need to not only see and do things, but benefit from being able to hear it as well. Also by hearing how certain rhythmic note values sound, they may be able to apply that later on an assessment. For those with kinesthetic strengths, I will be doing an activity where we perform rhythms using different bodily movements kicks for quarter note, punches for eighth notes, etc.

This will get them up out of their chairs and let them think about musical notation in a way they may had not before. I determined that these techniques were reliable and valid by visiting the website for the group Innovative Teaching Concepts After each class receives the instruction they will take an a short ten question test that consists of nine multiple choice questions covering topics from the lesson and one question that has them write a short two measure rhythm in four four time.

This test will be worth points and I will be looking to see how students performed in each class. To prove my hypothesis, I will be looking for higher scores in my experimental class. In addition to the actual graded assignments, I will also be giving students a survey to see how well they liked the lesson and the delivery method in which it was taught.

In addition I will re-give the intelligence survey to see if I get similar results. At the conclusion of the study, I hope to see that there is a link to the students results on the intelligence surveys, the grade they received on the assessment, and the classes reactions to the instructional method lecture versus Multiple Intelligences. This will serve as the triangulation in this research project.

This project and research will take place over a course of several weeks due to the fact that students only come to music class once a week. This research project will not require a set budget. Normal classroom materials and departmental funds will be used for basic supplies such as making copies. Students will provide their own writing utensils.

All assignments will take place within related units of study Summary It is important to note that though results from this study will be important to me for future use in my classes, the study and results cannot be generalized.

This is because of the nature of the population and sample size. Also an important note is that it is possible that the results will not show any correlation at all. However, from this study I hope to learn the strengths and weaknesses in intelligence domains of my students, and how they perform when multiple intelligence techniques are used in instruction. Multiple Intelligences 33 Chapter 4 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to examine the condition of the classrooms on the days the data was collected, explanations of how the data was collected and analyzed, and the results that the data presented.

Again I will be looking to see whether students receiving instruction geared toward their Multiple Intelligences MI will perform better on an assessment than students who do not. My original research design had called to break down my research over three weeks, but due to the time constraints all data was collected over a period of 2 weeks. This breaks down only into two class period because the students only have music once a week for one hour. The control class had twenty-six out of thirty students present on the days I collected data and the experimental class had twenty five.

So, in total, fifty- one fifth grade students participated in my study. Both classes come to music at the same time during the day, at two oclock and are there for one hour each. There is a large white board at the front of the class, the teachers desk is to the far left hand corner of the room, and there is also a teacher computer and projector system that can be used during lesson.

Upon entering the classroom the students were told what would be going on and the purpose of the research that was being done.

Join Kobo & start eReading today

In the next section I will breakdown the data that was collected and analyzed. Students were informed as to what the survey was measuring and told to be as accurate as possible with their answers. I read each statement to the students. The first purpose of this was to accommodate any student that had an IEP that called for them to have a reader.

Secondly, this gave me the opportunity to clarify the meaning of any statement if it seemed confusing to the student. The quiz that was used Appendix A was geared toward older elementary students, but some statements did need some explanation. The survey did have the option to let students tally their own scores, but I felt it necessary to tally the scores myself to ensure accuracy.

Analysis of these surveys follows. The surveys were quite easy to analyze. At the end of the survey there was a scoring guide that broke the survey down into seven categories.

As previously mentioned those categories were verbal, mathematical, visual, kinesthetic, musical, intrapersonal, and interpersonal.

There were five statements from the survey that corresponded with each section. According to the creator of the survey, Dr. Carla Piper from Chapman University, a total of four or more indicators in any category would signify a strong ability.

I simply ready through each students surveys and marked the questions they responding true to. I would then be able to go back and look for the categories in which they scored four or more. For my control group a total of twenty-six students completed the survey. Once I started my analysis of the surveys, I found that only twenty of the surveys, or I found that one of the six was not useable due to the fact that the student had answered true on every question.

Even if the student was being honest, I felt the survey was inaccurate and I could not count it as being valid or reliable for my study. The remaining five surveys that were not scored were not done so because students did not respond to all statements. Not responding to one statement could mean the difference between displaying a strength area or not.

After determining which surveys were useable and which were not, I begin to go through and look for students that displayed strengths in certain areas. As I began to do this my useable sample began to decrease as well. For the control group eighteen of the twenty useable surveys displayed totals of four or more in at least one category. The two that did not only had two or three indicators in a few categories.

From this point I entered into an Excel document the number of students with strength areas in each category. I then broke these numbers down into percentages. I will share these results in my results section, but it will be worth noting that the percentages do not equal one hundred because the majority of students had more than one strength area.

After looking at the percentages for each category I then ranked the Big Five categories verbal, math, visual, kinesthetic, and musical in order of the highest number of students displaying the strengths to the lowest. Of those twenty-five, I found that twenty-three of the surveys were useable, as two of the surveys were not completely filled out. I decided not to use these for the same reason I did not use them for my control group. Using the same analysis techniques as my control group, I began to total the indicator statements for each student.

Again I was looking for totals of four or more in any one category for the data to be included in my final results. After examining all the surveys for the experimental group, I found that twenty-one of the twenty-three useable surveys had at least one MI strength area with a score of four or more. I will use this in my results in comparing the results of the two classes. I also ranked the Big Five categories in order of the highest number of students displaying strengths to the lowest.

I also collected one other piece of data from the MI survey. I was interested to see how many students displayed strengths in more than one area. I was able to determine that and I will share those in my results section.

Multiple Intelligences – A thematic approach – Ages 11+ ebook

Students took this survey again following the day they received the instruction and took the assessment. This was primarily for me to look to see if there was any major changes in results of the first survey.

Instruction Reflection After students took the MI survey the lesson that would be assessed at the end of the study was presented.

A reminder that the control group was instructed using only the lecture format. In relationship to Multiple Intelligences this style of instruction is only going to appeal to students with strengths in the verbal domain. The topic for the lesson was rhythm. Students had done several activities and received several lessons earlier in the year on rhythm so I was expecting this to be a review.

It was apparent once I started teaching in both classes that students had forgotten some of the topics from earlier in the year. Specific material that was covered included definitions of important terms related to rhythm. They included rhythm, beat, and time signature. Also the following notes and rests and their rhythmic values were reviewed: Students were reminded of the specific symbol for each note or rest and the number of beats each is worth.

This can be seen in the Appendix B for the experimental groups student guide sheet. I also briefly introduced a new topic to the students, the dotted rhythm. Students were instructed that the dot added to a note added half the value to the existing note. I showed the students some examples. With the control group they were simply told what a dot does and showed examples and told the value. With the experimental group to help to appeal to the visual and mathematical strengths, I actually gave them examples to figure out.

That way they were able to see it and actually do the math to reach a conclusion. The last topic that was covered was actually writing and performing rhythms. For the control class I just showed them rhythms on the board and performed them.

The experimental group assisted me in coming up with the rhythms, wrote their own rhythms on their guide sheet, and even looked at a partially written rhythm to figure out the pattern and complete the remaining measures. This class also performed rhythms by using rhythm syllables, clapping, and an activity where they got up out of their chairs and created movements for each note and rest value.

The goal with this was to appeal to my students with kinesthetic strengths. Assessment Analysis At the conclusion of the lesson material, both the experimental and the control groups were given an identical assessment. The assessment consisted of ten questions. Nine of the questions were multiple choice and related to definitions, note values, and note symbols.

The tenth question simply asked students to fill in the measures with the appropriate number of beats. My goal was to look for higher scores in the class that received the multiple intelligence instruction. First, I scored each quiz using my answer key. I looked for the number of each score and then converted that score into a percentage. I also entered the results from both classes in to an Excel document so I could compare the results of the classes side by side.

Once I started examining the results I also analyzed the difference between the two classes in a score of 90 or above on the assessment Results Control Group Results As a reminder a total of eighteen surveys were deemed useable and had a score of four or more in at least one multiple intelligence domain. Eighteen was the number I used to get my percentages for each domain.

This was the majority of the class. From this point I only determined percentages for the Big Five domains as mentioned earlier. Percentages for those five domains are as follows: There were seven students that displayed strengths in intrapersonal and nine that displayed strengths in interpersonal, but these were not significant to my study because they are hard to use in creating lessons and assessments.

The results of the highest number of students ranking in one domain to the least were 1 kinesthetic, 2 musical, 3 math, 4 visual, and 5 verbal. I can already draw a conclusion from these results before even examining the assessment data. The assessment data results were as follows Appendix D: The two highest scores were scores of 50 and below, an F, and scores of 70, a C.

Only a total of The verbal domain, which the majority of the lesson was geared toward, was the lowest, with Students in this class also retook the Multiple Intelligence Survey. Differences in the results from the first survey were not significant enough to report any differences and results of the first survey stand.

Further conclusions will be drawn in the close of this paper after the results of the experimental group are reviewed. Experimental Group Results As a reminder a total of twenty-one surveys were deemed useable and had a score of four or more in at least one multiple intelligence domain.

Twenty-one was the number I used to get my percentages for each domain. First there were a total of It is interesting to note at this point that both the control and experimental group had the some hierarchy of domains. In comparison with the control group, a difference of I found it interesting that even though a higher number of students received an A in this class, a higher number of students also scored an F on the assessment.

This is a difference of A contributing factor could be the higher number of IEP students in this class, however, not all students in the special education program scored an F. Another factor could be general ability level between the two classes. The control class has a higher number of students that are in the gifted and talented program, and the class, for the most part from past observation, performs at a higher level. My experimental class also has more students that receive Response to Intervention instruction in reading and that could have lead to lower performance on a written exam.

Summary I found my results to be very interesting. As I move into chapter five, I will further review the results from the study and begin to answer my problem question and see if my hypothesis was proven.

Chapter 5 Introduction In this chapter, I will once again review the results of my study, draw conclusions based on the results, and answer my original question, Will students achieve higher scores on assessments when given instruction geared toward their given multiple intelligence domain? I will also draw conclusions based on my results, determining whether the results are useable in the future in my classes and to others who may wish to use Multiple Intelligence Theory MI Theory and techniques in their classrooms.

Lastly I will also be looking at previous research and studies in MI to see whether my study could be considered reliable and valid in comparison to past research. Results In my control group eighteen of the original twenty-six multiple intelligence surveys were useable and significant because those were the ones in which students displayed scores of four or more in at least one intelligence domain. This signifies a strength area in the given domain.

Percentages of students scoring in the five domains I chose to focus on where: The results of the greatest number of students ranking in one domain to the least were 1 kinesthetic, 2 musical, 3 math, 4 visual, and 5 verbal. In my experimental group a total of twenty-one surveys were deemed useable and had a score of four or more in at least one MI domain.

Percentages of students scoring in the five domains I chose to focus on were: The reader should be able to note that this was the same as with the control group. The assessment data results for the control group were as follows Appendix D: The two highest percentages were scores of 50 and below, a F, and scores of 70, a C. The assessment data results for the experimental group were as follows Appendix D: The initial data collected do reveal that the class that received instruction based in Multiple Intelligences had a higher number of students receiving the grade of an A on the assessment given at the end of instruction.

The control group had Again this is a difference of I found it interesting that even though a greater number of students received an A in this class, a greater number of students also scored an F on the assessment.

It would be hard to say whether these results could be used in all classrooms in the future or be used as the basis for curriculum for a school. In an article for the The Journal of Education Research, entitled Attitudes Toward a Multiple Intelligence Curriculum, authors Gwendolyn Mettetal, Cheryl Jordan, and Sheryll Harper concluded that when multiple intelligence theory is implemented across a school it tends to be implemented unevenly.

Also, if not all teacher download into the idea of Multiple Intelligence theory, then those students who truly could benefit from its use are missing out. Like the teachers in the school in which these authors conducted their study, most teachers would probably become very overwhelmed with developing lessons geared toward each students intelligence.

In my study, I simply tried to prepare a lesson that would reach out to all the identified intelligences in the class, but to truly paint an accurate picture every lesson, assignment, and assessment would have to be specifically designed for each student. This would bring new meaning to individualized education. Also in my study I assessed all students the same way. Each student took a teacher designed, multiple choice, pencil and paper assessment. Also each students intelligences were assessed in the same way, a pencil and paper assessment.

Relating back to chapter 2, Thomas Armstrong in his book Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom he said No test can accurately determine the nature or quality of a persons intelligence p. However, he did believe testing intelligence through paper and pencil tests would only be tapping into the logical and linguistic intelligences. Armstrong went on to say, The best way to assess your own Multiple Intelligences, therefore, is through a realistic appraisal of your performance in the many kinds of tasks, activities, and experiences associated with each intelligence p.

Conclusions So after reviewing all results and relating them to past studies of Multiple Intelligences can I say without a doubt that the use of MI theory in designing and assessing instruction will result in higher assessment scores?

I have two answers to this. First, according to my results, yes the use of some MI techniques did play a role in the results of my study.

I was looking for improved scores between my control and experimental group and that was what my results showed. In my control group, I saw in the control group that the majority of my students displayed strengths in the kinesthetic intelligence domain. That class received instruction based solely for students who have strengths in the verbal domain.

This could account for why several students received poor scores on the assessment. Looking at the experimental group, the majority of students in this class also displayed strengths in the kinesthetic domain, followed closely by the musical domain. During the instruction with this class students were up out of their seats moving, clapping rhythms, examining and analyzing musical concepts more closely, and thus receiving instruction more closely associated with their intelligence domains.

There were also techniques used that appealed to the math, visual, and verbal domains. So, it is easy to draw the conclusion that students scored better on this assessment because of the type of instruction they received.

I think this study could easily be viewed in several ways. Even though I did use techniques closely associated with MI it would be easy to determine that there were other factors involved that the higher scores could be attributed to. First, maybe the sole use of the student guide sheet, or a study guide, could be the reason why students performed better. Because of these factors it is necessary to report that results from these findings cannot be generalized across populations.

First, the sample size was too small and was only a convenience sample. Secondly, there were too many other factors that could have lead to the results of the study being skewed. Was the study actually measuring the use of MI Theory? Did the way the students were arranged allow them to cheat?

Also to truly get an accurate picture of using multiple intelligence theory in the classroom, again, I would have to customize instruction, assignments, and assessments for each individualized students strength areas. Remember, according to previous studies, it is next to impossible to ever really determine a persons intelligence by using a paper and pencil survey. Will I continue to use these techniques in my classes in the future?

I will probably continue to implement some of the techniques I used with my experimental class. I cannot truly say that they will always result in higher scores on assessments in all my classes though.

Would customizing the assignments and assessments for each individual student result in better scores? I can conclude, however, from this study that one instructional method, based in one intelligence domain, is not always best for all students. End Note So, in conclusion, I would say that if educators wish to try and implement multiple intelligence techniques in their classroom they must be first willing to do a little research and data collecting of their own.

I believe that educators could use my initial research design as a starting point to see if their students respond better to lessons taught with MI in mind.

My results, however, should not be the basis for a complete change in how a teacher designs their lessons or how a school designs their curriculum. More research on this subject would definitely be needed before any major decision such as that should be made.

Association for Supervision in the Classroom. Campbell, P. Collins, J. Seven Kinds of Smart.

Time Magazine Online. Retrieved November, 8, The Phi Delta Kappan, 65, Frames of Mind: The Theories of Multiple Intelligences. New York. Basic Books. Reflections on Multiple Intelligences: Myths and Messages. The Phi Delta Kappan, 77, and Guignon, A. Multiple Intelligences: A Theory for Everyone. Education World. Online Posting. Retrieved November 6, Excerpt from Early Childhood Curriculum: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Charles Spearman. MI Acitivities. Retrieved from http: Music and the Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Music Educators Journal,84, and Mettetal, G. The Journal of Education Research, 91, McClaskey, J. Assessing Student Learning through Multiple Intelligences. The English Journal, 84, Piper, C. Multiple Intelligence Quiz.

Teaching With Technology. Retrieved April 27, Smith, M. Howard Gardner and multiple intelligences. The Encyclopeda of Informal Education. Fighting butter battles: A reply. Phi Delta Kappan,65, Wilson, L. The Eighth Intelligence: Naturalistic Intelligence. Inside out, outside in. Zephyr Press. New Horizons. Online posting.

What's Inside

Control and Experimental Groups. Jay Sun. Fahmi M Faturahman. Clare Reilly. Tsering Tibet Dolker. Ivania Carolina. Saurav Kumar. Brindha Shanmuga Sundaram.

Favaj Fava. Samantha Ong Pei Shan. Edwina Wong. Yoon Wei. More From Ayhu Delisha.The gifted and talented program pulled top students out of their. At this time, most students were placed in classes based on a general intelligence test, otherwise known as an Intelligence Quotient IQ test. Multiple Intelligences 26 Chapter 3 Introduction It is apparent from the research that has been done that using Multiple Intelligence MI Theory in the classroom is a viable option for teachers looking for solutions to everyday classroom problems.

They can control their bodies with grace, expertise, and athleticism. My original research design had called to break down my research over three weeks, but due to the time constraints all data was collected over a period of 2 weeks. Music teachers for years have had.

Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. Literature Review9 a. In a famous article, General Intelligence Objectively Determined and Measured, Spearman proposed the idea that intelligent behavior is generated by a single, unitary quality within the human mind or brain Human Intelligences, , pg. I will also draw conclusions based on my results, determining whether the results are useable in the future in my classes and to others who may wish to use Multiple Intelligence Theory MI Theory and techniques in their classrooms.

KALI from Normal
Review my other posts. One of my hobbies is watching sporting events. I relish reading books obnoxiously .
>