Gardner’s
Multiple Intelligences
The
Traditional View of Intelligence
The
traditional view of intelligence can be traced to French psychologist Alfred
Binet. At the request of the French Ministry of Education in the early
1900s, Binet and his colleague Theodore Simon developed a test that identified
children at risk for school failure. The test was effective for that
purpose. However it was soon used as the basis for the psychometric measurement
of individuals' general capabilities or intelligence. Since that time,
intelligence tests have been heavily weighted toward the types of highly
predictive abilities Binet measured in his test, including: verbal memory,
verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, and appreciation of logical sequences.
And intelligence tests have defined how we define intelligence.
Gardner began to question the traditional view of
intelligence as he worked on studying the nature of human cognitive capacities
in the 1970s and 80s. At the Boston University Aphasia Research Center,
Gardner conducted studies with aphasic patients. He wanted to understand the pattern
of abilities of stroke victims suffering from impaired language and other kinds
of cognitive and emotional injury. At the same time, Gardner worked with
ordinary and gifted children at Project Zero, in an attempt to understand the development
of cognitive abilities. In his work with both children and brain-damaged
adults, Gardner observed that People have a wide range of capacities.
A person's strength in one area of performance simply does not predict any
comparable strengths in other areas.
From this observation Gardner developed his Theory of
Multiple Intelligences. According to
Multiple Intelligence Theory, intelligence may be defined as the biological
potential to process information in certain ways that can be activated in a
cultural setting to solve problems or make products that are value in a
culture. This definition suggests that intelligence represents potential that
will or will not be brought to bear depending on the values, available
opportunities, as well as personal decisions made by individuals, of a
particular culture.
Gardner's definition located intelligence in what
people can do and the products they create in the real world, in
contrast to the implied intelligence that is measured by a test score. Gardner’s definition of intelligence
suggests a qualitative expression, a description, of an individual's collection
of intelligences rather than a quantitative expression of a unitary ability.
Gardner's "new view" of intelligence
initially gave rise to a list of seven intelligences:
An eighth intelligence, Naturalist, has since been
added; naturalist intelligence designates the human ability to discriminate
among living things (plants, animals) as well as sensitivity to other features
of the natural world (clouds, rock configurations). This ability was
clearly of value in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers. A
ninth, Existential Ability, is currently under consideration.
Gardner proposed eight criteria for identifying an
intelligence. These were:
1.
potential isolation by
brain damage/neurological evidence
2.
evolutionary history and
evolutionary plausibility
3.
an identifiable set of
core operation(s)
4.
susceptibility to
encoding in a symbol system
5.
recognizable end-state
and distinctive developmental trajectory
6.
existence of savants,
prodigies, and other individuals distinguished by the presence or absence of
specific abilities
7.
support from
experimental psychological tasks
8.
support from
psychometric findings
The criteria have served well as the principal means
to identify a set of intelligences that captures a reasonably complete range of
abilities that are valued by human cultures. By keeping the criteria in active
use, MI theory can and has been modified to reflect our increasing
understanding of the ways in which people are intelligent. MI theory offers the
most accurate description to date of intelligence in the real world, and it
continues to be a helpful articulation and organization of human abilities.
Teachers may use MI theory as a basis to reflect on
and identify students' strengths and preferences or to emphasize student participation
in MI-based reflections. Teachers may create a “bridge” from
students' MI strengths to appropriate learning strategies. They may emphasize
using students’ particular strengths to assist in areas of particular
difficulty. Teachers may provide a range of MI-informed “entry points” into a
topic and “exit points” for students to demonstrate their learning. This
technique emphasizes using students’ identified strengths to develop entry and
exit points. Teachers may also develop a project-based curriculum using MI
theory as a framework. This technique emphasizes authentic problems and
activities.