麻豆传媒入口

When Howard Gardner introduced his multiple intelligences theory 35 years ago, it was a revolutionary idea that challenged聽long-cherished beliefs.

At the time, psychologists were interested in general intelligence鈥攁 person鈥檚 ability to solve problems and apply logical reasoning across a wide range of disciplines. Popularized in part by the IQ test, which was originally developed in the early 1900s to to 鈥渦nderstand, reason, and make judgments,鈥� the idea of general intelligence helped explain why some students seemed to excel at many subjects. Gardner found the concept too limiting.

鈥淢ost lay and scholarly writings about intelligence focus on a combination of linguistic and logical intelligences. The particular intellectual strengths, I often maintain, of a law professor,鈥� . Having grown up playing piano, Gardner wondered why the arts weren鈥檛 included in discussions about intelligence. As a graduate student studying psychology in the 1960s, 鈥渟truck by the virtual absence of any mention of the arts in the key textbooks.鈥�

That doubt planted the seed that grew into Gardner鈥檚 big insight: The prevailing idea of a single, monolithic intelligence didn鈥檛 match the world he observed. Surely Mozart鈥檚 genius was partially, but not fully, explained by an extraordinary musical intelligence. And wasn鈥檛 it the case that all people demonstrated a wide range of intellectual capabilities鈥攆rom linguistic to social to logical鈥攖hat were often mutually reinforcing, and that ebbed and flowed over time based on a person鈥檚 changing interests and efforts?

Those hypotheses have largely been confirmed by recent studies from the fields of neuroscience. A , for example, upends the centuries-old idea that reading occurs in distinct areas of the brain; scientists have discovered, instead, that language processing 鈥渋nvolves all of the regions of the brain, because it involves all cognitive functioning of humans鈥濃�攏ot just visual processing but also attention, abstract reasoning, working memory, and predicting, to name a few. And a growing body of evidence has dramatically altered , revealing that we continue to grow and change intellectually well into adulthood.

Mistakes Were Made

But if Gardner鈥檚 objective was to broaden and democratize our conception of intelligence鈥攁n idea that resonates deeply with teachers鈥攖he pull of the old model has been hard to shake. Today, the idea of multiple intelligences is as popular as ever, but it鈥檚 starting to look suspiciously like the theory Gardner sought to displace.

鈥淚t鈥檚 true that I write a lot and also that I am misunderstood a lot,鈥� , who originally proposed seven distinct intelligences, adding an eighth a decade later. The big mistake: In popular culture, and in our educational system, the theory of multiple intelligences has too often been conflated with learning styles, reducing Gardner鈥檚 premise of a multifaceted system back to a single 鈥減referred intelligence鈥�: Students are visual or auditory learners, for example, but never both. We鈥檝e stumbled into the same old trap鈥攚e鈥檝e simply traded one intelligence for another.

鈥淚f people want to talk about 鈥榓n impulsive style鈥� or 鈥榓 visual learner,鈥� that鈥檚 their prerogative,鈥� .聽鈥淏ut they should recognize that these labels may be unhelpful, at best, and ill-conceived at worst.鈥�

It鈥檚 clear that children learn differently鈥攖eachers in 麻豆传媒入口鈥檚 audience are adamant on that score鈥攂ut research shows that when students process and retain information, there is no dominant biological style, and that when teachers try to match instruction to a perceived learning style, the benefits are nonexistent.

Still, the idea endures.

Wide Acceptance

Over 90 percent of teachers believe that students learn better when they receive information tailored to their preferred learning styles, but that鈥檚 a myth, , professor of neuroscience and education at the University of Bristol. 鈥淭he brain鈥檚 interconnectivity makes such an assumption unsound, and reviews of educational literature and controlled laboratory studies fail to support this approach to teaching.鈥�

Students are also swayed by the idea. In a , medical professors Polly Husmann and Valerie O鈥橪oughlin found that many of their students 鈥渟till hold to the conventional wisdom that learning styles are legitimate,鈥� and often adapt their study strategies to match these learning styles. But after analyzing the test scores of these students, researchers found no improvement. Instead, they found that tried-and-true strategies鈥攕uch as viewing microscope slides online鈥攚orked equally well for all students, whether they considered themselves linguistic or visual learners.

The study highlights the value of learning through multiple modalities, which is an effective way to boost memory and understanding. A found that students have a deeper conceptual understanding of a lesson when teachers pair lectures with diagrams. And a found that students retain more information when textbooks contain illustrations because the images complement the text. When students use more than one medium to process a lesson, learning is more deeply encoded鈥攁nd being overly reliant on a perceived dominant learning style is a recipe for learning less effectively.

Some Dos and Don鈥檛s

So what should teachers do? that 鈥渕ultiple intelligences should not, in and of itself, be an educational goal.鈥� Instead, here are a few聽evidence-based dos and don鈥檛s for applying multiple intelligences theory in your classroom.

Do:

• Give students multiple ways to access information: Not only will your lessons be more engaging, but students will be more likely to remember information that鈥檚 presented in different ways.
• Individualize your lessons: It still makes sense to differentiate your instruction, even if students don鈥檛 have a single dominant learning style. Avoid a one-size-fits-all method of teaching, and think about students鈥� needs and interests.
• Incorporate the arts into your lessons: Schools often focus on the linguistic and logical intelligences, but we can nurture student growth by letting them express themselves in different ways. As , 鈥淢y theory of multiple intelligences provides a basis for education in the arts. According to this theory, all of us as human beings possess a number of intellectual potentials.鈥�

顿辞苍鈥檛:

• Label students with a particular type of intelligence: By pigeonholing students, we deny them opportunities to learn at a deeper, richer level. Labels鈥攕uch as 鈥渂ook smart鈥� or 鈥渧isual learner鈥濃�攃an be harmful when they discourage students from exploring other ways of thinking and learning, or from developing their weaker skills.
• Confuse multiple intelligences with learning styles: A popular misconception is that learning styles is a useful classroom application of multiple intelligences theory. 鈥淭his notion is incoherent,鈥� . We read and process spatial information with our eyes, but reading and processing require different types of intelligence. It doesn鈥檛 matter what sense we use to pick up information鈥攚hat matters is how our brain processes that information. 鈥淒rop the term styles. It will confuse others, and it won't help either you or your students,鈥� .
• Try to match a lesson to a student鈥檚 perceived learning style: Although students may have a preference for how material is presented, there鈥檚 that matching materials to a preference will enhance learning. In matching, an assumption is made that there鈥檚 a single best way to learn, which may ultimately prevent students and teachers from using strategies that work. 鈥淲hen one has a thorough understanding of a topic, one can typically think of it in several ways,鈥� .