21 Years Later, 'Multiple Intelligences' Still Debated



Source #1Children's Learning Styles May Be Key To EducationJuly 21, 1996|By Nina A. Koziol. Special to the Tribune.If, at birth, every child arrived with an operating manual, parenting would be simple. The chapter on fuel consumption would tell which foods to provide and which to avoid. It would state which musical instrument or sport, if any, the child prefers. And the chapter on education would explain the most effective methods for helping the child to learn.But children don't arrive with such instructions, and finding out how to help them learn is an ongoing challenge for educators and parents. For decades, educators have created and refined teaching methods and theories to enable students to reach their intellectual potential. In recent years, the focus has turned to learning styles, the ways in which individual children learn best."There's been a tremendous amount of research in learning styles theory in the past 10 years," said Joanne Planek, area manager for Sylvan Learning Systems Inc., who has a doctorate in administration and supervision.Founded in 1979, Sylvan provides supplemental instruction for children and adults at more than 600 facilities in North America. Ten Chicago public schools contracted with Sylvan in 1995 to provide on-site tutorial services for three years."There's much valid information about the preferred ways individuals learn," Planek said. "You try to find out what their preference is--whether they learn best by listening, watching or doing--and start with that strength."Donna Loftus and Anne Kutka are directors/owners of a Sylvan Learning Center in Tinley Park. About half of the students they work with are in elementary school and many attend two one-hour sessions a week, Loftus said. Students receive help with study skills, math, writing and reading.Sylvan uses a simple method to assess a child's preferred learning style. "For students in 5th grade and older, we give the Barsch Learning Style Inventory--a series of statements that the child responds to," Loftus said. The responses indicate a preference for one of three primary learning styles: auditory (hearing), visual (seeing) and tactile (touching).By observing their child, parents may determine if he or she embraces one of the styles. Does the child prefer listening, move his lips when reading, or like to hear himself or others talk? (Auditory learner.) Does she doodle, remember faces but not names or study well by herself? (Visual learner.) Does she express herself with gestures and body movements, fidget when reading or try things out by touching or feeling? (Tactile learner.)Loftus noted that children who are visual learners enjoy reading. "They find it helpful using graphs, diagrams, pictures and charts," she said. Visual learners can avoid distractions by studying alone and taking notes. They can use highlighters to emphasize ideas, key terms and phrases in their notes and books.Auditory learners benefit by reading aloud and having a study partner who takes turns asking questions. Older students can tape record lectures and written notes to listen to later."The math student who is a tactile learner may need (to handle) fraction bars, pie segments or a clock with movable hands," Loftus said. Tactile learners can draw maps, pictures or diagrams of ideas to organize information."When we talk about auditory, visual and tactile, that's just one way to define learning styles," said Jie Qi (pronounced "Jackie") Chen, a professor at Erikson Institute for Advanced Study in Child Development, Chicago, who has a doctorate in applied child development. "There are many ways that we access information."From research she has worked on, Chen found that a child can change learning styles."Some children use one style, such as visual, regardless of the task, but others switch their style based on the subject or activity," Chen said.For that reason, she recommends that teachers and parents use multiple ways to present material to children. "For example, if you hear something, see it and read it, the idea is reinforced."Chen points to a book called "Frames of Mind--The Theory of Multiple Intelligences," by educator Howard Gardner, as another way to look at how children process information.Gardner states in the book that there are various domains of potential intellectual competence. He examines several areas of intelligence, including linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic and personal."Multiple intelligence theory is something to be aware of because there are many dimensions in which children develop," said Diane Salmon, associate professor at National-Louis University, Evanston, who has a doctorate in educational psychology. "Don't just focus on math or verbal skills, but recognize that children have other strengths."Said Chen, "We all have strengths and weaknesses. When children work on areas where they're strong, they're happy. When they work on areas where they're weak, they may be less productive or nervous. That doesn't mean they shouldn't work on it."Source #2Understanding learning styles by LENORE HIRSCH Oct 27, 2013Top of FormBottom of FormDear Lenore: Is the school system ever going to target students’ learning styles to help them learn?The best lessons in any classroom involve multiple learning styles. When you can see it, hear it, and participate physically in an activity, you are more likely to stay engaged with the subject, to learn and remember.Parents and teachers who have children with learning disabilities need to understand learning styles. The child with an auditory weakness has difficulty processing what he hears and needs visual input. If the visual channel is weak, it will help to hear information. Some kids have disabilities in both auditory and visual areas and can be helped with kinesthetic practice — writing words in sand or finger paint, for example.So what is your child’s style? You can find lists of learning styles on the Internet. They include the verbal mode, using the written and spoken word, and the mathematical style of using logic and reasoning. Some lists include interpersonal aspects of learning. Do you learn best in a group or alone? Online inventories enable you to analyze your style based on answers to questions about how you would approach a variety of situations.A kid-friendly inventory can be found at?your-learning-styles. It’s just 24 questions and includes music and nature as learning styles. After the user responds, it provides a description of his dominant style and tips for learning.Classroom instruction for many years was limited to listening to a teacher, copying things onto paper, reading a book and remembering what you heard and read. Today classrooms are much more interactive. Children act out concepts (kinesthetic), create projects in groups (interpersonal) and use computers (kinesthetic, aural, visual). Whether you want to analyze your child’s learning style, there is a lot to be gained from understanding that we don’t all do our best learning in the same ways.?? ?Lenore Hirsch is a retired school principal living in Napa. Send questions tolenorehirsch@. Please include your child’s age or grade.Source #321 Years Later, 'Multiple Intelligences' Still DebatedEducator Pushes Appealing to All Types of LearnersBy Jay MathewsWashington Post Staff WriterTuesday, September 7, 2004; Page A09Howard Gardner, Hobbs professor of education and cognition at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, received an offer recently from a lawyer in Quito, Ecuador. For just $600, the man said, he would protect Gardner from an outrageous attempt to trademark his name for a local school.It appeared to be a scam but was not unexpected. Because of a book he wrote 21 years ago, Gardner is both lionized and exploited as one of the most famous educational theorists in the world. His notion of multiple intelligences -- including the idea that musical, athletic and other talents are separate from, but as important as, high SAT scores -- has inspired scores of books, journal articles, conferences and lesson plans for public schools.Say the words "multiple intelligences" to an American classroom teacher, and you probably will get a quick recitation of all the things that educator is doing to teach not only the student blessed with what Gardner calls linguistic intelligence and logico-mathematical intelligence -- what the SAT assesses -- but also those having the other six intelligences on Gardner's list: spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalist.But his fame has not saved him from criticism. This summer, two university professors accused Gardner, 61, of encouraging elementary school teaching methods, such as singing new words or writing them out with twigs and leaves, for which there is no scholarly evidence of success.Daniel T. Willingham, a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, wrote in the journal Education Next that Gardner's theory "is an inaccurate description of the mind" and that "the more closely an application draws on the theory, the less likely the application is to be effective."Linda S. Gottfredson, professor of education at the University of Delaware, wrote in the Wilson Quarterly that "by denying the difficulties in accommodating intellectual difference, multiple intelligence theories may do little more than squander scarce learning time and significant opportunities for improvements in the quality of American schooling."The response from Gardnerites is: What have traditional intelligence theorists done for classroom teachers and their students?Mindy L. Kornhaber, assistant professor of education policy studies at Pennsylvania State University's College of Education, found that nearly 100 teachers in 11 school districts liked Gardner's ideas because they validated what they knew from experience about the power of teaching different children in different ways.Kornhaber, responding to Willingham in a letter to Education Next, said, "It is exceedingly odd that he offers not a single example of good practice" stemming from the traditional view that intelligence is an interrelated hierarchy and that people who are smart in one category usually are smart in others.In a letter to the Wilson Quarterly, Gardner wrote that the multiple intelligence theory "was developed as a theory of the mind, not as an educational intervention." But he supported the notion that the theory "holds out hope that students can be reached in different ways."He added that "the standard psychologist's view of intelligence is a recipe for despair. It holds that there is but one intelligence and that intelligence is highly heritable."Gardner's 1983 book, "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences," arrived just as American educators were being pummeled in national reports for failing to teach reading, writing and mathematics adequately. SAT scores were dropping, and traditional educational theorists were arguing for longer school days, more homework and more testing.Gardner's ideas appealed to many traditional teachers who extolled hard work but also had some students who did better on tests if multiplication tables were set to music or works of literature were acted out in class.Since then, many psychologists have criticized the lack of scientific measures of Gardner's intelligences, and some educators say this leads to failed educational policies, such as ending ability grouping in schools.Administrators who think children of different achievement levels will learn better if placed in the same classroom say teachers can use multiple intelligence theory to take different approaches with different students. Gottfredson quoted a textbook for future teachers used at her university: "Educators' thinking has progressively moved away from policies of exclusion and homogenous grouping toward an emphasis on the value of diversity, policies of inclusion and practices that meet the needs of all students."In practice, Gottfredson said, "these instructional strategies for mixed-ability classes preclude precisely what helps the more able students most: accelerating their curriculum, allowing them to interact with their intellectual peers and making them work hard."Willingham argues that the standard theory of intelligence is not as monolithic as Gardner says it is and that Gardner's theory disintegrates when analyzed closely. Gardner's criteria for intelligences, such as scores on performance tasks or changes caused by brain damage, are too loose, he said. They open the way for alleged intelligences that make little sense to Willingham, such as humor intelligence or memory intelligence.Gardner said he thinks the theory has served its original purpose -- to challenge a century-old orthodoxy that defined intelligence only as doing well on multiple-choice tests.So Gardner continues to write and speak. He drew huge crowds this summer in China, where he was told that a recent conference in Beijing featured 195 papers on multiple intelligences. He and psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, whose work on creativity is also well known, have launched what they call the Good Work Project to encourage research that is both smart and helpful to society."I think that any scholar who is lucky enough to have his or her ideas taken seriously has to realize something," Gardner said. "When you release an idea to the rest of the world, you simply can't control what happens."My major response to bad uses of my work, or to uses by people who have never read a word of my writing, is to try to create structures that encourage better use of the work. In that sense, I am an idealist."Source #4Your Brain On Sesame Street: Big Bird Helps Researchers See How the Brain LearnsBrain scans of kids and adults watching Sesame Street reveals how the brain picks up reading and math skillsBy?Alexandra Sifferlin?@acsifferlin Jan. 04, 2013To understand how the?brain?works, researchers typically present study subjects in a brain scanner with simple stimuli, like a number against a black background, to see which regions of the brain respond. The results help them gain a better understanding of what part of the brain is responsible for learning skills, like math or reading.But it’s not always clear how applicable these neural patterns, generated in an isolated experiment, are to how the brain works in the real world—such as a classroom.In a new study,?Jessica Cantlon, a cognitive scientist at the University of Rochester and her colleagues used?functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)?to look at brains of children during a normal educational activity—watching?Sesame Street—to get a better of picture of how the brain changes as it develops reading and math skills. “It is not currently possible to measure the real-world thought process that a child has while observing an actual school session. However, if it could be done, children’s neural processes would presumably be predictive of what they know,” the authors write in the study, published in the journal?PLoS Biology.“Everyone would prefer to use the real world as the stimulus because that’s really the goal: to understand what brain regions are important when children are learning in the real classroom and not with isolated stimuli on a black background, because that’s not really how they learn,” says Cantlon, whose research team is making strides in understanding brain development in everyday settings.By using fMRIs, which provide real-time information about brain activity, while the children watched an episode of Sesame Street, the researchers argue they can examine a child’s neural processes as they are engaged naturally, putting them one step closer to understanding the complex way that different environmental influences and stimuli cooperate in the learning process. Eventually, such insight could lead to more accurate diagnosis and treatment of?learning disabilities.In the study, Cantlon and her team placed 27 kids between the ages 4 and 11, and 20 adults in the fMRI machine as the participants watched 20 minutes of?Sesame Street, which featured short clips on numbers, shapes and language. After the episode, the kids took?standardized?tests that assessed their math and verbal abilities. Using the fMRI scans, the researchers created neural maps of the kids’ thought processes and compared those maps to the patterns found among the adult participants.They found that kids whose brains worked in similar ways to that of the adults received?higher scores on their standardized tests. This suggests that the brain develops along a predictable pattern as we age, dedicating certain regions and networks to specific tasks, such as reading, or problem solving. The same brain images also revealed where verbal and math skills tend to develop.Kids with neural patterns similar to those of adults in the Broca’s area of the brain, which is associated with speech and language, for example, scored higher in verbal skills. Children with neural maturity in the intraparietal sulcus (IPS) region of the brain, which is involved with number processing, had better math scores.Then, in order to document how generalizable lab-based findings of brain regions are, Cantlon and her team asked the same participants who viewed the Sesame Street episode to take part in a more traditional fMRI?experiment in which they were asked to match shapes, numbers and faces while their brains were scanned. Afterward, the children took standardized reading and math tests. But this time, when the researchers compared the scans to the reading and math scores, they found that the brain patterns did not predict test scores as they did in the more naturalistic setting of watching the Sesame Street clip. They concluded that monitoring kids’ neural activity during the educational Sesame Street show better revealed the unconstrained and spontaneous thought processes that are essential to learning, and therefore was a better predictor of math and verbal performance.Using brain imaging to study naturalistic thought is gaining more traction in the scientific community, since people generally absorb information from complex situations with multiple stimuli, such as while attending class, interacting with family at home, watching TV or using the computer. Simple and isolated experiments in a lab may fall short of replicating the complexity of these learning?environments.By studying how the brain engages in a more natural learning setting, the researchers also hope to document the varying degrees to which different regions of the brain are involved in specific learning tasks. That knowledge could ultimately lead to using brain scans to diagnose and assess learning disabilities in kids.“There are good cognitive and behavioral tests for understanding what’s specifically wrong with a child if they have a math learning impairment, but having this brain data provides another independent source of data that you could then use to understand the nature of that problem to say whether it is a working memory problem, or it is a number-specific problem,” says Cantlon. “If you know what patterns of brain activity represent and differentiate those types of problems that could contribute to mathematics impairment, then you could tailor an intervention a little bit more specially to their problem.” Which would certainly be welcome by the nearly 8% of young children who struggle with learning disabilities in the U.S.Alexandra Sifferlin is a writer and producer for TIME Healthland. She is a graduate from the Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism.1. Source #3 describes how Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory challenged “a century old orthodoxy that defined intelligence only as doing well on multiple choice tests.” Prove TWO pieces of information from different sources to explain this idea. Cite evidence and identify the source of each by title or number.2. All of the sources say that students learn in a different ways. Provide TWO examples from different sources that support this idea and explain how each example supports this observation. Cite evidence and identify the source of each piece of information by title or number. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download