|
|
I want my children to understand
the world, but not just because the world is fascinating and the human mind
is curious. I want them to understand it so that they will be positioned to
make it a better place. Knowledge is not the same as morality, but we need to
understand if we are to avoid past mistakes and move in productive
directions. An important part of that understanding is knowing who we are and
what we can do... Ultimately, we must synthesize our understandings for
ourselves. The performance of understanding that try matters are the ones we
carry out as human beings in an imperfect world which we can affect for good
or for ill. (Howard Gardner 1999: 180-181)
Howard
Earl Gardner's
(1943- ) work has been marked by a desire not to just describe the world but
to help to create the conditions to change it. The scale of his contribution
can be gauged from following comments in his introduction to the tenth
anniversary edition of Howard Gardner's classic work Frames of Mind. The
theory of multiple intelligences:
In the heyday of the psychometric
and behaviorist eras, it was generally believed that intelligence was a
single entity that was inherited; and that human beings - initially a blank
slate - could be trained to learn anything, provided that it was presented in
an appropriate way. Nowadays an increasing number of researchers believe
precisely the opposite; that there exists a multitude of intelligences, quite
independent of each other; that each intelligence has its own strengths and
constraints; that the mind is far from unencumbered at birth; and that it is
unexpectedly difficult to teach things that go against early 'naive' theories
of that challenge the natural lines of force within an intelligence and its
matching domains. (Gardner 1993: xxiii)
One of the main impetuses for
this movement has been Howard Gardner's work. He has been, in Smith and
Smith's (1994) terms, a paradigm shifter. Howard Gardner has questioned the
idea that intelligence is a single entity, that it results from a single
factor, and that it can be measured simply via IQ tests. He has also
challenged the cognitive development work of Piaget. Bringing forward
evidence to show that at any one time a child may be at very different stages
for example, in number development and spatial/visual maturation, Howard
Gardner has successfully undermined the idea that knowledge at any one
particular developmental stage hangs together in a structured
whole.
In this article we explore Howard
Gardner's contribution and the use to which it has been put by educators.
Howard
Gardner - a life
Howard Gardner was born in
Scranton, Pennsylvania in 1943. His parents had fled from Nürnberg in Germany
in 1938 with their three-year old son, Eric. Just prior to Howard Gardner's
birth Eric was killed in a sleighing accident. These two events were not
discussed during Gardner's childhood, but were to have a very significant
impact upon his thinking and development (Gardner 1989: 22). The
opportunities for risky physical activity were limited creative and intellectual
pursuits encouraged. As Howard began to discover the family's 'secret
history' (and Jewish identity) he began to recognize that he was different
both from his parents and from his peers.
His parents wanted to send Howard
Gardner to Phillips Academy in Andover Massachusetts - but he refused.
Instead he went to a nearby preparatory school in Kingston, Pennsylvania
(Wyoming Seminary). He appears to have embraced the opportunities there - and
to have elicited the support and interest of some very able teachers. From
there Howard Gardner went to Harvard University to study history in readiness
for a career in the law. However, he was lucky enough to have Eric Erikson as
a tutor. In Howard Gardner's words Erikson probably 'sealed' his ambition to
be a scholar (1989: 23). But there were others:
My mind was really opened when I
went to Harvard College and had the opportunity to study under
individuals—such as psychoanalyst Erik Erikson, sociologist David Riesman,
and cognitive psychologist Jerome Bruner—who were creating knowledge about
human beings. That helped set me on the course of investigating human nature,
particularly how human beings think. (Howard Gardner quoted by Marge Sherer
1999)
Howard Gardner's interest in
psychology and the social sciences grew (his senior thesis was on a new
California retirement community) and he graduated summa cum laude in
1965.
Howard Gardner then went to work
for a brief period with Jerome Bruner on the famous MACOS Project
('Man: A course of study'). Bruner's work, especially in The Process of
Education (1960) was to make a profound impact, and the questions that
the programme asked were to find an echo in Gardner's subsequent interests.
During this time he began to read the work of Claude Levi-Strauss and Jean
Piaget in more details. He entered Harvard's doctoral programme in 1966, and
in the following year became part of the Project Zero research team on arts
education (with which he has remained involved to the present). Howard
Gardner completed his PhD in 1971 (his dissertation was on style sensitivity
in children). He remained at Harvard. Alongside his work with Project Zero
(he now co-directs it with David Perkins) he was a lecturer (1971-1986) and
then professor in education (1986- ). His first major book, The Shattered
Mind appeared in 1975 and some fifteen have followed. Howard Gardner is
currently Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education at the Harvard Graduate
School of Education and adjunct professor of neurology at the Boston
University School of Medicine.
Project Zero provided an
environment in which Howard Gardner could begin to explore his interest in
human cognition. He proceeded in a very different direction to the dominant
discourses associated with Piaget and with psychometric testing. Project Zero
developed as a major research centre for education - and provided an
intellectual home for a significant grouping of researchers. A key moment
came with the establishment of the Project on Human Potential in the late
1970s (funded by Bernard van Leer Foundation) to 'assess the state of
scientific knowledge concerning human potential and its realization'. The
result was Frames of Mind (1983) Howard Gardner's first full-length
statement of his theory of multiple intelligences.
Howard
Gardner on multiple intelligences - the initial listing
Howard Gardner viewed intelligence as
'the capacity to solve problems or to fashion products that are valued in one
or more cultural setting' (Gardner & Hatch, 1989). He reviewed the
literature using eight criteria or 'signs' of an intelligence:
Potential isolation
by brain damage.
The existence of
idiots savants, prodigies and other exceptional individuals.
An identifiable
core operation or set of operations.
A distinctive development
history, along with a definable set of 'end-state' performances.
An evolutionary
history and evolutionary plausibility.
Support from
experimental psychological tasks.
Support from
psychometric findings.
Susceptibility to
encoding in a symbol system. (Howard Gardner 1983: 62-69)
Candidates for the
title 'an intelligence' had to satisfy a range of these criteria and must
include, as a prerequisite, the ability to resolve 'genuine problems of
difficulties' (ibid.: 60) within certain cultural settings. Making
judgements about this was, however, 'reminiscent more of an artistic
judgement than of a scientific assessment' (ibid.: 62).
Howard Gardner
initially formulated a list of seven intelligences. His listing was
provisional. The first two are ones that have been typically valued in
schools; the next three are usually associated with the arts; and the final
two are what Howard Gardner called 'personal intelligences' (Gardner 1999:
41-43).
Linguistic
intelligence
involves sensitivity to spoken and written language, the ability to learn
languages, and the capacity to use language to accomplish certain goals. This
intelligence includes the ability to effectively use language to express
oneself rhetorically or poetically; and language as a means to remember information.
Writers, poets, lawyers and speakers are among those that Howard Gardner sees
as having high linguistic intelligence.
Logical-mathematical
intelligence
consists of the capacity to analyze problems logically, carry out
mathematical operations, and investigate issues scientifically. In Howard
Gardner's words, in entails the ability to detect patterns, reason
deductively and think logically. This intelligence is most often associated
with scientific and mathematical thinking.
Musical
intelligence involves
skill in the performance, composition, and appreciation of musical patterns.
It encompasses the capacity to recognize and compose musical pitches, tones,
and rhythms. According to Howard Gardner musical intelligence runs in an
almost structural parallel to linguistic intelligence.
Bodily-kinesthetic
intelligence
entails the potential of using one's whole body or parts of the body to solve
problems. It is the ability to use mental abilities to coordinate bodily
movements. Howard Gardner sees mental and physical activity as related.
Spatial
intelligence involves
the potential to recognize and use the patterns of wide space and more
confined areas.
Interpersonal
intelligence
is concerned with the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations and
desires of other people. It allows people to work effectively with others.
Educators, salespeople, religious and political leaders and counsellors all
need a well-developed interpersonal intelligence.
Intrapersonal
intelligence
entails the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one's feelings,
fears and motivations. In Howard Gardner's view it involves having an
effective working model of ourselves, and to be able to use such information
to regulate our lives.
In Frames of
Mind Howard Gardner treated the personal intelligences 'as a piece'.
Because of their close association in most cultures, they are often linked
together. However, he still argues that it makes sense to think of two forms
of personal intelligence. Gardner claimed that the seven intelligences rarely
operate independently. They are used at the same time and tend to complement
each other as people develop skills or solve problems.
In essence Howard
Gardner argues that he was making two essential claims about multiple
intelligences. That:
The theory is an
account of human cognition in its fullness. The intelligences provided 'a new
definition of human nature, cognitively speaking' (Gardner 1999: 44). Human
beings are organisms who possess a basic set of intelligences.
People have a
unique blend of intelligences. Gardner argues that the big challenge facing
the deployment of human resources 'is how to best take advantage of the
uniqueness conferred on us as a species exhibiting several intelligences' (ibid.:
45).
These intelligences, according to Howard Gardner, are amoral - they
can be put to constructive or destructive use.
The
appeal of multiple intelligences to educators
Howard Gardner's theory of
multiple intelligences has not been readily accepted within academic
psychology. However, it has met with a strongly positive response from many
educators. It has been embraced by a range of educational theorists and,
significantly, applied by teachers and policymakers to the problems of
schooling. A number of schools in North America have looked to structure
curricula according to the intelligences, and to design classrooms and even
whole schools to reflect the understandings that Howard Gardner develops
(follow the links below to visit a couple of
examples). The theory can also be found in use within pre-school, higher,
vocational and adult education initiatives.
This appeal was not, at first,
obvious.
At first blush, this diagnosis
would appear to sound a death knell for formal education. It is hard to teach
one intelligence; what if there are seven? It is hard to enough to teach even
when anything can be taught; what to do if there are distinct limits and
strong constraints on human cognition and learning? (Howard Gardner 1993:
xxiii)
Howard Gardner responds to his
questions by first making the point that psychology does not directly dictate
education, 'it merely helps one to understand the conditions within which
education takes place'. What is more:
Seven kinds of intelligence would
allow seven ways to teach, rather than one. And powerful constraints that
exist in the mind can be mobilized to introduce a particular concept (or
whole system of thinking) in a way that children are most likely to learn it
and least likely to distort it. Paradoxically, constraints can be suggestive
and ultimately freeing. (op. cit.)
Mindy L. Kornhaber
(2001: 276), a researcher involved with Project Zero, has identified a number
of reasons why teachers and policymakers in North America have responded
positively to Howard Gardner's presentation of multiple intelligences. Among
these are that:
... the theory
validates educators' everyday experience: students think and learn in many
different ways. It also provides educators with a conceptual framework for
organizing and reflecting on curriculum assessment and pedagogical practices.
In turn, this reflection has led many educators to develop new approaches
that might better meet the needs of the range of learners in their
classrooms.
The response to
Howard Gardner is paralleled by the adoption of Kolb's model of experiential
learning by adult and informal educators. While significant criticism can be
made of the formulation (see below) it does provide a useful
set of questions and 'rules of thumb' to help educators to think about their
practice. The way in which Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences
has been translated into policy and practice has been very varied. Howard
Gardner did not, initially, spell out the implications of his theory for
educators in any detail. Subsequently, he has looked more closely at what the
theory might mean for schooling practice (e.g. in The Unschooled Mind,
Intelligence Reframed, and The Disciplined Mind). From this
work three particular aspects of Gardner's
thinking need noting here as they allow for hope, and an alternative way of
thinking, for those educators who feel out of step with the current, dominant
product orientation to curriculum and educational policy. The
approach entails:
A broad vision
of education.
All seven intelligences are needed to live life well. Teachers, therefore,
need to attend to all intelligences, not just the first two that have been
their tradition concern. As Kornhaber (2001: 276) has noted it involves
educators opting 'for depth over breadth'. Understanding entails taking knowledge
gained in one setting and using it in another. 'Students must have extended
opportunities to work on a topic' (op. cit.).
Developing local
and flexible programmes. Howard Gardner's interest in 'deep understanding', performance,
exploration and creativity are not easily accommodated within an orientation
to the 'delivery' of a detailed curriculum planned outside of the immediate
educational context. 'An "MI setting" can be undone if the
curriculum is too rigid or if there is but a single form of assessment'
(Gardner 1999: 147). In this respect the educational implications of Howard
Gardner's work stands in a direct line from the work of John Dewey.
Looking to morality. 'We must figure out how intelligence and morality
can work together', Howard Gardner argues, 'to create a world in which a
great variety of people will want to live' (Gardner 1999: 4). While there are
considerable benefits to developing understanding in relation to the
disciplines, something more is needed.
Are
there additional intelligences?
Since Howard Gardner's original
listing of the intelligences in Frames of Mind (1983) there has been a
great deal of discussion as to other possible candidates for inclusion (or
candidates for exclusion). Subsequent research and reflection by Howard
Gardner and his colleagues has looked to three particular possibilities: a
naturalist intelligence, a spiritual intelligence and an existential
intelligence. He has concluded that the first of these 'merits addition to
the list of the original seven intelligences' (Gardner 1999: 52).
Naturalist intelligence enables human beings to
recognize, categorize and draw upon certain features of the environment. It
'combines a description of the core ability with a characterization of the
role that many cultures value' (ibid.: 48).
The case for inclusion of
naturalist intelligence appears pretty straightforward, the position with
regard to spiritual intelligence is far more complex. According to
Howard Gardner (1999: 59) there are problems, for example, around the
'content' of spiritual intelligence, its privileged but unsubstantiated
claims with regard to truth value, 'and the need for it to be partially
identified through its effect on other people'. As a result:
It seems more responsible to
carve out that area of spirituality closest 'in spirit' to the other
intelligences and then, in the sympathetic manner applied to naturalist
intelligence, ascertain how this candidate intelligence fares. In doing
so, I think it best to put aside the term spiritual, with
its manifest and problematic connotations, and to speak instead of an
intelligence that explores the nature of existence in its multifarious
guises. Thus, an explicit concern with spiritual or religious matters would
be one variety - often the most important variety - of an existential
intelligence.
Existential intelligence, a concern with 'ultimate
issues', is, thus, the next possibility that Howard Gardner
considers - and he argues that it 'scores reasonably well on the criteria' (ibid.:
64). However, empirical evidence is sparse - and although a ninth
intelligence might be attractive, Howard Gardner is not disposed to add it to
the list. 'I find the phenomenon perplexing enough and the distance from the other
intelligences vast enough to dictate prudence - at least for now' (ibid.:
66).
The final, and obvious, candidate
for inclusion in Howard Gardner's list is moral intelligence. In his
exploration, he begins by asking whether it is possible to delineate the
'moral domain'. He suggests that it is difficult to come to any consensual
definition, but argues that it is possible to come to an understanding that
takes exploration forward. Central to a moral domain, Howard Gardner
suggests, 'is a concern with those rules, behaviours and attitudes that
govern the sanctity of life - in particular, the sanctity of human life and,
in many cases, the sanctity of any other living creatures and the world they
inhabit' (ibid.: 70). If we accept the existence of a moral realm is
it them possible to speak of moral intelligence? If it 'connotes the adoption
of any specific moral code' then Howard Gardner does not find the term moral
intelligence acceptable (ibid.: 75). Furthermore, he argues,
researchers and writers have not as yet 'captured the essence of the moral
domain as an instance of human intelligence' (ibid.: 76).
As I construe it, the central
component in the moral realm or domain is a sense of personal agency and
personal stake, a realization that one has an irreducible role with respect
to other people and that one's behaviour towards others must reflect the
results of contextualized analysis and the exercise of one's will.... The
fulfillment of key roles certainly requires a range of human intelligences -
including personal, linguistic, logical and perhaps existential - but it is
fundamentally a statement about the kind of person that has developed to be.
It is not, in itself, an intelligence. 'Morality' is then properly a
statement about personality, individuality, will, character - and, in the
happiest cases, about the highest realization of human nature. (ibid.:
77)
So it is, that Howard Gardner has
added an eighth intelligence - naturalist intelligence - to his list. He has
also opened the door to another possibility - especially that of existential
intelligence - but the court is out on that one.
Howard
Gardners's multiple intelligences - some issues and problems
There are various criticisms of,
and problems around, Howard Gardner's conceptualization of multiple
intelligences. Indeed, Gardner himself has listed some of the main issues and
his responses (1993: xxiii-xxvii; 1999: 79-114). Here, I want to focus on
three key questions that have been raised in debates. (There are plenty of
other questions around - but these would seem to be the most persistent):
Are the criteria Howard Gardner
employs adequate? John
White (1997) has argued that there are significant issues around the criteria
that Howard Gardner employs. There are questions around the individual criteria,
for example, do all intelligences involve symbol systems; how the criteria to
be applied; and why these particular criteria are relevant. In respect of the
last, and fundamental question, White states that he has not been able to
find any answer in Gardner's writings (ibid.: 19). Indeed, Howard
Gardner himself has admitted that there is an element of subjective judgement
involved.
Does Howard Gardner's
conceptualization of intelligence hold together? For those researchers and
scholars who have traditionally viewed intelligence as, effectively, what is
measured by intelligence tests - Howard Gardner's work will always be
problematic. They can still point to a substantial tradition of research that
demonstrates correlation between different abilities and argue for the
existence of a general intelligence factor. Howard Gardner (1993: xxiv)
disputes much of the evidence and argues that it is not possible, as yet, to
know how far intelligences actually correlate. More recent developments in
thinking around intelligence such as Robert Sternberg's (1985, 1996)
advancement of a 'triarchic model' have shared Gardner's dislike of such
standard intelligence theory. However, in contrast to Howard Gardner, Robert
Sternberg does not look strongly at the particular material that the person
is processing. Instead he looks to what he calls the componential,
experiential and contextual facets of intelligence. A further set of
criticisms centre around the specific intelligences that Howard Gardner
identified. For example, it can be argued that musical intelligence and
bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are better approached as talents (they do not
normally need to adapt to life demands).
Is there sufficient empirical
evidence to support Howard Gardner's conceptualization? A common criticism made of Howard
Gardner's work is that his theories derive rather more strongly from his own
intuitions and reasoning than from a comprehensive and full grounding in
empirical research. For the moment there is not a properly worked-through set
of tests to identify and measure the different intelligences.
I once thought it possible to
create a set of tests of each intelligence - an intelligence-fair version to
be sure - and then simply to determine the correlation between the scores on
the several tests. I now believe that this can only be accomplished if
someone developed several measures for each intelligence and then made sure
that people were comfortable in dealing with the materials and methods used
to measure each intelligence. (Gardner 1999: 98)
Howard Gardner himself has not
pursued this approach because of a more general worry with such testing -
that it leads to labeling and stigmatization. It can be argued that research
around the functioning of the brain generally continues to support the notion
of multiple intelligence (although not necessarily the specifics of Howard
Gardner's theory).
There are further questions
around the notion of selfhood that Howard Gardner employs -
something that he himself has come to recognize. In the early 1990s he began
to look to the notion of distributed cognition as providing a better way of
approaching the area than focusing on what goes on in the mind of a single
individual (Hatch and Gardner 1993) (see the discussion of social/situational orientations to learning).
Conclusion
While there may some significant
questions and issues around Howard Gardner's notion of multiple intelligences,
it still has had utility in education. It has helped a significant number of
educators to question their work and to encourage them to look beyond the
narrow confines of the dominant discourses of skilling, curriculum, and
testing. For example, Mindy Kornhaber and her colleagues at the Project SUMIT
(Schools Using Multiple Intelligences Theory) have examined the
performance of a number of schools and concluded that there have been
significant gains in respect of SATs scores, parental participation, and
discipline (with the schools themselves attributing this to MI theory).
To the extent that Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences theory has helped
educators to reflect on their practice, and given them a basis to broaden
their focus and to attend to what might assist people to live their lives
well, then it has to be judged a useful addition.
Project SUMIT (2000) uses the
metaphor of Compass Points -'routes that educators using the
theory have taken and which appear to benefit students'. They have identified
the following markers that characterize schools with some success in
implementing practices that attend to multiple intelligences theory.
Culture: support
for diverse learners and hard work. Acting on a value system which maintains
that diverse students can learn and succeed, that learning is exciting, and
that hard work by teachers is necessary.
Readiness:
awareness-building for implementing MI. Building staff awareness of
MI and of the different ways that students learn.
Tool: MI is a means to foster
high quality work. Using MI as a tool to promote high quality student work
rather than using the theory as an end in and of itself.
Collaboration: informal and formal
exchanges. Sharing ideas and constructive suggestions by the staff in formal
and informal exchanges.
Choice: meaningful curriculum and
assessment options. Embedding curriculum and assessment in activities that
are valued both by students and the wider culture.
Arts. Employing the arts to
develop children's skills and understanding within and across disciplines.
Informal educators can usefully
look at this listing in respect of their projects and agencies. The multiple
intelligences themselves also provide a good focus for reflection. Arguably,
informal educators have traditionally been concerned with the domains of the
interpersonal and the intrapersonal, with a sprinkling of the intelligences
that Howard Gardner identifies with the arts. Looking to naturalist
linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences could help enhance their
practice.
Further reading
and references
The main Howard Gardner writings
on multiple intelligences are as follows:
Gardner, Howard (1983; 1993) Frames
of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, New York: Basic Books. The
second edition was published in Britain by Fontana Press. 466 + xxix pages.
(All references in this article refer to this second, 10th Anniversary,
edition). A major addition to the literature of cognitive psychology being
the first full length explication of multiple intelligences.
Gardner, Howard (1989) To Open
Minds: Chinese clues to the dilemma of contemporary education, New York:
Basic Books. This book includes a significant amount of material on Gardner's
early life.
Gardner, H. (1991) The
Unschooled Mind: How children think and how schools should teach, New
York: Basic Books.
Gardner, Howard (1999) Intelligence
Reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st century, New York: Basic
Books. 292 + x pages. Useful review of Gardner's theory and discussion of
issues and additions.
Gardner, Howard (1999) The
Disciplined Mind: Beyond Facts And Standardized Tests, The K-12 Education
That Every Child Deserves, New York: Simon and Schuster (and New York:
Penguin Putnam).
References
Bruner, J (1960) The Process
of Education, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Gardner, H. (1975) The
Shattered Mind, New York: Knopf.
Gardner, H., Csikszentmihalyi, M.
and Damon, W. (2001) Good Work: Where Excellence and Ethics Meet, New
York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., & Hatch, T.
(1989). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the
theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8),
4-9.
T. Hatch and H. Gardner (1993)
'Finding cognition in the classroom: an expanded view of human intelligence'
in G. Salomon (ed.) Distributed Cognitions. Psychological and educational
considerations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kornhaber, M. L. (2001) 'Howard
Gardner' in J. A. Palmer (ed.) Fifty Modern Thinkers on Education. From
Piaget to the present, London: Routledge.
Smith, L. G. and Smith, J. K.
(1994) Lives in Education. A narrative of people and ideas 2e, New
York: St Martin's Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985) Beyond IQ: A
triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Sternberg, R. J.
(1996) Successful intelligence. New York: Simon & Schuster.
White, J. (1998) Do Howard
Gardner's multiple intelligences add up? London: Institute of Education,
University of London.
Williams, W. M., Blythe, T.,
White, N., Li, J., Sternberg, R. J., & Gardner, H. (1996). Practical
intelligence for school. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Links
Project Zero: It's mission is to: 'understand
and enhance learning, thinking, and creativity in the arts, as well as
humanistic and scientific disciplines, at the individual and institutional
levels'. The site provides details of Howard Gardner, current initiatives, a
history of the project, plus a listing of publications etc.
The Good Work Project: The project 'researches how
leading professionals carry out work that is of high quality and
socially responsible' and is part of collaboration with Howard Gardner. This
site provides details of the projects and current publications.
Project SUMIT (Schools Using Multiple
Intelligences Theory): site gives the background to the project and provides
links to some of the schools etc.
New City School: is one of many that have tried
to integrate Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences into their
practice. Take a tour of the school and glimpse their vision of multiple intelligences. See, also, The
Gardner School, Vancouver WA.
About: Kimeiko Hotta Dover provides about a review of internet
resources on Howard Gardner. See, also, her internet guide to multiple intelligences.
|
Σχόλια
Δημοσίευση σχολίου