The contemporary science has achieved really outstanding results in different
field but the problem of intelligence remains one of the main mysteries specialists
still argue about and cannot arrive to any definite conclusion that could combine
the variety of views on intelligence. In this respect, the work of Howard Gardner
seems to be one of the most arguable since his multiple intelligence theory,
being relatively new, has already provoked numerous discussions as for its reliability.
Nonetheless, Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory is quite interesting
for research, especially when it is applied to the sphere of education where
intelligence has traditionally being one of the basic concepts.
First of all, it is necessary to point out that a strong connection between
Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory and education is not occasional
because this theory is a psychological and educational theory which espouses
seven kinds of intelligence that exist in humans. In fact, the creator of the
theory emphasizes that each kind of intelligence is closely related to a definite
sphere of life or human activity and, in such a way, individuals with different
kinds of intelligence dominating may be more or less successful in different
fields respectively to their kinds of intelligence.
In such a situation, it is quite natural that, applying this theory to education,
the supporters of the multiple intelligence theory state that educators should
develop all types of intelligence in their classroom in order to achieve possibly
better results and reveal the potential of each student due to the development
of different intelligences with an emphasis on particular ones typical for each
individual student.
Obviously, such a recommendation may be quite helpful because it actually suggest
to unite the class on the basis of the combination of a variety of intelligence
being developed in the process of education. At the same time, ideally, not
a single student remains deprived of a possibility to develop his/her individual
kind of intelligence since he/she receives a possibility to develop his innate
skills and abilities. Theoretically, what Gardner and his followers suggest
is the development of all intelligences which would help to define what kind
of intelligence each of the students in the classroom tends to. After that teachers
should develop the defined type of intelligence in each student that would presumably
enforce other types of intelligence.
Naturally, in order to properly evaluate the efficiency of the suggestion of
the supporters of the multiple intelligence theory, it is necessary to analyze
in details this theory and critically evaluate it. Basically, the multiple intelligence
theory has been already defined above but it is worthy to note that speaking
about the main points of his theory Howard Gardner, in response to traditional
views on intelligence, underlines 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” (1999:99).
It is also extremely important to say that, according to Gardner, intelligence
is “the capacity to solve problems or to fashion products that are valued
in one or more cultural setting” (Gardner and Hatch 1989:433). At the
same time, such a definition of intelligence seems to be really large and even,
to a certain extent, vague. In order to be more persuasive, Howard Gardner attempts
to substantiate his theory to the evidences of potential isolation by brain
damage, a distinctive development history, along with definable set of ‘end-state’
performances, support from experimental psychological tasks and psychometric
findings, the existence of idiot savants, prodigies and other exceptional individuals,
an evolutionary history and evolutionary plausibility, an identifiable core
operation or set of operations, susceptibility to encoding in a symbol system
(Gardner 1998).
Nonetheless, regardless all his attempts to make his theory possibly more understandable
and less susceptible to criticism, Howard Gardner obviously failed, at least
at some points. Firstly, it should be said that the definition of intelligence
in his interpretation is still unclear and imprecise and, consequently, severely
criticized. Naturally, it is quite difficult to apply an unclear term at any
field, especially in education where such a lack of precise definition threatens
to progress of chaos in the process of education based on multiple intelligence
theory. For instance, it is not a secret that the followers of multiple intelligence
theory suggest their own kinds of intelligence. Being applied to education it
may result in the situation when each student would need a particular definition
of his/her intelligence if the existing ones did not fully correspond.
Moreover, such an obscure definition of intelligence often leads to misinterpretation
of such notions as intelligence and abilities. In fact, Gardner’s critics
emphasize that he denies the existence of intelligence, as it is traditionally
understood, and instead uses the word intelligence whenever other people have
traditionally used words like ‘ability’ (Sternberg 1989). Obviously,
from this point of view the multiple intelligence theory is just another variation
of theories suggesting to develop a variety of abilities of students taking
into consideration their inmate predisposition to certain skills and abilities.
In such a situation, Garnder’s response that “I balk at the unwarranted
assumption that certain human abilities can be arbitrarily singled out as intelligence
while others cannot” (1998:102). Actually, such a statement makes Gardner’s
multiple intelligence theory hardly applicable to education because it is unclear
who would differentiate abilities from intelligences. Consequently, the introduction
of such a theory would produce a great mass in classroom if any ability could
be interpreted as intelligence and vice versa.
Eventually, there would remain little room for the development of general abilities
or intelligences of students. Such a situation is quite dangerous, especially
in the context of recent trends to develop students in different fields that
could make education broader and more efficient that found its reflection in
California’s proposition 227 and No Child Left behind Policy. In fact,
if Gardner’s critics are really right at the point that the application
of his theory would dramatically narrow the areas students would deal with in
their education than it will be really unwise to apply multiple intelligence
theory to practice in educational establishments.
This is why it is possible to conclude that, being innovative and research worthy,
Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory cannot be fully practically applied
because of the lack of precision and clearness in its key concepts, including
the notion of intelligence.
Bibliography:
1. Gardner, Howard. “A Reply to Perry D. Klein’s ‘Multiplying
the problems of intelligence by eight’” Canadian Journal of Education,
23(1), 1998, pp.96-102.
2. Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). “Multiple intelligences go to
school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences”.
Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-9.
3. Sternberg, R. J. “How much Gall is too much gall? Review of Frames
of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences”. Contemporary Education
Review, 2(3), 1983, pp. 215-224.