Multiple Intelligences Theory vs. Learning Styles: as they relate to teaching and learning.

The concept of “learning styles” was an unsubstantiated idea developed in the 60s that has long been debunked through numerous peer reviewed research studies. Learning styles DO NOT EXIST as they were originally proposed. Learning styles are related to one’s personality and no evidence has been found that matches a learner’s perceived style to improved educational attainment.

While learning styles do not exist, learning preferences do. Preferences are people’s favorite ways to learn. These preferences relate to Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences in that the preferences can be easily described within nine different kinds of intelligences –intellectual potentials people are born with. To clarify, learning preferences are not the same as learning styles –the suggestion that each person’s learning style is a central and all-purpose way of learning. Just as there are many learning theories, there are many types of learning. Learners will likely be particularly strong in more than one intelligence category. Therefore, teaching toward one particular learning preference or intelligence is often not the most effective teaching method for achieving a desired learning outcome. Instead, incorporating multiple intelligences theory into practice through universal design and a multifaceted delivery approach will improve the learning experience for most students.

Gardner suggests that there are nine intelligences:

1. Visual-spatial
2. Linguistic-verbal
3. Logical-mathematical
4. Body-kinesthetic
5. Musical
6. Interpersonal
7. Intrapersonal
8. Naturalistic
9. Existentialist

Just as any theory is scrutinized, psychologists and educators have argued that there is lack of supporting and empirical research, and that the intelligences simply represent a broad set of talents, personality traits, and abilities. Still, many educators have found success utilizing multiple intelligence theory into their classrooms. Listed below are Gardner’s nine intelligences, along with their strengths and a list of commonly associated characteristics.

Visual-Spatial Intelligence

People who are strong in visual-spatial intelligence are good at visualizing things. These individuals are often good with directions as well as maps, charts, videos, and pictures. 

Strengths

Visual and spatial judgment 

Characteristics

People with visual-spatial intelligence:

• Read and write for enjoyment.
• Are good at putting puzzles together.
• Interpret pictures, graphs, and charts well.
• Enjoy drawing, painting, and the visual arts.
• Recognize patterns easily. 

Linguistic-Verbal Intelligence

People who are strong in linguistic-verbal intelligence can use words well, both when writing and speaking. These individuals are typically very good at writing stories, memorizing information, and reading. 

Strengths

Words, language, and writing 

Characteristics

People with linguistic-verbal intelligence:

• Remember written and spoken information.
• Enjoy reading and writing.
• Debate or give persuasive speeches.
• Can explain things well.
• Use humor when telling stories. 

Logical-Mathematical Intelligence

People who are strong in logical-mathematical intelligence are good at reasoning, recognizing patterns, and logically analyzing problems. These individuals tend to think conceptually about numbers, relationships, and patterns. 

Strengths

Analyzing problems and mathematical operations 

Characteristics 

People with logical-mathematical intelligence:

• Have excellent problem-solving skills.
• Enjoy thinking about abstract ideas.
• Like conducting scientific experiments.
• Can solve complex computations. 

Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence

Those who have high bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are said to be good at body movement, performing actions, and physical control. People who are strong in this area tend to have excellent hand-eye coordination and dexterity. 

Strengths

Physical movement, motor control 

Characteristics

People with bodily-kinesthetic intelligence:

• Are skilled at dancing and sports.
• Enjoy creating things with his or her hands.
• Have excellent physical coordination.
• Remember by doing, rather than hearing or seeing. 

Musical Intelligence

People who have strong musical intelligence are good at thinking in patterns, rhythms, and sounds. They have a strong appreciation for music and are often good at musical composition and performance. 

Strengths

Rhythm and music 

Characteristics

People with musical intelligence:

• Enjoy singing and playing musical instruments.
• Recognize musical patterns and tones easily.
• Remember songs and melodies.
• Have a rich understanding of musical structure, rhythm, and notes. 

Interpersonal Intelligence

Those who have strong interpersonal intelligence are good at understanding and interacting with other people. These individuals are skilled at assessing the emotions, motivations, desires, and intentions of those around them. 

Strengths

Understanding and relating to other people 

Characteristics

People with interpersonal intelligence:

• Communicate well verbally.
• Are skilled at nonverbal communication.
• See situations from different perspectives.
• Create positive relationships with others.
• Resolve conflicts in group settings. 

Intrapersonal Intelligence

Individuals who are strong in intrapersonal intelligence are good at being aware of their own emotional states, feelings, and motivations. They tend to enjoy self-reflection and analysis, including daydreaming, exploring relationships with others, and assessing their personal strengths. 

Strengths

Introspection and self-reflection 

Characteristics

People with intrapersonal intelligence:

• Analyze their strengths and weaknesses well.
• Enjoy analyzing theories and ideas.
• Have excellent self-awareness.
• Understand the basis for his or her own motivations and feelings. 

Naturalistic Intelligence

Naturalistic is the most recent addition to Gardner’s theory and has been met with more resistance than his original seven intelligences. According to Gardner, individuals who are high in this type of intelligence are more in tune with nature and are often interested in nurturing, exploring the environment, and learning about other species. These individuals are said to be highly aware of even subtle changes to their environments. 

Strengths

Finding patterns and relationships to nature. 

Characteristics

People with naturalistic intelligence:

• Are interested in subjects such as botany, biology, and zoology.
• Categorize and catalog information easily.
• Enjoy camping, gardening, hiking, and exploring the outdoors.
• Dislikes learning unfamiliar topics that have no connection to nature. 

Existential Intelligence

Existential intelligence is the ninth type of intelligence suggested as an addition to Gardner’s original theory. He described existential intelligence as an ability to delve into deeper questions about life and existence. People with this type of intelligence contemplate the “big” questions about topics such as the meaning of life and how actions can serve larger goals. 

Strengths

An ability to see the big picture. 

Characteristics

People with existential intelligence:

• Have a long-term outlook.
• Consider how current actions influence future outcomes.
• Interest in questions about the meaning of life and death.
• Strong interest and concern for others.
• The ability to see situations from an outside perspective.

Applications for Teaching & Learning

To apply Multiple Intelligences Theory in the classroom, it is essential to create a learning environment that promotes and develops all forms of intelligence. Some strategies include:

• Diversifying activities: Design activities and tasks that engage different types of intelligence. For example, include reading and writing activities for verbal-linguistic intelligence, logical-mathematical challenges, art projects, or creative movement activities.
• Encouraging collaboration: Providing opportunities for learners to work together on group projects that promote inclusion and interpersonal intelligence. Teamwork and effective communication abilities developed in these activities are fundamental life skills.
• Using visual and manipulatable resources.: Provide visual materials, such as graphs, pictures, and diagrams, to stimulate spatial-visual intelligence. In addition, the classroom environment can be arranged so that learners have opportunities to create, explore, and manipulate objects.
• Integrating music and movement: Include musical and creative movement activities to stimulate musical intelligence and bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. People can learn through songs, rhythms, and dances, which facilitates comprehension and retention of information.
• Promoting reflection and self-awareness. Include opportunities for meta-cognition, transference, and individual reflection such as journaling activities to foster intrapersonal intelligence. It is important for learners to identify and develop greater understanding of their learning. Another example would to create a concept map to represent connections between ideas.
• Connecting learning with nature. Organize outdoor activities, gardening projects, or nature observation activities to develop naturalistic intelligence. Adults tend to learn better when they contextualize learning in relationship to the environment and expand their world view along with nature.

By applying Multiple Intelligences Theory in teaching and learning, we create an inclusive learning environment that values diversity of abilities and promotes intellectual growth and development. Furthermore, supporting different forms of intelligence not only enriches the teaching-learning process, but also prepares students to face the complex challenges of our diverse society.

References:

Bakić-mirić N. Implementation of multiple intelligences theory in the English language course syllabus at the University of Nis Medical School. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2010;138(1-2):105-10.

Cerruti C. Building a functional multiple intelligences theory to advance educational neuroscience. Front Psychol. 2013;4:950. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00950

Felder, R. M. (2020). Opinion: Uses, misuses, and validity of learning styles. Advances in Engineering Education, 8(1), 1-16.

Furey, W. (2020). The Stubborn Myth of “Learning Styles” – State teacher-license prep materials peddle a debunked theory. Education Next, 20(3), 8-12.

Gardner, H. (1983;2003). Frames of Mind. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: BasicBooks.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (2000). The Disciplined Mind: Beyond Facts And Standardized Tests, The K-12 Education That Every Child Deserves. New York: Penguin Putnam.

Gardner H, Davis K. The App Generation, How Today’s Youth Navigate Identity, Intimacy, and Imagination in a Digital World. Yale University Press; 2013

Husmann PR, O’Loughlin VD. Another nail in the coffin for learning styles? Disparities among undergraduate anatomy students’ study strategies, class performance, and reported VARK learning styles. Anat Sci Educ. 2019;12(1):6-19. doi:10.1002/ase.1777

Martin DJ, Loomis KS. Building Teachers: A Constructivist Approach to Introducing Education. Cengage Learning; 2013.

Levine SC, Ratliff KR, Huttenlocher J, Cannon J. Early puzzle play: a predictor of preschoolers’ spatial transformation skill. Dev Psychol. 2012;48(2):530-42. doi:10.1037/a0025913

Newton, P. M., & Miah, M. (2017). Evidence-based higher education–is the learning styles ‘myth’important?. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 444.

Parslow, G. R. (2012). Commentary: Learning‐style theories debunked, but still guiding educational practice. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 40(1), 72.

Scherer M, Gardner H. The understanding pathway: a conversation with Howard Gardner. The Constructivist Classroom. 1999; 57(3):12-16.

Singh Y, Makharia A, Sharma A, Agrawal K, Varma G, Yadav T. A study on different forms of intelligence in Indian school-going children. Ind Psychiatry J. 2017;26(1):71-76. doi:10.4103/ipj.ipj_61_16

Sternberg RJ. Intelligence. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2012;14(1):19-27.