The theory of multiple intelligences distinguishes intelligence to a certain 'modality', rather than seeing an intelligence dominated by a common ability. Howard Gardner proposed this model in his 1983 Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences . According to theory, intelligence must meet eight criteria:
- potential brain isolation by brain damage,
- place in evolutionary history,
- the existence of core operations,
- vulnerability to encoding (symbolic expression),
- different developmental developments,
- the existence of scholars, wonders, and other wonderful people,
- support from experimental psychology, and
- support of psychometric findings.
Gardner proposed eight abilities he held to meet these criteria:
- music rhythm,
- visual-spatial,
- verbal-linguistic,
- logical-mathematical,
- bodily-kinesthetic,
- interpersonal,
- intrapersonal, and
- naturalistic.
He then suggested that existential and moral intelligence may also be worth incorporating.
Although the distinction between intelligence has been defined in great detail, Gardner opposes the idea of ​​labeling learners for some intelligence. Gardner argues that his theory should "empower learners", not limiting them to a single learning modality. According to Gardner, intelligence is "the biopsychological potential for processing information that can be activated in cultural settings to solve problems or create products of value in culture."
Gardner's many "intelligences" correlate with the g factor, supporting the notion of the dominant single intelligence type. According to a 2006 study, each of the domains proposed by Gardner involves a mixture of g , cognitive abilities other than g , and, in some cases, noncognitive abilities or personality characteristics.
Video Theory of multiple intelligences
Intelligence modality
Music-rhythmic and harmonious
This area deals with sensitivity to sound, rhythm, tone, and music. People with high musical intelligence usually have a good tone and even have an absolute tone, and are able to sing, play a musical instrument, and write music. They have sensitivity to rhythm, tone, meter, tone, melody or timbre.
Visual-spatial
This area deals with spatial judgments and the ability to visualize with the mind's eye. Spatial ability is one of three factors under g in the hierarchical intelligence model.
Verbal-linguistic
People with high verbal-linguistic intelligence display facilities with words and language. They are usually good at reading, writing, telling stories and remembering words along with dates. Verbal ability is one of the most abundant capabilities Logical-mathematical
This area deals with logic, abstraction, reasoning, numbers and critical thinking. It also deals with the ability to understand the basic principles of some causal systems. The logic of reasoning is closely related to fluid intelligence and general intelligence ( g factors).
Kinesthetic-physical
The core elements of bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are the control of one's gestures and the ability to handle objects skillfully. Gardner describes to say that this also includes a sense of time, a clear understanding of the purpose of physical action, along with the ability to train responses.
People who have high kinesthetic kinesthetic intelligence in general must be good at doing physical activities such as sports, dancing, acting, and making things.
Gardner believes that careers suited to them with high kinesthetic-physical intelligence include: athletes, dancers, musicians, actors, builders, police officers, and soldiers. Although these careers can be duplicated through virtual simulation, they will not result in the actual physical learning that is required in this intelligence.
Interpersonal
In theory, individuals with high interpersonal intelligence are characterized by their sensitivity to moods, feelings, temperaments, motivations, and the ability of others to work together to work as part of a group. According to Gardner in How Are Kids Smart: Multiple Intelligences in Class , "Inter-and Intra-personal Intelligence is often misunderstood with extroverts or liking others..." Those with high interpersonal intelligence communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and can be a leader or follower. They often enjoy discussions and debates. "Gardner has likened this to Goleman's emotional intelligence.
Gardner believes that careers suited to those with high interpersonal intelligence include salespeople, politicians, managers, teachers, lecturers, counselors, and social workers.
Intrapersonal
This area deals with introspective capacity and self-reflection. It refers to having a deep understanding of self; what a person's strengths or weaknesses, what makes a person unique, able to predict a person's reaction or emotion.
Naturalistic
Not part of the original seven, Gardner's naturalistic intelligence proposed by him in 1995. "If I rewrite Frames of Mind today, I would probably add the eighth intelligence - naturalist intelligence.It seems to me that individuals who are ready to recognize flora and fauna , to make other consequential differences in nature, and to use this capability productively (in hunting, in agriculture, in biological sciences) is training essential intelligence and which is not adequately covered on the current list. " This area is concerned with maintaining and associating information with one's natural environment. Examples include classifying natural shapes such as animal and plant species and rocks and mountain species. This ability is clearly valuable in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and peasants; it continues to be central in the role of a botanist or a chef.
This kind of ecological understanding is rooted in "sensitive, ethical, and holistic understanding" of the world and its complexity - including the role of humankind in the larger ecosphere.
Existential
Gardner does not want to commit to spiritual intelligence, but suggests that "existential" intelligence can be a useful construct, also proposed after the original 7 in his 1999 book. The hypothesis of existential intelligence has been further explored by educational researchers.
Additional intelligence
On January 13, 2016, Gardner mentions in an interview with BigThink that he is considering adding pedagogical teaching intelligence "which enables us to be able to teach successfully to others". In the same interview, he explicitly rejected some of the other suggested intelligences such as humor, cooking, and sexual intelligence.
Maps Theory of multiple intelligences
Critical reception
Gardner argues that there are various cognitive abilities, but there is only a very weak correlation between them. For example, the theory postulates that a child who learns to multiply easily is not necessarily smarter than a child who has more difficulty in this task. Children who need more time to master multiplication can learn best to multiply through different approaches, may excel in fields outside mathematics, or perhaps see and understand the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level.
Intelligence and psychometric tests generally find a high correlation between various aspects of intelligence, not the low correlation predicted by Gardner's theory, supporting general general intelligence theory rather than multiple intelligences (MI). This theory has been criticized by mainstream psychology for its lack of empirical evidence, and its dependence on subjective judgments. But research by Dweck (2006), referred to as Growth Mindset Theory, shows that individuals with low correlations can achieve also high correlations through the growth of intelligence. It challenges the idea of ​​a fixed or static intelligence level that measures a common intelligence test. More importantly, it challenges the idea that an intelligence test score is an accurate predictor of future ability.
Definition of intelligence
One of the main criticisms of this theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner does not extend the definition of the word "intelligence," but rather denies the existence of traditionally understood intelligence, and instead uses the word "intelligence" in which people others traditionally use words like "ability" and "talent". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg, Eysenck, and Scarr. White (2006) suggests that the selection and application of Gardner's criteria for "intelligence" is subjective and arbitrary, and that a different researcher may appear with different criteria.
The defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus a broader definition more accurately reflects the different ways in which humans think and learn.
Some criticism comes from the fact that Gardner has not given his multiple intelligence tests. He initially defined it as the ability to solve problems that have values ​​in at least one culture, or as something of interest to a student. He then adds a disclaimer that he has no fixed definition, and his classification is more than an artistic assessment. from fact:
Ultimately, it is of course desirable to have an algorithm for intelligence selection, so that any trained researcher can determine whether the candidate's intelligence meets the appropriate criteria. At present, however, it must be admitted that the candidate's candidacy (or rejection) reminds more of an artistic assessment than a scientific judgment.
Generally, linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities are called intelligence, but artistic, musical, athletic, etc. No. Gardner believes this causes the former to be very unwarranted. Certain critics are wary of the widening of this definition, saying that it ignores "the connotation of intelligence... [which] always connects the type of thinking ability that makes a person successful at school."
Gardner writes, "I reject the unreasonable assumption that certain human abilities can be arbitrarily chosen as intelligence while others are not." Critics argue that with this statement, any interest or ability can be redefined as "intelligence". Thus, studying intelligence becomes difficult, because it diffuses into a broader concept of ability or talent. Gardner's addition to the naturalistic intelligence and conception of existential and moral intelligence is seen as the fruit of this diffusion. The defenders of MI theory will argue that this is merely a recognition of the wide scope of inherent mental ability, and that such a thorough scope is contrary to a one-dimensional classification such as the IQ score.
The theory and definition has been criticized by Perry D. Klein as so vague that it becomes tautologous and thus can not be justified. Having a high musical ability means being good at music while at the same time being good in music is explained by having a high musical ability.
Neo-Piagetian criticism
Andreas Demetriou states that theories that overemphasize domain autonomy are as simple as theories that overemphasize the role of general intelligence and ignore domains. He agrees with Gardner that there is indeed a relevant intelligence domain to each other autonomously. Some domains, such as verbal, spatial, mathematical, and social intelligence are identified by most lines of research in psychology. In Demetriou's theory, one of the neo-Piagetian theories about cognitive development, Gardner was criticized for underestimating the effects given on various domains of intelligence by various subprocesses that define the overall processing efficiency, such as processing speed, executive function, working memory, and meta-cognitive processes underlying self-awareness and self-regulation. All of these processes are an integral component of general intelligence governing the functioning and development of different intelligence domains.
These domains are largely expressions of general process conditions, and may vary due to their constitutional differences but also differences in individual preferences and trends. They function both channels and affect the operation of common processes. Thus, one can not satisfactorily determine the individual's intelligence or design an effective intervention program unless the general process and the domain of interest are evaluated.
Human adaptation to various environments
The premise of some intelligence hypotheses, that human intelligence is a collection of specialist abilities, has been criticized for not being able to explain human adaptation to a large extent, if not all environments in the world. In this context, humans are contrasted with social insects that do have scattered specialist 'intelligence', and they can spread to climates that resemble their origin but the same species never adapt to various climates from tropical to moderate temperatures by constructing different types of nests and learn what is edible and what is toxic. While some like leaf ants grow fungi on leaves, they do not cultivate different species in different environments with different farming techniques such as human farming. It is therefore argued that human adaptation comes from the general ability to forge hypotheses and make more accurate predictions and adapt behavior thereafter, and not a set of special abilities that will only work under certain environmental conditions.
IQ Test
Gardner argues that IQ tests only measure linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. He argues the importance of judging by means of "intelligence-just". While traditional paper and pen-writing exams support linguistic and logical skills, there is a need for fair-intelligence measures that assess the unique modalities of thought and learning that uniquely define each intelligence.
Psychologist Alan S. Kaufman points out that IQ tests have measured spatial ability for 70 years. Modern IQ tests are strongly influenced by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory that combines general intelligence but also many more narrow capabilities. While IQ tests provide an overall IQ score, they now also provide scores for many more narrow capabilities.
Lack of empirical evidence
According to a 2006 study, Gardner's many "intelligences" correlated with the g factor, supporting the notion of the dominant type of intelligence. According to the study, each of the domains proposed by Gardner involves a mixture of g , cognitive abilities other than g , and, in some cases, noncognitive abilities or personality characteristics.
Linda Gottfredson (2006) argues that thousands of studies support the importance of intelligence quotient (IQ) in predicting school and work performance, and many other life-related outcomes. In contrast, the empirical support for non-glib intelligence is very poor or very bad. He argues that although these ideas of some non-genius intelligence are very attractive to many people because of the suggestion that everyone can be smart in some way.
Critical reviews of MI theory argue that there is little empirical evidence to support it:
To date, no published studies have offered evidence of multiple intelligence validity. In 1994 Sternberg reported not finding empirical studies. In 2000 Allix reported not finding empirical validation studies, and at that time Gardner and Connell acknowledged that there was "little solid evidence for MI theory" (2000, p.229). In 2004 Sternberg and Grigerenko stated that there was no validation study for multiple intelligences, and in 2004 Gardner insisted that he would be "thrilled as the evidence grew", and admits that "MI theory has few fans among the psychometric or other traditional people. psychological background "because they need" psychometric or experimental evidence that allows one to prove the existence of multiple intelligences. "
The same review presents evidence to show that cognitive neuroscience research does not support the theory of multiple intelligences:
... The human brain is unlikely to function through Gardner's multiple intelligences. Together evidence of intercorrelation of sub-stage IQ measurements, evidence for a series of genes related to math, reading, and g, and evidence for sharing and overlapping "what is it?" and where it is? "Neural processing pathways, and joint nerve pathways for language, music, motor skills, and emotions show that it is unlikely that Gardner's intelligence can operate" through different nervous mechanisms "(1999, p.99) evidence for "what is it?" and where is it? " processing lines, for two Kahneman decision-making systems, and for adapted cognition modules show that this cognitive brain specialization has evolved to address very specific problems in our environment. Because Gardner claims that intelligence is a congenital potential associated with a common content area, MI theory has no reason for the emergence of phylogenetic intelligence.
The theory of multiple intelligences is sometimes cited as an example of pseudoscience because it has no empirical or falsifiability evidence, although Gardner thinks otherwise.
Use in education
Gardner defines intelligence as "the bio-psychological potential for processing information that can be activated in cultural settings to solve problems or create products of value in culture." According to Gardner, there are more ways to do this than just through logical and linguistic intelligence. Gardner believes that the purpose of the school "must be to develop intelligence and to help people achieve vocational and avocational goals that fit their specific intelligence spectrum." People who are helped to do so, [he] believe [s], feel more engaged and competent and therefore more tend to serve society in a constructive way. "
Gardner argues that IQ tests focus primarily on logical and linguistic intelligence. After conducting this test well, the opportunity to attend a prestigious college or university increases, which in turn creates the contribution of community members. While many students function well in this environment, some are not. Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader vision of education, where teachers use different methodologies, exercises and activities to reach all students, not just those who excel in linguistic and logical intelligence. It challenges educators to find "the way that will work for these students to learn about this topic".
James Traub's article on The New Republic states that Gardner's system has not been accepted by most academics in intelligence or teaching. Gardner states that "while the theory of Multiple Intelligence is consistent with many empirical evidences, it has not yet been subjected to a strong experimental test... In the field of education, the application of this theory is being examined on many projects.Our hunch will have to be revised many times given the classroom experience which are actually. "
Jerome Bruner agrees with Gardner that intelligence is a "useful fiction," and then states that "his approach is far beyond the thrilling mental testers that deserve to be encouraged."
George Miller, a prominent cognitive psychologist, wrote in The New York Times Book Review that Gardner's argument consists of "hunches and opinions" and Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein in The Bell Curve i> i> (1994) calls Gardner's theory "unique without psychometric evidence or other quantitative evidence."
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments