Skip to content

InstructionalDesign.org

 Concepts
 Theories
 Domains
 Models
 Books
 Jobs
 About
 Search










Home » Learning Theories » Multiple Intelligences (Howard Gardner)

Multiple Intelligences (Howard Gardner)

The theory of multiple intelligences suggests that there are a number of distinct forms of
intelligence that each individual possesses in varying degrees. Gardner proposes seven primary
forms: linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, spatial, body-kinesthetic, intrapersonal (e.g.,
insight, metacognition) and interpersonal (e.g., social skills).

According to Gardner , the implication of the theory is that learning/teaching should focus on the
particular intelligences of each person. For example, if an individual has strong spatial or musical
intelligences, they should be encouraged to develop these abilities. Gardner points out that the
different intelligences represent not only different content domains but also learning modalities.
A further implication of the theory is that assessment of abilities should measure all forms of
intelligence, not just linguistic and logical-mathematical.

Gardner also emphasizes the cultural context of multiple intelligences. Each culture tends to
emphasize particular intelligences. For example, Gardner (1983) discusses the high spatial
abilities of the Puluwat people of the Caroline Islands, who use these skills to navigate their
canoes in the ocean. Gardner also discusses the balance of personal intelligences required in
Japanese society.
The theory of multiple intelligences shares some common ideas with other theories of individual
differences such as Cronbach & Snow, Guilford, and Sternberg.

Application
The theory of multiple intelligences has been focused mostly on child development although it
applies to all ages. While there is no direct empirical support for the theory, Gardner (1983)
presents evidence from many domains including biology, anthropology, and the creative arts and
Gardner (1993a) discusses application of the theory to school programs. Gardner (1982, 1993b)
explores the implications of the framework for creativity (see also Marks-Tarlow, 1995).

Example
Gardner (1983, p 390) describes how learning to program a computer might involve multiple
intelligences:

“Logical-mathematical intelligence seems central, because programming depends upon the

deployment of strict procedures to solve a problem or attain a goal in a finite number of steps.
Linguistic intelligence is also relevant, at least as long as manual and computer languages make
use of ordinary language…an individual with a strong musical bent might best be introduced to
programming by attempting to program a simple musical piece (or to master a program that
composes). An individual with strong spatial abilities might be initiated through some form of
computer graphics — and might be aided in the task of programming through the use of a
flowchart or some other spatial diagram. Personal intelligences can play important roles. The
extensive planning of steps and goals carried out by the individual engaged in programming
relies on intrapersonal forms of thinking, even as the cooperation needed for carrying a complex
task or for learning new computational skills may rely on an individual’s ability to work with a
team. Kinesthetic intelligence may play a role in working with the computer itself, by facilitating
skill at the terminal…”

Principles
1. Individuals should be encouraged to use their preferred intelligences in learning.
2. Instructional activities should appeal to different forms of intelligence.
3. Assessment of learning should measure multiple forms of intelligence.

References
 Gardner, H. (1982). Art, Mind and Brain. New York: Basic Books.
 Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. New York: Basic Books.
 Gardner, H. (1993a). Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. NY: Basic Books.
 Gardner, H. (1 993b). Creating Minds. NY: Basic Books.
 Marks-Tarlow, T. (1995). Creativity inside out: Learning through multiple intelligences.
Reading , MA: Addison-Wesley.
Related Websites
To learn more about Gardner’s work, see his homepage.

A New York Times opinion piece from Oct 4, 2018 addressed components of multiple
intelligences. Are You a Visual or an Auditory Learning? It Doesn’t Matter.

Copyright © 2019 Richard Culatta. All rights reserved.

Multiple domain web hosting provided by InnovativeLearning.com. Website by Yellow Rubber

Ball.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Scroll back to top

Skip to content

InstructionalDesign.org

 Concepts
 Theories
 Domains
 Models
 Books
 Jobs
 About
 Search










Home » Learning Concepts » Cognitive/Learning Styles

Cognitive/Learning Styles
Cognitive styles refer to the preferred way an individual processes information. Unlike
individual differences in abilities (e.g., Gardner, Guilford, Sternberg) which describe peak
performance, styles describe a person’s typical mode of thinking, remembering or problem
solving. Furthermore, styles are usually considered to be bipolar dimensions whereas abilities are
unipolar (ranging from zero to a maximum value). Having more of an ability is usually
considered beneficial while having a particular cognitive style simply denotes a tendency to
behave in a certain manner. Cognitive style is a usually described as a personality dimension
which influences attitudes, values, and social interaction.

A number of cognitive styles have been identified and studied over the years. Field independence
versus field dependence is probably the most well known style. It refers to a tendency to
approach the environment in an analytical, as opposed to global, fashion. At a perceptual level,
field independent personalities are able to distinguish figures as discrete from their backgrounds
compared to field dependent individuals who experience events in an undifferentiated way. In
addition, field dependent individuals have a greater social orientation relative to field
independent personalities. Studies have identified a number connections between this cognitive
style and learning (see Messick, 1978). For example, field independent individuals are likely to
learn more effectively under conditions of instrinstic motivation (e.g., self-study) and are
influenced less by social reinforcement.
Other cognitive styles that have been identified include:

 scanning – differences in the extent and intensity of attention resulting in variations in the
vividness of experience and the span of awareness
 leveling versus sharpening – individual variations in remembering that pertain to the
distinctiveness of memories and the tendency to merge similar events
 reflection versus impulsivity – individual consistencies in the speed and adequacy with
which alternative hypotheses are formed and responses made
 conceptual differentiation – differences in the tendency to categorize perceived
similarities among stimuli in terms of separate concepts or dimensions

Learning styles specifically deal with characteristic styles of learning. Kolb (1984) proposes a
theory of experiential learning that involves four principal stages: concrete experiences (CE),
reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC), and active experimentation (AE).
The CE/AC and AE/RO dimensions are polar opposities as far as learning styles are concerned
and Kolb postulates four types of learners (divergers, assimilators, convergers, and
accommodators) depending upon their position on these two dimensions. For example, an
accommodater prefers concrete experiences and active experimentation (AE, CE).

Pask has described a learning style called serialist versus holist. Serialists prefer to learn in a
sequential fashion, whereas holists prefer to learn in a hierarchial manner (i.e., top-down).

Theoretically, cognitive and learning styles could be used to predict what kind of instructional
strategies or methods would be most effective for a given individual and learning task. Research
to date on this problem has not identified many robust relationships (see Cronbach & Snow).
However, the 4MAT framework based on the work of Bernice McCarthy which suggests 4
learning modes (Analytic, Imaginative, Common Sense, and Dynamic) has been widely applied
in education (see http://www.aboutlearning.com). And the learning styles framework developed
by Dunn & Dunn (1999) seems to be useful in terms of creating teacher awareness of individual
differences in learning.

Discussion about the relationship between learning styles and the Multiple Intelligences theory
of Gardner can be found at www.ldpride.net.

References
 Dunn, R. & Dunn, K. (1999). The Complete Guide to the Learning Strategies Inservice
System. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
 Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Englewood< Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
 Messick, S. (1976). Individuality in Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 Sternberg, Robert (1997). Thinking Styles. Boston: Cambridge University Press.
 Witkin, H.A. & Goodenough, D.R. (1981). Cognitive Styles: Essence and Origins. NY:
International Universities Press.
Copyright © 2019 Richard Culatta. All rights reserved.

Multiple domain web hosting provided by InnovativeLearning.com. Website by Yellow Rubber

Ball.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service
Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learning
Styles (VAK)
The VAK learning style uses the three main sensory receivers: Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic
(movement) to determine the dominant learning style. It is sometimes known as VAKT (Visual,
Auditory, Kinesthetic, & Tactile). It is based on modalities—channels by which human
expression can take place and is composed of a combination of perception and memory.

VAK is derived from the accelerated learning world and seems to be about the most popular
model nowadays due to its simplicity. While the research has shown a connection with
modalities and learning styles (University of Pennsylvania, 2009), the research has so far been
unable to prove the using one's learning style provides the best means for learning a task or
subject. This is probably because it is more of a preference, rather than a style.

Learners use all three modalities to receive and learn new information and experiences.
However, according to the VAK or modality theory, one or two of these receiving styles is
normally dominant. This dominant style defines the best way for a person to learn new
information by filtering what is to be learned. This style may not always to be the same for some
tasks. The learner may prefer one style of learning for one task, and a combination of others for a
different task.

Classically, our learning style is forced upon us through life like this: In grades kindergarten to
third, new information is presented to us kinesthetically; grades 4 to 8 are visually presented;
while grades 9 to college and on into the business environment, information is presented to us
mostly through auditory means, such as lectures.
According to the VAK theorists, we need to present information using all three styles. This
allows all learners the opportunity to become involved, no matter what their preferred style may
be.

While there is some evidence for modality specific strengths and weaknesses (Rourke, et al.
2002), what has has not been established is matching the instructional style to individual learning
strength improves their learning abilities. For example, one study (Constantinidou and Baker,
2002), found that visual presentation through the use of pictures was advantageous for all adults,
irrespective of a high or low learning-style preference for visual images. Indeed, it was especially
advantageous for those with a strong preference for verbal processing.

Hints for Recognizing and Implementing the Three VAK

Styles
Auditory learners often talk to themselves. They also may move their lips and read out loud.
They may have difficulty with reading and writing tasks. They often do better talking to a
colleague or a tape recorder and hearing what was said. To integrate this style into the learning
environment:

 Begin new material with a brief explanation of what is coming. Conclude with a
summary of what has been covered. This is the old adage of “tell them what they are
going to lean, teach them, and tell them what they have learned.”
 Use the Socratic method of lecturing by questioning learners to draw as much
information from them as possible and then fill in the gaps with you own expertise.
 Include auditory activities, such as brainstorming, buzz groups, or Jeopardy. Leave plenty
of time to debrief activities. This allows them to make connections of what they leaned
and how it applies to their situation.
 Have the learners verbalize the questions.
 Develop an internal dialogue between yourself and the learners.

Visual learners have two sub-channels—linguistic and spatial. Learners who are visual-
linguistic like to learn through written language, such as reading and writing tasks. They
remember what has been written down, even if they do not read it more than once. They like to
write down directions and pay better attention to lectures if they watch them. Learners who are
visual-spatial usually have difficulty with the written language and do better with charts,
demonstrations, videos, and other visual materials. They easily visualize faces and places by
using their imagination and seldom get lost in new surroundings. To integrate this style into the
learning environment:

 Use graphs, charts, illustrations, or other visual aids.

 Include outlines, concept maps, agendas, handouts, etc. for reading and taking notes.
 Include plenty of content in handouts to reread after the learning session.
 Leave white space in handouts for note-taking.
 Invite questions to help them stay alert in auditory environments.
 Post flip charts to show what will come and what has been presented.
  Emphasize key points to cue when to takes notes.
 Eliminate potential distractions.
 Supplement textual information with illustrations whenever possible.
 Have them draw pictures in the margins.
 Have the learners envision the topic or have them act out the subject matter.

Kinesthetic learners do best while touching and moving. It also has two sub-channels:
kinesthetic (movement) and tactile (touch). They tend to lose concentration if there is little or no
external stimulation or movement. When listening to lectures they may want to take notes for the
sake of moving their hands. When reading, they like to scan the material first, and then focus in
on the details (get the big picture first). They typically use color high lighters and take notes by
drawing pictures, diagrams, or doodling. To integrate this style into the learning environment:

 Use activities that get the learners up and moving.

 Play music, when appropriate, during activities.
 Use colored markers to emphasize key points on flip charts or white boards.
 Give frequent stretch breaks (brain breaks).
 Provide toys such as Koosh balls and Play-Dough to give them something to do with
their hands.
 To highlight a point, provide gum, candy, scents, etc. which provides a cross link of scent
(aroma) to the topic at hand (scent can be a powerful cue).
 Provide high lighters, colored pens and/or pencils.
 Guide learners through a visualization of complex tasks.
 Have them transfer information from the text to another medium such as a keyboard or a
tablet.
Cognitive style or thinking style is a concept used in cognitive psychology to describe the way individuals
think, perceive and remember information. ... While matching cognitive styles may make participants
feel more comfortable when working with one another, this alone cannot guarantee the success of the
outcome.

Home

Blog

About

Training

Certification

Coaching

Contact

Life Coach Training and Life Coaching for Teens Life Coach Training and Life Coaching for Teens

Session 2 – Thinking Styles

Thinking Styles are a core element in learning. It frames the context for how a student stores
information. In the description below you’ll learn more about the academic thinking styles that will give
your child a heightened awareness as to what their learning style is based on what kind of thinker they
are. And teenagers love learning about how they learn best, especially in the context of a life coaching
program. Students in the classroom use this by becoming more aware of which styles they use in a
group-like, academic setting. When students are aware of the teacher’s thinking style, they are more
able to match their studying and what they’re doing in terms of paying attention to the teacher with or
without studying methods. It is important for both the student and teacher to realize what kind of
thinker they are and base the performance of the material on the style that comes easiest to them.

How you can support your child

We’ve found the best support parents can give is to read the paragraphs below and determine the kind
of thinker they are. Then notice how often you revert to that thinking style. It’s fun to think about what
the different styles are and how those different styles play out in family interactions. It’s fun to take
notice at the dinner table, like when you’re planning the itinerary for a family vacation. By analyzing
conversation, you tend to become more aware of you and your child’s thinking styles. If you find that
you and your child have a different thinking style, which often happens, find where the largest
differences lie. For instance, if your child is a what thinker, and you’re a why thinker, you can agreeably
pay more attention to the details of the situation, as well as detail oriented questions. Your child then
can understand his or her parent is more focused on the why, and can respond accordingly, offering
explanations for their thoughts and actions. One of the most helpful way we both can assist a child in
studying is by taking their notes and looking at each concept, and figure out which details and
definitions are required, why the concept works either mathematically or scientifically, what the reasons
were behind the action, or why this happened historically, or in literature, for instance. Then look at
how these academic systems came to be.

From the Academic Life Coaching Workbook

Thinking Styles Just like learning styles, thinking styles are different for everyone. One of the benefits of
looking at thinking styles, especially in the context of a life coaching program, is that knowing your
thinking style is another tool to succeed that you can tailor to your specific process of learning. It’s
another way of understanding what makes you unique, it increases your self-awareness, and it helps you
understand why some teachers style makes sense while others don’t. Here’s an excerpt from an essay in
Future-Proofed that addresses Thinking Styles:

The brain is a thinking machine. Just as everyone has a specific style of speaking, the brain has a specific
style of thinking. From one point-of-view the brain can be thought of as an information device. It’s
designed to gather information about the environment to keep you safe from danger and alert to
opportunities.

Your thinking style is going to be approaching the knowledge from many different points of view. The
problem occurs when students think that they know a topic, but really, they just know one perspective
of the topic. They just know the details, the definitions, and not necessarily how everything fits together
or connects. For example, students may know how to do a math problem but they may not necessarily
know why it works or what it’s called.

When you know your thinking style, you’ll know your strength and you’ll also know what thinking styles
you need to develop. Ideally, you will become comfortable in each of the three thinking styles. You will
get in the habit of taking notes with each question answered for each concept, and include each thinking
style in your writing.

As such, your brain focuses on 3 specific questions to make sense of the world.

1) What?
2) Why?

3) How?

How to Find Your Thinking Style

Your Academic Life Coach will provide a lot of valuable experience to help you determine your Thinking
Style. Sometimes your style is readily apparent. Sometimes, it’s tough to determine. The key is to
recognize the kinds of questions you find yourself asking when trying to learn something. Here are three
paragraphs about characteristics of each thinking style.

What Thinkers

What-thinkers tend to love detail and want to know the names, definitions, facts, and more about the
material itself. What-thinkers may put a copious number of facts in an essay, and put hours of work into
their writing, but be frustrated with not earning the highest grade because teachers want more analysis.
(In other words, the teachers want to know more than just the facts and have a balance of thinking
styles in an essay.) What-thinkers assume that if they can know all the correct facts, and are
knowledgable about the facts of a situation, the cause (or why) or method (or how) will be apparent.

Why Thinkers

Why-thinkers want to understand the reasons behind the action. Detail is somewhat important, but not
as important as knowing the motivation behind someone doing something or the cause of something
happening. These kinds of learners tend to drive what-teachers crazy, especially in a subject like Math.
Why-thinkers assume that if they can know the causes behind something, they know all the important
facts and there can be any number of methods to accomplish it.

How Thinkers

How thinkers want to understand how they can do something or how it happened. To a how-thinker,
most details aren’t that important, but the essential details are paramount. When writing how-thinkers
tend to summarize or retell the event from their particular point-of-view. As a result their papers tend to
be light on synopsis and analysis and make the reader work to fill in many of the details. How-thinkers
assume that the reasons are obvious, the details are usually superfluous, yet if someone knows how to
do something, all the other pieces of knowledge will fall into place.

How to Use the Concept of Thinking Styles

Each Thinking Style is a channel or method of thought. Each is valid and important. Similar to a learning
style, one of the goals of knowing about and using thinking styles is to become proficient at each style as
well as know which styles might be your weak point. If you know, for instance, that you are a how-
thinker, you may want to take more time focusing on the specific definitions or names when studying. If
you are a what-thinker, you may want to spend more time looking for analysis and the reasons behind
action. If you are a why-thinker, it would be worthwhile to spend just a little more time on the names
and definitions as well as get used to learning specific methods for solving a problem.

The key to using learning styles is to become comfortable with each style, and to make sure that when
you are studying you understand the concept from each of the three angles:

1) What are the details and definitions?

2) Why did it happen this way? Why does it work?

3) How did it happen and how can I do it?

Exercises for Building Your Thinking Styles

1) Take notes that you would usually take in class. Then, when reviewing your notes, code them into
What, Why, and How for each major concept. If you can’t find a Why or How, that’s a good question to
ask the teacher next time in class.

2) Practice writing paragraphs that address each of the four questions. Students often find themselves
favoring one thinking style, which leads to writing that’s either filled with too many details and little
analysis, or a summary of what happened without really letting the reader know what the main topic is
and the reasons behind it. By addressing each of the four thinking styles, in turn, you ensure that you
will begin to write outstanding paragraphs and papers (which will also help you on the college
application).

3) Pay attention to the kinds of questions each teacher asks and the kinds of information your teacher is
giving in class. Is your teacher fond of names, dates, and details? If so, then she’s probably a ‘what-
thinker.’ Does he like to delve into the possible reasons why something happens? Then he’s a ‘why-
thinker.’ Does she spend a lot of time going step-by-step through the problem or section? Then she’s
probably a ‘how-thinker.’