You are on page 1of 37

1

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

The theory of multiple intelligences is a model of intelligence that differentiates it

into specific (primarily sensory) "modalities", rather than seeing intelligence as

dominated by a single general ability. This model was proposed by Howard Gardner in

his 1983 book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Gardner articulated

seven criteria for a behavior to be considered as intelligence. These were that the

intelligences showed: potential for brain isolation by brain damage, place in evolutionary

history, presence of core operations, susceptibility to encoding (symbolic expression), a

distinct developmental progression, the existence of savants, prodigies and other

exceptional people, and support from experimental psychology and psychometric

findings.

Gardner chose eight abilities that he held to meet these criteria: musical –

rhythmic, visual – spatial, verbal – linguistic, logical – mathematical, bodily –

kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. He later suggested that

existential and moral intelligence may also be worthy of inclusion. Although the

distinction between intelligences has been set out in great detail, Gardner opposes the

idea of labeling learners to a specific intelligence. Each individual possesses a unique


2

blend of all the intelligences. Gardner firmly maintains that his theory of multiple

intelligences should "empower learners", not restrict them to one modality of learning.

The tracking of academic performance fulfills a number of purposes. Areas of

achievement and failure in a student's academic career need to be evaluated in order to

foster improvement and make full use of the learning process. Results provide a

framework for talking about how students fare in school, and a constant standard to

which all students are held. Performance results also allow students to be ranked and

sorted on a scale that is numerically obvious, minimizing complaints by holding teachers

and schools accountable for the components of each and every grade.

Performance in school is evaluated in a number of ways. For regular grading,

students demonstrate their knowledge by taking written and oral tests, performing

presentations, turning in homework and participating in class activities and discussions.

Teachers evaluate in the form of letter or number grades and side notes, to describe how

well a student has done. At the state level, students are evaluated by their performance on

standardized tests geared toward specific ages and based on a set of achievements

students in each age group are expected to meet.

The subjectivity of academic performance evaluation has lessened in recent years,

but it has not been totally eliminated. It may not be possible to fully remove subjectivity

from the current evaluation methods, since most are biased toward students that respond

best to traditional teaching methods. Standardized testing is best responded to by students

that excel in reading, mathematics and test-taking, a skill that is not in itself indicative of

academic worth. The tests reward visual learners, and give no chance for kinesthetic or

auditory learners to show their abilities. The standardized test fails to recognize students
3

with learning and physical disabilities that do not allow them to complete the test in the

same manner or amount of time as other students. Evaluations from classroom teachers,

though they give the most detailed information, may still retain bias if individual

differentiation and learning styles have not been taken into account.

Although education is not the only road to success in the working world, much

effort is made to identify, evaluate, track and encourage the progress of students in

schools. Parents care about their child's academic performance because they believe good

academic results will provide more career choices and job security. Schools, though

invested in fostering good academic habits for the same reason, are also often influenced

by concerns about the school's reputation and the possibility of monetary aid from

government institutions, which can hinge on the overall academic performance of the

school. State and federal departments of education are charged with improving schools,

and so devise methods of measuring success in order to create plans for improvement.

Because of the aforementioned learning situations of the students, the researchers attempt

to undertake this study.

Statement of the Problem

The main problem of this study is: to determine if there is a correlation between

multiple intelligences of the respondents to their academic performance.

To support and further clarify the main problem, the researchers will also find

answers to the following sub-problems:


4

1. How may the multiple intelligences of the respondents be accounted to:

1.1. Linguistic Intelligence;

1.2. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence;

1.3. Musical Intelligence;

1.4. Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence;

1.5. Spatial Intelligence;

1.6. Interpersonal Intelligence;

1.7. Intrapersonal Intelligence; and

1.8. Naturalistic Intelligence?

2. What is the academic performance of the respondents in all of the subject

areas?

3. Is there a significant relationship between multiple intelligence and academic

performance?

Significance of the Study

This study will be significant to the following:

To the Students. This study intends to send awareness with the students’

weaknesses and strengths in terms of their multiple intelligences. It also aims to make

them realize that they may not be as good as the others in English, in the field of Science

or even in Mathematics, but they may have skills in the other areas like in Music, Arts, or

in Kinesthetic. This will help them accept themselves positively, have healthy self-esteem
5

and manage themselves with dignity in any learning situation. Understanding oneself and

ones role in teaching-learning process, the students will be motivated to learn and have

active participation and strong desire for knowledge. And this will lead them to have a

better academic performance.

To the Teachers. The significance of the outcome of this research is to provide

substantial information about the correlation of the multiple intelligences of the students

to their academic performance. Knowing the students capabilities, teachers will know the

appropriate learning methods that will be very beneficial and effective with the students

learning.

To the School Administrators. Findings of this research will give them insights

about the relationship of multiple intelligences to the academic performance of the

students. With the results of this study, it will give the school ideas about the good

academic habits. This study will also contribute awareness about the concerns of the

schools over-all performance and will aid the school administrators to rescue their

programs/ strategies accorded to the students’ intelligences and abilities.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study limited its coverage to the Grade Seven students of San Pedro High

School, San Simon, Pampanga, who were currently enrolled during the school year 2013-

2014.
6

The scope of this study focused on the academic performance of the respondents

and its significant relationship with multiple intelligences. This study considered every

aspect of students’ multiple intelligences that had an impact on their academic

performance.
7

Notes in Chapter I

http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-the-meaning-of-academic-performance

(retrieved on December 12, 2013)

http://beta.usc.edu.ph/research/index.php/dissertations/614-the-multiple-intelligences-

profile-and-academic-performance-of-freshman-students-in-mandaue-city-public-

secondary-schools-proposed-curricular-activities (retrieved on November 20, 2013)

http://www.ehow.com/about_4740750_define-academic-performance.html?

ref=Track2&utm_source=ask (retrieved on November 20, 2013)


8

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter presents the theories, literature, and studies gathered from local and

foreign sources to equip the researcher with insights to present today.

Relevant Theories

The Theory of Multiple Intelligences of Howard Gardner (1983) as cited by

Sanga (2012), one of the multiple-factor views of intelligence. Gardner proposed that

there are at least eight different types of intelligences: verbal skills, mathematical skills,

spatial skills, bodily-kinesthetic skills, musical skills, intrapersonal skills, interpersonal

skills, and naturalistic skills.

Furthermore, the theory also talks about the different facets of intelligences like

the ability to solve problems that one encounters in real life, the ability to generate new

problems to solve, and the ability to make something or offer a service that is valued

within one's culture. In his cross-cultural exploration of the ways in which people are

intelligent

In 1983, Howard Gardner published Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple

Intelligences, in which he provided extensive research to support his contention that

human intelligence is multi-faceted rather than singular. (Santos, 2008)


9

But Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences is the best known of these

pluralistic theories. Many hundreds of schools across the globe have incorporated MI

principles into their mission, curriculum, and pedagogy; and hundreds of books have

been written (in numerous languages) on the relevance of MI theory to educators and

educational institutions (Chen, Moran, & Gardner, 2009).

The Achievement Goal Theory of Gage (1998) as cited by Santos (2008) states

that three factors interact to determine a person’s achievement: (1) achievement goals, for

instance, an aspiring linguist in English subject but an aspiring historian may not put

much effort in their English subjects, (2) perceived ability, a person who perceives his

ability to be adequate in a given subject is likely to succeed than those who doubts his

competency in that particular subject, and (3) achievement behavior, a student that is

more motivated is more likely to succeed than a less motivated student with equal

abilities in the same subject. According to the central proposition of achievement of the

theory revolves around the manner in which individuals determine their goals in an

achievement setting.

Related Literature

According to Tenedero (2010), a young child’s ability is multi-furious:

understanding, memory, vocabulary, reasoning, capacity for drawing conclusions and

making inferences. This proves that every child has unique abilities that need to be

nurtured. Some of these abilities are innate and only needs to be developed like the
10

memory. During exams there is a great edge of having a retentive memory but this ability

has to be developed with the help of the teachers to guide the child.

Gazzaniga and Heatherton (2008) revealed that multiple intelligences is the idea

that people can show different skills in a variety of different domains. While intelligence

is referred to be a combination of being able to learn quickly, make reasonable decisions,

and adapt to diverse environments. A child can be musically inclined and at the same

time excels in sports and can show off these abilities depending on a specific

circumstance. Hence, the intelligence of a child referred is his ability to pick up a

particular lesson in a period of time or how can a child formulate a solution promptly in a

given situation.

Armstrong (2009) said that even if the students are smart in eight different ways

are expected to excel in academics. There should be a follow up with solid academic

effort leading to tangible improvements in knowledge of history, math, science, reading,

and other basic subjects. There are a lot of factors for the success of a child especially in

his or her academic performance. The teacher plays a huge role for the students’

improvement and also their parents. The child needs someone to remind and guide him

after school.

According to Santos (2008), the international standing of the United States in

terms of academic achievement is low. A factor that helps explain differences in

achievement striving are the expectations that people hold regarding their own potential

for success or failure. If people expect to do well on task, they are likely to devote more
11

effort into it than they do if they anticipate failure. Some people have confidence that

they will ultimately prevail, while others are filled with doubt.

As what Gazzaniga and Heatherton revealed that multiple intelligences was the

idea that people can show different skills in a variety of different domains, this study

revealed that the respondents’ have different abilities and capabilities, though they have

different fields of spacification.

Related Studies

In the study on the Multiple Intelligences as Predictor of Academic Performance

in Accounting: Evidence from a Private University in the Philippines, G. V. Fernando

(2009) revealed that there is a significant correlation between multiple intelligences and

academic performance. The study proved it by using descriptive-correlation methods of

research, the researchers found out that the 56 student respondents, sampled purposively

from Far Eastern University, have a great extent of multiple intelligences and performed

“good” in the two aforesaid courses. The average scores of students in the two courses

who perceived to have a great extent of multiple intelligences got higher grades than

students who perceived to have a moderate extent of multiple intelligences. Also, finds

significant relationship between logical, linguistics and visual intelligences and the

academic performance of the respondents. The respondents’ extent of logical and

linguistics intelligences significantly predicts their academic performance in accounting.


12

According to the study Correlates of Students’ Achievement in Technology

Livelihood Education in Selected Laboratory High School in SUC Region III of Rosita

D. Hilario (2009), the results found out that taken jointly, of all the student-related

variables as viewed by the students, five had significantly affected the level of

achievement of the students. Hence, the null Hypotheses were rejected.

In the study of Elizabeth W. Santos (2008), Multiple Intelligences, Language

Profiency and Academic Performace of First Year High School Students marked that the

performance of verbal people in Academic Achievement in English did not differ

significantly to other intelligences except for kinesthetic and visual people. People who

possess these intelligences except for the kinesthetic and visual people tend to have the

same level of performance in English achievement.

The first study shows using a descriptive was that there is a significant correlation

between multiple intelligences and academic performance, as it was proved by using

descriptive-correlation methods of research. The respondents’ extent of logical and

linguistic intelligences significantly predicts their academic performance in accounting.

In the second study, out of all the student-related variables, only five had significantly

affected the level of achievement of the students which lead the hypotheses was rejected.

While in the third study, the results show that the verbal people in Academic

Achievement in English did not differ significantly to other intelligences except for

kinesthetic and visual people, and people who possess these intelligences except the

aforesaid exceptional tend to have the same level of performance in English

Achievement. In relation to our, it was shown that there was a significant correlation

between the respondents’ academic performance to five of the eight intelligences namely:
13

linguistic/verbal, logical-mathematical, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, and visual/spatial

intelligences.

Conceptual Framework

“It is not enough merely to tell students that they are smart in eight different ways

and expect them to blossom. This has to be followed up with solid academic effort

leading to tangible improvements in knowledge of history, math, science, reading, and

other basic subjects” (Armstrong, 2009).

Multiple Intelligences

1. Linguistic Intelligence
2. Logical-Mathematical
Intelligence
3. Musical Intelligence
4. Bodily-Kinesthetic
General Point Average
Intelligence
5. Spatial Intelligence
6. Interpersonal Intelligence
7. Intrapersonal Intelligence
8. Naturalistic Intelligence

The paradigm summarizes descriptively the correlation between the Multiple

Intelligences and Academic Performance of the first year students in the San Pedro

National High School, accounting their General Point Average (GPA) during the second

grading period, school year 2013-2014. The Multiple Intelligences include the
14

linguistic/verbal intelligence, logical-mathematical intelligence, visual/spatial

intelligence, musical intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, intrapersonal

intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and naturalistic intelligence.

Hypothesis of the Study

To answer the questions set forth in this study, the following hypothesis is

formulated and will be tested:

1. There is no significant relationship between multiple intelligence and academic

performance of the respondents.

Definition of Variables

This portion discusses the terms used in the study.

Academic Performance. Refers to the general point average of the respondents

in the second grading period. Results provide a framework for talking about how students

fare in school, and a constant standard to which all students are held.

Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence. Students’ ability to control one’s body

movements and to handle objects skilfully.

Interpersonal intelligence. Students’ capacity to discern and respond

appropriately to the moods, temperaments, motivations and desires of other people.


15

Intrapersonal intelligence. Students’ ability to access to one’s own feelings and

the ability to discriminate among them and draw upon them to guide behavior.

Knowledge of one own’s strengths, weaknesses, desires and intelligences.

Linguistic/verbal intelligence. This is the students’ sensitivity to the sounds,

rhythms and meanings of words and sensitivity to the different functions of language.

Logical/mathematical intelligence. This is the students’ sensitivity to, and

capacity to discern, logical or numerical patterns and ability to handle long chains of

reasoning.

Musical intelligence. Students’ ability to produce and appreciate rhythm, pitch

and timbre. Appreciation of the forms of musical expressiveness.

Naturalistic Intelligence. Students’ ability to recognize and classify plants,

minerals and animals including rocks and grass and all variety of flora and fauna. Ability

to recognize cultural artifacts.

Spatial/Visual intelligence. Students’ capacity to perceive the visual-spatial

world accurately and to perform transformations on one’s initial perceptions.


16

Notes in Chapter II

Santos, E. W., Multiple Intelligences, Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement

in English of First Year High School Students at the University of the Assumption, 2008

Hilario, R. D., Correlates of Students’ Achievement in Technology Livelihood and

Education

Sanga, C. B., Compilation on Child and Adolescent Development, 2012

Tenedero, H. S., Breakthrough Education, 2010

Gazzaniga, M. S., Psychological Science Second Edition, 2008

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2158151 (December 8, 2013)

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109007/chapters/MI-Theory-and-Its-Critics.aspx

(December 8, 2013)

https://iadr.confex.com/iadr/2006Brisb/techprogram/abstract_78531.htm (December 8,

2013)
17

CHAPTER III

METHODS OF RESEARCH

This chapter presents the methods and techniques used in the study, research

instrument, data gathering procedures and the statistical treatment that were used.

Methods and Techniques of Study

The study used the descriptive method or otherwise known as normative survey.

It was a method concerned with the prevailing or existing status of an event or problem

under this method. This method analyzed data to find the correlation of multiple

intelligences of the first year students of College of Education of Bulacan State

University with their academic performance. The researchers used a questionnaire as a

tool in data gathering.

Sampling Technique

The researchers selected the first year students of the San Pedro High School in

the school year 2013-1014 as the respondents in the study and used simple random

sampling. The researchers will write each name of the respondents in a piece of paper

separately and place them in a bowl. Then, shuffle the rolled papers in the bowl every

time the researchers pick out one to give the respondents a fair chance and avoid being

bias.
18

Population and Sample of the Study

There were 159 first year students in the San Pedro High School and were divided

into four sections. In this study, the researchers only included 50% of the students in each

section as respondents. Random sampling was used as a method in choosing sample from

a target population such each population will have an equal chance to be involved in

testing of the material.

No. of students x 0.50 = No. of Sample

Section 1. St. Peter

41 x 0.50 = 21

Section 2. St. John

38 x 0.50 = 19

Section 3. St. Francis

36 x 0.5 = 18

Section 4. St. Matthew

44 x 0.05 = 22
19

Table 1

Population and Sample of the Study

Section No. of Students No. of Sample


1. St. Peter 41 21
2. St. John 38 19
3. St. Francis 36 18
4. St. Matthew 44 22
TOTAL 159 80

Research Instrument

The questionnaire was designed based on relevant researches. Primarily,

questions on students’ multiple intelligences (linguistic intelligence, logical-mathematical

intelligence, spatial intelligence, musical intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence,

naturalistic intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and intrapersonal intelligence) were

asked. Each item was designed with 5-point Likert scales, using values of 1 for “strongly

disagree” and 5 for “strongly agree”.

Table 2

Table of Distribution of Items

Topics Number of Items


Linguistic/ Verbal 1-10
20

Logical-Mathematical 11-20
Visual/ Spatial 21-30
Musical 31-40
Bodily-kinesthetic 41-50
Interpersonal 51-60
Intrapersonal 61-70
Naturalistic 71-80

The table above discusses the distribution of items in the research

instrument used in the study. It shows that from numbers 1-10 are questions in measuring

the linguistic/verbal intelligence, from numbers 11-20 are questions in measuring the

logical-mathematical intelligence, from 21-30 are questions in measuring the

visual/spatial intelligence, from 31-40 are questions in measuring the musical

intelligence, from 41-50 are questions in measuring the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence,

from 51-60 are questions in measuring the intrapersonal intelligence, from 61-70 are

questions in measuring the interpersonal intelligence, and from 71-80 are questions in

measuring the naturalistic intelligence.

Data Gathering Procedure

A letter of permission to conduct the study was written and submitted by the

researchers to the Principal of San Pedro High School. After the researchers were

permitted, another letter of request to get a copy of the list of number of first year

students per section in the San Pedro High School was written and submitted to the

registrar’s office. The researchers then distribute the questionnaires to the respondents.

Subsequently, the papers were collected after the students had answered by the

researchers.
21

Data Processing and Statistical Treatment

The data were gathered, organized, tallied and tabulated using assigned coded

values for some variables for some variables in the questionnaire.

To ease the processing and computation of the different statistical treatment, the

researchers made use of the Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS). The use of

the SPSS was due to the fact that a large number of students that were used as

respondents. The SPSS software uses two levels of significance, the .01 and the .05 level.

Pearson product-moment rank correlations coefficient, linear correlation was

employed in this study to determine the relationship between Academic Performance and

Multiple Intelligences of the Grade Seven students. The independent variables and

dependent variable were measured according to the following five-point Likert scale and

verbal description:

Scale Verbal Interpretation

5 Strongly Agree (SA)

4 Agree (A)

3 Neutral (N)

2 Disagree (D)

1 Strongly Disagree (SD)

The multiple intelligences of the students were described as presented below.


22

Scale Verbal Interpretation

3.50-4.00 Above Average

2.50-3.49 Average

1.50-2.49 Below Average

1.00-1.49 Low

The respondents’ level of performance was described using the result of their

second grading period Grade Point Average (GPA) according to the following:

Rating Verbal Interpretation

93 – 100 High

85 – 92 Above Average

78 – 84 Average

75- 77 Below Average

74 – below Low

Notes in Chapter III

Sta. Ana, Ma. L., Multiple Intelligences as a Predictor of the Performance of Freshmen

Students in College Algebra 2007


23

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents, analyzes and interprets the data gathered to assess the

correlation of multiple intelligences t academic performance among the grade seven

students.

To fully understand this study, the presentation is divided in three parts which are

based on the sequence of the specific problems arranged in Chapter 1.


24

The first part of the presentation is about how are the multiple intelligences of the

respondents be accounted to the different multiple intelligences according to Howard

Gardner.

The second part of the presentation deals with the academic performance of the

respondents in all the subject areas or their Grade Point Average (GPA).

The last part of the presentation is about the significant relationship or correlation

of the multiple intelligences of the respondents.

The Profile of the Students in Terms of their Multiple Intelligences

The Multiple Intelligences questionnaire developed by Niall Douglas was used to

determine the multiple intelligences profile of the students. The inventory was consists of

eighty (80) items each of which describes in a specific intelligence. There were a total of

eight (8) identified intelligences with ten (10) questions each.

The Table 4 on the next page is the descriptive measures of students’ multiple

intelligences.

Table 3

Descriptive Measures of Students’ Multiple Intelligences

Multiple Intelligences N Mean Verbal

Interpretation
25

Verbal/Linguistic 80 3.89 Above Average


Logical-Mathematical 80 3.85 Above Average
Visual/Spatial 80 3.93 Above Average
Musical 80 3.97 Above Average
Bodily-kinesthetic 80 3.91 Above Average
Intrapersonal 80 3.94 Above Average
Interpersonal 80 3.92 Above Average
Naturalistic 80 3.83 Above Average

Linguistic had a mean of 3.89, which means that the respondents have an above

average rating in the linguistic component of the multiple intelligences inventory test. In

the logical-mathematical component the respondents posted a mean of 3.85, which can be

interpreted that the students have an above average rating in recognizing abstract patterns

and reasoning with the respect to visual/spatial, the mean is 3.91, which means that the

respondents have an above average rating with regard to visual/spatial intelligence. In

musical component, the group posted the highest mean of 3.97 which is above average.

Meanwhile, the respondents have an above average rating in bodily-kinesthetic

component in 3.91. Their interpersonal intelligence got a mean of 3.94 which means that

the respondents have an above average rating in communication, teamwork and

collaboration. Their intrapersonal intelligence has a mean of 3.92. This shows that the

respondents have above average rating. Their naturalistic intelligence has the lowest

mean of 3.83. It can be said that, still, the group got an above average rating in

classifying and understanding the interrelatedness of nature.

The result supports what Gazzaniga and Heatherton (2008) revealed, that multiple

intelligences is the idea that people can show different skills in a variety of different

domains.
26

The Level of Academic Performance of Students in their Grade Point Average

(GPA)

The academic performance of respondents came from their grade point average

(GPA) during the second grading period.

Table 4

Descriptive Measure of Grade Point Average (GPA)

N Mean Verbal Interpretation


Grade Point Average 80 83.18 Average

(GPA) 80

Valid N (listwise)

The above table reveals that the grade seven students of San Pedro High School

have a Grade Point Average (GPA) mean of 83.18, which has a rating of average.

Based on the result presented in the table above, the respondents’ rating in terms

of their academic performance or their grade point average (GPA) is only average,

conversely, their rating in their multiple intelligences test is above average. This supports

Armstrong (2009), even if the students are smart in eight different ways are expected to

excel in academics. There should be a follow up with solid academic effort leading to
27

tangible improvements in knowledge of history, math, science, reading, and other basic

subjects.

The Correlation of the Multiple Intelligences and Academic Performance or Grade

Point Average (GPA)

The multiple intelligences and the academic performance is the main concern of

this study. The independent variable, the students’ multiple intelligences are correlated

with the dependent variable which is the student’s academic performance or grade point

average (GPA). The multiple intelligences that are considered are as follows: (1)

verbal/linguistic, (2) logical-mathematical, (3) visual/spatial, (4) bodily-kinesthetic, (5)

musical, (6) intrapersonal, (7) intrepersonal, and (8) naturalistic.

Table 5

Correlation of the Multiple Intelligences and Academic Performance or

Grade Point Average (GPA)

Verbal/ Logical- Visual/ Musical Bodily- Intrapersonal Interpersonal Naturalistic

Linguistic Mathematical Spatial kinesthetic


Grade Point Average (GPA)

Pearson Correlation .213 .242* .396** .247* -.109 -.054 .-005


.427**
Sig. (2-tailed) .058 .030 .000 .027 .336 .635 .936
.000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)


28

The above table shows that five (5) of the eight (8) multiple intelligences has

significant relationship to the academic performance or grade point average of the

respondents . The results reveal that the verbal/linguistic, logical/mathematical,

visual/spatial, musical, and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences have a significant relationship

but the intrapersonal, interpersonal and naturalistic intelligences have no significant

relationship.

Synonymous to the results on the table above, Hilario (2009), found out from the

results taken jointly, of all the student-related variables as viewed by the students, five

had significantly affected the level of achievement of the students.


29

Notes in Chapter IV

Hilario, R. D., Correlates of Students’ Achievement in Technology Livelihood and

Education

Gazzaniga, M. S., Psychological Science Second Edition, 2008

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2158151 (November 23, 2013)


30

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the summary of the study, the conclusions, and

recommendations based on the obtained, analyzed, and interpreted data presented in the

previous chapter.

Summary

The study was focused on the relationship between the respondents’ Multiple

Intelligences and their Academic Performance during the second grading period of the

school year 2013-2014.

Specifically, we sought answers to the following questions:


31

1. How may the multiple intelligences of the respondents be accounted to:

1.1 Linguistic Intelligence;

1.2 Logical-Mathematical Intelligence;

1.3 Musical Intelligence;

1.4Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence;

1.5 Spatial Intelligence;

1.6 Interpersonal Intelligence;

1.7 Intrapersonal Intelligence; and

1.8 Naturalistic Intelligence?

2 What is the academic performance of the respondents in all of the subject areas?

3 Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’ multiple intelligence and

their academic performance?

In line with these specific problems, the following research hypothesis was

tested in this study:

1. There is no significant relationship between multiple intelligence and academic

performance of the respondents.

The respondents were the Grade Seven students of San Pedro High School in San

Simon Pampanga.

The multiple intelligences inventory was developed by Howard Gardner (1999).

The inventory consists of eighty (80) items of which describes in a specific intelligence.

There are a total of eight (8) identified intelligences with ten (10) items each. The eight

intelligences that were included in the inventory are 1) verbal/linguistic 2)


32

logical/mathematical 3) visual/spatial 4) bodily/kinesthetic 5) musical/ rhythmic 6)

interpersonal 7) intrapersonal and 8) naturalistic intelligence.

This study utilized the descriptive method of research to examine the relationship

between the respondents’ multiple intelligences and their academic performance during

the second grading period.

A total of eighty (80) Grade Seven students enrolled in the said school during the

school year 2013-2014 were the respondents of the study.

Pearson product-moment rank correlations coefficient, linear correlation was

employed in this study to determine the relationship between Academic Performance and

Multiple Intelligences of the Grade Seven students.

Summary of Findings

Using the procedures described in the preceding paragraphs, the answers to

the specific problems raised in the study were ascertained and can be summarized as

follows:

1.) There are eighty (80) students from four sections (randomly selected) of the said

school who took a multiple intelligence inventory test. Students’ multiple

intelligences namely verbal/linguistic has a mean of 3.89; logical-mathematical,

3.85; visual/ spatial, 3.93; musical/rhythmic, 3.97; bodily-kinesthetic, 3.91;

interpersonal, 3.94; intrapersonal, 3.92; and naturalistic, 3.83. All have an above

average rating.
33

2.) The Academic Performance or the Grade Point Average (GPA) of the respondents

is average.

3.) Among eight (8) multiple intelligences, five (5) were found to be significantly

related to the academic performance of the respondents. The five variables were

verbal/linguistic, logical-mathematical, visual/spatial, musical, and bodily-

kinesthetic intelligences.

Conclusions

In the light of the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. Generally, the respondents’ strongest intelligence is Musical. And the

respondents’ weakest intelligence is Naturalistic.

2. Academically, the respondents’ performance or Grade Point Average (GPA)

in their second grading period is average as seen in the mean scores.

3. Furthermore, there was a significant relationship between multiple

intelligences and academic performance whereas the verbal/linguistic intelligence,

logical-mathematical intelligence, musical intelligence, visual/spatial intelligence,

and bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. But shows no significant relationship in

interpersonal intelligence, intrapersonal intelligence and naturalistic intelligence.

Recommendations
34

In the light of the findings of the study, the following recommendations were

offered for consideration:

1. With five of the students’ multiple intelligences with significant relationship with

their academic performance, and three without significant relationship namely:

interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalistic intelligences, it is suggested that the

classroom setting should also focus on social aspects so that the students will

improve their interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences.

2. In addition, teachers are also recommended to add more activities that would add

them interest on environmental and cultural aspects.

3. It is also suggested that more motivation should be given to the students

especially in the fields or subject areas that they lack interest with.
35

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. Books

Sanga, Carmelita B. Compilation on Child and Adolescent Development, 2012

Gazzaniga, Michael. S. and Heatherton, Todd F. Psychological Science Second Edition,

W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2008

B. PublicationsJournals

Tenedero, Henry S. Breakthrough Education, 2010

C. Theses

Santos, Elizabeth W., Multiple Intelligences, Language Proficiency and Academic

Achievement in English of First Year High School Students at the University of the

Assumption, 2008

Hilario, R. D., Correlates of Students’ Achievement in Technology Livelihood and

Education, 2008
36

Sta. Ana, Ma. L., Multiple Intelligences as a Predictor of the Performance of

Freshmen Students in College Algebra, 2007

D. Internet (Other Sources/ Documents)

“Academic Performance”, 2014, Retrieved on December 12, 2013 from

http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-the-meaning-of-academic-performance

“Studies about Multiple Intelligences”, 2014, Retreived on December 8, 2013 from

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2158151

“Multiple Intelligences Related Studies” 2014, Retreived on December 8, 2013

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109007/chapters/MI-Theory-and-Its-

Critics.aspx

“Multiple Intelligences Related Studies” 2014, Retreived on December 8, 2013

https://iadr.confex.com/iadr/2006Brisb/techprogram/abstract_78531.htm

“Multiple Intelligences Related Studies” 2014, Retreived on November 23, 2013

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2158151
37

You might also like