The implications of Gardner’s theory of

multiple intelligences for education.

E. Alpay

Department of Chemical Engineering and Chemical Technology,

Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine,
Prince Consort Road, London. SW7 2BY.
e.alpay@ic.ac.uk

Abstract.
An overview of Gardner’s theory on Multiple Intelligences is presented. This is shown to
question and challenge the current bias of schooling towards language and logic. Some implementations
of the theory are also considered, and general educational implications of the theory summarised.

Introduction.
The concept of intelligence has perhaps received more devoted attention in psychology than
any other concept, and yet has resisted a thorough clarification (Reber (1995)). The early works of Binet
viewed intelligent behaviour as cognitive abilities in reasoning and problem solving, and in
collaboration Simon, produced the first psychometric-type intelligence test in 1905. Such a view of
intelligence has persisted through modern intelligence tests, such as the Stanford-Binet and the various
versions of the Wechsler tests (see, for example, Rust and Golombok (1989)). Whilst theoreticians
continue to argue the underlying factors of cognitive processes which constitute intelligence, or indeed,
the existence of a single underlying or general (g) factor for intelligence (Spearman (1927)), the
definition of intelligence itself has been conceptualised in a rather broad manner to depict the ability to
profit from experience. In reality, intelligence is now cynically viewed by many psychologists and
educationalists as whatever intelligence tests measure. An issue of concern then arises as to whether or
not intelligence tests assess the full range of talents, competencies and skills that an individual may
possess. Likewise, if educational quality is measured against such tests, then the educational system
itself may be focussing on skills development for success at school, rather than development on the
broad intellectual potentialities of the individual. More fundamentally, the notion of intelligence as a
single unitary process or feature has been challenged, given the broad nature of talents exhibited by
individuals.

In the following sections, a review of one modern theory of intelligence is presented, in which
intelligence is viewed as numerous discrete intelligences, namely Gardner's theory of Multiple
Intelligences (Gardner (1993)). It is shown how such a view of intelligence raises questions on the
appropriateness of traditional Intelligence Quotient (IQ) and scholastic aptitude measurement, and thus
the teaching strategies employed in common Western schooling. The educational implications of the
Multiple Intelligences view is then summarised.

The intelligence of Multiple Intelligences.

“It is widely agreed that standardized tests do not sample all forms of intelligence. Obvious examples
include creativity, wisdom, practical sense and social sensitivity, among others”
(American Psychological Association, 1996 Press Release)

The psychometric testing of intelligence has been widely recognised to focus on specific
student abilities which mainly involve linguistic and logical-mathematical skills, and thus a highly
cognitive bias towards intelligence. As mentioned above, such measurement of intelligence will
typically fail to recognise other student abilities such as creativity, or indeed practical (tacit) knowledge
which has been accumulated from the experiences of the individual. Furthermore, observations show
that individuals of high IQ are not necessarily talented in all tasks or aspects of life. Likewise,
individuals with severe learning difficulties can on occasion exhibit certain specific (and exceptional)
talents. Whilst it is true that psychometric tests are generally reliable in predicting scholastic
achievement, this, as indicated above, should not be too surprising as scholastic achievement is usually
based on the types of abilities in which the tests themselves are addressing. However, through
longitudinal studies of individuals, it is seen that high IQ is not always indicative of career or personal
achievement. For example, successful businessman, politicians or indeed teachers are not necessarily of
high IQ, but have other attributes which make them excel in their professions. Similarly, studies have
shown that individuals with brilliant school and even higher-education credentials, may fail miserably
in their professions in later life (Kornhaber et al (1990)). This suggests that the multitude of abilities and
talents of individuals cannot be measured by tests which are predominantly geared towards cognitive
abilities.

In recent years, such deficiencies of the unitary intelligence approach, and through the research
findings from fields as disparate as artificial intelligence, developmental psychology, and neurology
(see Gardner (1996)), a number of workers have suggested the idea that the mind consists of several
independent modules or intelligences. In particular, Gardner (1993) postulated the theory of Multiple
Intelligences, which in its original form considered seven discrete types of intelligence: linguistic,
musical, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal (see Table 1 for more
detailed descriptions). In more recent communications, Gardner states at least eight discrete
intelligences, with the eighth intelligence defined as the naturalist intelligence, i.e. an intelligence in
observing, understanding and organising patterns in the natural environment (see also Gardner (1999)
on discussions on the spititual and existential intelligences). Such intelligences constitute the multitude
of ways in which individuals take in information, record and manipulate information, and demonstrate
understanding of the information to themselves and others (Veenema and Gardner (1996)). It is
interesting to note that the theory can also be related to the learning style approaches, which are often
employed with students with learning difficulties; e.g. visual, auditory and tactile-kinesthetic
approaches for coping with (or compensating for) learning difficulties.

Gardner specifically justifies his theory through several positions:

• the intelligences reflect distinct classes of profession

• the explanation of prodigies (and savants) which may have an exceptional talent in one area,
but otherwise normal (or in the case savants, deficient) intelligence in other areas

• evidence from cases of brain damaged individuals whereby certain specific intelligences may
be affected

• an evolutionary development argument in which different types (or modules) of intelligence

were necessitated at different levels of evolution.

However, criticisms of the theory include the lack of differentiation between intelligence, talent,
behaviour and cognitive process (Anderson (1992)), and the fact that no specific type of intelligence is
wholly distinct from others (Messick (1992)). Evenso, whether or not Gardner’s postulated intelligences
are fully discrete, i.e. fully indicative of a fundamental intelligence, the simple recognition of human
qualities other than those tested in traditional intelligence tests, leads to important educational
implications. For example, if intelligence is a much broader construct than previously thought, or if
there are human qualities which need to be valued in addition to language and logic, then schooling
itself must be broader in its training to enable individuals to realise potential abilities. In the following
section, some specific educational implications of Gardner’s theory will be considered.

Educational Implications.
It has been suggested above that schools in general have honoured linguistic and logical
abilities, but have given relatively small recognition to other abilities. Whilst this may be a reflection of
our current societal needs, for example a perception for more scientists and engineers rather than
dancers, it is quite conceivable that some students are being prevented in achieving natural or perhaps
innate abilities. Furthermore, the teaching approach for any given task is unlikely to be optimal if the
particular strengths (intelligences) of the student are not utilised in the learning process. This would
then suggest that it may be possible to teach, for example, mathematics through a mixed media
involving music, physical activity, language and pictorial depictions, so as to appeal to the spectrum of

2
intelligences of the classroom. Such realisations by the educational community have been acted upon
enthusiastically, particularly in some elementary (junior) schools in North America (Thompson (1999)).

What are the possible consequences on students of persevering with an educational system
which may be giving poor recognition of the wide spectrum of human abilities? In other words, what
are the implications of denying attention to student abilities outside that which is driven by typical
assessment criteria? An important issue which may arise here is that teacher learning objectives may not
be perceived as relevant by the student, and thus little motivation by the student towards the learning
task. Alternatively, the task may be perceived by the student as a threat to the self-concept through, for
example, the exposure of a weak intelligence, thus resulting in low self-esteem. Low self-esteem in turn,
of course, may be manifested through behavioural or anxiety problems (Lawrence (1996)). However,
even if low self-esteem issues do not arise, then it is possible that issues of job dissatisfaction or poor
personal fulfilment may in later life. For example, an individual who is driven towards scholastic
achievement may continue on a similar career path, even if such a path is against the natural
intelligence(s) of the individual.

If Gardner’s theory is to be accepted then, what can be done in an educational context?

Through studies on US high schools, Weber (1995) has suggested some general changes needed for the
successful implementation of Multiple Intelligences ideas:

• school authorities must alter the way in which curricula are viewed, and in particular flexibility
introduced to address different student abilities; i.e. a recognition that students learn in
different ways

• broader assessment methods are needed which are not confined to memory or written-test
orientations

• an integrated and thematic approach to teaching is needed which builds on the prior knowledge
of the student and capitalises on individual strengths and abilities (intelligences).

It is interesting to note than an integrated approach is also consistent with Gardner’s view that
intelligences work together in concert depending on the problem to be solved; some activities are
postulated to require a higher progress of a single intelligence, whereas others the development of more
than one intelligence. An integrated approach also means that the teacher needs to employ media and
representations which are perhaps consistent with the intelligence-bias of the student. Multimedia
learning facilities, such as CD-ROM based material, may be particularly useful to represent educational
material through multiple perspectives, as well as mixed pictorial, textual and auditory modes
(Veenema and Gardner (1996)). Likewise, in group work, a teacher could draw on and give attention to
the experiences, knowledge and perspectives of individuals, so as to gain from the diverse-intelligence
of the group.

The classroom implementation of the Multiple Intelligences theory has been described by
several workers; e.g. Campbell (1989, 1990), Campbell et al. (1999), Weber (1995). As mentioned
above, these have been predominantly at the junior school level. Descriptions of the different
implementation methods are given by Gardner (1999) and Thompson (1999). These include attempts to
incorporate the attributes of all eight intelligences into a lesson, the concentration on two or three
intelligences per lesson, and the set-up of different learning centres within the classroom to address the
development of different intelligences. Campbell (1990) describes a learning centre approach in which a
junior-school classroom is physically restructured into designated intelligence zones. These are, of
course, designed to relate to typical student interests, such that, for example, bodily-kinesthetic
intelligence is developed in the “building centre”, interpersonal intelligence in the “working together”
centre, and linguistic intelligence in the “reading centre”; students devote a portion of each day working
through the different centres. Campbell reports that classroom restructuring in this way had led to
increased multi-modal skills, improved co-operative skills, and improved student attitudes and
behaviour (particularly with children who had been previously identified as having behavioural
problems). However, longitudinal studies, and critical comparisons to conventional teaching (control)
programmes, have not been reported by the author. Furthermore, influences of the context of the
teaching programme, i.e. the dependency of the particular contexts in which the student are learning,
have not been considered; see the discussions by Gardner (1996) on the contextualisation and
distribution of intelligence. Even so, some of the reported outcomes of this trial, and indeed similar

3
trials under the Project Spectrum programme of Gardner and co-workers (Gardner (1999)), yield
general implications to other Multiple Intelligences programmes:

• The provision of flexible learning will require a teacher commitment towards student-
responsibility in learning. This, of course, may be beneficial in promoting intrinsic student
motivation towards the learning task. Gardner himself states that the key imperative Multiple
Intelligences is for individually configured education.

• Students may exhibit competencies or leadership skills in certain intelligence areas, and thus an
observable means for assessing student strengths and weaknesses.

• The role of the teacher is likely to change to become more facilitative and less directive.
However, the teacher will need to adopt a more creative teaching style so as to give
consideration to the various student intelligences.

• Students need to be assessed through their demonstrations of their spectra of intelligences in as

natural fashion as possible, but care is needed to avoid labelling the student, which may
otherwise act as a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Recent implementations of Gardner’s theory to secondary (high) school students have also
been reported. Indeed, through the Project Zero scheme led by Gardner, information is being gathered
on initiatives in schools at all levels, as well as homes, communities and adult training programmes. An
issue of assessment becomes particularly pertinent at higher level schooling. Whilst junior school
children may be resilient to societal demands on achievement, this is not likely to be so at later stages.
Thus, students may enjoy learning kinesthetically or musically, but may not perceive such learning as
important or relevant through current essay and written test-based grading methods. Thus, if Multiple
Intelligences programmes are to be successful, particular efforts are needed in devising compatible
assessment methods. This could involve, for example, the assessment of work portfolios containing
mixed media material, and the use of different methods, instruments or procedures to assess student
progress (Gardner (1999); Thompson (1999)). Furthermore, it can be anticipated that the utilisation of
multiple intelligences in every subject may be rather daunting, but as mentioned above, creative
computer-based teaching methods may be appropriate, as well as the use of combined video, reading
and physical models for learning.

Finally, for Multiple Intelligences based teaching approaches to be succesful in schools, a

fundamental change in the attitude of parents (or significant others) is also needed outside the school
environment. This may be rather difficult for some parents who may, after all, have been products of a
schooling system which had a distinct view of student success based on traditional intelligence theories.

Conclusions.
An overview of Gardner’s theory of Multiple intelligences has been presented, and shown to
appeal to a teaching philosophy that students should be given opportunities to develop and utilise the
many types of human abilities. Furthermore the different strengths (intelligences) of individuals should
be utilised teaching methods, even in cognitive tasks such as reading and arithmetic. This may be
achieved through creative classroom and curriculum structures, as well as the use of multimedia
teaching tools. An educational goal of such an approach is to open-up learning to the widest spectrum of
individuals, and perhaps help individuals towards later fulfilment in their careers, and indeed personal
lives. However, as Gardner states himself, perhaps more important than intelligence in the human
firmament are motivation, personality and emotions.

4
References.
Anderson, M., 1992, Intelligence and development: a cognitive theory. Blackwell, Oxford.

Campbell, B., 1989, Multiplying intelligences in the classroom. On the Beam, IX(2), 167.

Campbell, B., 1990, The research results of a multiple intelligences classroom. On the Beam, XI(1),
254.

Campbell, L., Campbell, B., Dickinson, D., 1999, Teaching and learning through multiple intelligences.
Allyn and Bacon, New York.

Gardner, H., 1993, Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences. Fontana, London.

Gardner, H., 1996, Intelligence in seven steps. In Creating the future: perspectives on educational
change, Dickinson, D. (Ed.), New Horizons for Learning: www.newhorizons.org/crfut_gardner.html

Gardner, H., 1999, Intelligence reframed: multiple intelligences for the 21st century. Basic Books, New
York.

Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M.L., Wake, W.K., 1996, Intelligence: multiple perspectives. Harcourt
Publishers, Fort Worth.

Kornhaber, M., Krechevsky, M., Gardner, H., 1990, Engaging intelligence. Educational Psychologist,
25, 177.

Lawrence, D., 1996, Enhancing self-esteem in the classroom, 2nd Ed., PCP Ltd., London.

Messick, S., 1992, Multiple intelligences or multilevel intelligence?, Journal of Psychological Enquiry,
1, 305.

Reber, A.S., 1995, Dictionary of psychology. Penguin Books Ltd., London.

Rust, J., Golombok, S., 1989, Modern psychometrics: the science of psychological assessment.
Routelidge , London.

Spearman, C, 1927, The abilities of man. Macmillan, London.

Thompson, H., 1999, World Wide Web Class, University of Georgia:

http://www.arches.uga.edu/~hmt/webwrite/home.html

Veenema, S., Gardner, H., 1996, Multimedia and multiple intelligences. The American Prospect, 7 (29);
see www.prospect.org/print/V7/29/veenema-s.html

Weber, E., 1995, Creative learning from inside, EduServ Inc., Vancouver, BC.

5
Table 1 - Seven examples of intelligence from the Multiple Intelligences theory.

intelligence features

verbal-linguistic rapid conversions of letters and / or verbal representations to higher

level codes; re reading writing and communication

logical-mathematical generalisation from specific experiences and abstract concepts or

rules; ability to reason; ability for quantitative calculation

spatial intelligence visualisation and mental rotation of a stimulus; re iconic intelligence

for thinking in pictures and drawing, interpretation and manipulation
of diagrams

bodily-kinesthetic skilful control of bodily motions and handled objects

musical ability to produce and appreciate music

interpersonal ability to relate-to and understand others; to notice and distinguish

moods, temperaments, motivations, and intentions

intrapersonal ability to self-reflect and to distinguish / identify thoughts and

feelings, and use these to understand one’s own behaviour