Multiple Intelligences and Its Relationship to Curriculum Development - Research Paper Example

? Applying Multiple Intelligences Theory in the Teaching of and Curriculum Development in Health Education Submission Introduction The outlooks, competencies, and knowledge concerned with health education and health management are greatly accomplished in health curriculum that is interdisciplinary and inclusive. The Multiple Intelligence (MI) Theory of Gardner can be viewed as the mechanism that stimulates learners to encourage positive response from learners, skills, and knowledge related to healthy living and the factor that unite social workers, community advocates, educators, and school administrators to advance health education (Sternberg & Williams, 1998). Similar to machines, MI theory improves learners’ cognitive skills. It motivates learners to ponder about content outside usual limits, and from various points of view. Parents, educators, and community supporters are attracted to the discipline. As learners embark on the course of physical activity and health management, they begin to think about their ties to specific socio-cultural ideals and objectives, government rules and agendas, and community programs (Sternberg & Williams, 1998). Diverse and new cultural, political, and social theories contribute to the scope and importance of health education. This essay has two objectives: (1) to recommend a structure for health education, (2) to provide a brief overview of the theory of multiple intelligences (MI) theory, and (3) to show how MI theory develops teaching practices, curriculum development, and student performance related to the behaviors, competencies, and knowledge related to health management. According to several studies, particularly on children who have difficulties in understanding concepts that are easily recognized by others, several teachers acknowledge that there are, certainly, numerous ways of looking at the world and diverse ways of understanding personal experiences (Kornhaber, Fierros & Veenema, 2004). Each person, indeed, in any group observes and addresses various facets of an experience. It usually appears there are as numerous ways of understanding or gaining knowledge as there are individuals (Kornhaber et al., 2004). However, a thorough examination of the theories of intelligence can offer a neutral basis between the perspective that there is an exclusive mechanism in which minds function and the idea that every mind is distinct (Armstrong, 2000). Obviously, theories are just assumptions; but in trying to understand the workings of the mind and, in particular, the intelligences in classroom, a relevant theory can assist teachers in understanding the unexpected behaviors and attitudes that students show. Practically every facet of classroom life, one way or another, created around what educators would like children to gain knowledge of and become skilled at, and how they perceive they are most likely to achieve it. In traditional classroom settings, desks or armchairs are organized in a row and students sit obediently and silently much of the day. In alternative classroom settings, there are work areas or stations, each assigned for individual forms of activity. From the actual structure of the room, to the contents of homework, to the issues raised in class discussions, to the materials given, each step a teacher takes shows, to a certain extent, a thought about learning and intelligence. The Implication of Multiple Intelligence (MI) Theory for Teaching and Curriculum Development The theory of multiple intelligences poses numerous issues for curriculum development and classroom practice. Should educators make an effort to cultivate all forms of intelligences evenly or should they concentrate on determining and enhancing the strengths of children? Should education institutions provide a broader range of courses or should they continue a fixed curriculum and give more diverse means of involving learners in the traditional subjects? It is essential to bear in mind that MI is not a goal as such. If a teacher claims, “I teach at an MI school” (Sternberg & Williams, 1998, 23) or “I have an MI classroom” (ibid, p. 23), one’s rejoinder should be, “What are your educational goals for your students and school and how does using MI theory help you get there? (Sternberg & Williams, 1998, 23)” On the surface, MI seems to be in agreement with several other educational principles and models, such as ‘whole language’, ‘interdisciplinary curriculum’, ‘project-based learning’, training the ‘whole child’, and others (Sternberg & Williams, 1998, 23). However, this raise the issue of whether implementing the theory merely becomes another model to illustrate current perspectives and practices. Even though MI may at times fulfill this objective, it also can offer a theoretical groundwork and validation justification for the perspectives and practices of teachers, expanding and/or broadening them to new areas and disciplines. The theory can become a structure for reflecting on the learners they teach and how to educate them, supporting teachers in becoming more thoughtful and clear about the academic steps they take (Lazear, 2004). Similar to any theory, individuals may primarily apply MI in limited ways, and others may keep doing so for years. However, according to Silver and colleagues (2000), if educational objectives and standards for realizing those objectives can be expressed, then MI can become a partner towards thorough learning. There is no exclusive, straight path from theory to practice and there are diverse means that MI can be employed in actual classroom settings. Applications differ depending on the pedagogical principles and objectives for the class and the whole education institution (Zwiers, 2004). Although several individuals may think it is vital for learners to be exposed to and enhance skills in all subject matters, some believe particular competencies, such as social or language skills, need more emphasis that others and invest significant amount of time and effort cultivating learners’ interpersonal or linguistic intelligences (Lazear, 2003). There are teachers who choose to enhance students’ strengths while there are those who choose to concentrate on weaknesses. Although there is no one precise approach towards the application of the theory, there are still several major opportunities for teaching and curriculum development. One implication of the theory of multiple intelligences for teaching and curriculum development is that teachers have to know their pupils thoroughly in order to accurately recognize each learner’s limitations, strong points, and interests, and construct their instructional materials accordingly (Gardner, 2006). Apparently, Gardner is not the only one who proposed that education has to be personalized or individualized. The pioneer of the Coalition of Essential Schools at Brown University also argued about the crucial essence of teachers’ familiarizing themselves of their students (Sternberg & Williams, 1998). Comer (1998), at the primary school level, argued about the importance of knowing the six developmental pathways, namely, ‘physical, psycho-emotional, social-interactive, cognitive-intellectual, speech and language, and moral’ ( as cited in Sternberg & Williams, 1998, 24). The MI theory includes a theory about intelligence and the functioning of the mind that sustains such pedagogical practices and values. MI offers a perspective for personalizing education by helping teachers to identify the entire array of learners’ intellectual abilities (Kagan & Kagan, 1999). Usual curriculum has put emphasis on fostering only language and math as intellectual skills. Educators who make use of a multiple intelligences model acknowledge other skills, such as bodily-kinesthetic, art, as cognitive, as well (Kagan & Kagan, 1999). However, merely recognizing these other skills is not sufficient. We should also be equipped to verify and justify assumptions about a learner’s strong points. A number of research and development programs have tried applying multiple intelligences framework in the classroom. For instance, Project Spectrum, a partnership between Tufts University and Harvard Project Zero, is a curriculum and assessment model in early childhood that provides educators instruments for determining and presenting justification for children’s skills in various areas (Sternberg & Williams, 1998). Spectrum scholars, as stated by Armstrong (2000), designed assessments spanning from organized tasks to observational worksheets in such areas as social skills, art, science, music, and movement to assist teachers in identifying the different ways learners make use of their intelligences. Spectrum, for instance, partitions the movement sphere into creative and athletic movement (Sternberg & Williams, 1998). Creative movement involves creation of movement ideas, expressiveness, rhythm, and body control whereas athletic movement skills involve balance, speed, agility, and power (Sternberg & Williams, 1998).This distinction aids teachers in the identifying and understanding major features of an area with which they might not be acquainted. Once a learner’s interests and strong points have been accurately determined, they either can be further improved or drawn upon to involve learners in domains of difficulty. Learners at the middle school levels can become observers of their own skills and can partner with teachers to customize their tasks. In the Practical Intelligence for Schools (PIFS) Project, a partnership between Yale University and Harvard Project Zero, learners are empowered to familiarize themselves to their intelligence frames and how to attract their eagerness and strengths in doing their academic tasks (Zwiers, 2004). According to Armstrong (2000), PIFS is an attempt to aid learners in performing well academically in part by aiding them in recognizing the features of school, the reason they go to school, and the importance of school tasks in their present and future lives. One of the PIFS units of curriculum exposes learners to various concepts of intelligence and motivates them to be responsible for their own intellectual growth (Sternberg & Williams, 1998). Learners individualize their education by understanding how they best acquire knowledge, thinking about and sharing experiences that display particular skills and/or inclinations, and involving in a group of problem-solving activities that can be worked out in different ways (Lazear, 2004). These kinds of experiences and associated thinking and discourse allow students to gain control of their own learning and develop their strengths by personalizing school activities to their personal interests. Choices about whether to provide all learners a comprehensive training in most or all of the domains mentioned by MI, or whether to individualize the education of students to enhance their strong points or deal with their limitations, may rely on the students’ developmental level (Silver et al., 2000). Numerous schools employing MI prefer to provide inclusive early exposure, with improving specialty and focus as learners mature (Kagan & Kagan, 1999). As remarked by Armstrong (2000), one justification for implementing this model is the idea that it is particularly vital in children’s earlier development to expose them to diverse forms of meaning-making and reflection. However, as students mature, going deeper into numerous subject matters or disciplines simply is impossible (Kornhaber et al., 2004). Furthermore, the demands of college admission tests and the labor market requirement that students be skillful in particular areas. Hence schooling seems to become more specialized (Kagan & Kagan, 1999). Nevertheless, even with a more restricted curriculum, the theory of multiple intelligences can be valuable in aiding students in the cultivation of intelligences. MI results in delivering instructional materials in different ways, granting learners multiple accesses into learning a subject matter. Gardner (2006) refers to specialists as people who are capable of embodying and explaining concepts and ideas in multiple ways. The more methods a teacher uses in teaching or discussing a concept or issue, the more likely that the students and the teacher as well will understand it in depth (Gardner, 2006). Due to the fact that most teachers are not at ease or well-informed enough to teach by using multiple intelligences, according to Gardner (1991), employing the theory of MI in actual classroom settings normally results in group teaching or inviting community experts to provide their knowledge and skill. Gardner (1991) argued that any substantive subject matter can be taught in five ways: ‘through the use of narrative, logical analysis, hands-on experience, artistic exploration, and philosophical examination (Gardner has since added participatory/interpersonal experience) (as cited in Sternberg & Williams, 1998, 26).’ For instance, pupils can gain knowledge of Darwin’s theory of evolution by reading his work (narrative); studying quantitative correlations in breeding recessive and dominant genes (logical); reproducing dragon flies for specific features (hands-on); identifying and sketching lines of differences and similarities in the wings of dragon flies (artistic); dealing with relevant issues such as whether the process of evolution produces growth in all living things (philosophical); or teaming up in a task (participatory/interpersonal) (Sternberg & Williams, 1998, 26). A rundown of the Seven Ways of Knowing by Gardner is shown below (Anderson & Weber, 1997, 57): (1) Logical Mathematical- Includes scientific or mathematical ability- the capacity to discern logical or numerical patterns, the ability to handle long chains of reasoning (ibid, p. 57); (2) Linguistic- includes speaking, poetic, or journalistic ability, with sensitivity to the sounds, rhythms, and meanings of words and the different functions of language (ibid, p. 57); (3) Musical—includes composition and instrumental abilities with ability to produce and appreciate rhythm, pitch, and timbre; appreciation of the forms of musical expressiveness (ibid, p. 57); (4) Spatial- includes navigator’s and sculptor’s abilities and capacities to perceive the visual-spatial world accurately (ibid, p. 57); (5) Bodily-Kinesthetic- includes dancing and athletic abilities and the ability to control one’s body movements and to handle objects skillfully (ibid, p. 57); (6) Interpersonal- Includes a therapist’s or salesperson’s capacities to discern and respond appropriately to the moods, temperaments, motivations, and desires of other people (ibid, p. 57); and (7) Intrapersonal- includes accurate self-knowledge with access to one’s own feelings and the ability to discriminate among them and to draw upon them and guide behavior (ibid, p. 57). These seven ways of enhancing multiple intelligences have considerable implications for curriculum development. This claim will be illustrated in the following discussion of the application of MI theory in health education Multiple Intelligences Theory in the Field of Health Education With the theory of multiple intelligences and an image of healthy students, this unit of curriculum is proposed to create a set of tasks and activities for elementary students. This proposal for a curriculum unit is adapted from the study of Andy Anderson and Ellen Weber (1997) entitled A Multiple Intelligence Approach to Healthy Active Living in High School. This curriculum makes use of the game of tennis as the unit to incorporate the theory of MI and health education since tennis can be played: (1) with a partner, (2) with colleagues, friends, and relatives, (3) informally (adjust for leisure play) and formally (rigid rules and guidelines), (4) on a school playground or open field with adjusted guidelines and equipment, and (5) across the lifespan. MI theory tasks allow students to (1) acquire various forms of knowledge about tennis and (2) enhance and boost opportunities of students to explore and articulate their knowledge, skills, and insights about healthy living from an individual and collective point of view. Health or physical education is apt to be excellent integration units because they are, in several cases, instructed by only one person. At first, it may be more sensible to venture to ‘home practice’ before trying collaborations with other disciplines, like history, language, science, and mathematics. By so doing, the instructor can control the changes within the areas of various disciplines and generate more reassurance and esteem with the idea of cross-disciplinary effort. The relevant tasks for this unit of curriculum are outlined below: Task 1. Determine the learning outcomes of students that motivate participation in the game of tennis in relation to good health management. Show relative and practical skills for striking a tennis ball; Connect tennis routines to features of a healthy life; Identify the psychosocial advantages of tennis; Adjust features of the game of tennis to address varied needs of learners; Provide and secure tennis equipment; Use adjusted and prescribed guidelines to the game of tennis; Use fitness activities that improve tennis skills; Articulate insights about the position of tennis in culture and sport; Connect aspects of the modern tennis game to the way it was played before and to the way it may be played in the near future; and Assess the human and economic benefits of tennis to the larger community. Task 2. Create a general diagram that shows the array of benefits students can gain from the curriculum. Task 3. Develop illustrations from the seven perspectives of MI theory. Some of the examples are shown below: (1) Linguistic Tasks & Evaluation: Craft a brochure that enumerates tennis pointers for the learner. You might want to add some wittiness in the contents. Perform an oral analysis with a remark from an excellently played tennis event. Draft a tennis word list for tennis jargons like backhand, ace, forehand, hacker, etc. Create an advertisement for tennis. 2. Logical-mathematical Tasks and Evaluation: Create a booklet of guidelines or pointers to aid tennis players in tallying correct scores. Enumerate the most important pointers accordingly. Provide an organized cause-effect diagram of an individual’s health profile and the game of tennis. Assist in the building of a tennis court, specifically, measure and calculate the expanses or distances, and create a scale sketch of an open field tennis court. 3. Spatial Tasks and Evaluation: Sketch charts that display various striking and swinging styles. Narrate the history of tennis through drawings. Create a diagram of sequences of drawings illustrating the health benefits of tennis. Plan and draft a tennis court. Make sure that the entire class can attend the activity. Make scale charts and score cards. 4. Bodily-Kinesthetic Tasks and Evaluation: Capture your moves on tape using various hand swings. Depict how your physical actions affect the direction of the tennis ball. Generate distinct situations that may influence performance, specifically, exhaustion. Determine major performance meters for the racket swing, then make a self-assessment plan, afterwards document own progress toward the attainment of performance indicators, and lastly, apply the data/information collected to rank progress and assess performance at the last part of the unit. Talk about how the self-assessment plan may be applied for activities outside the school course. Fashion a modern dance to illustrate the course tasks. 5. Musical Tasks and Evaluation: Determine how the music in the open field, like nature’s sounds, can affect the game? Make a hip-hop song, or listen to an instrumental music that closely relates to or describes your game. Depict an ordinary individual’s outlook toward tennis and health living in a rhythmic show. 6. Interpersonal Tasks and Evaluation: Illustrate how tennis builds friendships and teamwork. Narrate a story of a tennis player from the community. Make a poster, along with a friend, endorsing healthy lifestyles, and the positive effects of tennis to social and physical health. 7. Intrapersonal Tasks and Evaluation: Talk about or document how self-evaluation and descriptions affect performance on the tennis court. Make a self-evaluation dialogue to help you concentrate on major components of performance, lessen diversions, and motivate control. Build a recreational practice and imagery practice to regulate your swing. Compare your performance with any tennis player you are familiar with. Standards for a first-class curriculum unit involves: (1) offers an inclusive framework for relevant tennis progress; (2) involve tennis practice outside school grounds; (3) demonstrates competencies and knowledge of the game of tennis; (3) shows strong points of the students’ distinct skills; (4) promotes teamwork among the teachers and students; (5) promotes a thoughtful perspective on tennis expertise; (6) ends in essential tennis abilities; (7) exhibits interdisciplinary relationships between the theory of MI, healthy living, and tennis; and (8) results in more interactions between teachers and students, among students, and communities. This essay discusses several methods for health education teachers to teach beginners (1) tips for tennis; (2) connections between teaching tennis, MI theory, and healthy living; and (3) an MI model of learning and teaching. The theory of multiple intelligences consolidates the intellectual skills and diverse points of view provided by learners and the community. Incorporating the theory of multiple intelligences with the rules of healthy living is presented in this paper as an effort to stimulate curriculum development, teaching, student learning outcomes, and to enable objective evaluation in health or physical education. Summary and Conclusions Multiple Intelligence (MI) theory proposes that it could be more educational to take into account how individuals are intelligent instead of the level of intelligence they possess. Definitely, in actual classroom settings, the opportunity for every child to have a productive learning outcome is significantly improved when the leading framework is one where in every child is viewed as having effective ways of understanding the world, even though those techniques may not be directly apparent to the educator or the child. To some extent, the work of learning, teaching, and assessment is making sense of such methods of acquiring knowledge. This paper has discussed several techniques to curriculum and evaluation in health education, none of them completely unfamiliar, which show a framework of intelligence which is in agreement with the MI theory. Even though their application remains far from inclusive, majority of these models have drawn significant attention during the recent decade of educational reform. Several, such as project-based learning, have been applied traditionally in schools, particularly in arts education, but not in health management. However, these models remain mainly unimportant in majority of schools partly because they reveal a perspective of intelligence that remains unimportant. The model of intelligence as a rigid, quantifiable capacity with restricted types of valid expression is appropriate for specific frameworks, such as knowledge diffusion through lecture, and purposes, such as dividing and arranging by social groups, of education. Those planning to apply MI theory to health education should consider critically the complexity of putting into practice new methods in the classroom. In numerous schools, inadequate time is spent on reflecting how practice embodies values and theories and how theory could improve practice. Regardless of the practice, trial, adapted, new, or old, it is the duty of all institutions and professionals to take into account the theories and principles that substantiate what takes place in the classroom. Insufficient availability of models for reorganizing school schedule for health activities and reconstruction of a curriculum’s content, educators can make use of the strategies, as well as the proposed relationship between theory and practice, discussed in this paper. Merely evaluating thoroughly at one’s own actual classroom setting and monitoring how learners are motivated to solve problems, reflect, think, and articulate themselves is a strong foundation. Intelligence is just a single feature of theory and ideas about learning and teaching that has to be evaluated. However, it is a critical component and one that is, questionably, at the core of the pedagogical project. From the beginning of a formal education, learners carry functioning minds to school. The responsibility of the teacher is to build the best potential working condition for those intellects. References Anderson, A. & Weber, E. (1997) ‘A Multiple Intelligence Approach to Healthy Active Living in High School’, The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 68(4), 57+ Armstrong, T.  (2000) Multiple intelligences in the classroom.   Alexandria, VA: ASCD.  Comer, J. (1988) ‘Educating poor minority children’, Scientific American, 256(11), pp. 42-48. Gardner, H. (1991) The unschooled mind. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, H.   (2006) Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York, NY: Basic Books. Kagan, S., & Kagan, M.  (1999) Multiple intelligences: the complete MI book. San Clemente,CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning. Kornhaber, M., Fierros, E., & Veenema, S. (2004) Multiple intelligences: best ideas from research and practice. Boston, MA: Pearson.  Lazear, D.   (2003) Eight ways of teaching: The artistry of teaching with multiple intelligences.  Berkeley, CA : Sage. Lazear, D. (2004) Higher-order thinking the multiple intelligences way.   Chicago, IL: Zephyr Press. Silver, H.F., Strong, R.W., & Perieni, M.J. (2000) So each may learn: integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Sternberg, R. & Williams, W. (1998) Intelligence, Instruction, and Assessment: Theory into Practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Zwiers, J. (2004) Developing academic thinking skills in grades 6-12: A handbook of multiple intelligences activities. Newark DE: International Reading Association. Read More