Integrating Learning Styles and Multiple Intelligences

8/17/2019 Integrating Learning Styles and Multiple Intelligences

1/11

Integrating Learning Styles and MultipleIntelligences

Harvey Silver, Richard Strong and Matthew Perini

What does it mean to express kinesthetic intelligence in an interpersonal

way? Integrating styles and intelligences can help children learn in many

ways—not just in the areas of their strengths.

In the 20th century, two great theories have been put forward in an attempt to

interpret human differences and to design educational models around these

differences. Learning-style theory has its roots in the psychoanalytic community;

multiple intelligences theory is the fruit of cognitive science and reflects an effortto rethink the theory of measurable intelligence embodied in intelligence testing.

oth, in fact, combine insights from biology, anthropology, psychology, medical

case studies, and an e!amination of art and culture. ut learning styles

emphasi"e the different ways people think and feel as they solve problems,

create products, and interact. #he theory of multiple intelligences is an effort to

understand how cultures and disciplines shape human potential. #hough both

theories claim that dominant ideologies of intelligence inhibit our understanding

of human differences, learning styles are concerned with differences in

the process of learning, whereas multiple intelligences center on

the content and products of learning. $ntil now, neither theory has had much to

do with the other.

%oward &ardner '())*+ spells out the difference between the theories this way

In I theory, I begin with a human organism that responds 'or fails to respond+ to

different kinds of contents in the world. . . . #hose who speak of learning styles

are searching for approaches that ought to characteri"e all contents 'p. /+.e believe that the integration of learning styles and multiple intelligence theorymay minimi"e their respective limitations and enhance their strengths, and we

provide some practical suggestions for teachers to successfully integrate andapply learning styles and multiple intelligence theory in the classroom.

Learning Styles

Learning-style theory begins with 1arl ung '()23+, who noted ma4or differences

in the way people perceived 'sensation versus intuition+, the way they made

decisions 'logical thinking versus imaginative feelings+, and how active or


2/11

reflective they were while interacting 'e!troversion versus introversion+. Isabel

yers and 5atherine riggs '()33+, who created the yers-riggs #ype Indicator

and founded the 6ssociation of 7sychological #ype, applied ung8s work and

influenced a generation of researchers trying to understand specific differences

in human learning. 5ey researchers in this area include 6nthony &regorc '()9/+,

5athleen utler '()9+, ernice c1arthy '()92+, and %arvey :ilver and .

obert %anson '())/+. 6lthough learning-style theorists interpret the personality

in various ways, nearly all models have two things in common

• A focus on process. Learning-style models tend to concern themselves

with the process of learning how individuals absorb information, think about

information, and evaluate the results.

• An emphasis on personality. Learning-style theorists generally believe that

learning is the result of a personal, individuali"ed act of thought and feeling.ost learning-style theorists have settled on four basic styles.


3/11

a sense of wholeness by practicing all four styles to some degree. >ducators

should help students discover their uni=ue profiles, as well as a balance of styles.

Strengths and Limitations of a LearningStyle Model

#he following are some strengths of learning-style models• #hey tend to focus on how different individuals process information across

many content areas.

• #hey recogni"e the role of cognitive and affective processes in learning

and, therefore, can significantly deepen our insights into issues related to

motivation.

• #hey tend to emphasi"e thought as a vital component of learning, thereby

avoiding reliance on basic and lower-level learning activities.

Learning-styles models have a couple of limitations. ?irst, they may fail to

recogni"e how styles vary in different content areas and disciplines.

:econd, these models are sometimes less sensitive than they should be to the

effects of conte!t on learning. >merging from a tradition that viewed style as

relatively permanent, many learning-style advocates advised altering learning

environments to match or challenge a learner8s style. >ither way, learning-style

models have largely left unanswered the =uestion of how conte!t and purpose

affect learning.

Multiple Intelligence !heory

?ourteen years after the publication of $rames of Mind '&ardner ()9*+, the

clarity and comprehensiveness of %oward &ardner8s design continue to da""le

the educational community. ho could have e!pected that a reconsideration of

the word intelligence would profoundly affect the way we see ourselves and our

students@

&ardner describes seven intelligences linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial,

musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal.2 #he distinctions

among these intelligences are supported by studies in child development,

cognitive skills under conditions of brain damage, psychometrics, changes incognition across history and within different cultures, and psychological transfer

and generali"ation.

#hus, &ardner8s model is backed by a rich research base that combines

physiology, anthropology, and personal and cultural history. #his theoretical depth

is sadly lacking in most learning-style models. oreover, &ardner8s seven

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept97/vol55/num01/Integrating-Learning-Styles-and-Multiple-Intelligences.aspx#fn2http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept97/vol55/num01/Integrating-Learning-Styles-and-Multiple-Intelligences.aspx#fn2


4/11

intelligences are not abstract concepts, but are recogni"able through common life

e!periences. e all intuitively understand the difference between musical and

linguistic, or spatial and mathematical intelligences, for e!ample. e all show

different levels of aptitude in various content areas. In all cases, we know that no

individual is universally intelligent; certain fields of knowledge engage or elude

everyone. &ardner has taken this intuitive knowledge of human e!perience and

shown us in a lucid, persuasive, and well-researched manner how it is true.

Aet, there are two gaps in multiple intelligence theory that limit its application to

learning. ?irst, the theory has grown out of cognitive scienceBa discipline that

has not yet asked itself why we have a field called cognitive science, but not one

called affective science. Learning-style theory, on the other hand, has deep roots

in psychoanalysis. Learning-style theorists, therefore, give

psychological affect and individual personality central roles in understandingdifferences in learning.

ultiple intelligence theory looks where style does not It focuses on the content

of learning and its relation to the disciplines. :uch a focus, however, means that

it does not deal with the individuali"ed process of learning. #his is the second

limitation of multiple intelligence theory, and it becomes clear if we consider

variations within a particular intelligence.

6re conductors, performers, composers, and musical critics all using the same

musical intelligence@ hat of the differing linguistic intelligences of a master of

free verse like illiam 1arlos illiams and a giant of literary criticism like %arold

loom@ %ow similar are the bodily-kinesthetic intelligences of dancers artha

&raham and &ene 5elly or football players >mmitt :mith and golfer #iger

oods@ %ow can we e!plain the difference in the spatial intelligences of 7icasso

and onetBboth masters of modern art@

ost of us would likely agree that different types of intelligence are at work in

these individuals. 7erhaps one day, &ardner8s work on the C4agged profileC of

combined intelligences or, perhaps, his insistence on the importance of conte!t

will produce a new understanding of intelligence. ut at the moment, &ardner8swork does not provide ade=uate guidelines for dealing with these distinctions.

ost of us, however, already have a way of e!plaining individual differences

between onet and 7icasso, artha &raham and &ene 5elly, or between

different students in our classrooms e refer to these individuals as having

distinct styles.


5/11

ach

theory responds to the weaknesses of the other; together, they form an

integrated picture of intelligence and difference.Integrating Learning Styles and Multiple Intelligences

In integrating these ma4or theories of knowledge, we moved through three steps.

?irst, we attempted to describe, for each of &ardner8s intelligences, a set of four

learning processes or abilities, one for each of the four learning styles. ?or

linguistic intelligence, for e!ample, the Mastery style represents the ability to use

language to describe events and se=uence activities; the #nterpersonal style, the

ability to use language to build trust and rapport; the Understanding style, the

ability to develop logical arguments and use rhetoric; and the Selfe"pressive style, the ability to use metaphoric and e!pressive language.

"igure #. Sample $%inesthetic$ &ocations 'y Style

Mastery

#he ability to use the body and

tools to take effective action or to

construct or repair.Mechanic, Trainer, %ontractor,

%raftsperson, Tool and &ye Ma'er

Interpersonal

#he ability to use the body to build rapport, to

console or persuade, and to support others.

%oach, %ounselor, Salesperson, Trainer

%inesthetic

(nderstanding Self)xpressi*e


6/11

#he ability to plan strategically or to

criti=ue the actions of the body.

Physical !ducator, Sports Analyst,

Professional Athlete, &ance %ritic

#he ability to appreciate the aesthetics of the

body and to use those values to create new

forms of e!pression.

Sculptor, %horeographer, Actor, &ancer,

Mime, Puppeteer

De!t, we listed samples of vocations that people are likely to choose, given

particular intelligence and learning-style profiles. orking in this way, we devised

a model that linked the process-centered approach of learning styles and the

content and product-driven multiple intelligence theory.

?igure 2 shows how you might construct a classroom display of information

about intelligences, styles, and possible vocations. 1onsider kinesthetic

intelligence and the difference between a #iger oods and a &ene 5elly 7eoplewho e!cel in this intelligence, with an Understanding style, might be professional

athletes 'like #iger oods+, dance critics, or sports analysts; people with a Self

e"pressive style might be sculptors, choreographers, dancers 'like &ene 5elly+,

actors, mimes, or puppeteers.

"igure +. Student ,hoice- ssessment /roducts 'y Intelligence and

Style

LI01(IS!I,

Mastery

• rite an article

• 7ut together a maga"ine

• Eevelop a plan

• Eevelop a newscast

• Eescribe a comple! procedureFob4ect

Interpersonal

• rite a letter

• ake a pitch

• 1onduct an interview

• 1ounsel a fictional character or a friend

(nderstanding

• ake a case


7/11

• akeFdefend a decision

• 6dvance a theory

• Interpret a te!t

• >!plain an artifact

Self)xpressi*e

• rite a play

• Eevelop a plan to direct

• :pin a tale

• Eevelop an advertising campaign

#he following outline shows how we categori"ed abilities and sample vocations

for the seven intelligences, by learning style

Linguistic• astery #he ability to use language to describe events and se=uence

activities ()ournalist, technical writer, administrator, contractor*

• Interpersonal #he ability to use language to build trust and

rapport (salesperson, counselor, clergyperson, therapist*

• $nderstanding #he ability to develop logical arguments and use

rhetoric (lawyer, professor, orator, philosopher*

• :elf-e!pressive #he ability to use metaphoric and e!pressive

language (playwright, poet, advertising copywriter, novelist*

LogicalMathematical

• astery #he ability to use numbers to compute, describe, and

document (accountant, +oo''eeper, statistician*

• Interpersonal #he ability to apply mathematics in personal and daily

life (tradesperson, homema'er*

• $nderstanding #he ability to use mathematical concepts to make

con4ectures, establish proofs, and apply mathematics and data to construct

arguments (logician, computer programmer, scientist, uantitative pro+lem

solver*• :elf-e!pressive #he ability to be sensitive to the patterns, symmetry, logic,

and aesthetics of mathematics and to solve problems in design and

modeling (composer, engineer, inventor, designer, ualitative pro+lem solver*

Spatial


8/11

• astery #he ability to perceive and represent the visual-spatial world

accurately (illustrator, artist, guide, photographer*

• Interpersonal #he ability to arrange color, line, shape, form, and space to

meet the needs of others(interior decorator, painter, clothing designer, weaver,

+uilder*

• $nderstanding #he ability to interpret and graphically represent visual or

spatial ideas (architect, iconographer, computer graphics designer, art critic*

• :elf-e!pressive #he ability to transform visual or spatial ideas into

imaginative and e!pressive creations (artist, inventor, model +uilder,

cinematographer*

2odily%inesthetic

• astery #he ability to use the body and tools to take effective action or to

construct or repair (mechanic, trainer, contractor, craftsperson, tool and dyema'er*

• Interpersonal #he ability to use the body to build rapport, to console and

persuade, and to support others (coach, counselor, salesperson, trainer*

• $nderstanding #he ability to plan strategically or to criti=ue the actions of

the body (physical educator, sports analyst, professional athlete, dance critic*

• :elf-e!pressive #he ability to appreciate the aesthetics of the body and to

use those values to create new forms of e!pression (sculptor, choreographer,

actor, dancer, mime, puppeteer*

Musical

• astery #he ability to understand and develop musical

techni=ue (technician, music teacher, instrument ma'er*

• Interpersonal #he ability to respond emotionally to music and to work

together to use music to meet the needs of others (choral, +and, and orchestral

performer or conductor- pu+lic relations director in music*

• $nderstanding #he ability to interpret musical forms and ideas (music

critic, aficionado, music collector*

•

:elf-e!pressive #he ability to create imaginative and e!pressiveperformances and compositions(composer, conductor, individualsmallgroup

performer*

Interpersonal

• astery #he ability to organi"e people and to communicate clearly what

needs to be done(administrator, manager, politician*


9/11

• Interpersonal #he ability to use empathy to help others and to solve

problems (social wor'er, doctor, nurse, therapist, teacher*

• $nderstanding #he ability to discriminate and interpret among different

kinds of interpersonal clues(sociologist, psychologist, psychotherapist,

professor of psychology or sociology*

• :elf-e!pressive #he ability to influence and inspire others to work toward

a common goal(consultant, charismatic leader, politician, evangelist*

Intrapersonal

• astery #he ability to assess one8s own strengths, weaknesses, talents,

and interests and use them to set goals (planner, small +usiness owner*

• Interpersonal #he ability to use understanding of oneself to be of service

to others (counselor, social wor'er*

•

$nderstanding #he ability to form and develop concepts and theoriesbased on an e!amination of oneself (psychologist*

• :elf-e!pressive #he ability to reflect on one8s inner moods, intuitions, and

temperament and to use them to create or e!press a personal vision (artist,

religious leader, writer*

6s the final step in constructing the intelligence-learning style menus, we

collected descriptions of products that a person with strengths in each

intelligence and style might create. ?or e!ample, in the linguistic intelligence

domain, a person with the Mastery style might write an article, put a maga"ine

together, develop a newscast, or describe a comple! procedure. y contrast, a

person with a Selfe"pressive style might write a play, spin a tale, or develop an

advertising campaign 'see fig. 2+. In the kinesthetic intelligence domain, a person

with an Understanding style might choreograph a concept or teach a physical

education concept; a person with a Selfe"pressive style might create a diorama

or act out emotional states or concepts. 6 class display of such lists might

accompany charts like the sample shown in ?igure 2.

3ow to (se the Integrated Intelligence Menus

:everal years ago, &rant iggins reminded us that we can8t teach everything. It

is also =uite obvious that we can8t use every teaching method nor every form of

assessment. %ere are some ways to use the Integrated Intelligence enusB

particularly for performance assessmentBwithout trying to do everything at once.

/. Use the menus as a compass. 5eep a running record of the styles and

intelligences you use regularly and of those you avoid. hen a particular form of


10/11

assessment doesn8t work, offer the student another choice from another part of

the menu.

0. $ocus on one intelligence at a time.


11/11

&regorc, 6. '()9/+. #nside Styles4 2eyond the 2asics. aynard, ass.

&abriel :ystems, Inc.

ung, 1. '()23+. The Theory of Psychological Type. 7rinceton, D..

7rinceton $niversity 7ress.

c1arthy, . '()92+. The 5Mat System. 6rlington %eights, Ill. >!cel

7ublishing 1o.

:ilver, %.?., and .. %anson. '())/+. 3earning Styles and Strategies.

oodbridge, D.. #he #houghtful >ducation 7ress.

:ilver, %.?., and .. :trong. '())3+. Monographs for 3earning Style

Models and Profiles. '$npublished research+.

)ndnotes

( #he term interpersonal style overlaps with &ardner8s interpersonal intelligence. In

&ardner8s model, interpersonal intelligence is a category related to the content and

products of knowledge. In our learning-style model, the interpersonal style refers to a

way of processing knowledge.2 &ardner has recently introduced an eighth intelligenceBnaturalist . 6lthough our

integrated intelligence menus can easily accommodate this new category, we have

chosen to work only with the classic seven intelligences
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept97/vol55/num01/Integrating-Learning-Styles-and-Multiple-Intelligences.aspx#ref1http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept97/vol55/num01/Integrating-Learning-Styles-and-Multiple-Intelligences.aspx#ref2http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept97/vol55/num01/Integrating-Learning-Styles-and-Multiple-Intelligences.aspx#ref1http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept97/vol55/num01/Integrating-Learning-Styles-and-Multiple-Intelligences.aspx#ref2

Documents

Integrating Learning Styles and Multiple Intelligences