What began as a theory of intelligence, intended for psychologists, has become a tool that educators around the world seize with enthusiasm. The theory of multiple intelligences (MI) brings a pragmatic approach to how we define intelligence and allows us to use our students' strengths to help them learn. Students who read and write well are still smart, but they are joined by other students who have different talents. Through MI, schools and classrooms become settings in which a variety of skills and abilities can be used to learn and solve problems. Being smart is no longer determined by a score on a test; being smart is determined by how well students learn in a variety of ways.

The History of the Intelligence Quotient (I.Q.)

We, as humans, have a penchant for measuring things. Perhaps the beginning of the modern search for ways to measure intelligence was the creation of the I.Q. test. In Paris in the early 1900s, Alfred Binet was asked to develop an instrument that would identify youngsters who were mentally deficient and in need of extra help. Thus, the first standardized intelligence test was born. Later, other researchers developed the technique of administering a series of questions to children and recording which items could be answered correctly by almost all youngsters, which by most, which by few, and which by none. The information was used to create a test that would discern students' levels of knowledge, designed so that a score of 100 would indicate an average intelligence. The idea that intelligence could be objectively measured and reported by a single score took hold. Nearly a century later myriad standardized tests are available for a variety of purposes, and they all are based on Binet's premise that a single test can yield a score that captures all of an individual's abilities and potential.

Of course, we know this is nonsense. How could all of an individual's abilities and potential possibly be captured by a single test, much less a single score? Yet many important educational decisions, including whether a student is accepted into a program or a school, are heavily influenced by a single test or a single score. Despite the fact that the misuse of tests and test scores flies in the face of common sense, many people continue to embrace the I.Q. model, assuming that there is one measure that can assess an individual's intelligence.

Misuse and Overuse of I.Q. and Other Standardized Tests

Although standardized tests of various sorts have their roles and can be used with validity in many instances, they are often misused and overused. Misuse and overuse happen because standardized tests are easy to use, cheap, and accepted (indeed, are often expected) by the public.

Group achievement and I.Q. tests are remarkably inexpensive. Students fill in circles to indicate the response they choose and their answer sheets are shipped away for machine scoring. These relatively inexpensive standardized tests are attractive because most schools operate on a tight budget and the public is familiar with standardized testing. Virtually every parent has taken standardized tests, so they expect their children to do the same.

The strength of standardized tests is that they are reliable, yielding the same score over time and, thus, are comparable even though administered in different settings and at different times. Their weakness is that they may or may not be valid; what they actually measure may be quite different than what they purport to assess. Standardized tests that ask students to use a multiple-choice format to select the best written passage from four samples, for example, may identify a particular skill, but it is not the skill of writing, which can be determined only by asking students to write. Judging students' writing ability by having them identify good writing may be reliable, but it is certainly not valid.

The biggest problem with standardized tests and the I.Q. model, however, is that they measure intelligence narrowly, based on how well the student reads and computes. Only a few of a students' abilities, the “scholastic” intelligences, chiefly the linguistic and logical mathematical, are assessed. Although unfortunate, this tendency to assess only the linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences is not surprising because for decades schools have focused, sometimes almost exclusively, on the scholastic intelligences. The tendency to focus on scholastic intelligences is compounded by the fact that it is relatively easy to design reliable (if not always valid) paper and pencil tests for assessing reading, writing, and computation. Designing reliable and valid tests to assess students' musical or artistic talents, for example, is much more difficult and surely more expensive.

Because standardized tests are so focused on the scholastic intelligences, they can reasonably predict future success in school. Real-world success, however, encompasses much more than skill in the linguistic and logical-mathematical arenas. Therefore, that same focus means standardized tests offer little useful predictive information about success in life. For too long we have hidden behind “objective” tests, those yielding consistent and reliable results, disregarding the fact that they measure only a piece of the picture. And because we focus our energies on those things we measure, we wind up giving almost all of our attention to the scholastic intelligences, those that are easily measured through multiple-choice tests.

The Multiple Intelligences (MI) Model

Howard Gardner was working at the Boston Veterans Administration Medical Center when he became aware that brain-damaged patients lost different abilities depending upon the location of the injury in the brain. For example, damage to the frontal lobe results in difficulty producing speech that is grammatical, although it does not affect the ability to understand what has been said. In Frames of Mind Gardner says, “Other, even more specific linguistic disorders turn out to be linked to particular regions in the brain: these include selective difficulties in repetition, naming, reading, and writing” (1983, p. 51). He notes that some individuals who have experienced significant aphasia (a loss of language) from brain damage can maintain their musical abilities while, conversely, others become disabled musically yet keep basic language skills (p. 118). To Gardner, these differing losses suggest a biological basis for specialized intelligences. Working from the definition that intelligence is the ability to solve a problem or create a product that is valued in a culture, Gardner developed a set of criteria to determine what set of skills make up an intelligence. These criteria are focused on solving problems and creating products; they are based on biological foundations and psychological aspects of intelligence. He suggests that an ability can be considered an intelligence if it can meet a few (not necessarily all) of these criteria:

• It has the potential to be isolated by brain damage. For example, the location of damage to the brain, such as might occur from a stroke, may result in a person losing certain linguistic abilities.
• It is demonstrated by the existence of idiot savants, prodigies, and other exceptional individuals who demonstrate a high level of skill in one area. For example, by observing people who demonstrate extraordinary ability in a single intelligence, we can watch intelligences in relative isolation.
• It has an identifiable core operation or set of operations. Musical intelligence consists of sensitivity to melody, harmony, rhythm, timbre, and musical structure. Linguistic intelligence consists of sensitivity to structure and syntax, vocabulary, rhythm and cadence, and literary tools (e.g., alliteration).
• It has a distinctive developmental history, along with a definable set of expert “end-state” performances. Expert athletes, poets, and salespersons demonstrate these performance characteristics.
• It has an evolutionary history or evolutionary plausibility. Animals exhibit forms of spatial intelligence; birds have musical intelligence.
• It has support from experimental psychological tasks. Tests can indicate how intelligences are discrete or interrelated.
• It has support from psychometric findings. For example, batteries of tests can reveal which intelligences reflect the same underlying factors.
• It has susceptibility to encoding in a symbol system. Codes such as language, maps, numbers, and facial expressions capture components of the various intelligences.

The definition of intelligence that is supported by these criteria—the ability to solve a problem or create a product that is valued in a society—is very different from the definition of intelligence implicit in standardized I.Q. and aptitude tests (one based on verbal fluency, wide vocabulary, and computational skills). While the traditional definition of intelligence focuses on inert knowledge and skills that are especially valuable in school, Gardner's definition is far wider. “Creating a product” could encompass transforming a blank canvas into a picture that evokes emotion, or it might mean forming and leading a productive team from a group that couldn't agree on anything. The definition of “solving a problem or creating a product” is a pragmatic one, focusing on using an ability in a real-life situation. Applying his criteria resulted in Gardner asserting that there are more intelligences than those relied upon in I.Q. tests and typically valued in school.

Of course, Gardner is not the first person to suggest that there is more than one intelligence. Decades ago, J. P. Guilford created the Structure of Intellect, a model that identified more than 90 different intellectual capacities, and Robert Sternberg has developed the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence, which contains three forms of intelligence. Recently, Daniel Goleman's Emotional Intelligence and Robert Coles's Moral Intelligence have received national attention. All of these theories share the belief that intelligence is a multifaceted, complex capacity. Gardner's model is distinguished from the other theories by its breadth, its scientific basis, and its educational implications. Gardner's multiple intelligences are shown in Figure 1.1.^* 

Figure 1.1. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences

Intelligence	Definition	People who exhibit this intelligence
linguistic	sensitivity to the meaning and order of words	Winston Churchill, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Barbara Jordan
logical-mathematical	the ability to handle chains of reasoning and to recognize patterns and order	Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking, Benjamin Banneker
musical	sensitivity to pitch, melody, rhythm and tone	Ray Charles, Harry Connick Jr., Carly Simon
bodily-kinesthetic	the ability to use the body skillfully and handle objects adroitly	Mia Hamm, Michael Jordan, Michelle Kwan
spatial	the ability to perceive the world accurately and to recreate or transform aspects of that world	Mary Engelbreit, Maya Lin, Frank Lloyd Wright
naturalist	the ability to recognize and classify the numerous species, the flora and fauna, of an environment	Charles Darwin, Jane Goodall, George Meriwether Lewis
interpersonal	the ability to understand people and relationships	Colin Powell, Martin Luther King Jr., Deborah Tannen
intrapersonal	access to one's emotional life as a means to understand oneself and others	Anne Frank, Bill Moyers, Eleanor Roosevelt

MI in Schools

Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences resonates so strongly for many educators because it offers a model for acting on what we believe: all children have strengths. Many of us were taught to focus on the curriculum as we planned and taught, to concentrate on helping students respond to the curriculum; MI, however, is a student-centered model in which the curriculum is often modified to fit the students. Rather than relying upon a linguistic filter and requiring students to write to show their grasp of skills and information, teachers using MI can allow students to use their strengths to demonstrate what they have learned. Students might use their spatial intelligence in drawing, their musical intelligence in composing a song or identifying a melody, or their bodily-kinesthetic intelligence in acting out an interaction or creating a diorama. Figure 1.2 suggests some possible ways that teachers and students can incorporate the intelligences in teaching and learning.

Figure 1.2. Identifying and Encouraging the Use of Multiple Intelligences in Schools

Intelligence	Students who like to do these activities are often exhibiting their strongest intelligences	To help students develop a particular intelligence, teachers can
linguistic	write stories and essays; tell jokes, stories, puns; use an expanded vocabulary; play word games; use words to create images	encourage the use of outrageous words and palindromes; involve students in debates and making oral presentations; show how poetry can convey emotion
logical-mathematical	work with numbers, figure things out, analyze situations; see how things work; exhibit precision in problem solving; work in situations with clear answers	use Venn diagrams to compare and contrast; use graphs, tables, and time lines; have students demonstrate using concrete objects; ask students to show sequences
musical	listen to and play music; match feelings to music and rhythm; sing and hum; create and replicate tunes	rewrite song lyrics to teach a concept; encourage students to add music to plays; create musical mnemonics; teach history and geography through the music of the period and place
bodily-kinesthetic	play sports and be physically active; engage in risk taking with their bodies; dance, act, and mime; engage in crafts and play with mechanical objects	provide tactile and movement activities; offer role-playing and acting opportunities; allow students to move while working; use sewing, model making and other activities that require fine motor skills
spatial	doodle, paint or draw; create three-dimensional representations; look at and create maps and diagrams; take things apart and put them back together	draw maps and mazes; lead visualization activities; teach mind mapping; provide opportunities to show understanding through drawing; have students design buildings, clothing, scenery to depict an event or period
naturalist	spend time outdoors; collect plants, rocks, animals; listen to outdoor sounds; notice relationships in nature; classify flora and fauna	use outdoors as a classroom; have plants and animals in the classroom for which students are responsible; conduct hands-on experiments; create a nature area on the playground
interpersonal	enjoy many friends; lead, share, mediate; build consensus; help others with their problems; be an effective team member	use cooperative learning; assign group projects; give students opportunities for peer teaching; brainstorm solutions; create situations in which students observe and give feedback to others
intrapersonal	reflect; control own feelings and moods; pursue personal interests and set indiviual agendas; learn through observing and listening; use metacognitive skills	allow students to work at their own pace; create quite areas within the room or allow students to go outside to work alone; help students set and monitor personal goals; provide opportunities for students to give and receive feedback; involve students in writing journals
(Adapted from Succeeding with Multiple Intelligences, by the New City School faculty, 1996.)

There is no one, right way to implement MI. That there is no single path to implementation is one of the model's attractions, but also one of its liabilities. The way MI is used at New City School, for example, is different from the way it is used at the Key School in Indianapolis, Indiana, which is different from the way it is brought to life at the Fuller School in Gloucester, Massachusetts. The beauty of this is that each teacher or, preferably, each group of teachers, can use MI in a way that reflects their school's unique context and culture. At the New City School, for example, we believe that the personal intelligences are the most important; at the Key School, however, all intelligences are valued equally. Latitude in implementation respects the professionalism of teachers and trusts their judgment to know how best to meet their students' needs.

Latitude also means, however, that it is possible to misapply MI. Gardner has written with concern about teachers who have music playing in the background and believe that they are addressing the musical intelligence, or teachers who allow students to crawl on the floor during math, thinking that they are addressing the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. MI can be a powerful tool for reaching students, but using it effectively requires teachers to devote the time and energy to understand MI theory and then decide how it can be used in curriculum development, instruction, and assessment.

At New City School, the MI model has caused us to look differently at curriculum, instruction, and assessment; how we work with parents; and how we work with each other. A good beginning is to explore to what degree you are bringing the different intelligences to life in your classroom. Assess your baseline using the MI Inventory in Appendix A. Share the inventory with colleagues and discuss your results.

For Faculty Discussion

1. Which intelligences might have been more valuable in our culture 100 years ago? Which intelligences would have likely been most prized where we live 500 years ago?
2. Looking ahead, how might technology make some of the intelligences more or less important or obsolete?
3. Can we identify former students who were not successful in school but have been successful in life? Can we explain what accounts for this?
4. Why might it be difficult to incorporate many of the intelligences into curriculum and instruction?

A Paradigm Shift

Over a century ago, in Uncle Tom's Cabin, Harriet Beecher Stowe presented racial issues in a way that caused a nation to pause. In 1859 Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species forever changed the way we look at ourselves and our relationship to the cosmos. More recently, Ralph Nader's Unsafe At Any Speedand Rachel Carson's Silent Spring began movements for consumer safety and ecological consciousness. And in 1983 Howard Gardner changed the way we look at intelligence with Frames of Mind.  Written as a book for psychologists and pyschometricians, Frames of Mind has had an influence far greater than Gardner intended. More than pronouncements about the nature of intelligence, Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (MI) has significantly affected educators and schools around the world. In The Structure of the Scientific Revolution, Thomas Kuhn coined the term “paradigm shift,” which means looking at an established model or principle in a new way that forever changes its meaning. Gardner joins Stowe, Darwin, Nader, and Carson in writing a book that changed how we view a piece of the world.

Endnote

^*  The naturalist intelligence was not identified in Frames of Mind, but was proposed in the 1990s by Gardner. Gardner has speculated that an existential intelligence might be identified as a ninth intelligence.