Multiple Intellegences

Multiple Intelligences
By ; Drs. Agus Subandi, MBA
This article is about Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. For other theories of multiple intelligences, see Intelligence.
The theory of multiple intelligences was proposed by Howard Gardner in 1983 to analyze and better describe the concept of intelligence.
Gardner argues that the concept of intelligence as traditionally defined in psychometrics (IQ tests) mistakenly suggests that the wide variety of cognitive abilities measured in a battery of tests used to assess general intelligence factor are uncorrelated with each other, or at least only very weakly correlated. For example, the theory predicts that a child who learns to multiply easily is not likely to be generally more intelligent than a child who has more difficulty on this task. The child who takes more time to master simple multiplication 1) may best learn to multiply through a different approach, 2) may excel in a field outside of mathematics, or 3) may even be looking at and understand the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level. Such a fundamentally deeper understanding can result in what looks like slowness and can hide a mathematical intelligence potentially higher than that of a child who quickly memorizes the multiplication table despite a less detailed understanding of the process of multiplication.
The theory has been met with mixed responses. Empirical evidence reveals high correlations between different tasks (rather than the zero correlations which are predicted). Nevertheless many educationalists[who?] support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.

The multiple intelligences
‹ The template below (Ref improve section) is being considered for deletion. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus.›
Gardner has articulated eight basic types of intelligence to date, without claiming that this is a complete list.[1] Gardner's original list included seven of these; in 1999 he added a naturalist intelligence. He has also considered existential intelligence and moral intelligence, but does not find sufficient evidence for these based upon his articulated criteria,[2] which include:[3]
 the potential for brain isolation by brain damage,
 its place in evolutionary history,
 the presence of core operations,
 susceptibility to encoding (symbolic expression),
 a distinct developmental progression,
 the existence of idiot-savants, prodigies and other exceptional people,
 support from experimental psychology and psychometric findings.
The theory's eight currently accepted intelligences are: (Ref: Educational Psychology, Robert Slavin. 2009, 117)
 Spatial
 Linguistic
 Logical-mathematical
 Bodily-kinesthetic
 Musical
 Interpersonal
 Intrapersonal
 Naturalistic


Spatial
This area deals with spatial judgment and the ability to visualize with the mind's eye. Careers which suit those with this type of intelligence include artists, designers and architects. A spatial person is also good with puzzles.
Linguistic
This area has to do with words, spoken or written. People with high verbal-linguistic intelligence display a facility with words and languages. They are typically good at reading, writing, telling stories and memorizing words along with dates. They tend to learn best by reading, taking notes, listening to lectures, and by discussing and debating about what they have learned. Those with verbal-linguistic intelligence learn foreign languages very easily as they have high verbal memory and recall, and an ability to understand and manipulate syntax and structure.
Logical-mathematical
This area has to do with logic, abstractions, reasoning and numbers. While it is often assumed that those with this intelligence naturally excel in mathematics, chess, computer programming and other logical or numerical activities, a more accurate definition places less emphasis on traditional mathematical ability and more on reasoning capabilities, recognizing abstract patterns, scientific thinking and investigation and the ability to perform complex calculations. It correlates strongly with traditional concepts of "intelligence" or IQ.
Bodily-kinesthetic
The core elements of the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are control of one's bodily motions and the capacity to handle objects skillfully (206). Gardner elaborates to say that this intelligence also includes a sense of timing, a clear sense of the goal of a physical action, along with the ability to train responses so they become like reflexes.
In theory, people who have bodily-kinesthetic intelligence should learn better by involving muscular movement (e.g. getting up and moving around into the learning experience), and are generally good at physical activities such as sports or dance. They may enjoy acting or performing, and in general they are good at building and making things. They often learn best by doing something physically, rather than by reading or hearing about it. Those with strong bodily-kinesthetic intelligence seem to use what might be termed muscle memory - they remember things through their body such as verbal memory.
Careers that suit those with this intelligence include: athletes, pilots, dancers, musicians, actors, surgeons, doctors, builders, police officers, and soldiers. Although these careers can be duplicated through virtual simulation, they will not produce the actual physical learning that is needed in this intelligence.[4]
Musical
This area has to do with sensitivity to sounds, rhythms, tones, and music. People with a high musical intelligence normally have good pitch and may even have absolute pitch, and are able to sing, play musical instruments, and compose music. Since there is a strong auditory component to this intelligence, those who are strongest in it may learn best via lecture. Language skills are typically highly developed in those whose base intelligence is musical. In addition, they will sometimes use songs or rhythms to learn. They have sensitivity to rhythm, pitch, meter, tone, melody or timbre.
Careers that suit those with this intelligence include instrumentalists, singers, conductors, disc-jockeys, orators, writers and composers.
Interpersonal
This area has to do with interaction with others. In theory, people who have a high interpersonal intelligence tend to be extroverts, characterized by their sensitivity to others' moods, feelings, temperaments and motivations, and their ability to cooperate in order to work as part of a group. They communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and may be either leaders or followers. They typically learn best by working with others and often enjoy discussion and debate.
Careers that suit those with this intelligence include sales, politicians, managers, teachers and social workers.[5]
Intrapersonal
This area has to do with introspective and self-reflective capacities. People with intrapersonal intelligence are intuitive and typically introverted. They are skillful at deciphering their own feelings and motivations. This refers to having a deep understanding of the self; what your strengths/ weaknesses are, what makes you unique, you can predict your own reactions/ emotions.
Careers which suit those with this intelligence include philosophers, psychologists, theologians, lawyers, writers. People with intrapersonal intelligence also prefer to work alone.
Naturalistic
This area has to do with nurturing and relating information to one’s natural surroundings. Careers which suit those with this intelligence include naturalists, farmers and gardeners.
Existential
Some proponents of multiple intelligence theory proposed spiritual or religious intelligence as a possible additional type. Gardner did not want to commit to a spiritual intelligence, but suggested that an "existential" intelligence may be a useful construct.[6] The hypothesis of an existential intelligence has been further explored by educational researchers.[7]
Ability to contemplate phenomena or questions beyond sensory data, such as the infinite and infinitesimal. Careers or callings which suit those with this intelligence include shamans, priests, mathematicians, physicists, scientists, cosmologists and philosophers.
Use in education
Traditionally, schools have emphasized the development of logical intelligence and linguistic intelligence (mainly reading and writing). IQ tests (given to about 1,000,000 students each year)[citation needed] focus mostly on logical and linguistic intelligence as well. While many students function well in this environment, there are those who do not. Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader vision of education, wherein teachers use different methodologies, exercises and activities to reach all students, not just those who excel at linguistic and logical intelligence.
Many teachers[who?] see the theory as simple common sense. Some say that it validates what they already know: that students learn in different ways. On the other hand, James Traub's article in The New Republic notes that Gardner's system has not been accepted by most academics in intelligence or teaching.
George Miller, the esteemed psychologist credited with discovering the mechanisms by which short term memory operates, wrote in The New York Times Book Review that Gardner's argument boiled down to "hunch and opinion" (p. 20). Gardner's subsequent work has done very little to shift the balance of opinion. A recent issue of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law devoted to the study of intelligence contained virtually no reference to Gardner's work. Most people who study intelligence view M.I. theory as rhetoric rather than science, and they are divided on the virtues of the rhetoric.
The application of the theory of multiple intelligences varies widely. It runs the gamut from a teacher who, when confronted with a student having difficulties, uses a different approach to teach the material, to an entire school using MI as a framework. In general, those who subscribe to the theory strive to provide opportunities for their students to use and develop all the different intelligences, not just the few at which they naturally excel.
A Harvard-led study of 41 schools using the theory came to the conclusion that in these schools there was "a culture of hard work, respect, and caring; a faculty that collaborated and learned from each other; classrooms that engaged students through constrained but meaningful choices, and a sharp focus on enabling students to produce high-quality work."[8]
Of the schools implementing Gardner's theory, the most well-known is New City School, in St. Louis, Missouri, which has been using the theory since 1988. The school's teachers have produced two books for teachers, Celebrating Multiple Intelligences and Succeeding With Multiple Intelligences and the principal, Thomas Hoerr, has written Becoming a Multiple Intelligences School as well as many articles on the practical applications of the theory. The school has also hosted four conferences, each attracting over 200 educators from around the world and remains a valuable resource for teachers interested in implementing the theory in their own classrooms.
Thomas Armstrong argues that Waldorf education organically engages all of Gardner's original seven intelligences.[9]
Questions
Questions raised about Gardner's theory include:
 What kind of correlations exist between the intelligences, or are they completely independent?
 Should schools be focusing on teaching to students' strengths or on remediating where they are weak?
 To what extent should students be aware of their profile in the various intelligences?
Critical reception
The definition of intelligence
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985)
Defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus broader definition more accurately reflects the differing ways in which humans think and learn. They would state that the traditional interpretation of intelligence collapses under the weight of its own logic and definition, noting that intelligence is usually defined as the cognitive or mental capacity of an individual, which by logical necessity would include all forms of mental qualities, not simply the ones most transparent to standardized I.Q. tests.
Some of these criticisms arise from the fact that Gardner has not provided a test of his multiple intelligences. He originally defined it as the ability to solve problems that have value in at least one culture, or as something that a student is interested in. However, he added adisclaimer that he has no fixed definition, and his classification is more of an artistic judgment than fact:
Ultimately, it would certainly be desirable to have an algorithm for the selection of an intelligence, such that any trained researcher could determine whether a candidate's intelligence met the appropriate criteria. At present, however, it must be admitted that the selection (or rejection) of a candidate's intelligence is reminiscent more of an artistic judgment than of a scientific assessment. (Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, 1985)
Gardner argues that by calling linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities intelligences, but not artistic, musical, athletic, etc. abilities, the former are needlessly aggrandized. Certain critics balk at this widening of the definition, saying that it ignores "the connotation of intelligence...[which] has always connoted the kind of thinking skills that makes one successful in school."[10]


Catatan
1. ^ http://www.miresearch.org/mi_theory.html
2. ^ Gardner (infed.org)
3. ^ Lynn Gilman, Kecerdasan Manusia
4. ^ Gardner, "Heteroglossia: Sebuah Perspektif Global" Jurnal Interdisipliner Teori Studi Postpedagogical (Mei 1984)
5. ^ Gardner "Komunikasi interpersonal antara Multiple Subjek: Studi di redundansi," Eksperimental Psikologi (2002)
6. ^ Gardner, Howard. (1999) "Intelijen dibingkai kembali: Multiple Intelligences untuk Abad 21." New York: Buku Dasar.
7. ^ Tupper, KW (2002) Entheogens dan Kecerdasan Eksistensial: Penggunaan Guru Plant sebagai Alat Kognitif . Jurnal Pendidikan Kanada. 27 (4), 499-516.
8. ^ Kornhaber, "Keunggulan Psikometri? Periksa Fakta Anda," 2004
9. ^ "pendidikan Waldorf mewujudkan dalam pengertian organik benar-benar semua tujuh Howard Gardner kecerdasan ... bukan hanya merupakan campuran dari tujuh kecerdasan yang Banyak. sekolah saat ini berusaha untuk membangun kurikulum berdasarkan's model Gardner hanya melalui proses aditif (apa yang bisa kita tambahkan untuk apa yang telah kita punya.?) Pendekatan Steiner, bagaimanapun, adalah untuk memulai dengan visi batin yang mendalam anak dan kebutuhan anak dan membangun kurikulum di sekitar visi tersebut. " Thomas Armstrong, dikutip dalam Eric Oddleifson, Boston Public Schools Sebagai Seni-Terpadu Organisasi Pembelajaran: Mengembangkan Standar Tinggi Budaya untuk Semua
10. ^ Willinggam, "Periksa Fakta: Membingkai kembali Pikiran itu," 2004
11. ^ Gardner, Howard (1998). Sebuah Balas ke 's' Perry D. Klein Mengalikan masalah intelijen oleh delapan ' . 96-102.
12. ^ Klein, D. Perry (Winter, 1998). "Sebuah Tanggapan untuk Gardner Howard: Falsifiability, Bukti Empiris, dan Kegunaan Pedagogi di psikologi pendidikan". Kanada Jurnal Pendidikan 23 (1): 103-112.
13. ^ Demetriou, A., Efklides, A., & Platsidou, M. (1993). Arsitektur dan dinamika pikiran berkembang: strukturalisme Experiential sebagai bingkai untuk pemersatu teori perkembangan kognitif 234. Monograf Masyarakat untuk Penelitian di Anak, 58 Pembangunan, Serial Number.
14. ^ Demetriou, A., christou, C., Spanoudis, G., & Platsidou, M. (2002). Pengembangan pengolahan mental: Efisiensi, memori kerja, dan berpikir 268. Monograf Masyarakat Penelitian dalam Anak, 67 Pembangunan, Serial Number.
15. ^ a b Pengujian IQ 101, Alan S. Kaufman, 2009, Springer Publishing Company, ISBN-10: 0826106293 ISBN-13: 9780826106292
16. ^ Visser, B. et al ".," g dan pengukuran Multiple Intelligences: Tanggapan terhadap Gardner, Intelijen Volume 34, Issue 5, September-Oktober 2006, Halaman 507-510
17. ^ Gottfredson, LS (2006). Sosial konsekuensi dari perbedaan kelompok dalam kemampuan kognitif (Consequencias sociais das diferencas de grupo em habilidade cognitiva). Dalam CE Flores-Mendoza & R. Colom (Eds.), Introducau sebuah psicologia das diferencas individuais (hal. 433-456). Porto Allegre, Brasil: Penerbit ArtMed.
18. ^ Stahl, "Stroke berbeda untuk Orang-orang yang berbeda-beda: Sebuah Kritik Gaya Belajar"
19. ^ Rothstein, R., & Jacobsen, R. (2006). "Apakah Basic?". Kepemimpinan Kepala Sekolah, 7 (4), 14-19.
Referensi
 Demetriou, A., & Kazi, S. (2006). Kesadaran diri dalam g (dengan efisiensi pengolahan dan penalaran). Intelijen, 34, 297-317.
 Demetriou, A., Mouyi, A., & Spanoudis, G. (2010). Pengembangan pengolahan mental. Nesselroade, JR (2010). Metode dalam studi hidup-span pembangunan manusia: Isu dan jawaban. Dalam WF Overton (Ed.), Biologi, kognisi dan metode di seluruh rentang kehidupan.Volume 1 dari Buku Pegangan of-span pengembangan kehidupan (hal. 36-55), Editor-in-chief: Lerner RM. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
 Eysenck, M. W (1994) "Intelijen". Dalam MW Eysenck, (ed.), The Blackwell kamus psikologi kognitif (hal. 192-193). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.
 Gardner, Howard. (1983) "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences." New York: Buku Dasar .
 Gardner, Howard. (1993) "Multiple Intelligences: Teori Dalam Praktek. The" New York: Buku Dasar .
 Gardner, Howard. (1999) "Intelijen dibingkai kembali: Multiple Intelligences untuk Abad 21." New York: Buku Dasar .
 Gardner, Howard. (1998) "A Balas ke 's' Perry D. Klein Mengalikan masalah intelijen oleh delapan '" Canadian Journal of Education, 23 (1), 96-102.
 Gardner, Howard, dan Moran Seana. (2006). Ilmu teori Multiple Intelligences: Tanggapan terhadap Lynn Waterhouse. Pendidikan Psikolog, Volume 41, Issue 4, Fall 2006, hal 227-232.
 Gardner, H. (2004) pikiran Mengubah: Seni dan ilmu berubah dan orang lain pikiran kita sendiri. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, hal 196.
 Kavale, Kenneth, A., dan Steven R. Forness, 1987. "Substansi lebih gaya: Menilai kemanjuran pengujian modalitas dan pengajaran", yang luar biasa Anak 54:228-239.
 Klein, Perry, D. (1997) "Mengalikan masalah intelijen oleh delapan: Sebuah kritik dari Teman-teori Gardner", Kanada Jurnal Pendidikan, 22 (4), 377-394.
 Klein, Perry, D. (1998) "Tanggapan terhadap Howard Gardner: Falsifiability, bukti empiris, dan manfaat pedagogis dalam psikologi pendidikan" Kanada Jurnal Pendidikan, 23 (1), 103-112.
 Kornhaber, Mindy. (2004) "Keunggulan Psikometri? Periksa Fakta"
 Kornhaber, Mindy, Fierros Edward dan Veenema Shirley. (2003) "Multiple Intelligences: Best Ide dari Research dan Praktek"
 Lohman, DF (2001). "Fluida kecerdasan, penalaran induktif, dan memori kerja: Dimana teori Multiple Intelligences jatuh pendek." Dalam N. Colangelo & S. Assouline (Eds.), Pengembangan Bakat IV: Proceedings dari tahun 1998 Henry B. & Jocelyn Wallace Simposium Nasional Penelitian pengembangan bakat (hal. 219-228). Scottsdale, AZ:. Tekan Psikologi Berbakat Link
 Scarr, S. (1985) "Sebuah kerangka penulis pikiran [Review Frames pikiran: Teori kecerdasan ganda]" Ide Baru dalam Psikologi, 3 (1), 95-100.
 Sempsey, James, "Implikasi Pedagogi Ilmu kognitif dan MI Teori Howard Gardner (Kritik A)" 10.19.93
 Steven A. Stahl "Berbeda Strokes untuk Orang-orang yang berbeda-beda:? Sebuah Kritik Gaya Belajar", American Educator, Jatuh, 199 [1]
 Sternberg, RJ (1983, Winter) "Berapa banyak Gall jauh empedu terlalu}? {Review Frames of Mind: Teori kecerdasan ganda" 215-224.Contemporary Education Review, 2 (3),.
 Sternberg, RJ (1988) Pikiran triarchic: Sebuah teori baru kecerdasan manusia New York: Penguin Books .
 Sternberg, RJ (1991) "Kematian, pajak, dan tes kecerdasan yang buruk", Intelligence, 15 (3), 257-270.
 Tupper, KW (2002) Entheogens dan Kecerdasan Eksistensial: Penggunaan Guru Plant sebagai Alat Kognitif Canadian Education. Journal of. 27 (4), 499-516
 Traub, James (1998, Oktober 26),. intelijen Beberapa kelainan The New Republic
 Waterhouse, Lynn. (2006a). Multiple Intelligences, Efek Mozart, dan Emotional Intelligence: Sebuah tinjauan kritis 207-225. Pendidikan Psikolog, 41 (4), Fall 2006, hlm.
 Waterhouse, Lynn. (2006b). "Bukti Tidak sesuai untuk Multiple Intelligences, Mozart Effect, dan Teori Kecerdasan Emosional." Psikolog Pendidikan, 41 (4), Fall 2006, hal 247-255.
 Willingham, Daniel T. (2004) "Periksa Fakta: Membingkai kembali Mind," Pendidikan Next