Design the Intellectual Profiles Using Multiple Intelligences Model

8/13/2019 Design the Intellectual Profiles Using Multiple Intelligences Model

1/11

Design the intellectual profiles using multiple

intelligences modelM.R. Bermejo, C. Ferrndiz, P. Ballester and M. Ferrando

Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Crete,

22-25 September 2004

1. Summary

In 1983, when Howard Gardner published Frames of Mind, nobody would have imagined the

educational implications that the theory was going to have. In those work the author assumes that

intelligence is multi-dimensional and that people have different cognitive potentials. He hasidentified the existence of eight intelligences required for problem solving of for making products

which are valued in a cultural context. These intelligences are Linguistic, Mathematical/Logical,

Musical, Spatial, Bodily-Kinaesthetic, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal and Naturalistic.

One aim of Multiple Intelligences Theory is to assess and identify the strengths of students in

different learning areas. For that purpose, a set of instruments, measurements and procedures have

been designed to evaluate abilities, knowledge and attitudes implicit in the learning process.

(Ferrndiz, 2003; Prieto & Ferrndiz, 2003).

Assessment is a dynamic process for obtaining information about individual potential, with the

aim of achieving useful data about the cognitive profile of the pupils (Gardner, Feldman &

Krechevsky, 1998a; Ballester, 2004). The difference between this kind of assessment and the test

of IQ is that in the former, we include all kinds of information derived from the teaching-learning

process within the classroom context.

The objectives of this work are two. By the one hand, to design the intellectual profile of the

students through Multiple Intelligences model and to analyse the educative repercussions of thismodel; and also to establish the relation between each of the capacities measured by an IQ test

(BAD&G, General and Differential Aptitudes Set) and the performance in the marks reached by

the students in the MI activities, with the aim of establishing the validity in terms of coincidence

and discrimination of the different MI evaluation scales.

2. Method

2.1. Participants and School Centres

The research is made of 237 students (120 boys and 117 girls), 108 are pre-schoolers (4-5 years

old) and 129 belong to first, second and fifth year of primary education (6-7-10 years old). The

selection of schools is made in a very simple way, by conglomerates at random, from the public,

state-assisted and private schools in the Region of Murcia (Spain). The social-economic

characteristics of the studentsfamilies cover the usual range.

Design the intellectual profiles using multiple intelligences model http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00003640.htm

1 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


2/11

2.2. Instruments

Battery of General and Differential Aptitudes

The aim is to establish the cognitive profile of the student in respect to the General Intelligence,

analogical reasoning and spatial relation (Yuste, Martinez Arias and Galve, 1998).

It has been used different BAD&G Battery levels, that corresponds with the ages of the students.

Therefore, for the enfant education students we used BAD&G I (updated edition) and for 1and

2year primary education BAD&G E1 (updated edition).

The BAD&G I is made of 138 items grouped in categories reefed to the following abilities: non

verbal mental ability, quantitative concept, numerical, reasoning with figures, information,

puzzles, graphic vocabulary, aural perception or word reproduction and perception and graphic-

mobile coordination. The global marks allow us to obtain a CI from global intellectual maturity.

This too, results from an adding of the direct marks of the verbal general intelligences and

non-verbal general intelligences. The verbal general intelligence is made of the trials referred to

the numeric concepts, to the information and the graphic vocabulary. All of it allows us to find the

verbal intellectual capacity and the capacity to assume the verbal and numeric concepts. The

non-verbal general intelligence comes from the adding of subtest referred to the non verbal mental

ability, to the reasoning with figures and puzzles, through these sub trials we measure the capacity

of pre-logical reasoning, the ability to solve problems of figurative type and the capacity to find a

common characteristic to several pictures. #9;

The BAD&G E1 trial is made of 162 items grouped in several relative variables: analogical

relations, numeric problems, logical matrix, numeric calculations, complex verbal commands,

twisted figures, immediate memory, alteration in writing and difference discrimination. The

general marks allow us to obtain an IQ from general intelligence, that it is obtained too from theadding of the 6 basic sub trials that are analogical relations, numerical problems, logical matrix,

numeric calculations, complex verbal commands and twisted figures. With the Battery we can find

the logical reasoning that comes from the adding of 3 sub trials mentioned above.

In few words, these trials allow us to find the IQ reefed to the studentsgeneral intelligence, aswell as the partial marks on verbal, numeric and spatial factors.

MI evaluation activities

For MI evaluation we use 11 activities designed by Gardner and his team (1998b) in the Spectrum

Project with the aim of evaluating the 8 Gardner and his team proposed intelligences in childrenbetween 4 and 5 years old. The activities have been adapted and set into our context for our

students of primary education by our research team (Ferrndiz, Prieto, Ballester & Bermejo,

2004).

The aim is to evaluate the skills implicit on each intelligence: Linguistics; LogicalMathematical; Visual-Space; Corporal; Naturalist; Musical and Social. For each of the activities

the observers count with protocols or likert type observation scales, on which appear the abilities

of each of the intelligences matter of evaluation. As follows we present briefly these evaluation

instruments used in this study.

Naturalist Intelligence


2 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


3/11

For the evaluation of this intelligence we use the activities of "discovery" and the "float and sink".

All are oriented to evaluate through a likert type scale from 1 to 4, the precise observation

abilities, relation identification, hypothesis formulation and testing, experimentation, interest in the

naturalist intelligence and knowledge of the natural world that according to Gardner the are

implicit in the naturalist intelligence.

Visual Spatial Intelligence

The evaluation of visual-spatial intelligence is developed in two sessions with the following

structured activities: create an sculpture, draw an animal, draw a person and draw an imaginative

animal for this activity we use likert type scale from 1 to 4 that pretends to evaluate the

representation, exploring and artistic talent activities.

Corporal Kinaesthetic Intelligence

For the evaluation of this intelligence we use the activity called "creative movement" oriented to

value, through likert type scale from 1 to 4 the abilities of: rhythm, sensibility, expressivity,

corporal control and generation of ideas through movement.

Linguistic Intelligence

The linguistic intelligence is developed through two sessions, one for the activity of Story teller"

and another for the "reporter" both oriented to value through a likert scale 1 to 4 the following

abilities: primary functions of the language (telling, interactions with adults, research, description

and categorization); telling abilities (telling structure, subject coherently, use of telling voice, use

of dialogue, temporal sequences, expressivity, level of vocabulary and sentence structure) and the

abilities reefed to information (level of scaffolding, content precision, argument structure,

vocabulary complexity, level of details and sentence structure). With the aim of making the data

analysis procedure more operative these abilities have been grouped in 3 variables: language

primary functions, telling abilities and informing abilities.

Logical-Mathematical Intelligence

This intelligence is valued through the activity "dinosaur game" oriented to value, through a likert

type scale from 1 to 4 the ability of: numeric reasoning, logical and spatial reasoning.

Musical Intelligence

The musical intelligence is evaluated with the activity of "singing" that pretends to evaluate the

sensibility to the tone, to the rhythm and musical capacity. These abilities are valued using a likert

type scale from 1 to 4.

Social Intelligence

The musical intelligence is evaluated with the activity of "classroom model" that pretends to

evaluate the Knowledge that the child have about her/his-self; about the others, and the knowledge

that has about social roles.

2.3. Procedure

The general procedure to follow in this work is developed in four sections.


3 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


4/11

In the first one, we adapt and set in context the different MI evaluation instruments.

The second one we applied the evaluation of each intelligence is developed following this order:

Naturalist, Corporal-Kinaesthetic, VisualSpace, Linguistic, Logic-Mathematical, Social-Musical. Each activity is done within the classroom context but the "creative movement" that is

done in the psychomotor activity room. In every activity teachers are always present with every

group of students taking part in the evaluation process. The duration of each activity is 60 minutes.

Finally we continue with the test marking, valuation of the different activities as MI evaluation

instruments, we process the data and its statistical analysis, we value the results obtained and we

make conclusions.

2.4. Data design and analysis

Data analysis includes a descriptive analysis on the marks obtained on each of the items that

conform each intelligence such as averages and standard deviations.

We present the design of the intellectual profile of the students taking part in the research on thedifferent intelligences proposed by Gardner. The aim is to analyse in what intelligences the

students obtained the better skills and difficulties, in order to shape an instruction suitable to the

cognitive needs of our students.

We as well, using Krechevsky and Gardner (1990) methodology and with the aim of valuing the

benefits coming from the theory for applying them to the exceptional students, we show the

individual profile of two students, one of them shows a talented profile and the other shows

difficulties in some of the intelligences.

We carried out, also, correlation analysis, among the different items that conform the scales of

each of the intelligences and between these and the marks obtained in the BAD&G psychometrictest, with the aim of analysing the existing relations between them and determine the concurrent

and discriminatory of the MI evaluation scales.

3. Results

3.1. Participants Cognitive Profile

With the aim of showing the usefulness that the evaluation procedure used by Gardner has to the

configuration of a more suitable instruction adequate to our students, we present the intellectual

profile of our participants in this research for each of the different intelligences Corporal-

Kinaesthetic, Musical, Linguistic, Logic-Mathematical, Naturalist, Visual-Space, Social.

Following the methodology and analysis done through Spectrum Project (Krechevsky and Gardner

1990) the marks obtained were transformed into "z" marks. It was considered that boys obtaining

standard deviation, or more, above the average, were gifted with a determine intelligence, while

the boys obtaining a standard deviation, or less, below the average, show disadvantage in that

intelligence.

The results show that the majority of the students demonstrate abilities and skills in the different

intelligences, existing a great variability in the marks obtained. It is the Visual-Space intelligence

on which we can see a great number of students where the values are below the average (61.2%);

and it is also in this intelligence where there is a majority with weak points, because a 20.7 %obtains marks below a-1z. If we analyse in which intelligence the students show generally better


4 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


5/11

abilities we find that 52.1 % obtain marks above the average when they work on social

competence duties related, the intelligence is the linguistics where we find a bigger number of

students with strong points or abilities (39.2 %), because their marks are equal or bigger that a+1z.

Finally, we observe that with the exception of Social Intelligence, there are many students

obtaining marks below average in the different intelligences although we have to point out that

students, generally, show more abilities or strong points than difficulties in the different

intelligences but Visual-Space whereas we have commented, appears a high percentage of studentswith difficulties below1z.

Figure 1. Cognitive Profile of participants sample in the eight intelligences (% of students that obtain scores above of

+1z, above of the average, below of1z and below of average in each one of multiple intelligences).

3.2. Analysis of exceptionally students

One of the implications that the MI evaluation model has on education is the usefulness for

designing the intellectual profile of a classroom and especially that of exceptionality students.

The intellectual profile of a pre-school (4 years) student with difficulties in most of the Gardner

defined intelligences showed that with the exception of Social Intelligence the student had

difficulties and weak points in all the intelligences evaluated. Being these difficulties much more


5 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


6/11

stressed in abilities related to Logic-Mathematical and Musical Intelligence in which the marks

was higher than2s . However, we can observe that the student showed adequate social abilities,where the marks was close to the average.

A second year Primary Education girls intellectual profile with potential signs of being talentedshowed, that it is Social Intelligence in which she got the highest mark well above +2,5s , follow

by the Visio -Space getting +1,8s , both will conform potential areas of talent. But besides sheshowed marks above the standard deviation in the Corporal-Kinaesthetic, Musical, Linguistic and

Logic-Mathematical intelligences.

Her marks was moderated for Naturalist Intelligence in which she obtained a mark close to

average.

We can state that from the MI evaluation model the competence of any student is much more

defined and it help us in a very enriching way, much more than the general factor tests, for

designing the intellectual profile of potential students with high cognitive abilities indicators.

3.3. Relation between Multiple Intelligence and General Intelligence

It can be observed, in general, high and significant correlations between the different variables

from the same scale in the model of Gardner. On the contrary the correlations between the

different Gardner scales and the psychometric test used are low.

The correlation between the total mark of Corporal-Kinaesthetic Intelligence and CI is low, from

.154 to a signification level of .05.

In relation to the analysis referred to the Logic-Mathematical scale, the existing correlations

between the variables of such scale are very high, all at a signification level of .01, this same thing

happen between the total mark and scale variables. However, the existing correlation between CI

and the total mark of Logic-Mathematical Intelligence is low and no significant, what it gives

discriminative validity to the evaluation scale.

Given the conceptual similarity between this intelligence and some of the BAD&G A and E

subtests (Logical Reasoning, LR; Non verbal General Intelligence, nVGI; VerbalNumberProblems Resolutions, NR; and Number Calculations), we believe that it is convenient to analyse

the kind of relation established between them. The results show that contrary to what it happens in

the IQ, the correlations between the BAD&G subtest and the Logic-Mathematical Intelligence

variables are in general significant to a .01 level, aspect that supports the Logic-Mathematical

Intelligence scale validity.

Table 3. Pearson correlation coefficients between the CI and the Logic-Mathematical Intelligence variables.

Direction

Movement

Counting Election

Given

Election

Movement

Election

Given

Number

Direction Movement 1


6 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


7/11

Counting ,500** 1

Election Given ,580** ,514** 1

Election Movement ,331** ,485** ,483** 1

Election Number Given ,370** ,450** ,418** ,563** 1

CI ,078 ,049 ,143* ,097 ,097

Logic-Mathematical

Total

, 663** , 735** .749** , 751** , 840**

L.R. , 155 , 212* , 250** , 280** , 326**

nVGI ,329** ,494** ,352** ,249* ,373**

NR ,119 ,126 ,186* ,230* ,269**

Numerical Calculation , 090 , 179 , 124 , 341** , 288**

*Correlation is significant at 0,05 level (Bilateral)** Correlation is significant at 0,01 level (Bilateral)

The existing correlations between variables in the Musical Intelligence scale (tone, rhythm and

Musical capacity) are very high, all with a 0.01 significance level as well as the correlation

between these and the total scale mark, as expected. However it is not the same between these

variables and IQ, the relationship between them are extremely low (0.97) what it gives constructor

discrimination validity to the Musical Intelligence scale.

In general, there are not relationships between the variables that measure the Social Intelligence(self-knowledge, knowledge of the others, assuming and knowledge of the social roles), these

results supports the hypothesis that the three aspects that conform the Social Intelligence are all

different, it seems to be that the self-knowledge related to Intra-personal Intelligence would be

independent from the rest of the knowledge, closer to the interpersonal Intelligence.

In relation to the existing links between these three variables and the intellectual quotient

according to the results form the analysis done, the relationship would be very low and only

significant at 0.05 level between the assumption and knowledge of social roles and IQ (.170). In

respect to the existing correlation between the Social Intelligence total scale mark and IQ, there is

not relation between them; this data offers constructor-discrimination validity to such scale. It

seems clear that, the self-knowledge and the knowledge of the others are independent from the


7 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


8/11

intellectual quotient.

The analysis of variables that define the Naturalist Intelligence shows the great relationship

between them, the correlations are significant to .01 between all the variables studied and between

these and the total mark, the marks are very high between the observation and relation identifier

variables with a .630 as coefficient and between the experimentation and hypothesis formulation

variables with a.799 as coeffi

cient.

In connection with the existing relationship between the Naturalist Intelligence and Intellectual

Quotient we can see that there are little relation between the last one and the variables referred to

the observation and relationship identifier. On the contrary, there is a relationship between the

experimentation and hypothesis formulation variables and IQ and the existing correlation of this

last one and the Naturalist Intelligence total mark having 0.209 as a coefficient reaching .01 of

significance. It seems that the Naturalist Intelligence abilities that require a much more logical

thinking would be related to a kind of thinking measured in the psychometric test used in the

research.

The variables that define the Linguistic Intelligence, according to the Gardners model, shows asignificant relationship between them, in a way that the correlation analysis offers a value of .802

between the primary language functions and the narration or inventive abilities to a significant

level of .01; a correlation of .236 between the language primary functions and the abilities to

inform at a significant level of .01 and a correlation of .315 with a level of significance of .01,

between the abilities involved in the narration and invention of a story and the ones involved in the

task of informing about the story seen previously. The existing correlations between the variables

in the BAD&G psychometric test that measures the verbal aspects and the ability to inform of the

Linguistic Intelligence are very high and significant reaching 0,01 above all the ability to inform of

the Gardner scale (.296). Aspect that is due to the number of IQ and BAD&G test as they have a

great number of comprehension enunciations, besides IQ and BAD&G have a great amount oflogic and accuracy, both are very necessary in the informative skills. This correlation would

contribute with more concurrent validity to these abilities.

The existing relationships between the variables that define the Visual-Space Intelligence

(representation; exploration and artistic talent), are high, all of them are significant to a .01 level

with indexes reaching .65.

The correlation analysis done between the Visual-Space analysis and the BAD&G A and B

psychometric test current validity to the Visual-Space Intelligence evaluation scale. However the

existing correlation between general IQ and Visual-Space Intelligence evaluation scale total mark,

although significant, it is low, this would give validity to the discrimination scale.

Table 4. The Pearsons correlation coefficients between the variables of Visual-Space Intelligence and CI.

Representation Exploration Artistic Talent CI

Representation 1


8 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


9/11

Exploration ,698** 1

Artistic Talent ,672** ,707** 1

Visual-Space Total ,888** ,890** .896** ,155*

IQ ,095 ,137* ,179** 1

Jigsaw ,315** ,185 ,207*

Logical Matrix ,224* ,294** ,280**

Rotated figures ,149 ,225* ,221*

Difference discrimination ,303** ,473** , 450**

*Correlation is significant at 0,05 level (bilateral).

** Correlation is significant at 0,01 level (bilateral)

The existing correlation indexes between the total marks of each of the MI evaluation scales and

the intellectual quotient show that correlations are in general weak between the different Gardner

proposed intelligences and IQ, being the highest correlation in the Naturalist Intelligence and IQ

with a value of .209 to a level of significance of .01.

Table 5. Pearsons correlation coefficients between the each of the MI Intelligences and IQ.

Corporal Musical Social Naturalist Linguistic Visual-SpaceLogic-

Mathematical

IQ

Corporal 1

Musical , 290** 1

Social ,097 ,140* 1

Naturalist ,221** ,086 ,189** 1


9 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


10/11

Linguistic ,246** ,007 ,126 ,290** 1

Visual-Space ,172** ,080 ,144* ,272** ,308** 1

Logic-

Mathematical, 351** , 234** ,284** , 223** , 267** , 293**

1

IQ , 154* , 097 , 120 , 209** , 193** , 155* , 124 1

*Correlation is significant at 0,01 level (Bilateral)** Correlation is significant at 0,05 level (Bilateral)

4. Discussion and conclusions

The results of our work, obtained in a classroom natural context, and with the same evaluation

instruments used by Professor Gardner and his team, show that the MI evaluation model represent

an complementary to the psychometric evaluation and it is useful for designing the classroom

development profile and especially that of children with retarded cognitive problems or

difficulties, underlining the strong points and vacuums referred to basic abilities on which each

intelligence is based. This means that we can use the strong points for fighting the intelligence

imbalance (Ferrndiz, 2003; Ferrndiz, Prieto, Ballester & Bermejo, 2004).

The correlation analysis established between the different intelligences and the intellectual

quotient show the existence of evaluation scales discriminatory validity assigned to value the

different intelligences.

In general, as we have commented before individually for each scale, it seems to be that aspects

evaluated by IQ are, in most of the cases, different to those evaluated by the different scales

analysed. The constructor discrimination validity would be, finally, established for the MI

Intelligences evaluation scales.

In order to finish, we can say that the MI evaluation model represent an alternative to the

psychometric evaluation and it is useful for designing the classroom development profile and

especially that of children with retarded cognitive problems or difficulties, underlining the strong

points and vacuums referred to basic abilities on which each intelligence is based. This means that

we can use the strong points for fighting the intelligence imbalance (Prieto & Ballester, 2003;Ballester, 2004).

5. References

Ballester, P. (2004).Evaluar y atender la diversidad de los alumnos desde las Inteligencias

Mltiples. Tesis Doctoral. Universidad de Murcia

Ferrndiz, C. (2003).Evaluacin y desarrollo de la competencia cognitiva. Un estudio desde el

modelo de las Inteligencias Mltiples. Murcia: Servicio de publicaciones de la Universidad de

Murcia.


10 de 11 02/03/11 19:05


11/11

Ferrndiz, C., Prieto, M.D., Ballester, P., & Bermejo, M.R. (2003). Validez y fiabilidad de los

instrumentos de evaluacin de las Inteligencias Mltiples en los primeros niveles instruccionales.

Psicothema Vol.16n1 pp. 7-13

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind.New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H; Feldman, D. & Krechevsky, M. (1998a). Project Spectrum: Building on ChildrensStrengths: The Experiene of Project Spectrum. N. Y.: Teachers College press.

Gardner, H; Feldman, D. & Krechevsky, M. (1998b). Project Spectrum: Preschool Asessment

Handbook. N. Y.: Teachers College press.

Krechevsky, M. & Gardner, H. (1990). The emergence and nurturance of multiple intelligences:

the Project Spectrum approach. In M.J.A. Howe (Ed.),Encouraging the development of

exceptional skills and talents. Leicester, UK: The British Psychological Society

Prieto, M.D.& Ferrndiz, C. (2001).Inteligencias Mltiples y curriculum escolar. Mlaga: Aljibe

Prieto, M.D. & Ferrndiz, C. (2003) Foreword. In Coreil, C.Mltiple Itelligences, Howard

Gardner and new methods in College Teaching(pp.:11-14). New Jersey: New Jersey City

University

Prieto, M.D. & Ballester, P. (2003)Las Inteligencias Mltiples. Diferentes formas de ensear yaprender. Madrid: Pirmide

SPSS/PC 11.0 for Windows (2001). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. SPSS Inc.

Yuste, C.; Martnez, R. & Galve, J.L. (1998).BADyG. Manual Tcnico. Madrid: CEPE

This document was added to the Education-line database on 17 September 2004


11 de 11 02/03/11 19:05

Design the Intellectual Profiles Using Multiple Intelligences Model

Documents

Transcript of Design the Intellectual Profiles Using Multiple Intelligences Model