Contributed by Annie Stachura and Branton Shearer, in response to Ahmadie Thaha
Over the years, we’ve received many suggestions for how to use the concept of multiple intelligences in the classroom. These proposals arrive in our inbox from all over the world; they often present us with new contexts, and thus, new lenses for considering what interventions might support student learning and achievement in different arenas. We try our best to lend a helpful ear to these correspondents—to acknowledge their hard work and offer support and guidance where we can.
Recently, we read a thoughtful piece that appeared in KBA News, titled Reborned Academic Streams: Reviving the Stigma. Columnist Ahmadie Thaha takes issue with a new policy being contemplated by Indonesia’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology. As described, this policy reinstates academic tracking or “streaming”—requiring high school students to select and stick to one area of study, effectively narrowing their future career path.
The policy clashes with the still-nascent “Merdeka Curriculum” (meaning “the freedom curriculum”)—a recently developed framework that prioritizes flexibility, individuation, long-term growth, and comprehensive development in the classroom. Critics of the Merdeka Curriculum worry that this freedom can beget confusion for students, who may ultimately end up in the “wrong” field due to indecision, lack of knowledge of their areas of strength, and/or societal pressures. As described, The Ministry of Education’s new academic streaming policy seeks to resolve these concerns.
Logo for Indonesia’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology
Thaha criticizes the restrictive policy-in-progress and warns of its consequences. He quips: “It’s like saying, ‘Because so many people choose the wrong life partner, marriage will now be assigned by the neighborhood head.’”
Thaha puts forth an alternative way of determining a student’s strengths: an interest and aptitude assessment he’s designed based around multiple intelligences. 90 “Yes/No” questions aim at yielding a reasonably accurate map of a student’s various potentials. In addition, rather than yielding an inflexible stream, the assessment should be used in conjunction with structured observation to curate personalized learning strategies and help students gain insight into their own skills and possible vocations. Thaha asserts that this type of support system would be well-worth the time and effort it would take to implement.
The article concludes with a moving call-to-action from Thaha:
We’re not against structure—we oppose lazy structure. We’re not anti-tracking—we’re anti-boxing. If students need a framework, let’s provide one. But it should be flexible—less like a Victorian corset that restricts breathing, more like an adaptable map.
Tracking should be a guide, not a hammer. Let science students study sociology, let social studies kids peek into math. The world isn’t as black-and-white as our textbooks.
We found this essay thoughtful and well-considered, and believe it put forward concrete ideas about assessment and how it could help with educational and vocational planning.
To get his take, we consulted with our colleague Branton Shearer. Branton is a researcher who many years ago developed the MIDAS (Multiple Intelligences Developmental Assessment Scales). This instrument assesses the range of intelligences in students and, upon request, connects the findings to study and career options. We shared Ahmadie Thaha’s pieces for KBA News with Branton, and here’s what he had to say:
Branton Shearer
I am writing to lend my support and experience to Ahmadie Thaha’s suggestion that Indonesia adopt a multiple intelligences inspired approach to their Merdeka Curriculum. Guiding students through their education to a successful adult role and career path is a daunting task. There are no simple answers. Parents are the primary guides along with other family members, traditionally; but school personnel can be crucial. This is especially true in our high-tech digital information era when the jobs of tomorrow may look very different from what their parents do today.
[...]
I observed firsthand the benefits of using an MI assessment to guide middle school students (13+ years old) as they prepared to enter high school. Students completed an MI inventory (www.MIResearch.org) and were given short lists of jobs / careers matched to their top two MI strengths. They were encouraged to choose an 8 hour Career Shadowing Experience matched to a combination of their strengths. At the end of the program, students who did this were overwhelmingly more likely to have a satisfying positive experience and gain self-insight into potential career paths.
This finding was echoed during a 10-year project with undeclared university students who were confused about their major course of study. Every semester 75% or more of students reported that learning about their MI profiles enhanced both self-understanding and the fit with career requirements. Useful college courses to promote skill development were also highlighted.
The multiple intelligences have been called “the brain’s tool kit” and every brain is uniquely configured. We all have our particular strengths and limitations that can change given time and attention. Research has found that adults may have several distinct careers over the course of a lifetime so it makes sense to educate students about their own “MI Tool Kit” that can be employed to achieve success in an array of professions. The eight intelligences are much more than mere hobbies or enjoyable talents.
Another advantage of MI is that it provides a common-sense language to describe “thinking-in-everyday-life”, classrooms, and on-the-job. The MI terms can be scaled to fit across the lifespan and situation. As Thaha states, an MI profile used for career planning can also be employed by classroom teachers (and parents) to promote academic achievement. An MI profile is truly a multi-purpose power tool.
That’s the good news. One has to concede there are frequently barriers and difficulties integrating MI into a traditional school program. The retrofitting process can be perilous. It takes resilient and creative leadership to make it happen and then to sustain it.
The Indonesian government is to be commended for focusing the attention of their Department of Education on helping young people to gain career awareness and direction. [...] An MI assessment can be a powerful framework to inform a “dialogue of discovery” among the student, parents and classroom performance. The goals of this collaborative conversation are to deepen self-understanding (intrapersonal intelligence) and awareness of the skills that successful professionals use (interpersonal) and select the next best steps. From this dialogue a career development plan can emerge with a high probability of success.
This is not always a quick or easy process. Only the lucky few know at a young age what their career path will entail and how to stick to it. For the majority of us, it is a constant adventure that zigs and zags through life. When we coach young people with a deep and realistic MI profile there will be fewer dead ends, higher intrinsic motivation and many benefits to society in the long run.
Concluding Thoughts
In agreement with Ahmadie Thaha and Branton Shearer, we hope that the Indonesian government will reconsider implementing its policy to reintroduce academic streams, which limit students’ ability to explore various subjects. As Thaha writes, this new system will not only cause stress to pick the “right” career far too early on for most, but also prevent students from gaining knowledge in diverse arenas and—in the process—becoming interdisciplinary individuals, capable of excelling in more than just one field.
MI Assessments of the sort endorsed by Thaha and Shearer would help students identify their interests and strengths and choose fitting subjects and careers, much better than standardized testing can. However, for a few reasons, it’s important to be cautious about self-assessment:
There is no reason to believe that most people, especially young students still developing their senses of selves, have particular insights into their own strengths;
Most persons do not understand the differences between what you like to do (preferences), what you are interested in, and how powerful your computational capacities are. Only the latter indicates the strength of an intelligence.
This being said, we recognize the desire for some kind of instrument—such as the one proposed by Thaha, or the MIDAS process. And we do see the benefits of using data, particularly when discussing with policy-makers the pros and cons of different curricular and assessment options.
We recommend a system that relies heavily on triangulation—that is, using more than one source of data. For example, if individuals rate themselves on their intelligences, but one also obtains ratings from those who know them well (family, friends, present and former teachers), the profile of intelligences would be more reliable.
The gold standard consists of performance measurements: in this type of assessment, you have the opportunity to demonstrate your intelligence profile and not just testify to it. As examples: Assess interpersonal intelligences by observing how a person handles a conflict situation or motivates others to pursue a certain course of action. Assess spatial intelligence by seeing how quickly a person masters an unfamiliar geographical terrain and how accurately he or she remembers it.
If Thaha’s suggestion of an MI-based assessment were implemented, flexibility is imperative so that students don’t become “trapped” in one path. In general, we believe that a broad liberal arts education (as long practiced in Western countries) focused on nurturing students’ interdisciplinary potentials strengths are more valuable than those that pipeline students—“from cradle to grave.”
RESOURCES SHARED BY BRANTON SHEARER
Research and application reports on MI and The MIDAS assessment: https://miresearch.org/midas-archives/research/research-reports-papers/
Shearer, C. B. (2001). Enhancing a Career Exploration Program for 8th Grade Students with an Assessment for the Multiple Intelligences. Presented at AERA Annual Conference in Seattle, WA on April 12, 2001. Republished on ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED452212.pdf
Shearer, C. B., Luzzo, D. (2009). Exploring the application of multiple intelligences theory to career counseling. Career Development Quarterly. 58, 1, 3 – 13. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2009.tb00169.x
Shearer, C. B. (2011). Exploring the relationship between intrapersonal intelligence and university students’ career confusion: Implications for counseling, academic success, and school-to-career transition. Journal of Employment Counseling, 46, 52-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1920.2009.tb00067.x