New Children's Book About MI Theory

Notes by Howard Gardner

In December 2014, I received an email from author Jennifer Steuck and illustrator Slava Tayon regarding their intention to create a book that would help make the theory of multiple intelligences accessible to elementary school students and parents.

This past April, I received the completed work, to which I responded:

“Thank you very much for sharing your wonderful graphic interpretation of my work. It is quite impressive and engaging. I particularly enjoyed your representation of me as Professor I.Dea. This is something that is sure to captivate children and introduce them to the concepts of multiple intelligences. Thank you for your work and your efforts to expose a greater audience to my research.”

In this week’s blog, Jennifer and Slava reflect on the creation of their self-published, multiple intelligences-inspired children’s book, Meet the Me’s.

---

Dear MI Oasis,

Our mission in writing Meet the Me’s was to start a conversation about multiple intelligences and what it means to be smart. Intelligence has many different facets, and we want to help others appreciate diverse learners. Before writing the book, I understood the concept of MI intellectually, but I developed a much deeper sense of the theory by engaging with it directly in this text.

Our writing process began with thinking about the available research on the brain and the neural pathways of intelligence. Howard Gardner’s work on MI became the foundation of this book.

Our cover design is intended to draw the reader in and pique curiosity about the content within its covers. It is a pictorial metaphor of thinking, feeling, and perceiving. The light at the bottom is turned on, the circuitry activated, and a new idea is planted in the mind. The design also includes the eye that is featured on the cover of many of Howard Gardner’s books. Our version of the eye is portrayed in front of a color wheel, which represents the kaleidoscopic variation in human intelligence.

The book is written in epistolary format, in which Professor I.Dea (Howard Gardner) corresponds with the eight “Me” characters, each of whom symbolizes a component intelligence of MI.

Slava’s graphic representations allow the ideas to come alive by turning the various components of MI into characters that make the concepts more personal and meaningful. Each of the “Me” characters is assigned a unique icon, which serves as a visual representation of their respective pathway.

All of the characters tell the stories of how they think and how they feel. For example, WordMe, who is first to respond, begins the exploration along the neural pathways by asking, “Doesn’t everyone think in words?”

 In response, PictureMe reveals that he processes and expresses himself through images.

Throughout the various Me’s pathways, we’ve included inspirational quotes, vocabulary words, and clarifying questions and answers. At the end of the book, readers will find a glossary, as well as an extensive bibliography of picture books that explain the life and accomplishments of people on their corresponding pathways.

We’ve also addressed the possibility of a ninth intelligence, Meaning Intelligence, on the last page of the book. Although the MeaningMe does not meet all the criteria for an intelligence as defined by Professor Gardner, we felt it was important to include.

Our hope is that other readers of Meet the Me’s will discover more about themselves, one another, and the process of learning itself. We encourage people to discuss what makes them curious, how they learn, and how they express themselves.

Changing the paradigm,

Jenny (and Slava)

---

Meet the Me’s is available for purchase in-store and online via The Bookies Bookstore in Denver, CO.

MI Expert Dr. Thomas R. Hoerr's Interview with Brazilian Magazine, "Nós"

In June 2017, MI Expert Dr. Thomas R. Hoerr, Emeritus Head of School at New City School and Scholar In Residence, UMSL College of Education in St. Louis, MO, was interviewed by journalist for the Brazilian online magazine, "Nós."

Below, the interview is printed in full.

---

Nós: In your opinion, what was the greatest contribution of research on Multiple Intelligences Theory to science and education?

Thomas Hoerr: I believe that Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences (MI) caused us to view intelligence more broadly, beyond a score that can be derived from a paper and pencil test. This can have powerful implications for how educators view student potential and how they differentiate instruction.

N: Around the web, it's easy to find a lot of articles and tests based on your work that try to define people's types of intelligences. How can a person find out, in a more scientific way, their most and least developed types of intelligences?

TH: There are many tests, as you point out, and I know that Branton Shearer’s MIDAS test has been widely used. My bias, though, is to determine intelligence strengths by observation. When given choices, how do people solve problems? How do people spend their spare time? We typically enjoy doing those things at which we excel, and we are likely to excel in those areas in which we have strengths.

N: How many intelligences can be found in a person?

TH: We all have some of each intelligence. That is, all eight intelligences are found within us. The relative strengths of the intelligences will vary greatly, of course.

N: What can governments take from your theory to improve public education around the world?

TH: We should focus less on standardized tests, both for assessing student potential and growth and also for determining our curricular focus. Children of all ages (and adults) benefit from experiences in the arts.

N: What do you think about elective matters in high school?

TH: There is a basic set of skills and understandings that all students need, i.e., the 3 R’s. Beyond that, I believe that giving students choices can increase motivation and performance.

Three Messages from the “MI Front”

Notes by Howard Gardner

Nowadays, most of my energies are devoted to new projects. With Wendy Fischman and other colleagues, I am studying higher education in the United States. And with Lynn Barendsen, Danny Mucinskas, and other colleagues, I am continuing work on The Good Project. In particular, we’re focused on the fostering of good work and good citizenship in young people… and in the rest of us. You can follow those lines of work at thegoodproject.org and howardgardner.com.

That said, to this day, approximately 80% of my over-the-transom mail concerns the theory of multiple intelligences—and I can confidently predict that when I die, obituaries will feature MI. As for the MI queries, I direct people to FAQ on this site, to various readings, or to colleagues who continue to work, broadly speaking in the MI tradition. And occasionally, I provide answers myself and may post them on this site.

In the last weeks, three items have come to my attention and I thought it worthwhile to mention them:

Neural networks dedicated to social processing

When MI theory was first introduced, almost 35 years ago, the most convincing line of evidence was the existence in the brain of specific neural zones that are particularly dedicated to specific kinds of contents. At the time, the neural evidence was quite schematic, because methods of monitoring the brain were still quite rough and imprecise. Nowadays, it is possible to get far more precise evidence—and in a recent article in Science magazine, we find evidence of the neural systems in monkeys dedicated specifically to the content of social information. For a non-technical summary, click here.

In this context, I should also mention the work of Branton Shearer and Jessica Karanian who have provided far more up-to-date information about the neural correlates of each of the several intelligences. See this link.

Genes for intelligence

Ever since the concept of genes were introduced early in the 20th century, at about the same time that the psychometric examination of intelligence was launched, investigators have searched for the gene or the genes of intelligence. As with the discovery of evidence for neural correlates of specific intelligences (like interpersonal intelligence), the physicality of a biological marker is persuasive particularly (as it happens) to American audiences.

It’s long been clear that there are genes for intelligence, as measured by psychologists (“g” for general intelligence), and it’s also been clear that many genes are involved—often hundreds or even thousands have been cited.

Nonetheless, as reported in Nature Genetics on May 22, it is progress in the genetics of intelligence that recently 52 genes have been identified as contributing to psychometric intelligence. It’s estimated that these genes account for 5% of the variance in measured intellect—of course, leaving 95% unaccounted for.

I have to emphasize that this discovery does not have any particular relevance to MI theory. We still have little idea of whether strength in, say, musical, or spatial, or interpersonal (social) intellect is based largely, somewhat, or minimally on psychometric intellect. And that is because psychometric intellect is primarily a measure of linguistic and logical abilities, with spatial abilities sometimes included as well.

My own speculation is that there will be some overlap, but there will clearly be specific genes or gene complex that are implicated in one intelligence, and that these will not be identical with those genes or gene complex are implicated in other intelligences. Put concretely, the genes that contribute to traditional IQ will be different from those that contribute to musical or athletic or social talent.

And even if I am wrong, even if the correlation across intelligences turns out to be quite high, this fact does not undermine MI theory. And that is because we still need to understand why specific individuals can be strong in intelligences A and B, and not in C , D, or E, while others can exhibit the opposite profile. And the explanation is likely to lie in the importance (or unimportance) attached to a specific skill in a given society, the amount of resources devoted to its cultivation, and the excellence of the teaching and modelling. Put concretely, if a society values music, teaches it well, and individuals are highly motivated, the population will be musically intelligent as a whole—think Finland, think Hungary.

I believe that we will continue to accrue evidence for the scientific validity of MI theory. But in the end, its status as a scientific claim is not identical to its significance for education. The latter goal has to be determined by teachers, and others involved in education—which, as it happens, is all of us.

An unlikely award for me

On May 26, I learned by email that I had been selected as the 2017 winner of the Mensa Lifetime Achievement Award, for “contributions to the field of human intelligence and related subjects.” It’s always pleasurable to get an award and particularly one that was not expected. Moreover, I looked over the previous winners and they are all respectable scholars of intelligence.

Still, the receipt of the award has a certain irony. Mensa is the organization for individuals who have documented high IQs—and if I am known at all within psychology, it is as a critic of the concept of IQ, particularly as a variable used to explain a whole cluster of human outcomes. Moreover, I have sometimes quipped that individuals in Mensa spend time congratulating one another on their high IQ scores—a comment that is not a sign of respect, I have to admit.

But I would never have studied cognition, and would never have developed and enunciated a theory of intelligence, if I did not think that the topic was an important one—indeed, one of the most importance in psychology. And in that vein, I am happy to accept the award and to hope that, going forward, we can continue to explore the relationship between the traditional views of intellect, and more iconoclastic ones, like the one to which this site is dedicated.

MI Theory Featured in Zimbabwean News

In an article featured on AllAfrica.com, an African online news source, on September 13, 2016, Zimbabwean author David Mungoshi writes about MI theory in relation to several esteemed Zimbabwean figures. This feature marks an exciting expansion in the reach of MI theory, as it is the first time MI has been featured in press in an African nation.

In the article, Mungoshi urges parents and teachers to consider MI theory as a resource to help guide their students and children to their dominant intelligences. He cites Kirsty Coventry, Olympic gold-medalist swimmer, and Charles Manyuchi, Silver Class World Boxing Champion, as examples of Zimbabweans who have honed their dominant intelligences to bring success and fame not only to themselves, but also to their country.

To read the article in full, visit the following website: http://allafrica.com/stories/201609130359.html

MI Theory as Foundation for Children's Learning Center in Hong Kong

A shopping mall in Hong Kong, called Discovery Park (D Park), has created a children’s educational facility based on the principals of MI theory. D Park aims to use its programs to teach parents and children in Hong Kong about the facets of MI theory and how to incorporate them into both their family and public education.

Keiko Ishiwata, President of Japan MI Society and lecturer at Yokohama National University, and Tomoe Fujimoto, Executive Director of Japan MI Society and President of Tomoe Soroban Co., Ltd., were invited to visit Discovery Park August 3rd to 6th, 2016 to give a presentation on MI Theory.

For more information of D Park, visit their website at: https://www.dpark.com.hk/en/home.html

And to learn more about Japan MI Society, visit their website at: http://www.japanmi.com/