Schools in India Celebrate MI Festival

A recent article in APN News (link here), featured a group of schools in India that has embraced Gardner’s MI theory. Lexicon Schools recently organized “MI Fests” celebrating multiple intelligences. At these festivals, students gave presentations on projects using different intelligences. Students were encouraged to identify their strengths and passions and use their artistic and creative talents. Each school chose a different theme for their festival, though all emphasized the interplay between arts and sciences.

Lexicon School MI Fest celebration: Photo from APN News

At the Lexicon International School, Kalyaninagar, students used dramatization, word games, music and rap to showcase their learning on the theme of “herbal life” which included ayurveda and yurvedic herbs, diet and nutrition, acupressure, and yoga.

Students at the Lexicon School, Hadapsar, chose the theme, space and technology. Their MI Fest began with dance performances that showed off their kinesthetic and visual-spatial intelligences. Students hosted booths highlighting different intelligences.

The Lexicon International School, Wagholi, will host their MI Fest on the theme of sustainability in December, 2023.

It is very encouraging to see how schools around the world are not only recognizing and encouraging children’s multple intelligences, but celebrating them in these ways.

[Main photo from lexiconedu.in]

Is Linguistic Intelligence The Most Important of all Intelligences?

Forbes magazine recently published an article (link here) which purports that linguistic intelligence is the most important of all the intelligences. The author argues that linguistic intelligence and linguistic influence, or “LQ and I,” both shape and externalize our inner emotions and beliefs. The theory is that through understanding the emotions elicited by certain words and replacing them with others, we can influence our behavior and, presumably, the behavior of others.

“When we elevate our LQ and I, we become self-aware of them. We can then decide to anchor or challenge beliefs and behavioral patterns and lead ourselves toward different, more empowering emotions, beliefs and behaviors.”

Though the author claims that this goes beyond MI theory, the description of “LQ and I” is in line with Howard Gardner’s description of linguistic intelligence and only goes beyond it in the sense that it also touches on the personal intelligences (understanding oneself and others). However, Gardner has explained that in MI theory, no single intelligence is more important than the others, for more details see his blog post “Are All Intelligences Equal?” (link here). In fact, the valorization of different intelligences depends on the culture and time period, as Gardner has said,

“Like beauty, intelligences are in the eye of the beholder.”

The byline mentions that the author of the Forbes article is a “Business Strategist & Mindset Coach.” It makes sense that a person in such a profession, who must offer convincing advice verbally and through written reports, would most valorize linguistic intelligence.

Introducing MI Theory to Children

There are many ways for educators to introduce the theory of multiple intelligences to children, for example, some teachers have created MI songs or MI art projects. Even young children can easily grasp the concept of “being smart in different ways.”

This is an article aimed at 7-11 year olds from the magazine, Eureka Explorers. It was written by Dr. Valsa Koshy of Brunel Able Children’s Education Center at Brunel University, London. She checked with a group of children to make sure the concept was easily understandable for the targeted age. Eureka Explorers is distributed free to schools in the West London area. The articles and activities included in the magazine are based on their “Triangle of Success Model” with the the three points being:

• Gifts, talents and passions (developing and nurturing abilities and interests)

• Physical and mental well-being (healthy eating, exercise, confidence and resilience)

• Learning and outlook (nurturing a positive attitude to learning and future success)

We hope that educators will be inspired to find interesting and fun ways to engage students with MI theory.

Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

Multiple Intelligences: A New Idea about A Forty-Year-Old Idea

By Howard Gardner © 2023

It’s been forty years since I first introduced the notion of multiple intelligences (MI) in my book Frames of Mind. A lot has been said about this idea, much of it by me, and in many ways, I’ve moved on to other concerns. And yet, I recently noted something about myself—and that in turn, led to an idea about MI which is new to me, and, perhaps, to others as well.

Even those of us who explicitly endorse the idea of multiple intelligences are often overheard claiming that someone is “intelligent,” “smart,”….or, less thoughtfully, as “dumb,” “dull,” or “not too swift.” I plead “Guilty—with extenuating circumstances.” What’s going on here?

One possibility is that this reveals an unconscious default to the idea of a single intelligence (“g” for general intelligence) as manifested by scoring well on a standard psychometric instrument like an IQ or SAT. But I propose another possibility. Rather, without quite realizing it, those of us who use such phrases are actually valorizing the particular intelligence—or set of intelligences—that we believe this person has—or that we ourselves have.

Yo-Yo Ma - World Economic Forum, Davos 2008 (Source: World Economic Forum from Cologny, Switzerland,Wikipedia)

A few examples:

• When we refer to a great cellist (like Yo-Yo Ma) or a great soprano (like Renee Fleming) as “smart,” it’s not that we are referring to how well that person scores on an IQ or SAT test. Instead, we might have in mind how quickly and how well that person picks up a new piece of music; or how well he or she analyzes a classical (or popular) work; or how the performer adjusts to the different conditions in various performance halls or with diverse ensembles.

• When we refer to a great tennis star (like Arthur Ashe), or a great gymnast (like Simone Biles) as “smart,” we are unlikely to be referring to their grades in school. Instead, we might have in mind how quickly and how well that athlete adjusts to new weather conditions, new opponents, new rules of the game, an unexpected compliment, or an unfair criticism.

• When we refer to a U.S. Senate majority leader or a House of Representatives Speaker as “smart,” we are not referring to their class rank in college. Instead, we might be referring to how the person manages to secure the votes needed to get a controversial bill passed or, depending on the circumstances, blocked…or how to position themselves vis-à-vis the media, reporters, cartoonists, or polls.

Even within the academy, this contextual use of the term smart prevails. Historians look for signs of intelligence that are quite different from those noted by economists, linguists, literary critics, biologists, mathematicians, or physicists. Scholars rarely comment in illuminating ways on the capacities of those working in fields remote from their own. We could say that a recognition of multiple forms of intelligence is spread throughout the academy, even among those who purport to believe in a singular intelligence, or IQ.

And so on—you can invent your own examples—whether from the ranks of clinical practitioners or weather forecasters or religious leaders or shop clerks. Nearly all of us are likely to continue using words like “smart” and “dumb,” or “clever” and “dull,” but we need to pick apart the field of reference of these words and make clear what we mean—and that requires the exercise of our personal intelligences!

Stepping back, after decades of pondering these issues, I identify three separate insights:

1. Human beings have a range of intelligences and we may, and sometimes do, change the ones that we valorize and why we valorize them.

2. Any intelligence can be used benevolently or malevolently; considered in themselves, intelligences are value-neutral. As masters of the German language, both the poet Goethe and the propagandist Goebbels had considerable linguistic intelligence, but they used it to very different ends. As human beings, we should be judged not by the intelligences that we happen to display and deploy but rather in which way we—and others—invoke them.

3. Even those of us who continue to use the words “smart,” “intelligent,” or “brilliant” need to stop, reflect, and recognize which of the intelligences we are actually valorizing—and why we do so.

And of course, the advent of ChatGPT and other Large Language Instruments will compel us to continue reflecting on these issues.

Reference

Gardner, H. Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books, 1983.

For comments on this essay, I thank Shinri Furuzawa, Annie Stachura, and Ellen Winner.

Could Musical Intelligence Be Genetic?

By Howard Gardner

Bring up, or even mention, any kind of human talent or intelligence. Before long, the inevitable debating topic arises—is this capacity innate/genetic, or is it one that is due to teaching, education, environment, or some force that is not biological, strictly speaking.

Of course, except among ideologues, the answer is clearly “Both are important.” In the absence of the necessary genetic material, no human capacity can develop, let alone flourish. But just as clearly, in the absence of a supporting, nurturing environment, even those who are greatly “at promise” will never realize their biological potential.

Contemporary research allows us to come up with a finer trained response. Researcher, Nadine Gaab, and colleagues demonstrated that even early in life, well before any kind of formal lessons or instructions, some infants have neural (brain) structures that indicate they are more likely to eventually display musical giftedness (link here). And indeed, when tested in kindergarten, these youngsters display more musical aptitude.

Clearly, this is a point on the genetic side of the scale.

But before we conclude that experiences do not make their contribution: Consider that these brain structures are being studied in infants who have come to term and whose nervous system can now be scanned. We know that long before birth, infants can already hear—and indeed, even newborns orient more toward linguistic sounds that they had heard in utero. It is conceivable (no pun intended) that pre-natal experiences have influenced the development of neural structures. And it’s also possible that if a mother-or indeed, other adults—respond favorably to music, this positive manifold may well affect the development of the infant—including his or her nervous system. One way of testing for this would be for parents and control parents to keep diaries of exposures as in the work of psychology and music researcher, Samuel Mehr.

Moreover, even if certain brain structures favorable to musical development can be discerned early in life, this does not mean that those with less developed structures are condemned to a non-musical life. On the contrary: this knowledge may stimulate the development of new kinds of educational systems and environments that bring these infants up to snuff—or even above. Just as might be the case with infants who are at risk for problems with reading (dyslexia) or social intercourse (autistic spectrum).

Stay tuned!

Thanks to Shinri Furuzawa for her helpful comments on an earlier draft.