What is the theory of multiple intelligences? Gardner's 8 intelligences and their educational implications for class
- The theory of multiple intelligences is Gardner's theory that looks at intelligence as a combination of several independent abilities.
- There are eight intelligences such as linguistic, logical mathematics, and space, and natural exploration intelligence was added later.
- Diversifying teaching methods and assessments and compensating for weaknesses with strengths are key implications.
Contents
- What is the theory of multiple intelligences? 8 intelligences at a glance
- What's different from conventional intelligence tests?
- What educational implications do you use in conjunction with Ericsson's developmental stages?
- If you do it yourself, the point where you get stuck in the theoretical cleanup
- FAQ
The theory of multiple intelligences is a theory proposed by Howard Gardner in 1983 in Frames of Mind. It is regarded as a combination of various independent intelligences such as language, logic, mathematics, space, music, physical movement, interpersonal relationships, self-understanding, and nature exploration. In pedagogy, each student's strengths and intelligence are often treated as implications for diversifying teaching methods.
What is the theory of multiple intelligences? 8 intelligences at a glance
| Intelligence | Core Talents | Lesson Activity Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Language intelligence | Effective use of words and writing | Discussion, writing |
| Logical Mathematical Intelligence | Reasoning, dealing with numbers and rules | Problem solving, Experimental design |
| Spatial Intelligence | Draw form and space in your mind | Mind maps, drawing diagrams |
| Music Intelligence | Rhythmic and tonal sense | Memorize concepts with songs |
| Physical Exercise Intelligence | Manipulating and Manipulating Your Body | role-playing, creating |
| Interpersonal Intelligence | Understanding the feelings and intentions of others | Group Activity |
| Self-understanding intelligence | Understand your feelings and goals | Reflection Journal |
| Nature Exploration Intelligence | Nature classification and pattern recognition | Observation Records |
Remember, the test often shows that seven intelligences were presented in the first book and nature exploration intelligences were added later.
What's different from conventional intelligence tests?
Spearman's general factor (g) theory or traditional IQ tests assume one general intelligence. Gardner argued for multiple intelligences based on cases of brain injury, a servant who excelled only in certain areas, and differences in ability to value different cultures.
However, it is necessary to introduce criticism that it is difficult to objectively measure each intelligence and lacks empirical evidence, so that it can be balanced.
질문이 나올 만한 부분을 미리 세 개쯤 생각해 두면 마음이 편하더라고요. 연습할 때 휴대폰으로 녹음해서 들어 보는 것도 좋을 것 같아요.
What educational implications do you use in conjunction with Ericsson's developmental stages?
When two theories are asked to be addressed together in a task, the overlapping of 'what do you do well (multiple intelligences)' and 'what developmental tasks do you go through (Erickson)' is effective. For example, at the stage of diligence versus inferiority in school age, opportunities for recognition of diverse intelligences can be connected in a way that can help reduce feelings of inferiority (see Ericsson Psychosocial Development Theory for an overview of the stages).
| Educational Implications | Specific method |
|---|---|
| Diversify your teaching methods | Present one concept in several ways such as words, pictures, activities, etc. |
| Diversify your rating methods | Portfolio, presentation, project evaluation in addition to paper |
| Strengths-Based Maps | Student Strengths Intelligence Access to Weak Areas |
| Consider Developmental Stages | Provide success experiences tailored to the development task at the time |
When using implications, it is easier for the reader to understand what can actually be changed in the classroom rather than the theory name.
If you do it yourself, the point where you get stuck in the theoretical cleanup
A common mistake is to use multi-intelligence as the same thing as a learning type (visual or aural), to list only intelligence names and omit class application, and to explain and not connect the two theories separately.
For example, if you set a hypothetical example of "elementary school students who have difficulty with math but are good at drawing", you can use spatial intelligence to explain fractions in shapes and create a guidance plan that builds diligence through success experiences. The key is to apply both theories together in one case.
- Were the eight intelligence names and core abilities used correctly?
- Distinguished from Learning Type Theory?
- Did you write down the differences and criticisms against traditional intelligentsia?
- Did you connect the two theories in one instance?
- Are the educational implications presented in a specific way?
When checked like this, it becomes a report with implications that go beyond the conceptual listing and lead to the actual training scene.
This article has been organized by the Campus Down Editorial Department based on public materials and textbook content · Review 2026-10-24. See Gardner, Frames of Mind (1983), Intelligence Reframed (1999), Intelligence and Development in Educational Psychology Textbook. This article is general learning information, please follow your instructor's guidance for the scope and citation format of the assignment.
FAQ
How many are multiple intelligences?
At first, there were seven things, and then there are usually eight things introduced with the addition of nature exploration intelligence. I sometimes refer to existential intelligence as a candidate.
Are multiple intelligences and learning types the same?
No, multi intelligence is a different concept that refers to the area of ability and the type of learning is the preferred way to receive information.
What are the limitations of the theory of multiple intelligences?
There are criticisms of the lack of intelligence-specific measurement tools and weak empirical evidence, and criticisms of the blurring of the lines between intelligence and talent.