~ The MI News ~
March 1999 Edition
(Volume 1, Number 3) |
Publisher Branton Shearer | Editor
Cliff Morris |
Table of Contents
1 Welcome message by Clifford Morris
2 The MIDAS by Clifford Morris
3 The parenting corner by Debra Jones
4 MI learning and care by Ellen Weber
5 Thomas Armstrong's other LD by Clifford Morris
6. Mindy Kornhaber's Project SUMIT
Welcome message by Clifford Morris
Welcome once again to the March 1999 (Volume 1, Number 3)
version of the MI-News. This newsletter is provided free of charge by Multiple Intelligences (MI) Research and
Consulting. Our goal is to provide useful information to those
interested in Howard Gardner's MI Theory and to explore its applications via
discussion, contact and sharing. In exchange for receiving this
newsletter, we request that you consider making a contribution in the form of a
good idea, thoughtful response, question or an inspirational MI learning
activity.
2. The MIDAS
by Clifford Morris
Dear readers,
In the inaugural issue of the MI-News (Volume 1, Issue 1,
January 1999), an inaccurate inference was made whereby Dr. Branton Shearer's
MIDAS was stated to be the sole assessment instrument for the multiple
intelligences that was recognized by Howard Gardner for enhancing educational
planning and self awareness. That inference was wrong and ought never to
have appeared. As the newsletter's editor, I bring this error to your
attention and, on behalf of the other member involved in the publication of the
MI-News, to extend our apologies to Dr. Howard Gardner for any negative effects
which this sentence may have produced.
Here is Howard Gardner's comment on this issue.
Why I Don't Endorse Multiple Intelligences Products and
Services by Howard Gardner March 1999
Since the idea of multiple intelligences was first
introduced, many individuals have created products and services based on the
key points. Often I do not learn about these products and services, or I
learn about them only after the fact. At other times, individuals send
them to me for comments or criticisms. I appreciate this collegiality and
try to be responsive when I can. And in many cases, I have written a word
of en encouragement and allowed the statement to be quoted.
I have a long standing policy against endorsement of any
commercial product. While I do not expect others to abide by this policy,
I believe that the work of a scholar is compromised when he or she becomes
identified with a specific product. I am also uncomfortable with the
blurring of the line between profit and non-profit undertakings.
At times, my words of encouragement have been mistaken for
endorsements. This happened recently in this publication, and I regret
its occurrence. I am grateful for this opportunity to set the record
straight.
3. Using MI
to learn the multiplication tables by Debra Jones
Editorial Introduction
Teaching the multiplication tables can be a long, slow and
often laborious task. Many teachers and parents have spent countless
hours drilling, memorizing and trying to instill these basic math facts into
their children. Writing as a former classroom teacher, I continue to
remember specific parent-teacher interviews whereby I would be searching, often
unsuccessfully, for another way to tell a parent how best to reteach these
tables. I only wished that I knew then what I know now about the
"Skip Counting" method, this month's excellent other way of learning
the times tables.
Skip counting through the multiplication times tables
Today, as I drove my children to the museum, I could hear
them in the back seat reciting the "times table" for 4's. Now,
this may not sound so amazing, but my twins are only five (5) years old!
So, how do they do it? We have been playing a "Skip Count"
cassette in the car every time we commute around town. This wonderful
tape has a song to go with each number from 2 to 10 that will have your
children reciting the times tables in no time!
What does this all mean? Well, right now at a very
early age, this tedious job of memorizing times tables has been turned into fun
songs. They do not understand what a times table is yet, and they are
nowhere near ready for multiplication, but when they are ready, this part of
the process (i.e., memorizing the times tables) will have already been
completed. This is especially important for my one daughter, who is not
good with memorization. She is a highly logical thinker but she is even
higher in her musical intelligence. So, this approach is especially
helpful for her. She resists ALL attempts at memorizing things in the
traditional way (to get her to learn to spell her name I had to put it to that
old Mickey Mouse song from the Mickey Mouse Club; the one that went M-I-C--see
you real soon ...).
I think what really sold me on these skip count tapes was a
conversation with another mother who used them with her son when he was
little. He is now at middle school age, and he complains to his mom that
he just can not get those songs out of his head! Whenever he wanted to
multiply, those little tunes just came right back to him. As he used them
more and more, though, he found he relied on the songs less, and the answers
came easier. BUT he didn't have to memorize the tables from
scratch. They were already in his head in the form of a song from those
early days of listening to the cassette in the car.
I purchased my tape from a company in Texas called Sing
'N' Learn. They have information on the tapes at their web site Sing 'N' Learn.
I am sure you can get these tapes from other sources as well. They are
put out by Skip Count Kid, 8200 S. W. 130 Street K, Miami, FL.
33156-6652. As an added bonus, I am finding that I too am doing better
with my own multiplication now! I guess we are never too young or
too old to learn our times table!
4. MI
learning and care by Ellen Weber
Editorial Overview
Howard Gardner's interpersonal intelligence is all about
person-to-person relationships. This social form of intelligence deals
with the relationships that occur between people as they journey through
life. This theme became the central focus of a recently received email
from Ellen Weber, Director of Secondary Education at Houghton College,
Houghton, New York. In what immediately follows, we read her true recollection
about Herb Sawyer, a person from her youth.
MI Learning and Care by Ellen Weber
We waited daily as kids for the clomp - pause - clomp -
pause. Old Herb Sawyer's ancient nag pulled up from the dump, a wooden
cart that looked more like a coal bin than a buggy. Tin cans rattled
together and Herb's tiny photographic film spools rolled on rotted
boards. We kids ran behind wobbly wheels hoping to collect even one black
film spool. Herb collected film parts from the trash and spools trickled
through holes in the cart floor onto dirt below. We scooped up these film
discards as if to photograph Herb's mysterious world from the viewpoint of a
Nova Scotian kid.
This frail hermit coachman, perched up on a rough slab of
wood behind his only friend, a horse, added intrigue and mystery that traveled
with me for a lifetime. Who were these two partners? Why did man
and beast limp daily from the junk yard toward thick woods? Rumor had it
Herb's wife died back there giving birth to their first child, a stillborn son.
We knew very little else about this man, who we watched from
a safe distance. Herb lived alone somewhere back in groves of spruce and
maple trees. I'm not sure exactly where, though, because we were
forbidden to follow him home. While I never saw his house, I imagined
rotted wood like the rough cart pulled behind him. For years, we waited
after school just to catch another glimpse of the man who kept to
himself. Nobody greeted Herb, that I remember, we just watched. In
fact, the stench from his ragged clothes, which kept a bunch of immature kids
at a distance, could hold wild dogs at bay.
Sadly, just as I can still see old Herb and his horse hobble
along, I still cringe when I remember a few boys who threw rocks at his
cart. Stones sometimes hit the horse, and then you heard a squeal of
laughter from the boy who hit his mark. The nag would rear up as far as
stiff bones enabled and bolt off, to Herb's mumbled curses.
My regret that I never stood up for Herb or seriously tried
to help, keeps alive personal lessons about caring. Maybe no one else
felt those rocks hit wood as I did. I never asked. But my feelings
or regrets didn't help Herb, either. A lifetime later, I've learned that
care travels far enough beyond mere feelings so that others can say, "It's
good to know and be known by that person."
Fortunately, even though I let chances to interact
meaningfully with Herb pass by, other people continue to enter my world each
day. And each one who crosses my path brings another opportunity to relate
to, and learn from, another person's life.
Lately I've been thinking more than usual about this silent
lesson of time and memories mixed within my soul. Yet, in spite of all
Herb taught me, I have to admit that I still miss choice opportunities to practice
genuine care for others. My students and colleagues, for example, don't
always feel cared for by me. Over time, though, Herb's lesson taught me
that care and learning weave together as naturally as hemp fibers braided
Herb's old rope harness. I'm speaking about listening to and taking part
in another's dreams as deliberately as Herb's old horse and cart hinged them
together.
Whenever I've cared genuinely about those with whom I've
crossed paths, I've learned from them. Brain specialists now tell us that
interactions with people expand interpersonal domains within our brains.
Howard Gardner shows how meaningful exchanges with others can unleash
interpersonal intelligence. With other people, we develop ability to
better understand our own world. I think brain scientists are really
saying that by caring more we also learn more about life with all its deeper
meanings.
Herb and his nag have long since left this world, and he has
moved into the next. But because he lived and traveled along my path, I
am reminded to stop and consider care's impact. The other kids discovered
their own truths when Herb clomped by, but these were mine.
About the author
Ellen Weber is Director of Secondary Education, at Houghton
College, in Houghton, New York 14744. Her phone number is (716) 567-9673
and her email address is eweber@houghton.edu. Her internet web site
address is http://www.houghton.edu/depts/education/ellen.htm
5. Thomas
Armstrong's other LD by Clifford Morris
Editorial Comment
Twelve years ago, Dr. Thomas Armstrong wrote a book called In
Their Own Way. The book was based, in the main, around Howard
Gardner's Multiple Intelligences (MI) model. The book became an instant
success and an important guide for parents who believed that their children
should be doing better in school. At the time, Mr. Armstrong was a
learning disabilities teacher; he found that many of his students were not
un-intelligent or learning disabled (LD), as many of them were so labeled, but
that their LD title simply suggested that they learned differently (LD).
In other words, they worked at a slower pace and processed information in a different
way than did other school aged youngsters.
Such ongoing classroom observations led Armstrong to
question the validity of the learning disabilities concept and it's LD label
and to explore Howard Gardner's more positive way to define an LD student as
one who learned differently. Armstrong sought another way to demonstrate
that his classroom students possessed different types of 'intelligences' ...
intelligences that were not being tapped by the conventional schooling
systems. Armstrong thus became one of the first cognitivists to redefine
the LD label from 'learning disability' to 'learning differently.' The
rest of the story is LD history and need not be repeated here, except for the
following two short comments. Since 1987, Armstrong's additional books
and articles have assisted numerous parents and teachers to grasp the complex
differences among students, to look deeper and see talents they may have been
neglected and to create a more nurturing environment that might enhance the
development of their many intelligences. Here then is how one teacher has
interpreted the Armstrong model.
Special Education and the Real Meaning of LD by Clifford
Morris
Most school aged children are different from one another and
special in in numerable ways. For example, they may differ i) in terms of
their learning abilities and learning styles, ii) by their physical abilities
and attributes, and iii) in how they perceive their most dominant and least
dominant intelligences. However, students who have been formally
identified as special needs learners or exceptional pupils are very
special. They differ from most other general level students to such an
extent that they often require specialized instruction in a specific program
tailored by the school's special services team to meet their needs.
Usually, such exceptional learners receive special education or special
services because it continues to be the common belief (unfortunately) that such
specialization will help these exceptional students reach their fullest
potential. I believe that this traditional learning model for special
education is incorrect and thus damaging to many special education
children. In what follows, I argue against this mainstream practice, and
instead suggest a more positive learning model for those special needs
youngsters who simply learn differently.
The Glass is Half Empty: LD Only Means Learning Disabilities
The conventional way of grouping special needs youngsters
has been according to the prevalence of the exceptionality in the current
population. Students so labeled as learning disabled (LD), students with
special gifts and students with speech and language problems make up the
highest prevalence categories of exceptionality. On the other hand, the
different ways of instructing students who learn differently (LD) are less
frequently considered. Students so "stamped" by our current
schooling systems as learning disabled constitute the largest group of
exceptional children within the school-age population. Approximately 4%
of schoolchildren aged 6 to 17 have been diagnosed as LD, that label coined
initially by Samuel Kirk in 1963 to describe children who were experiencing
academic difficulties and who may have been labeled dyslexic, brain injured,
perceptually handicapped, neurologically impaired, aphasic, or children with
minimal brain dysfunction. Since that time, there have been several
definitions for LD. Most generally stated, a learning disability is here
defined as a heterogeneous group of disorders that are "manifested by
significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of reading, writing,
reasoning, or mathematical abilities, or of social skills. These
disorders are presumed to be due to central nervous dysfunction. Even
though a learning disability may occur concomitantly with other handicapping
conditions, with socio-environmental influences, and with attention deficit
disorder, all of which may cause learning problems, a learning disability is
not the direct result of those conditions or influences" (The American
National Institutes of Health, 1988).
Typically, a student with such a negative cognitive profile
supposedly demonstrates an average or above average intellectual quotient
(IQ). However, these students are likely to show specific deficits in
thinking procedures, such as memory, attention and perception, as well as
difficulties in developing or using strategies to understand or remember what
they have read. Those students who have been categorized as
"exceptional pupils" have very specific and special learning
needs. While the often irregular needs of each special student differ,
and programs and services must be determined on an individual basis, some broad
generalizations can be nevertheless made. The bottom line in all of this
is that once so stamped as LD, a student is supposed to be taught specific
learning strategies so that s/he may become more successful in school.
One way of approaching this objective is to view the learner differently.
The Glass is Half Full: LD Also Means Learning Differently
In 1963 when Dr. Samuel Kirk initially tossed the LD coin,
it landed tails up. He thus interpreted the LD coin as Learning
Disability -- a most negative label which has since been stuck to students who
encounter serious difficulties learning in the conventional mode. More
recently, other cognitive psychologists, including Thomas Armstrong (1988),
have tossed the same LD coin into the educational arena and this time it has
landed heads up. Here, the special learner is viewed in another way, as a
being who simply learns differently. This more positive approach to
learning is essentially what Howard Gardner (1993, 1994, 1995, 1999) proposes
with his multiple intelligences (MI) concept. By using an MI approach
towards special education assessment and programming, there are more a)
opportunities for developing children's strengths and achieving mastery, b)
time for understanding various domain-specific content areas, and c) provision
for improving mainstream forms of assessment.
To see how offspring can be so different from each other,
stop reading this commentary and take a minute to think and look at your own
children, or other children you know. Are they intelligent in more ways
than one: for example, in music, sports, chess, debating, or computer science,
to name just a few? The most sensible approach to measuring their
talents, skills or gifts would be to recognize the multiplicity of their
intelligences (see Gardner 1998) by stating that they may indeed learn
differently. However, common sense is not very common!
A growing number of special educators are now believing in
this common sense approach -- that many of our classroom youngsters are more
often than not simply unaware of their talents on each of the eight
intellectual spectrums as proposed by Gardner. As a former teacher, I
have so often witnessed such students, who perceived themselves as educational
washouts; they failed to realize that they had a learning strength in, at
least, one of the Gardner strands. Such students frequently became
discouraged and withdrawn. Often, they became aggressive and rebellious
to mask their inner feelings of (supposed) weakness, due, in part, to their
ignorance of their 'secret' intelligences. While working with such
children, I was often reminded of the central theme from Prissilla Vail's
(1987) text -- a focus on weaknesses at the expense of developing talents can
result in a low level of self-efficacy, an external locus-of-control, a lack of
motivation, and even depression.
Thomas Armstrong represents one of those growing number of
educators. Twelve years ago, Armstrong (1987b; see also Armstrong 1987a)
wrote In Their Own way. Based on Howard Gardner's MI model, the
book became an instant success and an important guide for parents who believed
that their children should be doing better in school. At the time,
Armstrong was a learning disabilities teacher who found that many of his
students were not unintelligent or learning disabled as many of them were so
labeled, but instead, that their LD title simply suggested to him that they
learned differently. In other words, they worked at a slower pace and
they processed information in a different way than did other school aged
youngsters (Armstrong, 1988).
Such ongoing classroom observations led Armstrong to
question the validity of the learning disabilities concept and it's LD label,
and instead to explore Gardner's more positive way to define LD students.
In other words, Armstrong sought another way to demonstrate that his pupils
possessed different types of intelligences, intelligences that were not being
tapped by the conventional schooling system. While Armstrong may not have
been aware of what he was doing at the time, he became one of the first
cognitivists to redefine LD. The rest of the story is LD history and need
not be repeated here, except for this final comment. Since 1987,
Armstrong's books and articles have assisted numerous parents and teachers to
grasp the complex differences among students, to look deeper and see talents
they may have neglected and how to develop a more nurturing environment that
could enhance the development of their many intelligences (for a more involved
discussion, see Armstrong, 1991, 1993a, 1993b, 1994a, 1994b, 1998).
Summary and Conclusion
The final words to this most informal LD debate go to the
prominent Yale University cognitivist, Dr. Robert J. Sternberg. In a
recent article, where he and his colleagues suggested that teaching for
successful intelligences raised school achievement, he stated "when
material is taught in a variety of pedagogically sound ways -- in this case,
for memory as well as analytically creatively and practically -- students have
more opportunities to learn and understand the material being taught. If
they do not comprehend the material when it is taught in one way, they might
comprehend it when it is taught in another. Thus their achievement is
likely to improve" (Sternberg, Torff, & Grigorenko, 1998, p. 668; see
also Sternberg, 1997, 1998a, 1998b ). To simply sum up Sternberg's above comment,
by teaching students in other ways means that they are learning differently
(LD). In my opinion, that is what LD truly means!
References
Armstrong, T. (1987a). Describing strengths in children
identified as learning disabled: Using Howard Gardner's theory of multiple
intelligences as an organizational framework. (Doctoral dissertation).
Dissertation Abstracts, 48. 08A. (University Microfilms No. 87-25, 844)
Armstrong, T. (1987b). In their own way: Discovering and
encouraging your child's personal learning style. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.
Armstrong, T. (1988, September). Learning differences
-- not disabilities. Principal, 68(1), 34-36. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. EJ 377 480)
Armstrong, T. (1991). Awakening your child's natural genius.
Los Angeles, CA.: Jerermy P. Tarcher.
Armstrong, T. (1993a). 7 kinds of smart: Identifying and
developing your many intelligences. New York: Plume/Penguin.
Armstrong, T. (1993b, January 23). Seven kinds of
smart: The theory of multiple intelligences. Paper presented at the 5th
Annual Coastal Conference of The Orton Dyslexia Society.
Armstrong, T. (1994a). Multiple intelligences in the
classroom. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development (ASCD).
Armstrong, T. (1994b, November). Multiple
intelligences: Seven ways to approach curriculum. Educational Leadership,
52(3), 26-28.
Armstrong, T.
(1998). Awakening Genius in the classroom. Alexandria, Va.: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of
multiple intelligences: Tenth anniversary edition. New York: Basic Books.
(Original work published 1983).
Gardner, H. (1994). The Multiple intelligences theory.
In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human intelligence (Vol. 2,
pp. 740-742). New York: Macmillan.
Gardner, H. (1995, Nov.). Reflections on multiple
intelligences: Myths and messages. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 200-203,
206-209.
Gardner, H. (1998, Winter). A multiplicity of
intelligences. [Special Issue]. Scientific American, 9(4), 18-23.
Gardner, H. (1999, January 25). A prescription for
peace. Time, 153(3), pp. 44-45.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful intelligence: How
practical and creative intelligence determine success in life. New York:
Simon & Schuster.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998a, Winter). How intelligent is
intelligence testing? [Special Issue]. Scientific American, 9(4). 12-17.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998b). Thinking styles. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., Torff, B., & Grigorenko, E. (1998,
May). Teaching for successful intelligence raises school achievement.
Phi Delta Kappan, 79(9), 667-669.
Vail, P. L. (1987). Smart kids with school problems:
Things to know and ways to help. New York: Penguin Books.
6. Mindy Kornhaber's Project SUMIT
In January of 1997, a three-year national investigation
titled Schools Using Multiple Intelligence Theory (SUMIT) was launched.
The principal Investigator is Dr. Mindy Kornhaber from Harvard
University. Briefly stated, during the late winter and early spring of
1997, the SUMIT staff identified schools that had been been using MI for at
least three years. They conducted phone interviews with principals and teachers
at 41 such schools and administrators from three school districts. During
these interviews, educators described how they integrated Howard Gardner's MI
model into their curriculum, assessment, professional development and various
organizational practices. They also described the outcomes they associate
with the use of MI in their schools. To read more about SUMIT, go to
Kornhaber's site at http://pzweb.harvard.edu/SUMIT/
Leslie Wilson and MI Lesson Plans
Recently, I placed a plea for lesson plans associated with
Howard Gardner's MI model. Thanks to Leslie Wilson we now have access to
a site that contains many such plans. To read about these plans, go to
her web site at http://www.uwsp.edu/acad/educ/lwilson