~ The MI News ~

Winter  2000 Edition  (Volume 2, Number 4) |

Publisher Branton Shearer | Editor Cliff Morris |

Table of contents

1 For your intelligences only by Clifford Morris
2 Using MI profiles to optimize leaning with graduate level studies by Doris Sweeney
3 A final word by Bruce Campbell
4 Multiple intelligences in American schools by Shiffy Landa, Susan Pope and Thomas Hoerr
5 MI lesson plans and high school learning by Branton Shearer

1.  For your intelligences only by Clifford Morris

For those of you who are visiting us for the first time, we are pleased to welcome you aboard the MI train.  Here are a few comments about us and our newsletter.  The MI-News is provided free by Dr. Charles Branton Shearer's Multiple Intelligences (MI) Research and Consulting.  Our main objective in publishing this newsletter is to provide you with theoretical and practical information about Howard Gardner's MI model and how this model of the human mind is currently being implemented throughout the world.  We try to explore MI applications via discussion, contact and sharing.  As we bring this final issue of Volume 2 to a close, we believe that we have achieved this objective.  In our nine 1999 issues, we were able to present a variety of MI topics, ranging from personal comments and interviews, to excerpts from Gardner's writings, to informative articles from MI practitioners.  We hope to continue this practice, in 2001, with four new issues.

The MI-News Team

Before continuing, here are a few comments about the members of the MI-Team.  Dr. Shearer, the publisher of the MI-News, is currently seeking primary / elementary schools (grades pre-K to grade 5) willing to have parents complete The MIDAS-KIDS on their child.  This is for his validation sample.  He requires approximately 100 students at each grade level.  In exchange, he will provide individual student profiles and MI interpretative materials.  Interested schools / teachers may contact Dr. Shearer via email at sbranton@kent.edu.  They may also complete the Research Application on the MIDAS web site and send it to him.

My name is Clifford Morris and I am the newsletter's editor.  I have been reading and writing about the Multiple Intelligences of Howard Gardner since 1985.  I was a classroom teacher and school principal from 1966 until 1998.  During those 32 years, I was fortunate to be working in schools where I was able to incorporate many of Gardner's intelligences into my daily classroom lessons.  Now that I have formally retired as a teacher, I continue this MI interest, as your editor.

The second member of our team is our web site editor, Debra West Jones.  She is responsible for the development and organization of The Multiple Intelligences (MI) Research and Consulting web site, as well as the web site editor for the MI-News.  Our third member is the technical administrator, Larry Wilson.  He is responsible for the overall organization of our list server.  Recently, he informed me that according to his recent records, the total subscriber count for the MI-News newsletter was approximately 3,100 subscribers.

He was also able to inform me that currently, at least 64 countries (Albania, Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Mauritius, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Turks & Caicos Islands, United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia) are represented on the MI-News subscriber list. He said 'at least', deliberately because he believes that there may be more subscriber addresses as address that use '.net' or '.com' or '.edu' domain names may actually be for individual located outside the U.S.A.  Larry Kessenich, our web site copy editor, represents the final member of our newsletter team. He is responsible for editing many of the articles and manuscripts that you read.

As your editor, I receive numerous e-mail from all over the world, ranging from doctoral students seeking research information to practicing classroom teachers, school administrators, and university professors.  Many of the e-mail from that latter group are more pragmatic, in that these more experienced educators are using Gardner's MI model directly during their educational practices. Thus, I can comment with some authority when I say the there are many people in the world really interested in Multiple Intelligences. The list seems to be growing all the time!

Since publishing the Fall 2000 issue, I have received numerous manuscripts for possible publication in this edition. Unfortunately, I have had to reject some as I did not feel that their content was directly applicable to the central theme of the MI-News -- to foster and to promote the Multiple Intelligences of Howard Gardner, and more specifically, the implementation of Dr. Charles Branton Shearer's Multiple Intelligences Developmental Assessment Scales (MIDAS).  However, I was quite impressed with the content of two recently received commentaries.  In the first commentary, titled A Brief Report, the author, Linda Searby, comments on how she recently used the MIDAS. In the second commentary, a junior school teacher, Mike Fleetham, comments on how he uses the MI model in the UK.

--------
A Report by Linda Searly on the MIDAS
--------

I teach graduate courses in Curriculum and Instruction at Illinois State University.  Most of the students are aspiring school administrators, taking courses that will train them to evaluate teachers.  I also like to make sure that all my students are conversant about multiple intelligences research and how it can be used in classroom instruction.  The students find it very informative to see what their dominant intelligence is and then to discuss how that might impact how they supervise teachers when they become administrators.  I also encourage them to assess the dominant intelligences of their staffs when they become administrators.  The more self understanding we have and the more awareness we have of others' perspectives, the better leaders we will be.  The MIDAS can be a valuable tool in developing this awareness.

I also used the MIDAS in my doctoral dissertation research.  I focused in on four Illinois principals who demonstrated dominance in intrapersonal intelligence.  I was studying the practice of an administrator's personal reflection and how it related to school leadership and school improvement.  Of course, each of my subjects was already quite reflective (as shown by the fact that they were highly intrapersonal (looking inward).  What I found was that those principals who were not only
personally reflective, but also shared their reflections publicly with teachers, led their schools to be improving.  It was interesting research.  For additional information as to how Linda utilized the MIDAS, please email her at lsearby@mtpulaski.k12.il.us

How Mike Fleetham used MI in the UK

Those of you who know a UK classroom will recognize: National Curriculum, National Literacy Strategy, National Numeracy Strategy, QCA Medium Term Plans and other friendly monsters.  A UK teacher's day is over-full with nationally prescribed content and suggested teaching methods.  There is little room to breathe, to reflect, to experiment or simply to get to know your children.  Like many UK teachers I felt my creativity stifled and my art suppressed. Here's what I did:

I'd been aware of Gardner's MI theory for some time.  I had enough experience, a supportive head teacher and a local inspector/advisor to back me in trying it.  But the challenge was to integrate MI with existing content and methods.  I began by establishing a baseline: a draft MI profile for each of my 35 children, and a learning attitudes survey. I used questionnaires (for the children and their parents), focussed observation and one-to-one questioning.

I let the children know what was going on and began to present lessons to target intelligences.  For example, our National Literacy strategy prescribes 15 minutes of shared reading at the start of each daily literacy lesson.  This looses its sparkle after a few weeks, but with MI it shines.  The text can be sung, acted, given a rhythm, visualized and changed, discussed with a partner, reflected on alone, have it's full stops counted - all activities suggested by MI theory. The children love it.

Grouping by dominant intelligence comes next, plus handing  responsibility for learning over to each child: 'You're a visual learner - how do you think you could best get the hang of writing plays cripts?'  I keep hearing whispers across the UK of others doing the same as me...

Mike Fleetham,Fernhurst Junior School,
Southsea, Hants, UK, PO4 0AG
Tel: UK 023 92 735998; Email: mike.fleetham@tesco.net


2.  Using multiple intelligence to optimize leaning within Master’s level graduate studies by Doris Sweeney

Editorial Comment

We are pleased to have Dr. Doris Sweeney, an associate professor with National Louis University, College of Education, and a practicing classroom teacher with the Orange County Public School System share some of her findings from a recently-conducted research project involving MI and post-secondary school students.  She comments that "although most of the work with multiple intelligence theory has been in the elementary and secondary levels of the public school system, its use and application is also needed and useful in the post K--12 arena."

More to that latter point, Sweeney had the unique opportunity to use the MI model at the master’s level -- a graduate program in education.  Her research subjects consisted of twenty-three graduate students (8 males and 15 females) from three sections of a Masters in Education program.  This membership crossed all economic, gender, and educational levels.  Many of the graduate students had recently returned to the educational arena to update their skills, to become more experienced within education, or to increase their personal knowledge base.  Not all graduate students were educators: some were social scientists, administrators of programs other than those found within education.  Many were students hoping to open schools of their own.

Sweeney used a variety of informal MI inventories to develop student profiles.  By doing so, she was able to tailor a model of instruction that met the needs of her graduate students.  The analysis of the profiles thus generated provided her with information that she then used to modify how she delivered the content of the courses -- varying a modified lecture format with small and large group interactions, cooperative learning projects, media presentations, the use of audio-visual aids and film, as well as music and movement.  Here then is her commentary.

--------
Introduction to Multiple Intelligence Theory

General Applications

Most often, the application of the multiple intelligence theory has been at the elementary and secondary public school levels covering a variety of disciplines and applications.

Introduction to the study

I had the unique opportunity to use the multiple intelligence profile at the post secondary level -- a master’s level, graduate program in education.  The population consisted of twenty-three graduate students (8 males and 15 females) from three sections of the masters’ in education program.  The membership crossed all economic, gender, and educational levels.  Many of the graduate students had recently returned to the educational market to update their skills, to become more experienced within education, or to increase their personal knowledge bases.  Not all of the graduate students were educators, but were social scientists, administrators of programs other than those found within education, and many were students hoping to open schools of their own.

The survey

The survey given was an informal survey (Identifying Your Multiple Intelligences:  Assessment 1 (Teacher Curriculum Institute, pp. 46-47).  The survey was self administered and consisted of 35 questions, which covered all areas of the multiple intelligence theory with the exception of the naturalistic intelligence.  The scoring phase of the survey consisted of 7 boxes lettered A-G with each letter containing five numbered boxes corresponding to the question and area of intelligence.  Twenty-three students (8 males and 15 females) participated in the study and were from three different masters in education groups.
 

Group Results

A

5

5

1

 

 

B

5

2

 

 

 

C

3

 

 

 

 

D

5

2

 

 

 

E

5

 

 

 

 

F

5

5

5

4

 

G

5

5

5

5

2

Verbal/linguistics 11/23 (44%), logical/mathematical 7/23 (28%), visual/spatial 3/23 (12%), body/kinesthetic 7/23 (28%), musical 5/23 (20%), interpersonal 20/23 (80%), and intrapersonal 22/23 (88%).  As a group, the overall strengths within this limited sampling were interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence areas followed by verbal/linguistic, body/kinesthetic, logical/mathematical, visual/spatial, and musical.

 

Group Results

Males

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

1

x

 

x

x

 

x

 

2

 

x

 

x

 

x

 

3

 

 

 

x

 

x

 

4

x

 

 

 

 

x

 

5

x

 

 

x

 

x

 

6

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

7

x

 

 

 

 

x

 

8

 

 

 

x

 

x

 

 

Group Results

Females

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

1

 

 

 

x

 

x

x

2

 

 

 

 

x

 

x

3

 

 

 

 

 

x

x

4

x

x

 

 

 

 

x

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

6

x

 

 

 

x

 

x

7

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

10

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

15

 

 

 

 

 

x

x

Key  A = verbal/linguistic; B = logical/mathematical; C = visual/spatial; D = body/kinesthetic
E = musical; F = intrapersonal; G = interpersonal

Reflections  This limited sampling focused on twenty-three graduate students perusing a master’s degree in education.  As a whole, the group was strong or dominant in those areas needed for academic (verbal/linguistic and logical/mathematical areas) and social success (intrapersonal and interpersonal areas).  Individually, the results were not promising.  Many students were strong or dominant in only limited areas. Five female students were not dominant or strong in any area defined although they did score at least a four in three areas.  A mean of 5 determined a strong or dominant response to an area of intelligence.

Application  Although most of the work with multiple intelligence theory has been in the elementary and secondary levels of the public school system, its use and application is also needed and useful in the post K--12 arenas.  By using a variety of informal, multiple intelligence inventories, I hope to continue to develop student profiles at the graduate level.  By doing so, I will be able to custom tailor a model of instruction that meets the needs of the students.  The analysis of the profiles provided information that I used to modify how I delivered the content of the courses -- varying a modified lecture format with small and large group interactions, cooperative learning projects, media presentations, the use of audio visual aids and film as well as music and movement.  I have also incorporated some mind gym activities to help activate the brain for more effective learning.

About the author

Dr. Doris Sweeney is an associate professor with National Louis University, College of Education and is also a classroom teacher with the Orange County Public School System.


3.  A final word by Bruce Campbell

Excerpted from The Multiple Intelligences Handbook: Lesson Plans and More
Campbell & Associates, 17410 Marine Drive, Stanwood, WA  98292.

Editorial Comment

The following excerpt, A Final Word represents the concluding chapter in Bruce Campbell's above book.  He uses this book to document his multiple intelligences "learning centers" approach to teaching elementary and intermediate-aged children.  He thoroughly explains how he creates learning centers and provides MI-inspired lesson plans and curricular ideas for a wide variety of subject areas.  This is a must read book for classroom teachers aspiring to incorporate MI into their daily curriculum guidelines.

Here then are his comments.

In looking back over my years of teaching with the MI model, I want to share a few reflections.  I have been willing to do extra planning and create new assessment processes because of the way my students have responded and because of the success I have experienced as a professional.  I would like to explain some of the tangible results I have achieved that motivate me to continue.

What are some of the results of this program?

I have conducted action research projects in my classroom to assess what effect, if any, this classroom model has on intermediate-aged students.  To do the research, I maintained a daily journal with specific entries that recorded the following:
 - general daily reflections
 - daily evaluation of how focused or "on-task" students were
 - evaluation of transitions between centers
 - explanation of any discipline problems
 - self-assessment – how my teacher-time was used
 - tracking of specific individuals, previously identified as students with serious behavior problems

In addition, I administered a "Classroom Climate Survey" twelve times during the school year, a "Student Assessment Inventory" of the Multiple Intelligences learning centers nine times, and a "Center's Group Survey" eight times during the year.

The data I gathered revealed the following:

Students develop increased responsibility, self-direction, and independence over the course of the year  Although I have not attempted to compare my students with those in other classes, the self-direction and motivation they exhibit has been consistently apparent to literally hundreds of classroom visitors.  The students become skilled at developing their own projects, gathering necessary resources and materials, and making well planned presentations.

Discipline problems significantly reduce  Students previously identified as having serious behavior problems show rapid improvement in social skills typically during the first six weeks of school.  By mid-year, they are often making important contributions to their groups.  And by year's end, they occasionally assume positive leadership roles at the centers.

All students develop and apply new skills   In the fall, most students typically describe only one center as their favorite.  (Interestingly enough, the distribution among the seven centers is always relatively even.)  By mid-year, most identify three to four favorite centers.  By year's end, nearly every student identifies at least six centers as favorites.  Moreover, they all make multi-modal presentations of their independent projects that include songs, skits, visuals, poems, games, surveys, puzzles, and group participation activities, the skills they are developing at the seven centers.

Cooperative learning skills improve in all students  Since so much of the center work is collaborative, students become highly skilled at listening, helping each other, sharing leadership in different activities, accommodating group changes, and introducing new classmates to the program.  They learn not only to respect each other but also to appreciate and call upon the unique gifts and abilities of their classmates.

Academic achievement has improved as measured by classroom and standardized tests  CAT scores are at or above local, state, and national averages in all areas.  Retention is high on classroom year-end tests.  Methods for recalling information are predominately musical, visual, and kinesthetic, indicating the influence of working through the different intelligences.  I have observed students who were previously unsuccessful in school become high-achievers in all areas.

In summary, it is clear that students' learning improves.  Many students say they enjoy school for the first time.  As the school year progresses, new skills emerge.  Some students discover musical abilities, artistic, literary, mathematical, and other capacities.  Some become skilled leaders.  In addition, self-confidence and motivation increase significantly.  Finally, students develop responsibility, self-reliance, and independence as they take an active role in shaping their own learning experiences.

What is the teacher's role in a Multiple Intelligences program?

One interesting consequence of a student-centered classroom, such as this, is the role of the teacher.  While the majority of students are at work in the centers and on projects, my time is spent with individuals or small groups.  I help students learn new skills, tutor those with reading or math difficulties, assist gifted students with challenging activities, and work with small groups to design structures, create dances, and plan projects.  Additionally, I often confer with individual students, evaluating their work, suggesting opportunities for improvement, and giving positive feedback.  Thus, my role has become that of facilitator, guide, and resource provider.  My relationships with students are more personal and I am gratified by their individual accomplishments.

Not only has my role changed but I have also developed new competencies as a result of teaching in such an environment.  I have learned to observe my students from multiple perspectives.  I have become more accomplished at preparing for diverse methods of learning and gathering resources to facilitate learning that is center-and project-based.  I also find that I am working with my students, rather than for them, exploring what they explore, discovering what they discover, and often learning what they learn.  My satisfaction is gleaned from my students' enthusiasm for learning and their independence, rather than from their test scores and ability to sit quietly.  Perhaps most importantly, because of planning for such diverse modes of learning, I have become more creative and multi-modal in my own thinking and learning.  I sometimes wonder who is changing more, the students or me?

Why is a Multiple Intelligences model successful?

The program has been successful not only in my classroom but in hundreds more around the country where it has been adopted.  There seem to be two reasons for the success.  First, every student has an opportunity to specialize and excel in at least one area of human intelligence.  Usually, however, it is three or four areas.  Since I began this program, there has not been a single student unable to find an area of specially and success.  Second, each student is learning subject matter in multiple ways and has a variety of opportunities to understand and retain academic information.  Moreover, because of the input students have into the program, their learning experiences are personally meaningful.

Many student needs are met through this program.  Their intellectual needs are met through the constant challenges in their daily activities.  Emotional needs are met at times by working closely with others and at other times by working independently.  Ultimately, I believe that students working in an MI environment develop new strengths and come to better understand and appreciate themselves as individuals.  Because of their skills which they develop, the students have multiple abilities to pursue their interests long after they leave my classroom.  And that has always been my goal as an educator: to inspire a love of learning in each child I teach.

4.  Multiple Intelligences in American Schools by Shiffy Landa, Susan Pope and Thomas Hoerr

Editorial Comment

To repeat what I have already mentioned at the outset of this newsletter, I receive various e-mails from fellow educators who write about their success in implementing MI into their daily professional lives.  More often than not, such writers are practicing classroom teachers.  Such was the case, once again, when I recently received an email containing the complete contents of the Fall 2000 issue (Volume X, Number 1) of Intelligence Connections Newsletter of the ASCD, Multiple Intelligences Network.  The editor of this excellent MI newsletter is Dr. Tom Hoerr, principal of New City School, in St. Louis, MO.

Hoerr commenced the newsletter by commenting on the excellent results obtained when MI is used as a learning tool.  He stated, "More and more, educators see MI not as a panacea, but as a tool to help meet students’ individual needs.  More and more, educators are finding that while implementing MI requires effort and creativity, the rewards are remarkable.  When MI is used well, both students and teachers prosper."

Next, he commented on and then presented two excellent articles on MI.  The first article was written by Shiffy Landa, a grade one classroom teacher at a Jewish day school in St. Louis.  The other article was written by Susan Pope, Staff Development and Design Coordinator for the 21 schools implementing MI in Memphis.  After reading both articles, I quickly e-mailed Hoerr, seeking written permission to reprint the articles in this issue of the MI-News.  He responded in the affirmative.  Thanks Shirley Landa, Susan Pope and Thomas Hoerr for letting the MI-News team share your two excellent articles with our readership.  Here then are their two articles.

4.  If You Can't Make Waves, Make Ripples by Shiffy Landa, H. F. Epstein Hebrew Academy, St. Louis, MO

As I sat at my desk on a rainy afternoon, attempting to map out my Multiple Intelligence lesson plans for the coming month, I tried to recall the chain of events that inspired me to convert my room into a MI classroom.  I began to reflect about the teacher I once was and the transformational mindshifts I made that helped me become the teacher I am today.

To be fair, in my twenty-five years of teaching, my students always learned well and my classroom activities were considered to be lots of fun. But there were times when I felt frustrated by my occasional inability to reach all of my students.  At times, I doubted whether I was really connecting with each and every one of my students in the manner that I wanted to.  I didn't have the tools to tune in to every student’s unique pathway to learning.  As a teacher, I envisioned my classroom as a haven, where all of my students would be engaged in their learning in a fun and meaningful way.  It was essential for me that my students be comfortable asking questions, and that they would take risks that would propel them to greater heights and develop their critical thinking skills.

To my delight, I discovered that MI provides the way to reach many different styles of learners in the classroom.  MI is all about tapping into the different styles and pathways of learning so that each and every child is successful.  What a thrill it was for me to learn that we had a Multiple Intelligences school (right here) in St. Louis!  I visited The New City School and met with its director, Dr. Tom Hoerr, and thus began my MI journey.  Tom and his wonderful staff have been incredible MI resources for me.  They often direct me to great MI reading material, web sites, and networking with other teachers, as I continue to search for more ways to implement MI in my classroom.

With eagerness and determination, I approached the challenge of developing a MI curriculum to teach my first graders how to read and write in Hebrew and learn their Judaic studies, at the H. F. Epstein Hebrew Academy, in St. Louis.  Fortunately, I had the support of our school's Headmaster to apply MI in my classroom, even though this was not a school-wide endeavor.  Ironically, MI was the method used in the traditional Jewish learning of the Talmud hundreds of years ago, before the influence of our factory model schools, so it made even more sense for me to pursue the theory.

My role as a teacher is quite different now from the way it was just a few years ago.  No longer do I stand in front of the room and lecture to my students.  I consider my role to be one of a facilitator rather than a frontal teacher.  The desks in my room are not all neatly lined up in straight rows.  In my MI classroom, the students are busily working in centers in cooperative learning groups, which gives them the opportunity to develop their interpersonal intelligences.  A coordinator for each cooperative learning group is responsible for being the group leader.  This is a valuable pathway of learning for my students, one they will continue to use long after they graduate from school and enter the adult work environment.

Children have an opportunity to use their bodily-kinesthetic (B-K) intelligence to form the shapes of the letters as they learn to write Hebrew in cursive.  They also use their B-K to move to the sounds of the vowels that they are learning, blending them together with letters, as they begin to read.  This is a completely novel alternate method of processing information, which provides a much deeper way of internalizing new concepts using the entire body.  Rather than replacing the pencil and paper, these different pathways of learning help students be even more successful with pencil and paper.

The intrapersonal intelligence is an intelligence that often is neglected in the traditional classroom.  In the MI classroom, the children complete their own evaluation sheets after they have concluded their work at the centers.  They evaluate their work and create their own portfolios.  They can compare their current work with their work from the previous week or month, and take note of their own progress.  The students begin to learn about and to perceive themselves as learners.

Remarkably, I no longer have a need for behavior modification systems, sticker charts, candies or any of the rewards and prizes traditionally used in the classroom.  Think of all the free time I have when I no longer have to spend my time as a scorekeeper does!  When children are genuinely engaged in their learning they are intrinsically motivated.  The student's natural curiosity and thrill in learning becomes the motivation to attain even more knowledge.  Is there anything that could be more meaningful?

Last year, one of my students went on a skiing trip with her family and friends, and missed a week of school.  When she returned her mother told me, "Gabi was the only child who was anxious to get back to school."  "She had a good time and loves to ski," her mother continued, "but she would have preferred not to miss your class."  I consider this the best compliment a student could possibly give me.

As I was implementing MI in my classroom, I realized the importance of educating the parents about this, as well  They needed to understand that MI was a lot more than just fun and games.  Thus began a parent education class called The Parent-Teacher Connection.  We met three times during the year to view videos or to chat about other MI material, and discussed how this was being implemented in the classroom.  My weekly newsletters kept the parents updated on the many activities taking place in our classroom.  The parents were aware of my networking with other teachers and of my connecting with Tom Hoerr and the New City School.  I found that my personal motivation and dedication to the students impressed the parents the most, and helped me to earn their uncompromising trust and support.

I looked for as many opportunities as I could to invite the parents into my room so they could share in their children’s learning experiences.  When we studied about Chanukah, the children put on a puppet show for their parents.  In typical MI fashion, the students chose their characters, designed their scenery background, made their own puppets, and wrote the script for the puppet show, all on their own.  They kept reflection logs as they put together the puppet show.  We invited the parents to our performance and shared the entire MI aspects of the project with them.  We put on another puppet show several months later, thus giving the parents an opportunity to witness the students’ progress and growth.  The puppet show served as an alternate method of assessing the children's knowledge.

Hoping to be an inspiration to others on staff and a source of encouragement for them to explore MI, I invited colleagues to attend our puppet shows.  I find that many teachers actually do MI activities or projects; they just aren't making all the connections yet.  My classroom has become somewhat of a MI exhibit for the many teachers that are interested in learning about MI.

Enlarging the photos of the children that were taken during MI activities and displaying them on my bulletin board outside my classroom was a way of documenting the children's work.  Two things people immediately noticed were that (1) the children were smiling and seemed happy and that (2) they were all engaged in their learning.

The parents of the children in my classroom are my greatest support system and source of encouragement.  In fact, they are constantly remarking about how wonderful it would be for MI to continue on with their children in the following grades.  As I stood up from my desk with my lesson plans finally mapped out, the rain had long since stopped. And then I noticed the magnet hanging on the refrigerator, "If you can't make waves, make ripples?"

For more information about any of the above, please contact Shiffy Landa at ShiffyL@aol.com


4.  Multiple Intelligences in Memphis by Susan D. Pope

Howard Gardner’s theory of Multiple intelligences has sparked a revolution in many classrooms across the country, including those in Memphis City Schools.  As you know, this is a whole new era in which our students are being prepared for a century in which many more types of skills are going to be recognized and used.  This challenge of expanding knowledge and skills is being presented to districts across the nation.  As a vehicle to address this challenge and as a part of system-wide restructuring, the staffs at fourteen elementary schools and seven high schools chose Dr. Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences as the foundation for developing a model for restructuring and redirecting instructional delivery.

Take a look at how the schools began implementing the theory of Multiple Intelligences in Memphis.  Principals and teachers in two schools began the quest for a research-based foundation that would enhance instructional delivery and meet the diverse needs of students, while at the same time meeting the district criteria for reform efforts.  The theory of multiple intelligences kept “popping up” everywhere.  In the winter of 1996-1997, the principals and teachers attended a conference where brain-based presentations further influenced their findings.  One of the things that really impressed the attendees was the number of presenters from the business community, as well as the field of education.  Brain-based training/learning was a real-world connector for adults and students.  The infusion of multiple intelligences could redirect instructional delivery in order to reach all students at higher levels of achievement.  This belief was further enhanced by a site visit to New City School in St. Louis in the Spring.  The two schools began preparing a joint proposal to restructure based on the MI theory.  By late Spring, two other schools had come on board.  The group was four strong and enthused about MI and positive change for student success!

These four elementary schools paved the way to implement the MI Design by first writing benchmarks in the areas of: Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, and Organization.  A team of teachers, principals, and the design facilitator collaborated regularly to develop a working document, "The Multiple Intelligences Benchmarks, Indicators, and Evidence."  The Benchmarks are organized in three phases for gradual systemic change.  The Curriculum Benchmark is based on evidence of unit planning, exemplary models of instructional practice, and student/ teacher reflection.  The Instruction Benchmark is grounded in evidence of MI as a major part of curriculum included in project work, exhibitions, portfolios, peer review, and revision.  The Assessment component includes alternative assessment methods to measure, report, and improve individual student learning and school-wide progress.  The Organizational area focuses on MI common knowledge base, evidence of MI vision throughout the school, community building, and shared-decision making through a uniform School Improvement Plan framed around MI and improved student learning.  Critical friend visits are conducted each Spring by an outside consultant to guide further implementation.  The MI design carefully executes a paradigm shift that provides avenues that seek new ways to use MI to help students develop their potential and deliver quality work.

The implementation of MI successes spread throughout the district.  The following year, the MI group grew by eight elementary schools and six high schools.  This year, two more elementary schools and one more high school have joined the MI cohort.  Three of the MI schools serve special needs students, nine schools serve optional (magnet school) students, and nine schools serve students within an assigned attendance zone.  With twenty-one schools implementing the MI theory, school change and implementation exists at many different levels and stages.

Teachers and administrators have attended Skylight conferences and workshops –  ASCD, New City School MI Conferences, the Key School Workshop, Project Zero –  and numerous presentations that enhance the implementation of the MI theory.  High school representatives visited Lake Washington High School.  Elementary school, teams visited New City School many times and are grateful for the continued collaborative sharing of the staff.  The New City School staff has presented several staff development sessions in Memphis that further build on the practicing MI classroom.  Thanks to New City for being our MI friends and mentors.

The MI Curriculum Fairs serve as one of the most powerful examples of team collaboration throughout the elementary schools.  Most recently Grahamwood Elementary and Brownsville Road Elementary hosted MI Fairs.  Two schools traditionally host fairs in the Fall and Spring, and six schools in that cohort visit in place of a faculty meeting.  The fairs serve as powerful forms of professional development, bonding, and affirmation.  They also serve as excellent ways to communicate the MI vision to parents.  The MI Journal is our latest initiative that includes all twenty-one schools.

The MI Journal is published and edited by Shrine School and the MI Design Facilitator.  The journal spotlights teachers and keeps schools informed about MI and technology.  Several of the MI schools are recipients of grants to support extensive outdoor classrooms.  Many of the teachers are presenting staff development sessions for the other MI schools, as well as for the district.  One of the new topics presented by teachers this winter will be on developing and sustaining the outdoor classroom.  The staff development coordinator/design facilitator visits the MI schools, monitors design implementation, coordinates staff development and serves as a team collaborator for sharing among the schools.

With the theory of MI and the power of change, the Memphis MI schools have set a new standard by expanding learning opportunities that prepare all children to be successful citizens and workers.  The schools are in the building stages and are creating more expanded opportunities.  Every student has an opportunity to achieve through MI.  Every teacher has an opportunity to experience success through MI.  These attributes together make positive differences in the place we call “school.”

About the Author

Susan Pope serves as Staff Development Coordinator and MI Design Facilitator in Memphis City Schools.  She was a principal for five years in a MI school and can be reached at popes@memphis-schools.k-12.tn.us

Editorial Comment

Towards the end of his newsletter, Hoerr thanked Shiffy and Susan for sharing their MI experiences.  He stated, "I hope that reading about their efforts offers you ideas and inspiration.  Please let me know how you are using MI.  I’d love to hear from you (trhoerr@AOL.com or trhoerr@newcityschool.org) and welcome any thoughts you have about how to make this newsletter, this network, more effective in meeting your needs."  Hoerr concluded his newsletter by inviting the reader, if interested, to become a MI Network member by sending a $10.00 check Dr. Tom Hoerr, Principal, New City School, 5209 Waterman Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63108. The email address at the school is www.newcityschool.org.

-------------------------------
5. Multiple Intelligences, Lesson Plans, and High School Learning by Branton Shearer
-------------------------------

Editorial Comment

One of the best ways to show to others that MI is alive and well within contemporary classrooms is to display samples of MI lesson plans.  Such is the case in this final section of this issue.  We shall continue to print similar lesson plans in this section of the Spring 2001 issue of this newsletter, due out on Thursday, March 15, 2001.  I wish to take this opportunity to thank four high school teachers (Kathleen McCafferty, Deb Merrow, Jill Madonia, and Julie Hanna) for giving me permission to print their lesson plans.  At a time when so much is written about elementary schooling and MI, I find it extremely refreshing to begin the publication of a series of lesson plan and commentaries especially tailored to high school learning.

The following four (4) lesson plans were created by (high school) teachers in a multiple intelligences (MI) workshop to extend the range of student intelligences engaged in the learning process.  Each teacher rewrote an existing lesson / unit plan by adding and altering activities so that student learning might be enhanced and understanding of the topic enriched.

A few of the teachers' reflections on their lesson plans are included so that you may hear their reasoning on the benefit of this type of instruction.  Most experienced teachers find that MI lesson planning is quite familiar and affirming because they often already think this way naturally.  The structure of the MI approach is, however, beneficial for even the most experienced teacher because it adds dimensions that are easily neglected.  This is especially true for teachers of kindergarten and elementary school children who must think across all the disciplines.  High school teachers, on the other hand, who are more discipline focused often find thinking in cross-discipline terms to be a challenge.

A fundamental guideline to MI lesson planning is to ask yourself the question, "How might I translate this information / topic / concept / skill into a variety of different yet appropriate intelligences?"  Of course, there is no such thing as the perfect MI plan that engages every intelligence.&