A mile wide and an inch deep. I have been saying this for years and I've never studied education until now. Kids only pay attention to pass the test, and don't deeply understand the material. Like he said, we need to have priorities and go deeply into them. 100% agree Mr. Gardner.
I’ve followed Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences with a passion for many years. I taught MIs to all of my students - children and adults, from the time there were only 7 intelligences in Gardner’s theory. I answer a out of questions on Quora about education. I believe in it because so much emphasis is on IQ in the USA, yet they can’t test anything outside the four corners of a piece of paper or a computer screen. Someone with Asperger Syndrome may score very high in an IQ test, but can never be happy in a relationship because they have neither Intrapersonal or Interpersonal intelligence. A gifted musician may have a low IQ score even though they have an abundance of musical talent although this is never assessed in an IQ test, although Musical Intelligence should be. It’s impossible within the set boundaries of a written test. The same goes for elite athletes. IQ tests are only valued by people who score highly. What students need to learn is how to work smarter with what they have. Forget bloody IQ tests! They shouldn’t define success as they are far too narrow.
I 'so' support what Howard Gardner states here. Having been through rote learning, I still remembr so many facts, but in the long term they have not assisted me much in my chosen career, except to know who, when, why, how and what. Those areas that really impacted was when I got involved with my daughter's education. Those that took away the rote, limited the 'vastness', but brought it back to understanding, research and delivery of a results-orienetated assignment based in those two, with a well thought out assessment/criticism of the topic, self-assessed before handing in. This showed me she had truly thought it out, made a statement and made a commitment to the final view of her research work. And that is what is expected of us in the workforce - research, review, assess and most of all commit. And no, it's not just related to the office 'johnnies' - even those talented individuals witha more practical approach have developed, through a system of 'lateral learning and thinking', ways to effectively produce amazing results. So I agree, limit the extent of the knowledge and prevent the student from being overwhelmed. Rather bring it right back to deeper understanding of a few subjects, with a knowledge of expectation and a route of self-assessment before delivery. Produces a most amazing outcome in young people who are able to walk away from an education with their faith and trust in themselves and their abilities till intact.
This work has changed my life. I have integrated it into a book on Zen I wrote - "Spiritual, Not Religious: Sacred Tools for Modern Times". Gardner's work is "Sacred"
People like this man speak a universal reason that makes great sense. It would be good to explain this to teens at high school at a time when they are thinking about how they compare to each other.
Every teacher and every class at our school utilizes Dr. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. We've made a few videos (that are posted on our RUclips page) that show examples of it in action.
I enjoyed this video. I am studying this in my college course for teaching. It is a real eye opener. Howard Gardner's theory is better understood for me by watching this video. Very useful information for teachers. :)
High school drop out here, GED all the way! If men like this are honestly heard we may be able to actually make a difference. I will post this link on my FB and hope all will do the same. I have an IQ (according to Mensa Int.) in the top two percent of the world (149). Had schools been like what this kind man has described, things may have gone differently for me. Kudos, my friend, may success find you wherever you go!
I think the idea of MI is empirically shown to be true. I think the problem starts when we conclude that it is telling us something about how we need to teach when I think the reality is it's telling us something about what should be taught to each individual. We have this system in the U.S. where the only way we ever think you should live a decent life is if you move to the top. We refuse to see the dignity of traditional blue collar and hands on trades and now we make sure these people can't even make a living with crappy wages and no beneftits. So, we now feel it is our responsibility to teach everyone the same curriculum that will get them into college. The real conclusion for me behind the concept of MI (which again to me is empirical) is that people are not the same and should be treated differently in teaching but maybe in what they will be most adept at learning and doing in life. You can't be a good woodworker through lectures--it necessitates hands on and many people are not great at that (although we'd never call them stupid). But if you're a kinesthetic learner forget differential equations--it simply isn't going to happen. Certain domains DEMAND certain ways of thinking. We must face that. This new stuff is one reason American kids get into STEM programs and get wiped out. They can't deal with the material because they were never suited for it in the first place and were being told that "they are the center" and that they somehow shouldn't have to do hard stuff like memorize and take good notes. Then comes something like anatomy in pre-med or any hard science program where the prof barely even knows you're alive and you need tons of memorization and the ability to sit through a boring lecture and learn, especially in the first several years, and they crash and burn. But now, because they were never allowed to pursue younger what they really would have been good at they have nothing (except of course a lot of student debt)..
It's obviously a valid concept, and acceptable, if not bound by the same tautological conceptions that IQ rests on. There is no fair reason to assume intelligence is 'constant', 'general', or 'unmalleable'. Those are convenient assumptions that are adopted by proponents of IQ, and in the interest of living up to the Kantian paradigm of 'pure reason'. In effect, we've created a glorified short-term memory test and call it an 'intelligence test'. Many people are happy with it, but that doesn't mean it's a kosher test. Most people are unexceptional, and would rather take an inflated number, than have to show for it. Personally, I begin looking at education/expertise level, as the first prerequisite to high human intelligence, than intuition; the level of fluency(s) within that education/expertise level, which determines at what rate and what distance ideas come together, and is the first source of generative thinking (not 'fluid IQ' as IQ proponents say), then I'll look at IQ.
But, come on. Haven´t you noticed that you are smarter than other people (family, friends) in a certain way, lets say, numerically, and they are smarter than you in another way, lets say, visually? I have.
Very nice concentrated dose of essential 'wisdom'! Thank you to Doctor Gardner and Edutopia. One can only hope that this reaches the teachers and administrators in significant-enough numbers to make a difference.
Chryll Rajh. BEd. ECDFS. UWI. Year 3 Student.I believe Mr. Gardner is on point when he relates that learning is evolving in the many Intelligences that one aspires to use as a learning tool for lifelong learners.
What a brilliant mind. No doubt the negative comments to Gardners message illustrates perfectly the missed opportunity for people to have improved their interlect under a multiple intelligence learning system.
i find the theory of multiple intelligence very convincing based on my learning pattern.. it has put things in place in my life.. in the past.. as to why i used to think in a particular manner at some time and differently in another..
I love this. I fully support and agree with the logic. This should be shown to every prospective teacher and then re-shown every year to remind them, that children are not all the same in the way they learn and the teachers themselves with be challenged to think outside the box to offer the best education possible to our children.
Lol! Good for you. I am a teacher. Tomorrow, I will teach a lesson about Multiple Intelligences. Gardner developed the theory of MI in the early 1980s and has worked on them for a long time. Recently, he has been developing different types of "minds" such as the ethical mind, the creative mind, etc and what he would do to education, etc, if he was a policy maker. Anyway, best wishes to getting your teacher to teach Multiple Intelligences.
I read and learned a lot about MI. The video tells more about MI but also about Howard Gardner. It's interesting what he tells you in this youtube-clip.
I am a neuroeducator and psychopedagogue, I deeply believe in changing the educational system for one more adapted to the multiplicity of cognitive and motor skills in children, in my country Colombia, and LATAM, I believe that our greatest challenge has been political commitment
There is something in his voice or the way he speaks that is quite attractive (for lack of better word I can think of as English isn't my first language). You just want to keep listening him and it doesn't feel tiring
It has been interesting to revise information on multiple intelligence and I think working on multiple intelligence is very vital in educational system, as all types of learners are activated in the process of the lesson.. What has been important in this video of cource is an assessment question, reflection on providing feedback and how to account for all kids abilities that involve multiple intelligence and its different range of approaches for teaching
@chrismca Actually, there are many studies that show that students achieve more and they keep their interest in learning. Learning becomes meaningful while the learner takes an active part in their learning. Why limit a person's way of learning when there are multiple ways each individual learns. Also, brain imaging shows that more areas of the brain are active when engaging different intelligences.
the problem I have with multiple intelligences, is that its a theory. Not in 20 years and more, was it proven the be correct or better than just plain simple IQ. That's the problem. I wish, that was not the case
As a 58yo male that just finished his masters degree in marine biology, I whole heartedly agree with the premise that the student must be able to recreate in his mind the ideas in order to really learn them. An fine example of this was an animal physiology class I had in which the exams were a series of "essay questions". I knew that I had to prepare to answer the questions in that fashion. While the material was quite detail oriented, I was constantly digesting it in a more wholistic manner, knowing that I needed to understand the way in which the pieces fit together. It didn't hurt that I had an truly extraordinary professor. My comment on the course evaluation was " the most efficient and effective delivery of course material in my academic career". Many other ideas in the video that are important and pertinent as I embark on my instructor journey
The student has to see the Value of what they are learning, which creates an excitement in them to learn more and participate more in order to learn more .
I am Mensa member and I can tell you something honestly: I have been told many times that I am smart and stuff like that. that helped me maybe to learn SOMETHING faster,but all of my achievements I attribute 95% to emotional and social intelligence.So that is the MOST important of all -in my humble opinion.
@pseudosimplicity Are you saying that these studies show these good outcomes because of the use of Gardner's ideas? I've looked through the literature pretty thoroughly, and I can't find any studies that allow a reader to conclude this. If you have the references, I'd be very glad to read the studies or anything you think might help me learn more about this. Thanks
The idea of publicly exhibiting multiple intelligence's, as Gardner suggests, is cultural in nature. Perhaps there are schools and environments where children can utilize, nurture, and exhibit their intelligence's. This is a reflection of Gardner's 2009 perspectives which have evolved since. Nice comprehensive presentation.
@LeeMIlby I think you're 100% right in that there is much to improve in our current system. But, the question is: Do we replace the status quo with things shown to work (e.g., class sizes of 15, better trained teachers, - see the research), or with pseudo-science like MI? See Michael Shermer's book "Why People Believe Weird Things" It has a list of qualities of pseudoscience. Make a list of how many of these qualities MI has. I honestly think you'll be surprised. Cheers
@chrismca ...Because, like i said, it's common sense. Unless you disagree that people are all individuals and all different and learn things in different ways?
He is right. I got zero mathematical logic, but do really well in other fields. I suffered for this at school and it seemed like nothing else matters only MATHS. Mathematics was above any other subject. Very wrong.
With what Blayne states isn't it the pen that is mightier than the sword. We need the future to be with brains and not brawn. Fund schools and not war.
@LeeMIlby I don't want you to repeat yourself or help me, just think about something honestly. Common sense says that multi-ton objects won't fly or float, but science gives us planes and ships that do. Common sense says that inoculations won't work, yet this science has saved millions of lives. As to schooling, common sense tells us that a child suffering from hyperactivity will not be helped by a stimulant, but science has shown us that they are. Isn't science is the far better guide?
How do we teach professionals the skill/ability to recognise various subtle intelligences? Then apply that to planning for the classroom? Seems like a logistical nightmare to me. Isn't that the key? Being able to recognise a students intellectual strengths and then apply techniques or practices to foster that students improvement in learning?
+Steven Tyers Perhaps its about informing professionals about the ways in which they can be offering the same content in a variety of ways to allow for the differing intellectual strengths.
One way for me has been to give students opportunities to work with different intelligences in the classroom. I taught an art/design class, and certain students were better at analizing visual works of art, and others at doing them. The next step (I hope I can do that, some day) will be that students can make some choices concerning the type of intelligence they want to focus.
A person doesn't learn in "eight ways" they learn in "one" or even two of the eight ways. The way which your mind works...it doesn't work in eight ways.
no, you're right, and I thinks he agrees with you. But to explain and teach people about various intelligences, I think it was important to cut it out roughly into these eight areas of intelligence, for them to understand the idea of not one, nut several ways to be intelligent. I don't believe either, that people learn in one way only. I personally think, that people each have their set of intelligence areas, which is easier for them to learn, and therefore have surden ways to easier understand and learn stuff.
He is saying we each learn differently some are visual some learn better by audio ...he isn't saying we learn in eight different ways we each learn individually in our own way.I about making a connection between teacher and student seeing what way fits them.Im sure you are not food at everything Some are good at math others are not.If we all learned the same way we all be genius
@gmccall22 "have to be thought out before executed physically" sounds like the process of making art, to me! Skill needs to be valued in the classroom- all kinds of skill! It gives people confidence and broadens their abilities and perspectives. Wonder why has it become more important to memorize things to pass tests than learn skills that will last a lifetime??? :/
Gardner is mistaken about limiting physical and biological science in. HS. A growing number of students will have little or no exposure after that, even iF they go on to college. I do agree with his emphasis on the scientific method as a pattern for logical thought and decision making. Unfortunately, "science" in many fields has become so politicized that honest inquiry is blocked by PC grant request review boards. he right about intellect. It's not what you have, but how you use it.
Such an interesting theory which is also realistic and i believe it could work in schools if given the chance ... by the way im in University in SA and we are being taught about this theory oh i actually have a test tomorrow regarding this theory 😅.
Ok but American public school system is horrible. I'm not saying it's because of this theory but come on, with all of our psychological studies and creativity can't we do better than China? or Norway? Maybe this theory is just a small piece of the puzzle of educational success and we are missing a very large piece that should be blatantly obvious?
Given that cliche response that just means you are. I rest my case. Anyway, congratulations, you just proved that there are Multiple Intelligences and without a doubt your Intrapersonal Intelligence is low.
rubicxcibur "intrapersonal intelligence...?" You just invented yet another kind of intelligence. You are an idiot. Your "Stupidity IQ" is quite awesome.
Work on your reading comprehension, I didn't invent anything. Intrapersonal Intelligence is one of the Multiple Intelligences mentioned, just like Kinesthetic Intelligence, which the anatomy professor (Marian Diamond) mentions in the video you posted. BTW, the guy you accuse as gay in one of your other videos is Asian (Oriental). Oriental culture is effeminate, like you. You seem to hate Blacks and gays and everyone else, because deep down inside you just hate yourself.
@LeeMIlby OK, you've mentioned three things: #1 "It would be better logically to go with a system proven to be a little better than the last" Of course you're right, but notice that evidence that MI is better than the current system is exactly what MI lacks. If there is evidence, where is it? There's plenty of evidence that Gardner has made money, but where are the improvements to the school system brought by MI?
the UK already does ALL of what he says: 1. in the final 2 years of school we choose only 3 subjects to study in depth 2. we have VERY long essay questions in exams some 38 marks (which you have t write 3 to 4 pages for) 3. We get feedback from every exam we take and we know where we stand compared to others
@terafrayne111 I wasn't trying to imply that you had. Sorry if it seemed so. But what do you think of the ethical/scientific status of Gardner's claims?
+Luke Alberti It's probably people who understand science who dislike it. They understand that there is no good evidence that MI is even a valid idea (much less that it could improve learning - it does not); and that Howard Gardner has made plenty of money off the schools selling his idea, but given the schools nothing of value.
***** Oh yes, a full AP, honors student going into aerospace and mechanical engineering on a merit-based scholarship did terribly in school. Go on, tell me more with your brilliant insight.
@@user-xw1yh2py4j For godsakes man, if you're that capable of understanding scientific knowledge then go read the research done on the multiple intelligence hypothesis. The results have been replicated several time by different research groups. There is no empirical evidence for Multiple intelligence; therefore, the multiple intelligence hypothesis is not a scientific theory.
@LeeMIlby ..Yes, thought out...Have you ever seen a playbook ie Football? Try looking in one, they're not much different from IQ tests...Reaching a goal is more important...
@LeeMIlby #3 "Not only is technique a problem, but so is content." Again your diagnosis of this problem is right on the money but, any implication that MI would, somehow, effectively address this issue runs counter to the facts we have. MI has been around for more than 25 years and it has no supporting evidence. Question: It seems you're (rightly) criticizing the use of unproven methods, so, do you think MI has evidence? If so, where? Or, are you advocating it without evidence? If so, why?
Videos like this present a serious ethical problem. It tells teachers to spend their valuable time using a concept (MI) that has never been shown to improve student learning. That MI has no support is widely known, and this information is easily available to any responsible, diligent adult. What's the difference between: a) recommending an unsupported concept to folks with real educational needs and, b) a doctor giving only sugar pills to a patient who could benefit from proven medicine?
@ChuckBart100 The current curriculum has been proven to fail in countless ways. Is it better to stick to a regiment that we know for certain fails than to try something that might actually work?
I can listen to this guy. He didn't bore me to tears because of the inflection of his voice. He makes excellent points also.
i agree. Also the pause when he ends a topic.
He's fraud
Excellent reminder of what teachers and schools should be doing!
Dam this guy should be secretary of education and try to fix our system
A mile wide and an inch deep. I have been saying this for years and I've never studied education until now. Kids only pay attention to pass the test, and don't deeply understand the material. Like he said, we need to have priorities and go deeply into them. 100% agree Mr. Gardner.
i wish i had a teacher like him earlier in life but im glad i found him now.
I’ve followed Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences with a passion for many years. I taught MIs to all of my students - children and adults, from the time there were only 7 intelligences in Gardner’s theory. I answer a out of questions on Quora about education. I believe in it because so much emphasis is on IQ in the USA, yet they can’t test anything outside the four corners of a piece of paper or a computer screen. Someone with Asperger Syndrome may score very high in an IQ test, but can never be happy in a relationship because they have neither Intrapersonal or Interpersonal intelligence. A gifted musician may have a low IQ score even though they have an abundance of musical talent although this is never assessed in an IQ test, although Musical Intelligence should be. It’s impossible within the set boundaries of a written test. The same goes for elite athletes. IQ tests are only valued by people who score highly. What students need to learn is how to work smarter with what they have. Forget bloody IQ tests! They shouldn’t define success as they are far too narrow.
Yes, the intelligentsia have monopolized the concept of IQ.
I 'so' support what Howard Gardner states here. Having been through rote learning, I still remembr so many facts, but in the long term they have not assisted me much in my chosen career, except to know who, when, why, how and what. Those areas that really impacted was when I got involved with my daughter's education. Those that took away the rote, limited the 'vastness', but brought it back to understanding, research and delivery of a results-orienetated assignment based in those two, with a well thought out assessment/criticism of the topic, self-assessed before handing in. This showed me she had truly thought it out, made a statement and made a commitment to the final view of her research work. And that is what is expected of us in the workforce - research, review, assess and most of all commit. And no, it's not just related to the office 'johnnies' - even those talented individuals witha more practical approach have developed, through a system of 'lateral learning and thinking', ways to effectively produce amazing results. So I agree, limit the extent of the knowledge and prevent the student from being overwhelmed. Rather bring it right back to deeper understanding of a few subjects, with a knowledge of expectation and a route of self-assessment before delivery. Produces a most amazing outcome in young people who are able to walk away from an education with their faith and trust in themselves and their abilities till intact.
This work has changed my life. I have integrated it into a book on Zen I wrote - "Spiritual, Not Religious: Sacred Tools for Modern Times". Gardner's work is "Sacred"
This is right up my alley thank you!
AskLewis Harrison You are obviously stupid for buying into this guy's idea.
People like this man speak a universal reason that makes great sense. It would be good to explain this to teens at high school at a time when they are thinking about how they compare to each other.
This may be RUclips's most brilliant eight minutes.
Amazing Man!!!! Schools should listen to him! This is what current ECE's are taught!
Every teacher and every class at our school utilizes Dr. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. We've made a few videos (that are posted on our RUclips page) that show examples of it in action.
Best 8 minutes of applicable truth I've found, second only to Ken Robinson's spiritual enema of public education.
I enjoyed this video. I am studying this in my college course for teaching. It is a real eye opener. Howard Gardner's theory is better understood for me by watching this video. Very useful information for teachers. :)
I've thought this for years! This is really affirming to hear about.
i find him so fascinating
SuperZvn me too
High school drop out here, GED all the way! If men like this are honestly heard we may be able to actually make a difference. I will post this link on my FB and hope all will do the same. I have an IQ (according to Mensa Int.) in the top two percent of the world (149). Had schools been like what this kind man has described, things may have gone differently for me. Kudos, my friend, may success find you wherever you go!
I think the idea of MI is empirically shown to be true. I think the problem starts when we conclude that it is telling us something about how we need to teach when I think the reality is it's telling us something about what should be taught to each individual. We have this system in the U.S. where the only way we ever think you should live a decent life is if you move to the top. We refuse to see the dignity of traditional blue collar and hands on trades and now we make sure these people can't even make a living with crappy wages and no beneftits. So, we now feel it is our responsibility to teach everyone the same curriculum that will get them into college. The real conclusion for me behind the concept of MI (which again to me is empirical) is that people are not the same and should be treated differently in teaching but maybe in what they will be most adept at learning and doing in life. You can't be a good woodworker through lectures--it necessitates hands on and many people are not great at that (although we'd never call them stupid). But if you're a kinesthetic learner forget differential equations--it simply isn't going to happen. Certain domains DEMAND certain ways of thinking. We must face that. This new stuff is one reason American kids get into STEM programs and get wiped out. They can't deal with the material because they were never suited for it in the first place and were being told that "they are the center" and that they somehow shouldn't have to do hard stuff like memorize and take good notes. Then comes something like anatomy in pre-med or any hard science program where the prof barely even knows you're alive and you need tons of memorization and the ability to sit through a boring lecture and learn, especially in the first several years, and they crash and burn. But now, because they were never allowed to pursue younger what they really would have been good at they have nothing (except of course a lot of student debt)..
+Duane Bidoux YES!!!!
+Duane Bidoux Actually, there's no good empirical evidence that supports MI. Though folks might want him to, this emperor just has no clothes.
+Duane Bidoux Yes!!! Yes!!! Yes!!! A thousand times yes!!! I did horrible in school. I have learned SO much more through reall life experience.
+Duane Bidoux Yes!!! Yes!!! Yes!!! A thousand times yes!!! I did horrible in school. I have learned SO much more through reall life experience.
It's obviously a valid concept, and acceptable, if not bound by the same tautological conceptions that IQ rests on. There is no fair reason to assume intelligence is 'constant', 'general', or 'unmalleable'. Those are convenient assumptions that are adopted by proponents of IQ, and in the interest of living up to the Kantian paradigm of 'pure reason'. In effect, we've created a glorified short-term memory test and call it an 'intelligence test'. Many people are happy with it, but that doesn't mean it's a kosher test. Most people are unexceptional, and would rather take an inflated number, than have to show for it. Personally, I begin looking at education/expertise level, as the first prerequisite to high human intelligence, than intuition; the level of fluency(s) within that education/expertise level, which determines at what rate and what distance ideas come together, and is the first source of generative thinking (not 'fluid IQ' as IQ proponents say), then I'll look at IQ.
As much as this theory is supported or not, this video helped me to understand some points in MI theory!
So you dont think that someone can be very intelligent in certain area and not very much in another one?
But, come on. Haven´t you noticed that you are smarter than other people (family, friends) in a certain way, lets say, numerically, and they are smarter than you in another way, lets say, visually? I have.
Very nice concentrated dose of essential 'wisdom'! Thank you to Doctor Gardner and Edutopia. One can only hope that this reaches the teachers and administrators in significant-enough numbers to make a difference.
A theory which every teacher/educator should know & understand.
Words of Wisdom!
Chryll Rajh. BEd. ECDFS. UWI. Year 3 Student.I believe Mr. Gardner is on point when he relates that learning is evolving in the many Intelligences that one aspires to use as a learning tool for lifelong learners.
What a brilliant mind. No doubt the negative comments to Gardners message illustrates perfectly the missed opportunity for people to have improved their interlect under a multiple intelligence learning system.
This is an excellent explanation, also Dr. Gardener has a very easy-listening voice.
i find the theory of multiple intelligence very convincing based on my learning pattern.. it has put things in place in my life.. in the past.. as to why i used to think in a particular manner at some time and differently in another..
Fantastic! that's how teachers should be thinking and planning learning.
Hats off for this man! you are way ahead of your time Mr, the world is yet to catch up
I love this. I fully support and agree with the logic. This should be shown to every prospective teacher and then re-shown every year to remind them, that children are not all the same in the way they learn and the teachers themselves with be challenged to think outside the box to offer the best education possible to our children.
Lol! Good for you. I am a teacher. Tomorrow, I will teach a lesson about Multiple Intelligences. Gardner developed the theory of MI in the early 1980s and has worked on them for a long time. Recently, he has been developing different types of "minds" such as the ethical mind, the creative mind, etc and what he would do to education, etc, if he was a policy maker. Anyway, best wishes to getting your teacher to teach Multiple Intelligences.
One of the most significant theories in modern history, and one of the foundations of our innovative music program from Vienna!
I read and learned a lot about MI. The video tells more about MI but also about Howard Gardner. It's interesting what he tells you in this youtube-clip.
I am a neuroeducator and psychopedagogue, I deeply believe in changing the educational system for one more adapted to the multiplicity of cognitive and motor skills in children, in my country Colombia, and LATAM, I believe that our greatest challenge has been political commitment
There is something in his voice or the way he speaks that is quite attractive (for lack of better word I can think of as English isn't my first language). You just want to keep listening him and it doesn't feel tiring
It has been interesting to revise information on multiple intelligence and I think working on multiple intelligence is very vital in educational system, as all types of learners are activated in the process of the lesson.. What has been important in this video of cource is an assessment question, reflection on providing feedback and how to account for all kids abilities that involve multiple intelligence and its different range of approaches for teaching
@chrismca Actually, there are many studies that show that students achieve more and they keep their interest in learning. Learning becomes meaningful while the learner takes an active part in their learning. Why limit a person's way of learning when there are multiple ways each individual learns. Also, brain imaging shows that more areas of the brain are active when engaging different intelligences.
is a great topic and very interesting and lot of information as well too. enjoyed it alot.
the most useful 7:54 minutes of my life !!!
the problem I have with multiple intelligences, is that its a theory. Not in 20 years and more, was it proven the be correct or better than just plain simple IQ. That's the problem. I wish, that was not the case
As a 58yo male that just finished his masters degree in marine biology, I whole heartedly agree with the premise that the student must be able to recreate in his mind the ideas in order to really learn them. An fine example of this was an animal physiology class I had in which the exams were a series of "essay questions". I knew that I had to prepare to answer the questions in that fashion. While the material was quite detail oriented, I was constantly digesting it in a more wholistic manner, knowing that I needed to understand the way in which the pieces fit together. It didn't hurt that I had an truly extraordinary professor. My comment on the course evaluation was " the most efficient and effective delivery of course material in my academic career".
Many other ideas in the video that are important and pertinent as I embark on my instructor journey
That is epic Mr. Dr. Professor Gardner
this is marvelous
OMG! I love the way he thinks!
Me tooo!!!
Sterling explanation!
Watching this in 2020 and I couldn't agree more!!
The student has to see the Value of what they are learning, which creates an excitement in them to learn more and participate more in order to learn more .
I am Mensa member and I can tell you something honestly: I have been told many times that I am smart and stuff like that. that helped me maybe to learn SOMETHING faster,but all of my achievements I attribute 95% to emotional and social intelligence.So that is the MOST important of all -in my humble opinion.
I like this guy the way he explains the subject..
Very good teaching ,
Am Raphael nyakenyanya, the fact that one can be born intelligent we need to develop our way of thinking by learning more
This video made my day. ♥
anybody else notice how window it was outside?
@pseudosimplicity Are you saying that these studies show these good outcomes because of the use of Gardner's ideas? I've looked through the literature pretty thoroughly, and I can't find any studies that allow a reader to conclude this. If you have the references, I'd be very glad to read the studies or anything you think might help me learn more about this. Thanks
The idea of publicly exhibiting multiple intelligence's, as Gardner suggests, is cultural in nature. Perhaps there are schools and environments where children can utilize, nurture, and exhibit their intelligence's. This is a reflection of Gardner's 2009 perspectives which have evolved since. Nice comprehensive presentation.
I agree with meeting the child where he/she is in order for them to want to learn and be assessed based on the way they learn............
great video ....I'm going to the site now
The heart of my educational theory.
Very informative thank you
This is true and if teachers realized this theory and put it into practice the most learners could benefit from schooling.
brilliant speech
I hope such education can become reality
@LeeMIlby I think you're 100% right in that there is much to improve in our current system. But, the question is: Do we replace the status quo with things shown to work (e.g., class sizes of 15, better trained teachers, - see the research), or with pseudo-science like MI?
See Michael Shermer's book "Why People Believe Weird Things" It has a list of qualities of pseudoscience. Make a list of how many of these qualities MI has. I honestly think you'll be surprised.
Cheers
@chrismca
...Because, like i said, it's common sense. Unless you disagree that people are all individuals and all different and learn things in different ways?
Howard Gardner for the minister of education.
Teel202- I chose this video because it covered the multiple intelligence theory covered in class
He is right. I got zero mathematical logic, but do really well in other fields. I suffered for this at school and it seemed like nothing else matters only MATHS. Mathematics was above any other subject. Very wrong.
With what Blayne states isn't it the pen that is mightier than the sword. We need the future to be with brains and not brawn. Fund schools and not war.
hay..use subtitle. He's so good
@LeeMIlby I don't want you to repeat yourself or help me, just think about something honestly.
Common sense says that multi-ton objects won't fly or float, but science gives us planes and ships that do. Common sense says that inoculations won't work, yet this science has saved millions of lives.
As to schooling, common sense tells us that a child suffering from hyperactivity will not be helped by a stimulant, but science has shown us that they are.
Isn't science is the far better guide?
Hairstyle on point
Lol
The geniuses always have perfect hair
THUMBS UP IF U STUDY THIS IN THE PHILIPPINES!
I DO
Ashley Bila I DO TOO!
How do we teach professionals the skill/ability to recognise various subtle intelligences? Then apply that to planning for the classroom? Seems like a logistical nightmare to me.
Isn't that the key? Being able to recognise a students intellectual strengths and then apply techniques or practices to foster that students improvement in learning?
+Steven Tyers You don't. MI is just a basket of airy, untestable principles.
+Steven Tyers Perhaps its about informing professionals about the ways in which they can be offering the same content in a variety of ways to allow for the differing intellectual strengths.
One way for me has been to give students opportunities to work with different intelligences in the classroom. I taught an art/design class, and certain students were better at analizing visual works of art, and others at doing them.
The next step (I hope I can do that, some day) will be that students can make some choices concerning the type of intelligence they want to focus.
David Ramirez Larsen "certain students were better at analizing "
lol k.
The Alternative Hypothesis You don´t believe me?
A person doesn't learn in "eight ways" they learn in "one" or even two of the eight ways. The way which your mind works...it doesn't work in eight ways.
no, you're right, and I thinks he agrees with you. But to explain and teach people about various intelligences, I think it was important to cut it out roughly into these eight areas of intelligence, for them to understand the idea of not one, nut several ways to be intelligent.
I don't believe either, that people learn in one way only. I personally think, that people each have their set of intelligence areas, which is easier for them to learn, and therefore have surden ways to easier understand and learn stuff.
He is saying we each learn differently some are visual some learn better by audio ...he isn't saying we learn in eight different ways we each learn individually in our own way.I about making a connection between teacher and student seeing what way fits them.Im sure you are not food at everything Some are good at math others are not.If we all learned the same way we all be genius
Thank you!
@LeeMIlby ..Interesting piece of info..Thanks...I agree with Gardner all the way. The traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow...
@gmccall22
"have to be thought out before executed physically" sounds like the process of making art, to me! Skill needs to be valued in the classroom- all kinds of skill! It gives people confidence and broadens their abilities and perspectives. Wonder why has it become more important to memorize things to pass tests than learn skills that will last a lifetime??? :/
Very good watch,
The link from my Technology in the Classroom online course to this video did not work. Thankfully, I just searched You Tube and found it right here!
Gardner is mistaken about limiting physical and biological science in. HS. A growing number of students will have little or no exposure after that, even iF they go on to college. I do agree with his emphasis on the scientific method as a pattern for logical thought and decision making. Unfortunately, "science" in many fields has become so politicized that honest inquiry is blocked by PC grant request review boards. he right about intellect. It's not what you have, but how you use it.
Such an interesting theory which is also realistic and i believe it could work in schools if given the chance ... by the way im in University in SA and we are being taught about this theory oh i actually have a test tomorrow regarding this theory 😅.
Thank you
Great Job
Ok but American public school system is horrible. I'm not saying it's because of this theory but come on, with all of our psychological studies and creativity can't we do better than China? or Norway?
Maybe this theory is just a small piece of the puzzle of educational success and we are missing a very large piece that should be blatantly obvious?
rubicxcibur What made you conclude that my high IQ has not done me any good? You're an idiot.
Given that cliche response that just means you are. I rest my case. Anyway, congratulations, you just proved that there are Multiple Intelligences and without a doubt your Intrapersonal Intelligence is low.
rubicxcibur "intrapersonal intelligence...?" You just invented yet another kind of intelligence. You are an idiot. Your "Stupidity IQ" is quite awesome.
Work on your reading comprehension, I didn't invent anything. Intrapersonal Intelligence is one of the Multiple Intelligences mentioned, just like Kinesthetic Intelligence, which the anatomy professor (Marian Diamond) mentions in the video you posted. BTW, the guy you accuse as gay in one of your other videos is Asian (Oriental). Oriental culture is effeminate, like you. You seem to hate Blacks and gays and everyone else, because deep down inside you just hate yourself.
rubicxcibur What the fuck is this Asian video you are talking about??? You don't make any sense -- typical black.
@LeeMIlby OK, you've mentioned three things: #1 "It would be better logically to go with a system proven to be a little better than the last" Of course you're right, but notice that evidence that MI is better than the current system is exactly what MI lacks. If there is evidence, where is it? There's plenty of evidence that Gardner has made money, but where are the improvements to the school system brought by MI?
the UK already does ALL of what he says:
1. in the final 2 years of school we choose only 3 subjects to study in depth
2. we have VERY long essay questions in exams some 38 marks (which you have t write 3 to 4 pages for)
3. We get feedback from every exam we take and we know where we stand compared to others
he does show alot of opions on his lecture here though.
holy shit, i need to show this to my teachers :O
Howard un gran cognitivo de USA!
Smart man
@terafrayne111 I wasn't trying to imply that you had. Sorry if it seemed so.
But what do you think of the ethical/scientific status of Gardner's claims?
I came here typing multipel intelligence in youtube box and knowing psychology no one could care less how I got here.
Very interesting!
Who in the hell disliked this?
+Luke Alberti Someone who had their ego hurt because they realized that analytical intelligence is not the only type.
+Luke Alberti It's probably people who understand science who dislike it. They understand that there is no good evidence that MI is even a valid idea (much less that it could improve learning - it does not); and that Howard Gardner has made plenty of money off the schools selling his idea, but given the schools nothing of value.
Christopher McAuliffe Or perhaps he is actually addressing an issue that society has shunned, due to its tendency to label people on a whim.
***** Oh yes, a full AP, honors student going into aerospace and mechanical engineering on a merit-based scholarship did terribly in school. Go on, tell me more with your brilliant insight.
@@user-xw1yh2py4j For godsakes man, if you're that capable of understanding scientific knowledge then go read the research done on the multiple intelligence hypothesis. The results have been replicated several time by different research groups. There is no empirical evidence for Multiple intelligence; therefore, the multiple intelligence hypothesis is not a scientific theory.
Good Points!
@LeeMIlby ..Yes, thought out...Have you ever seen a playbook ie Football? Try looking in one, they're not much different from IQ tests...Reaching a goal is more important...
very useful
@LeeMIlby #3 "Not only is technique a problem, but so is content." Again your diagnosis of this problem is right on the money but, any implication that MI would, somehow, effectively address this issue runs counter to the facts we have.
MI has been around for more than 25 years and it has no supporting evidence.
Question: It seems you're (rightly) criticizing the use of unproven methods, so, do you think MI has evidence? If so, where? Or, are you advocating it without evidence? If so, why?
1:20 - To document the fact? How the hell can you "document" anything when you oppose any kind of standardized testing?
Videos like this present a serious ethical problem. It tells teachers to spend their valuable time using a concept (MI) that has never been shown to improve student learning. That MI has no support is widely known, and this information is easily available to any responsible, diligent adult. What's the difference between: a) recommending an unsupported concept to folks with real educational needs and, b) a doctor giving only sugar pills to a patient who could benefit from proven medicine?
@ChuckBart100
The current curriculum has been proven to fail in countless ways. Is it better to stick to a regiment that we know for certain fails than to try something that might actually work?
Ωραίος άνθρωπος!