Few ideas in psychology have travelled as far beyond the laboratory as the theory of multiple intelligences. But the more popular an idea becomes, the more it gets simplified, and sometimes distorted. Let us look at what Howard Gardner actually said, what he did not say, and why our site still finds his theory useful.
Where the theory came from
Howard Gardner, a psychologist at Harvard University, worked with two very different groups: gifted children and adults who had suffered brain injuries. He saw that brain damage could take away one ability and spare others, and that some children were exceptional in one field but ordinary in the rest. Both observations made him doubt that intelligence is a single thing.
In 1983 he described seven intelligences in “Frames of Mind”. In the 1990s he added an eighth, the naturalist intelligence, and explained it in “Intelligence Reframed” (1999). Gardner defines intelligence as the ability to solve problems or create products that are valued in a culture. So composing a melody, building a sturdy house or settling a quarrel fairly counts too, not only answering test questions.
Eight criteria and eight intelligences
Gardner proposed eight criteria that a candidate intelligence should meet:
- it can be lost or spared on its own after a brain injury;
- it appears in exceptional form in prodigies and in savants with a striking one-sided talent;
- it has core operations of its own, such as sensing pitch and rhythm in music;
- it has its own path of development, from beginner to master;
- it has roots in human evolution;
- experimental psychology supports it;
- psychological test results support it;
- it can be recorded in a symbol system: letters, musical notes, numbers, maps.
The eight intelligences are:
- linguistic — words, reading, storytelling;
- logical-mathematical — numbers, patterns, cause and effect;
- spatial — images, shapes, maps;
- bodily-kinaesthetic — skilful use of the body and hands;
- musical — rhythm, melody, sound;
- interpersonal — understanding other people and working with them;
- intrapersonal — knowing one's own feelings, goals and limits;
- naturalist — recognising and classifying living things and features of nature.
Every person has all eight, in a combination of their own.
What the theory is not
- It is not learning styles. An intelligence is an ability to work with a kind of content, such as sounds, words or people; a “learning style” is a supposed preference for how to take in information (“I learn best with my eyes”). Gardner himself wrote in 2013 that the two should not be confused, and research has not shown that matching lessons to such a style improves learning.
- It is not a label. “She is a musical child” may sound kind, but it can close other doors. Gardner warns against labelling children: a profile changes with experience, teaching and opportunity.
- It is not a test. There is no well-validated, reliable test that measures eight separate intelligences.
- It is not a rejection of research on general ability. Tests of general ability predict school results reasonably well, and people who do well on one kind of mental task tend to do well on others — psychologists call this the general factor g. The theory does not cancel these findings; it stresses that school tests capture only part of what people can do.
What critics say — and why teachers still use it
As a scientific theory, it remains debated. In a critical review in 2006, Waterhouse concluded that there is little empirical evidence that the intelligences exist as separate abilities. In the same year Visser, Ashton and Vernon tested people on tasks for each intelligence and found that most of the “thinking” ones — linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial and others — were linked to the general factor g. So they are less independent than the theory suggests.
Why do teachers still find it useful? It changes how they see a class:
- several entry points into a topic: a lesson about rivers can include a story, measurements, a map, a song and a group discussion, so more pupils find a way in;
- noticing strengths that school marks miss;
- a broader view of success: a skilled carpenter, nurse or musician is using intelligence too.
These are teaching benefits, not proof that the theory is right.
How Zehnhoi Gunogun uses the theory
For us, multiple intelligences are a shared language: a way for parents, teachers and children to notice strengths and talk about them. In practice we:
- gather observations from several sources: parents, the teacher and the child or teenager;
- compare their views and look for patterns, not for one “main” intelligence;
- never turn results into a number, a ranking or a verdict on a child's future, and review them as the child grows;
- remember that questions about learning difficulties or development need a specialist assessment, which our questionnaires do not replace.
At home, notice what your child chooses freely, offer varied experiences and use a strength as a bridge to a weaker area: a child who loves stories can turn a maths problem into a story. The aim is not to fit a child into one “type” but to widen the paths along which they can grow.