Do you agree with this approach?
What MI type are you?
Take a test
How do you like the result? Do you feel it being more or less objective?
Howard Gardner's Site
Q. Can you summarize “multiple intelligences’ (MI) theory briefly?
"I developed MI theory in the late 1970s and early 1980s. In doing so, I drew on evidence from a
wide variety of sources, disciplines, and research tradition. I presented the theory for the first time in 1983, in my book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.
The theory is a critique of the standard psychological view of intellect: that there is a single intelligence, adequately measured by IQ or other short answer tests. Instead, on the basis of evidence from disparate sources, I claim that human beings have a number of relatively discrete intellectual capacities. IQ tests assess linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligence, and sometimes spatial
intelligence; and they are a reasonably good predictor of who will do well in a 20th (NOT 21st)
century secular school.
But humans have several other significant intellectual capacities. In my original book, I described
musical intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, interpersonal (social) intelligence, and
intrapersonal intelligence (understanding of self). A few years later, I added the naturalist
intelligence: the capacity to make consequential distinctions in the world of nature. I also have
speculated about two other possible intelligences: existential intelligence, the intelligence of ‘big
questions’; and pedagogical intelligence, the intelligence that allows human beings to convey
knowledge or skills to other persons."
http://howardgardner01.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/faq_march2013.pdf
Bonus
This does not really belong here, nevertheless, I could not resist.
First try yourself, than laugh.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/robinedds/its-thanksgiving-so-we-asked-some-brits-to-label-the-us-stat
http://www.buzzfeed.com/summeranne/americans-try-to-place-european-countries-on-a-map
I agree with an approach which recognizes different types of intelligences. Very important.
OdpovědětVymazatI don't think the test is accurate to the same degree with everybody, the answers might be based on incorrect view of oneself and or are easily just selected based on how one would LIKE to see oneself, but generally if one knows him or herself really well, then I think the test can tell us a lot and to a high degree of accuracy.
I seem to be stronger in Linguistic, Logical and Intrapersonal Intelligence; & I seem to be weaker in Kinaesthetic, Musical and Naturalistic Intelligence, according to this MI Test. I do agree with the results and I am happy about my strengths and weaknesses in intelligence.
More detail here: http://prntscr.com/27kscc
I also remembered I saw a documentary about 7 people who were tested for Intelligences; these people were top of their disciplines such as art, music, physics and so on. These people were tested in many disciplines and the results were fascinating! Is a musician more intelligent than a quantum physicist or an IQ expert? Find out for yourselves here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEePiqHhS-k
About the bonus. Is that a typo? :P (than)
Havránková H.
OdpovědětVymazatI have done such a test before, so the results did not suprise me. I am musical, linguistic and intrapersonal type, on the other hand I am very weak in numbers. I know that about myself.
The test seems to be objectve for me, because I know what I can expect from myself. However, these tests in general does not seem very objective. It really depends on many factors. The mood, time of the day, attitude of the respondent...
Lenka Čízová
OdpovědětVymazatYes, I definitely agree with the Multiple Intelligences approach.
According to this test my prevailing intellingences are Linguistic, Naturalistic and Intrapersonal and I agree with this result.
But what is quite surprising is that according to this test I have quite a high Kinaesthetic intelligence and I do not think it is true.
In my opinion this test can give us a general notion of our prevailing intelligences but if we want to learn more we should take more elaborate tests.
I would say this test is rather less objective.
I agree with this theory.
OdpovědětVymazatMy prevailing intelligences are naturalistic, intrapersonal and interpersonal. What surprised me was that I have a week linguistic inteligence, but in the other test, the score of my linguistic intelligence was high.
I think that these tests can never be objective because it is only me who is responding and people tend to have mispresented conceptions about themselves which they cannot avoid and that is why there is also need some specialist who would conduct another tests and makeing the results much more objective.
"week linguistic inteligence" - did you spell weak & intelligence wrong on purpose? If so - nice joke Anna :D
VymazatWhere is the "like" button? :D
VymazatNikola Špiritová
OdpovědětVymazatI agree with the Multiple Intelligences approach.
According to this test my prevailing intelligences are Kinaesthetic, Musical, Intrapersonal and Visual. I agree with results because I more or less know myself.
If it is objective or subjective. I would say that it is subjective because if someone gave me some of those questions when I was angry or tired or...whatever..I would probably answer differently and the results would not be the same as they are now.
Kleinová
OdpovědětVymazatI absolutely agree with the MI theory.
According to this test I seem to be strong in Naturalistic and Musical intelligence which kinda surprised me, but I was really tired while taking the test...
I don't think the test can be 100% objective, people often have a certain image of themselves in mind and it is not always true. Our mood or a wish to get a good result can also affect the result.
Michelová.
OdpovědětVymazatI have to agree with the MI theory. The test didn´t surprise me even though I wasn´t always absolutely sure about the answer.
For me, the test is rather subjective than objective. I was the only one who was responding the questions and I might appear different to others.
Vášová
OdpovědětVymazatI think that the questions in test were so obvious that if you wanted to get into a particular result you could do it easily. I had low level in logical intelligence and I think the fact that I don´t like math does not necessarily mean I´m not good at it. However the MI theory is better than the other theories because it works with a combination of intelligencies and not with just one intelligence.
Very true,
Vymazatlike other similar tests one can so easily drive the answers towards a desired result.
Just as one can easily drive a temperament test towards choleric result, one can easily drive this test towards all intelligences, just answer all questions accordingly...
I am not really fan of these kinds of tests. This one told me what I actually thought about myself, so it should be objective, but I dont think so. Every human being is so different that none test is able to specify person. For example here I should be Naturalistic, but it is not true at all and I dont think they know more about me than myself.
OdpovědětVymazatI agree with MI theory. The result doesn´t surprise me at all. Im naturalistic and interpersonal and the lowest result was from logical part, which I expected because I can´t operate with numbers at all since I was at primary school. I think it is quite subjective test and the results are reliable.
OdpovědětVymazatDynda
OdpovědětVymazatThe test told me that my highest intelligencies are Visual/Spatial, Logical, Intrapersonal, Interpersonal.
According to these results I would say that the test is more or less objectives because I agree with its results.
And while I do agree with Multiple Intelligences theory on its basis I don't think such differentiation is correct. All of the intelligencies/subjects are intertwined with each other not a standalone intelligencies.
Marketa Fortova
OdpovědětVymazatI definitelly agree with MI approach. This test and its results were merely a surprise for me because I know myself. The question what would be the result if my closest friends or family filled out this test. My highest score was in interpersonal sphere. No surprise for me I like people I like working with people, but my linguistic was the second best sphere, which I am surprised, because I seem to have no luck in learning other languages than English :)
Well, I think it's true that there is several types of intelligences like social, visual, musical...but then there's the ACTUAL intelligence and that is the one which really matters. Nee, I'm only joking :) I totally agree with MI theory. In the article above there is mentioned how the old IQ test belong to the previous century and I agree with that statement very much. Because before it was actually important to know math and have like logical thinking to do office job, but thanks to IT - it is not that necessary today, on the other hand skills needed to get along with people and be a good team member are more important today in our diverse society. So that’s that.
OdpovědětVymazatThe test results told me that my highest intelligences are Interpersonal and Linguistic, the lowest was logical intelligence and I would say that’s about right - I do not try to calculate my actions, I rather try to do whatever feels right. However it is obvious that the test has its flaws.
Kuzmová
OdpovědětVymazatI agree with the MI theory. It is important to know it about ourselves and our students - it explains so much and it can help us to understand why is somethong easier or difficult for us.
The result was not suprising for me. And that's why I think it is more subjective.
I agree with MI theory, but I think that all types of Intelligence are connected. My results were not a big surprise, my best are intrapersonal and kinaesthetic. The test is easy to fool though, so anyone could cheat to be as he wants to, even not intentionally.
OdpovědětVymazat