Gardener's Multiple Intelligences

P=Plus (All the benefits of the ideas presented in the readings)	M=Minus (All of the dangers/problems associated with the ideas in the readings)	I = Interesting (Elements that are ambiguous, difficult to make a decision on or elements that are outstanding and work)
I agree; that when we are born we have a range of multiple intelligences rather than a blank slate that could be trained anything. So, I agree with Gardner, that all eight intelligences are needed to live life well. It is good for learners and teachers to engage and connect with all intelligences from a holistic point of view and to be able to understand that all learners have strengths and weaknesses within these multiple intelligences. Teachers need to attend to all intelligences and develop new approaches to the classroom to meet the needs of a range of learners.	Gardner made the comment that these multiple intelligences were quite independent of each other. I disagree with this comment because I believe we learn by using many different intelligences at one time. For instance, when a lecturer is speaking and showing a powerpoint we are learning on both a visual and auditory platform which I believe enhances the opportunity to comprehend the content. Further on in the reading, he then describes that multiple intelligences “rarely operate independently. They are used at the same time and tend to complement each other as people develop skills or solve problems” (Gardner). This I agree with.	We have a unique blend of intelligences and we are required to cater and take advantage of all these intelligences in one classroom. Teachers can revise and reflect on their curriculum assessment and pedagogical strategies. It enables teachers to learn about their classroom dynamics and about their learners who are ultimately the fundamental key to teaching effectively.
This theory has made educators at least question their teaching practices and compelled them to revise their methods of assessing and pedagogical practices within the curriculum. They have questioned and there is “success in implementing practices that attend to the multiple intelligences theory.” Curriculum and assessment should not be rigid for multiple intelligences practices to work.	Robert Sternberg (researcher debating Gardener’s theory) does not look strongly at the particular material that the person is processing. Instead he looks to what he calls the componential, experiential and contextual facets of intelligence. I believe that it is still important to have valid and sound material to teach, this is where PCK takes form. Learners want to be interested by the material which enhances engagement and motivation within the classroom.	What is an intelligence? 'An intelligence' had to satisfy a range of criteria and must include, as a prerequisite, the ability to resolve 'genuine problems or difficulties' (ibid.: 60) within certain cultural settings. Making judgements about this was, however, 'reminiscent more of an artistic judgement than of a scientific assessment' (ibid.: 62). Who decides what an intelligence is? It seems that multiple intelligences rely on judgements rather than specific empirical evidence. There is not a properly worked-through set of tests to identify and measure the different intelligences.
I agree that educators should use multiple intelligences (MI) as a tool for promoting and encouraging a high standard of work within the classroom. The more students we can engage by connecting with MI’s the more high order thinking succumbs rather than using the theory has as an end in and of itself.	Sternberg argued that “musical intelligence and bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence are better approached as talents (they do not normally need to adapt to life demands).” I believe people to learn by rhythm and rhyme and by movement. I remember in science class we used to sing the mineral song to indentify certain minerals. Also, many people learn by physically doing and applying a theory or concept to a real-life situation.
I agree, that rather having eight intelligences to teach as been a constraint, it can be ultimately freeing to have a choice and to try mobilising different teaching styles.

 Simone Benoit

P=Plus (All the benefits of the ideas presented in the readings)	M=Minus (All of the dangers/problems associated with the ideas in the readings)	I = Interesting (Elements that are ambiguous, difficult to make a decision on or elements that are outstanding and work)
Firstly I agree with the main premise that a child can be at different stages of intelligence.  When a child comes to school certain areas of their intelligence may be higher as they have had more input to that area from their home culture.  One child may be more musically inclined than other child who has a higher reading skill	I question the idea about moral judgement coming into this theory as you can be a highly intelligent person who makes a bad moral judgement more due to an emotional decision rather than intellectual decision.	If I understand correctly is he saying that people with only base intelligence are the ones who can get led astray (amoral) if not properly educated.
Agree that a person will use a number of different intelligences at once to learn and solve problems	Howard Gardner even says “We must figure out how intelligence and morality can work together”, so even to him this is a grey area.	If we teach based on his Seven Intelligences theory we would allow children to think more freely as they are not constrained to one mode of thinking.  We need to allow them to grow their seven areas of intelligence which will make them greater human beings with better moral judgement.
Agree that if we are educated in all the intelligences we will have a better life as we are better rounded individuals.	Spiritual and Existential Intelligence – how is it measureable?  How can general education cater for this – a Catholic School can with religious study and provide spiritual, but not everyone goes to a Catholic School.	Moral Intelligence – if we are in touch with our seven intelligences and are using them to a greater capacity is moral intelligence a natural extension of them.  We are highly thinking individuals and from this we achieve moral intelligence?
Agree that education needs to be more flexible in approaching these learning needs.	Existential Intelligence would have to be taught through philosophy as an example.  But, this may not be seen as a core need and therefore not encouraged in teaching.
	The point is well taken in how do you measure these intelligences as they are more subjective, so therefore how can you really prove them?	I can see the point of Naturalist Intelligence because it is from cultural values which can be somewhat measureable. Does this relate to social/situational orientation to learning?

Referring links:
Learning Theories - what do they mean?