MI Theory, Differences and a General Approach

From Howard Gardner’s Intelligence Reframed

I regard MI theory as a engine endorsement of three key propositions: We are not all the same; we do not all have the same kind of minds (that is, we are not all distinct points on a single bell curve ; and education works most effectively if these differences are taken into account rather than denied or ignored.

But he does outline a general approach for aiding student’s understanding that fits with his theory (albeit making with the caveat that there is no one right way of implementing this):

Roughly, this is as follows:

1. Stress that understanding is a challenge & that different means to reach it.
2. Entry points to engage students (some will fit class culture/topic better than others)
3. • Narrational (e.g. story of Darwin’s voyage)
   • Quantitative (e.g. how do species vary in different areas in number, size)
   • Logical (e.g. if there are too many birds, variations among them then those that survive best will flourish)
   • Foundational (e.g. where do we come from)
   • Aesthetic (e.g. pictures of evolved art, Darwin’s interest in the “tangled bank of nature”)
   • Hands on (e.g. breeding generations of fruit flies, Dawkins)
   • Social (e.g. give group a problem – what happens to a species when climate changes)
4. Telling Analogies
5. • e,g, characters evolve in a book, themes in a fugue evolve, societies evolve
   • get students to identify what features are what
6. Approaching the Core
7. • Key Point = “A concept can be well understood – and give rise to convincing performances of understanding – only if a person represents the core features of that concept in certain ways.”
   • So:
   • • Need to spend sufficient time on a topic
     • Need to portray it in different ways
     • Need to use match ways with specific intelligences, skills and interests.