This essay discusses the status of multiple intelligences (MI) theory as a scientific theory by addressing three issues: the empirical evidence Gardner used to establish MI theory, the methodology he employed to validate MI theory, and the purpose or function of MI theory.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsM. (1993). An empirical investigation of domain-specific theories of preschool children's cognitive abilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tufts University, Medford, MA.
2.
CampbellL., CampbellB., & DickinsonD. (1996). Teaching and learning through multiple intelligences.Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
3.
ChenJ. Q. (1993, April). Working with at-risk children through the identification and nurturance of their strengths. Paper presented at the biennial conference of the Society for Research of Child Development, New Orleans, LA.
4.
ChenJ. Q., & GardnerH. (1997). Alternative assessment from a multiple intelligences theoretical perspective. In FlanaganD. P., GenshaftJ. L., & HarrisonP. L. (Eds.), Beyond traditional intellectual assessment: Contemporary and emerging theories, tests, and issues (pp. 105–121). New York: Guilford.
5.
ChenJ. Q., KrechevskyM., & ViensJ. (1998). Building on children's strengths: The experience of Project Spectrum.New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
GardnerH. (1993a). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (10th-anniversary ed.) New York: Basic Books.
7.
GardnerH. (1993b). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice.New York: Basic Books.
8.
GardnerH. (1999). Intelligence refrained: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century.New York: Basic Books.
9.
GardnerH. (2000). The disciplined mind: Beyond facts and standardized tests, the K—12 education that every child deserves.New York: Penguin Books.
10.
HsuehW. C. (2003, April). The development of a MI assessment for young children in Taiwan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
11.
KornhaberM. (1999). Multiple intelligences theory in practice (pp. 179–191). In BlockJ., EversonS. T., & GuskeyT. R. (Eds.), Comprehensive school reform: A program perspective.Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishers.
12.
KornhaberM., VeenemaS., & FierrosE. (2003). Multiple intelligences: Best ideas from research and practice.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
KuhnT. (1962). The structure of scientific revolution.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
LazearD. (1994). Seven pathways of learning: Teaching students and parents about multiple intelligences.Tucson, AZ: Zephyr.
16.
LoseeJ. (1980). A historical introduction to the philosophy of science (2nd ed.). Oxford: University Press.
17.
McNameeG., ChenJ. Q., MasurA., McCrayJ., & MelendezL. (2002). Assessing and teaching diverse learners. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Educators, 23(3), 275–282.
18.
New City School. (1994). Multiple intelligences: Teaching for success.St. Louis, MO: Author.
19.
PopperK. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery.London: Hutchison.
20.
ShearerB. (1996). The MIDAS: professional manual.Kent, OH: MI Research and Consulting.
21.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22.
YoongS. (2001, November). Multiple intelligences: A construct validation of the MIDAS Scale in Malaysia. Paper presented at the International Conference on Measurement and Evaluation in Education, Penang, Malaysia.
