Both the special education and gifted education literature call for a differentiated curriculum to cater for the wide range of student differences in any classroom. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences was integrated with the revised Bloom's taxonomy to provide a planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Teachers’ progress in using the tool to plan and implement units of work through learning centers was documented over 18 months in two small elementary schools. They reported greater confidence in their ability to broaden their curriculum and cater for different students’ strengths across the multiple intelligences and intellectually challenge their students using first the original and then the revised taxonomy. The teachers saw their students as more successful learners as a result of this curriculum differentiation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonL., & KrathwohlD. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives.New York: Addison, Wesley Longman.
2.
AndersonL. W. (1994). Research on teaching and teacher education. In AndersonL. W., & SosniakL. A. (Eds.), Bloom's taxonomy. A forty-year retrospective (pp. 126–145). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
AndersonL. W. (1999). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Unpublished manuscript.
4.
AndreT. (1979). Does answering higher level questions while reading facilitate productive learning?Review of Educational Research, 49, 280–318.
5.
BiggsJ. B., & MooreP.J. (1993). The process of learning.Sydney: Prentice Hall.
6.
ChenJ.-Q. (1993). Building on children's strengths: Examination of a Project Spectrum intervention program for students at risk for school failure.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Project Zero.
7.
ClarkB. (1997). Growing up gifted: Developing the potential of children at home and at school.New York: Merrill.
8.
CohenL. M. (1992). Differentiating the curriculum for gifted students. Our Gifted Children, 8, 10–18.
9.
CsikszentmihalyiM., & CsikszentmihalyiI. S. (1988). Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
CsikszentmihalyiM., RathundeK., & WhalenS. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure.New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
ForemanP. (2001). Integration and inclusion action.Sydney: Harcourt Brace.
12.
GardnerH. (1993). Frames of mind.New York: Basic Books.
GardnerH. (1999). Intelligence reframed. Multiple intelligences for the twenty-first century.New York: Basic Books.
15.
GoodT. L. (1995). Teacher expectations. In AndersonL. W. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (pp. 29–35). New York: Pergamon.
16.
GoodT. L., & BrophyJ. (1990). Educational psychology. A realistic approach (4th ed.). New York: Longman.
17.
GuskeyT. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15(5), 5–12.
18.
JensenE. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind.Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
19.
KrechevskyM., & GardnerH. (1990). Multiple chances, multiple intelligences. In InbarD. E. (Ed.), Second chance in education. An interdisplinary and international perspective.London: Falmer Press.
20.
KreitzerA. E., & MadausG. F. (1994). Empirical investigations of the hierarchical structure of the taxonomy. In AndersonL. W., & SosniakL. A. (Eds.), Bloom's taxonomy. A forty-year retrospective (pp. 64–81). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
MarshH. W., & CravenR. (1998). Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl. In PhyeG. (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement and adjustment (pp. 131–198). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
22.
MayerR. E. (2001). In AndersonL. W., & KrathwohlD. R., (Eds.), A taxonomy of teaching and learning: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives.New York: Longman Publishers.
23.
McGrathH., & NobleT. (1995a). Seven ways at once: Classroom strategies for using multiple intelligences.Melbourne: Longman.
24.
McGrathH., & NobleT. (1995b). Seven ways at once: Units of work for using multiple intelligences.Melbourne: Longman.
25.
McGrathH., & NobleT. (1998). Seven ways at once: More classroom strategies and units of work for using multiple intelligences.Melbourne: Longman.
NobleT. (2000). Integrating Gardner's multiple intelligences theory with a revised Bloom's taxonomy: A new model for school reform} Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney.
28.
NobleT. (2002). Blooming with multiple intelligences. A planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Learning Matters, 8(2), 8–12.
29.
NobleT., & GrantM. (1997). An interview with Howard Gardner. EQ Australia, pp. 24–26.
30.
PintrichP. R. (2001). In AndersonL. W., & KrathwohlD. R. (Eds.), A taxonomy of teaching and learning: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives.New York: Longman.
31.
PoplinM. S., & StoneS. (1992). Paradigm shifts in instructional strategies: From reductionism to holistic/constructivism. In StainbackW., & StainbackS. (Eds.), Controversial issues confronting special education. Divergent perspectives (pp. 153–180). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
32.
RiefS. F., & HeimburgeJ. A. (1996). How to reach and teach all students in the inclusive classroom.West Nyack, NY: Center for Applied Research in Education.
33.
StainbackS., & StainbackW. (1996). Inclusion. A guide for educators.Baltimore: Brookes.
34.
TomlinsonC. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom. Responding to the needs of all learners.Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
35.
TomlinsonC. A., CallahanC. M., TomchinE. M., EissN., ImbeauM., & LandrumM. (1997). Becoming architects of communities of learning: Addressing academic diversity in contemporary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 63(2), 269–283.
