[ProfessionalDevelopment 1956] Re: Debunking Multiple intelligencesCatherine B. King cb.king at verizon.netTue Feb 12 10:37:42 EST 2008
Hello Barbara and all: Thank you to Barbara for the website--BTW, it's www.learningstyles.org (not .net). I'm looking forward to exploring this site and will pass it on to my students. Catherine King ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara K Given" <bgiven at gmu.edu> To: "Catherine B. King" <cb.king at verizon.net>; "The Adult Literacy Professional Development Discussion List" <professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:26 AM Subject: Re: [ProfessionalDevelopment 1954] Re: Debunking Multiple intelligences >I think Rita Dunn's response to this interchange is important. She wrote: > > PLEASE click onto www.learninstyles.net and into BIBLIOGRAPHY. You will > find more than 850 published studies on one particular learning style > model conducted by researchers at more than 125 institutions of higher > education--almost 200 on adult learning styles (and we are just now > updating). I do not have Tom Sticht's email or I would have sought to > enlighten him. This is the website of the International Learning Style > Network, in operation since 1979 and cosponsored by organizations in more > than 22 nations. Tom just doesn't have access to the best information. > > Cordially, > > Professor Rita Dunn > St. John's University > > > Barbara K. Given, Ph.D. > Associate Professor Emerita of Special Education; > Faculty Affiliate, Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study; and former > Director, Center for Honoring Individual Learning Diversity, an > International Learing Styles Network Center. > George Mason University > Fairfax, VA 22030-4444 > Ph: 703-549-4483 > Fax: 703-993-4325 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Catherine B. King" <cb.king at verizon.net> > Date: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 9:28 am > Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 1954] Re: Debunking Multiple > intelligences > >> Hello Eric and Susan: >> >> Though I think Tom is premature in his criticism of the import of >> learning >> styles (and MI--thank you Wendy for clarifying the distinction), >> he is quite >> right about his call for evidence-based research--and I would add: >> Theory >> development and its applications that stand the test of time. >> >> Education is a synthetic field--in the classroom, we can recognize >> and apply >> all sorts of theory and research from all sorts of fields, e.g., >> sociology, >> psychology, philosophy, history, etc.; and our theories draw from >> all of >> these other fields. And of course there is an art to teaching as >> well--we >> all know that. >> >> However, just like other professional fields, e.g., medicine or >> architecture, what makes and keeps us professional(s) is not only >> what we do >> in the classroom, but our open and active connection with our >> theoretical >> and research fields, e.g., through regular PD, research journals >> and >> newsletters, professional collaboration, etc. >> >> What you are calling "common sense" applications, then, are often >> the >> manifestation of the qualified art of teaching; however, as >> professional >> applications, they are and should be constantly informed and >> edified by >> relevant theory, research, and discourse from the fields. >> >> I am always appreciative of Tom's contributions to our field (bow >> to Tom). >> However, my own (long-term) issue with Tom is not about whether >> our field >> should maintain its critical-theoretical and research base--it >> should and >> our professionalism and legitimacy depend on that maintenance--but >> rather >> what constitutes (and should constitute) the materials and methods >> that >> inform that base. Those very changes in materials and methods-- >> not what it >> means to be critical and evidence-based--is what is at stake in >> the dialogue >> between more positivist foundations, and foundations that begin by >> taking >> into consideration more nuanced human data and methods of approach. >> >> That brings us to your statement that Multiple Intelligences and >> learning >> styles are "metaphors for the kinds of individual differences that >> exist." >> If you mean that in the same way the "heart disease" is a metaphor >> for a >> kind of degeneration that actually exists in some people's >> systems, I would >> agree with you. The only issue is then whether either kind of >> theory can be >> tested in a critical way, and whether we are using the best >> metaphors to >> identify, explore, and explain theoretically and to test, in this >> case, the >> different ways people learn, as well as pedagogy that actually >> works for the >> student. >> >> Thanks for listening, >> >> Catherine King >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Susan McShane" <smcshane at famlit.org> >> To: "The Adult Literacy Professional Development Discussion List" >> <professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov> >> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 12:47 PM >> Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 1946] Re: Debunking Multiple >> intelligences >> >> >I agree Eric. That's the way I've always thought about these >> things--as >> > metaphors for the kinds of individual differences that exist. >> > >> > Just vary the approaches and activities and use as many of the >> senses as >> > you can. It seems to me that's the common-sense way to >> understand it (no >> > pun intended). >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: professionaldevelopment-bounces at nifl.gov >> > [mailto:professionaldevelopment-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of >> > ejonline at comcast.net >> > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 3:11 PM >> > To: The Adult Literacy Professional Development Discussion List; >> > professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov >> > Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 1945] Re: Debunking Multiple >> > intelligences >> > >> > I can see both sides of this discussion. >> > >> > One of the problems that I have seen with both MI and learning style >> > work is that sometimes it is presented as something other than a >> > possibly helpful heuristic. That is, it is presented like we >> *know* that >> > the brain or thinking works in *this* way for the person in question >> > because it does so in some objective way (as if we could read a >> > schematic). This leads to thinking a person thinks in one way, >> or worse, >> > that whole cultures and ethnicities think in one way (e.g., work in >> > Australia that tried to identify what kind of "intelligences" >> > Aboriginals have). >> > >> > Like anything else that tries to figure out the mystery of the mind, >> > these are models and metaphors. In fact, >> > over the decades we have cycled through a variety of models and >> > metaphors for cognition, typically in reaction to advances in >> technology> (so first our brains were computing, then they were >> conceived of as >> > being more like hypertext, next up - a social networking update on >> > connectionism). >> > >> > I think some of this work on MI and learning styles is >> compelling and >> > helpful, but as a heuristic. You don't have to survey a room and >> try to >> > come up with a fixed-label for the way that people think to keep >> in mind >> > that you should vary your presentation style and that classwork >> should> touch on multiple modalities. >> > >> > Erik Jacobson >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -------------- Original message ---------------------- >> > From: "Wendy Quinones" <wbquinones at comcast.net> >> >> Tom and all, >> >> >> >> I am the developer and facilitator of the Multiple >> Intelligences and >> >> Differentiated Instruction course under discussion here. I >> > acknowledge Tom's >> >> point about the dearth of empirical evidence about the efficacy of >> > using MI. >> >> But isn't that true of virtually everything in adult education? >> We >> > are >> >> starved for the very resources that would make such studies >> available;> until >> >> our government funds more adult literacy research, we can base very >> > little >> >> on empirical research. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> With respect, Tom, I wonder if you aren't thinking a little too >> > narrowly >> >> about what the research actually tells us about multiple >> > intelligences. >> >> There has been a great deal of research done on MI, and a great >> deal>> continues to be done. (Please note that I am not discussing >> learning> styles, >> >> nor are they addressed in my course. Confusion between these two >> > concepts >> >> is common.) For some past studies (Project SUMIT, Multiple >> > Intelligences >> >> Schools), as well as ongoing work in various aspects of MI, you can >> > check >> >> out the Project Zero website >> http://www.pz.harvard.edu/index.cfm at >> > the >> >> Harvard Graduate School of Education, where Howard Gardner >> developed> his >> >> theory of multiple intelligences. This began as a psychological >> > theory >> >> based on exhaustive study of neurological and brain research; >> it was >> > we >> >> educators who jumped on it for pedagogical purposes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Granted, most MI research has been done with K-12 in mind, but >> that's> true >> >> of much of the research we use in adult education. I was, however, >> >> privileged to be one of the teacher-researchers in the Adult >> Multiple>> Intelligences study, which dealt exclusively with using >> MI in adult >> >> classrooms, both ABE and ESOL. The project, which lasted for 3-4 >> > years, was >> >> a collaboration between Project Zero and the New England Literacy >> > Resource >> >> Center/World Education under the auspices of NCSALL, then >> located at >> > the >> >> Harvard Graduate School of Education. Much of the material we >> > produced is >> >> available on the web through NCSALL >> >> >> > >> http://www.googlesyndicatedsearch.com/u/NCSALL?q=multiple+intelligences+> >> and+adul >> >> t+literacy&sa=NCSALL+Site+Search >> >> >> >> including an issue of Focus On Basics devoted to the project: >> >> http://www.ncsall.net/?id=161 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> You might also consider research that isn't even directed at >> MI, but >> > which >> >> points to precisely the intelligences that Gardner posits. For >> > example, >> >> research has shown repeatedly that what have been called multi- >> modal>> approaches are virtually a necessity in reaching native- >> English> speakers >> >> with learning disabilities. The Wilson method uses tapping, which >> > would >> >> draw on both the bodily-kinesthetic and musical intelligences. >> Other>> proven, research-based methods use writing in air, flour, >> or sand, >> > which are >> >> certainly bodily-kinesthetic activities. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The NIFL publication "Applying Research in Reading Instruction for >> > Adults" >> >> >> (http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/publications/adult.html ) >> >> advocates a number of research-based strategies that draw >> similarly on >> > the >> >> intelligences: activating prior knowledge (intrapersonal), >> > cooperative and >> >> group learning (interpersonal), think-alouds for comprehension >> (again,> >> >> intrapersonal), graphic organizers (spatial), and so on. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> My course is intended to give teachers a solid grounding in MI >> theory> so >> >> that they can intentionally, systematically, and creatively use >> these>> strategies and others that they may devise themselves, to >> improve> practice. >> >> Studies, my own included, have shown increased retention, >> engagement,> and >> >> learning gains attributable at least in part to the use of MI. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Colleagues: I have followed discussions on several NIFL- >> sponsored>> > discussion >> >> > lists recently in which people have advocated teaching to >> learning> styles >> >> > or >> >> > to multiple intelligences. This is strange to me given that the >> > federal >> >> > government has argued for the use of evidence-based, >> scientifically>> > validated approaches to adult literacy >> education (see the What >> > Works >> >> > Clearinghouse sponsored by the U.S Department of Education). >> But by >> > even >> >> > loose standards of evidence, there is no credible evidence to >> > support >> >> > teaching to a person's learning style, preferred learning >> modality> (i.e., >> >> > visual, auditory, kinesthetic), multiple intelligences, right >> > brain-left >> >> > brain preference, or other very malformed ideas. Indeed, >> there are >> > a wide >> >> > variety of so-called learning styles (impusive vs reflective; >> > introverted >> >> > vs extroverted; field dependent vs field dependent and on and >> > on)and no >> >> > research on how a teacher can take all of them into account >> > everyday and >> >> > over weeks and months. It is not even certain that a >> learning style >> > stays >> >> > the same from the beginning of a course to the end of the >> course.> While I >> >> > understand the desire of the NIFL to promote useful discussions >> > among >> >> > adult >> >> > literacy educators, with only a minimum of censorship, it >> strikes> me as >> >> > counter productive to advocate for evidence-based, >> scientifically>> > validated >> >> > teaching while also permitting the advertisement of commercial >> > workshops >> >> > that are based on poorly formed concepts and devoid of empirical >> > evidence >> >> > for the efficacy of such ideas and the practices based on >> them. Tom >> > >> >> > Sticht >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------- >> >> > National Institute for Literacy >> >> > Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list >> >> > professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov >> >> > >> >> > To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please >> go to >> >> > http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment >> >> > >> >> > Email delivered to amuro5 at epcc.edu >> >> > >> >> > Professional Development section of the Adult Literacy Education >> > Wiki >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Adult_Literacy_Professional_Devel> >> opment >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ---------------------------------------------------- >> >> National Institute for Literacy >> >> Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list >> >> professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to >> >> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment >> >> >> >> Email delivered to ejonline at comcast.net >> >> >> >> Professional Development section of the Adult Literacy >> Education Wiki >> >> >> > >> http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Adult_Literacy_Professional_Devel> >> opment >> > >> > ---------------------------------------------------- >> > National Institute for Literacy >> > Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list >> > professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov >> > >> > To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to >> > http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment >> > >> > Email delivered to smcshane at famlit.org >> > >> > Professional Development section of the Adult Literacy Education >> Wiki> >> http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Adult_Literacy_Professional_Devel> >> opment >> > ---------------------------------------------------- >> > National Institute for Literacy >> > Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list >> > professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov >> > >> > To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go >> to >> > http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment >> > >> > Email delivered to cb.king at verizon.net >> > >> > Professional Development section of the Adult Literacy Education >> Wiki> >> http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Adult_Literacy_Professional_Development> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------- >> National Institute for Literacy >> Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list >> professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov >> >> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to >> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment >> Email delivered to bgiven at gmu.edu >> >> Professional Development section of the Adult Literacy Education >> Wiki >> http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Adult_Literacy_Professional_Development >> >
More information about the ProfessionalDevelopment mailing list |