schooling have been attracted by MI theory, seeing that the traditional view of
education bases it around intellectual disciplines pursued mainly for their own sake.
Whether that view holds water is another question.
Conclusion
For most of this lecture I have concentrated on a critique of MI theory based on an
analysis of some of Gardner’s crucial arguments, especially in Chapter 4 of Frames of
Mind. I’m aware that the critique has been pretty complicated. But if MI theory is not
to be taken on trust, its credentials have to be examined in some detail.
But my main concern is not with MI theory for its own sake but with its present
influence in the educational world. If I am right, the eight or nine intelligences have
not been shown to exist. If so, what are the implications for the school reforms based
on the theory? As things are now, children are being encouraged to see themselves, in
PSHE (Personal, Social and Health Education) lessons and elsewhere, as having
innately given strengths in certain areas. This is part of their self-understanding. But if
the theory is wrong, they may be getting a false picture of themselves. Is this
necessarily a bad thing, if the idea that they are Body Smart or Music Smart improves
their view of themselves and helps them to enjoy their learning?
My own view is that there can be better ways of improving self-esteem, ones based on
fact rather than illusion. Children can be encouraged to see that their intelligence in
practical, physical and creative areas is no less valuable than being good at more
abstract subjects - and all this can be done without using MI theory. The idea, found
in the latter, that we are all different in our innately given abilities in the MI areas can
be just as limiting to children’s self-perception as IQ theory used to be. In some ways
it is only a pluralistic version of this older determinism.
I am left with further questions. In many schools there is a something like a simplified
version of Gardner’s theory that is being used. It divides children not into eight or
nine categories, but into three. These are known by the letters V A K: „visual, auditory
and kinaesthetic’. The schools I have been in contact with who use VAK do not know
where it originates. It comes to them „shrink-wrapped’, just like MI theory itself, the
idea of mind-maps or learning how to learn. VAK is part of this new armoury of ideas
on teaching and learning. But where does it come from?
17