Howard Gardner is the father of the theory of multiple intelligence (MI). and, for the last 20+ years, the educational community has had a moderate or even high influence by the theory of MI. curricular materials have been adopted; syllabi have been written; lessons implemented; assessment materials have been developed; inservice trainings have been conducted . . . all based on this theory. much school reform has been based on MI. my question is this: why? the answer: mob mentality (okay, that’s a bit strong, but the gist is correct). it sounds good and folks just went with it.
the problem with schools adopting the MI materials is that there doesn’t exist a body of scholarly research to support spending the hundreds of thousands of dollars (or millions) wasted on MI. i am not saying that MI is a bad theory; rather, i am saying that the tie to education is not mature enough for schools to have jumped on the bandwagon. Larry Cuban even writes:
MI has had the greatest influence on educators’ beliefs and talk about differences in children’s intelligence, moderate to high influence on the formal curriculum and instructional materials, and least influence on mainstream teaching and assessment practices.
in other words . . . much money is being spent with very little to show in the classroom. further, the research that exists on the implementation of MI demonstrates that the money being spent is NOT JUSTIFIED. to recap — neat idea (on paper — or on screen), no research supporting the initiative, and much money being spent — can there be a better recipe for failure?
now i want to link the story above to the previous discussion about blogs and their place in the educational community. the problem i see with blogging and “meaningful conversations” contained therein is that a “mob” of visitors can easily come to a conclusion that what they believe is the correct conclusion. depending on who comments on any particular blog story, the “meaningful conversation” can drift into half-truths and thrive on the hopes and biases that exists in the minds of the participants. if no dissension exists to steer the conversation back on track then the participants leave with incorrect assumptions and beliefs. or, the dissension that does exist can be easily dismissed by folks who want to believe a more hopeful conclusion. that cannot be a good thing for education.
i came across a story recently that claimed that there are 69,000 educational blogs that exist. i don’t know that i believe that, but even if the number is 10% of that, then there are a heck of a lot of edu blogs. who monitors that much traffic to ensure that valid and reliable information is being disseminated? who monitors that portion of the blogosphere to ensure that the educational community is safe from itself? i don’t think it matters as long as we realize that blogs are not the source of “meaningful” change in education. if a new theory or reform movement (or even a teaching strategy) is to emerge in blogs the logical next step is to conduct research and test the research for reproducibility, etc. — the scholarly process is still king and will remain so for as long as we’re around, lest we take a step backward (and this happens far too often as it is).
my esteemed peer from Texas, Miguel, directed me to an initiative that the journal of Nature is trying where they are opening up the peer review process to the whole scientific community. kudos to them. i have much to say on this topic so i’ll save it for my next entry — i also believe this is a different issue. for now, i am content to stick with my warning on personal blogs.
Tags: multiple intelligence, blogs, scholarly, gardner, blogging, education, school reform
