See previous post for background (click here)

The first statement that Christensen et al  (in Disrupting Class) make is that children learn in different ways. They cite Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences theory as evidence that children have different modes of learning. Furthermore, they make the jump to education stating that the current system uses a standardized, one-size-fits-all approach to instruction that does not adequately serve different student needs. All of these are compelling arguments, which lead the authors to suggest a “modular” approach using technology, where students can get just-in-time, individualized instruction that cater to their multiple intelligences.

While I am not an educational, or cognitive psychologist by training I have a couple of initial critiques of the authors here. If I am mistaken in any of these points, please comment and point me to any resources that may help my own learning. My critiques in order:

1. I do not believe there is no solid evidence that multiple intelligences exist. There is a great theory, posited by Howard Gardner, which has gained much popularity in Education because it seems to make perfect sense. There are also numerous research articles that suggest mulitple intelligences are at play in children’s learning. However, I have yet to come across any studies that definitively prove ML.
2. So do children learn differently? It sure does seem like they do huh? However, I personally would stop short of calling it multiple intelligence. A kid who excels at sports is a kinestetic learner but not a visual learner? I find that hard to believe. Perhaps the kid who is a good football player has a unique body structure that allows him to run faster than others, and perhaps through dedicating more time to football (since he has natural physical gifts) he has trained his brain to master football concepts. However, that does not mean an athlete who is less naturally gifted cannot excel.
3. This is not multiple intelligences to me… Perhaps human beings have a certain balance of physical and mental capabilities. Some people may pick up running the 100m faster than reading a book… but if that same person invested enough time in reading a book, I’m sure they could (even if it took a bit longer than a good reader). What I’m suggesting is that yes, “children learn differently”, but all children (who are within a range of normal needs) could adequately learn something given enough time for their abilities to develop. Using this framework, instead of multiple intelligences, calls for very different uses of technology.
4. The authors of Disrupting Class suggest that online learning, and social media, have the potential to help children who learn differently. Using a ML theory, there are a couple of problems. How would you design online resources for a kid who is a “physical learner”? How about a kid who is “socially smart”, what would you design to help each of these children learn how to plot data points in a chart? If we start to think concretely about what we’d design online, using ML theory, I’m hard pressed to see any usefulness of the theory.
5. Instead if we suggest that children learn at a different pace, and some students need multiple perspectives on a concept in order to learn it, then online resources play a VITAL role. Perhaps one student could read a wikipedia entry on photosynthesis and understand it completely.  Perhaps another student needs to read the wikipedia entry, see a video on YouTube, and ask students on a Facebook group to explain it in their own words — before finally having that ah-ha moment. This process makes more sense to me, and using technology and social media to create different KINDS of educational resources would help different children learn in different “ways” and time-tables.

Thoughts?