1
CHANGING PARADIGM OF INTELLIGENCES THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES THEORY IN SCIENCE CLASSROOM
Atiek Winarti
Chemistry Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training Education Universitas Lambung Mangkurat
Abstract
This article intends to describe the study that has been conducted on the implementation of Multiple Intelligences theory in science classroom to show that multiple intelligences are really existed. The study was conducted in senior high schools in Banjarmasin by applying quasi experimental method using pretest-posttest control group design. The development of students‘ multiple intelligences was measured by using Multiple Intelligences (MI) test, while students' understanding of science concepts was evaluated by achievement test. The differences of students‘ multiple intelligences between control and experimental group was analyzed by Wilcoxon Sign Rank test. The differences of students’ achievement on chemistry was tested by using the independent t-test. The results showed that significantly, integration of MI theory in a relatively simple cooperative learning model such as Think Pair Share (TPS) and Number Head Together (NHT) is able to develop students’ multiple intelligences. Types of growing intelligence varies from interpersonal intelligence, visual spatial, intrapersonal to linguistic intelligences. Not only multiple intelligences, students’ understanding of science concepts develops as well. The development of various types of students‘ intelligence shows that the intelligence of human beings is not only limited to mathematical logic and linguistics, but much more complex. Based on these results it can be concluded that practically, integration MI theory in simple cooperative learning models is able to increase the effectiveness of those models. Theoretically, development of some types of multiple intelligences after implementing MI theory not only proofs that multiple intelligences are really exist, but also change paradigm of intelligences from single intelligence to multiple intelligences.
Keywords: intelligences, multiple intelligences, students' understanding of science concepts.
BACKGROUND
Many assumes that IQ (intelligence quotient) is an important factor that determines the success of learning and one's life (Suparno, 2004). The higher the IQ, the more successful the life. Some researches show that such statement is not always true. Research conducted by
2
Hidayani (2007) showed the significant effect of Emotional Quotient and Spiritual Quotient toward students’ achievement, in addition to IQ. So, it is considered that although IQ is very important but it’s not everything. Other factors such as Emotional and Spiritual Quotient have important role as well.
According to Gardner (1983) the weaknesses of IQ lies on the measurement of intelligences which is only focus on mathematical-logic and linguistics intelligences. In fact, every human being has at least 8 kinds of intelligences, that are (1) verbal/linguistik, (2) mathematical-logic, (3) visual/spatial, (4) musical, (5) kinestetic, (6) interpersonal, (7) intrapersonal, and (8) naturalistic. Those are needed to be noted in helping someone to
develop and to be more successful in life.
Often, learning activities in schools are just emphasis on the model of mathematical logic and language intelligences. Teachers teach using a rational approach to logical- mathematical intelligence; and explain all the lessons with lectures and story models that are better suited to the linguistic intelligence. This approach model will benefit students who stand out in a logical-mathematical intelligence and linguistic, but it does not help students who stand out in other intelligences. According to Gardner (1983) students need to be assisted in learning by developing those eight intelligences. In other words, learning should be based on multiple intelligences, not just based on logical-mathematical intelligence and linguistics only.
Such problems encourage researcher to conduct studies about application of Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences in science classroom. Learning models implemented are the simple cooperative learning model such as Numbered Head Together (NHT) and Think Pair Share (TPS). Effect of Multiple Intelligences integrated in these models will be evaluated by measuring the development of multiple intelligences and student achievement in science after learning. In general, this paper intends to describe the attempt to applying multiple intelligences theory in science classroom and its influence on the development of students’ multiple intelligences and students’ achievement.
3 LITERATURE REVIEW
Multiple intelligences theory was developed by Howard Gardner, a psychologists and professor from Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, USA. Gardner defines intelligence as the ability to solve problems and create product in a various setting and real situation. It is very clear from the definition that intelligence does not only someone’s ability to answer IQ test in a closed room apart from the environment. Intelligence involves ability to solve a real problem in a various situation (Gardner, 1983). So that, understanding someone’s dominant intelligence has to be seen from the way he/she copes with the problems (Suparno, 2003).
Through Multiple Intelligences theory, Gardner tries to expand the scope of human potential beyond the limit of IQ value. Instead, Gardner states that intelligence more related to capacity of : (1) solving problem, and (2) creating product in the conducive and natural environment (Armstrong, 2004). Gardner differentiates between intelligence measured by IQ and multiple intelligences he was found out. In the past, intelligences were measured by written test (IQ test); someone’s IQ fixed since the person was born and cannot be improved significantly. IQ only measures logical-mathematic and linguistic. Yet according to Gardner, someone’s intelligence cannot be measured only by written test, but more suitable by assessing how people solve problems in real life. According to Armstrong (2004) intelligence can be developed by education through many ways. So that, this research tried to develop multiple intelligences by implementing learning model in science classroom, and the selected learning model were Number Head Together (NHT) and Think Pair Share (TPS).
Numbered Head Together (NHT) is cooperative learning model designed to affect students’ interaction pattern and as an alternative of traditional class structure. NHT firstly developed by Spencer Kagan (1993) to involve more students in analyzing lesson material and checking their understanding towards lesson content. This model requires students to be more active and studying together. It is excellent to increase students’ interpersonal intelligence. So that the improvement of personal intelligence more clear, then in this research NHT was modified by adding some activities related to Multiple Intelligences.
Think Pair Share (TPS) developed by Frank Lyman from Maryland University constitutes a simple but useful cooperative learning model. While teacher presents a lesson,
4
students work in pairs. Teacher poses questions to the class and students are encouraged to think the answer individually, then they work in pairs to discuss the problem. Finally, teacher asked them to share their ideas with the class. By conducting Think Pair Share strategy, students fulfill their curiosity by themselves because in learning process they involve more as a thinker instead of knowledge collector (Chotimah & Dwitasari, 2009). So that, integrating Multiple Intelligences theory in Think Pair Share model is expected to improve effectiveness of the model, because the activities involve more intelligences.
METHODS
The research was conducted by quasi experimental method and pretest-posttest control group design was selected to be the research design. Two senior high schools in Banjarmasin were chosen being the sample. The sample of the research implementing NHT model based on MI theory consisted of 33 students on control class and 32 students on experimental class.
While the sample of the research implementing TPS model consisted of 30 students on control class and 31 students on experimental class. The sample was selected by using cluster random sampling technique. The data was taken by multiple intelligence test developed by Armstrong (2004), McLelland & County (2008) and achievement test. Normality of the data was examined by using Saphiro wilk test while the homogenity of the data was tested by using Levene test. The difference of multiple intelligences data was evaluated by using Wilcoxon Sign Ranked test, and the difference of students’ achievement on chemistry was tested by using independent t-test.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 showed that after learning science by integrating MI Theory on cooperative learning models (NHT and TPS), students’ multiple intelligences were slightly higher.
5
Table 1. Students Intelligences Before and After Learning
Intelligences TPS NHT
% Gain %Gain
Control Experiment Control Experiment
Lingustic 0 0 0 6.2
Mathematic-logical 6.7 -3.2 3.3 3.1
Musical 0 -3.3 0 0.8*
Visual spatial 6.7 16.2* 0 12.5*
Kinesthetic -6.7 3.3 -3.3 0
Interpersonal -3.3 3.3 0 34*
Intrapersonal 3.3 6,7* 0 0
Naturalistic 3.3 3.3 0 21.9*
The development of students’ multiple intelligences was also followed by the development of students’ dominant intelligences.
Tabel 2. Percentage of students dominant intelligences by integrating MI Theory
No Intelligences Learning Model
TPS NHT
Control (%)
Experimen (%)
Control (%)
Experiment (%) Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post
1 Linguistic 6.67 3.33 9.68 9.68 0 0 6.67 6.67
2 Matematical Logic
3.33 10.00 6.45 3.23 3.03 3.03 3.13 3.13
3 Musical 6.67 6.67 12.90 6.45 12.12 6.06 3.13 4.38
4 Visual-spatial* 0.00 6.67 3.23 19.35 0 0 9.75 6.25
5 Kinestetic 13.33 6.67 12.90 9.68 6.06 9.09 18.75 18.75 6 Interpersonal* 26.67 16.67 9.68 6.45 15.15 30.3 11.25 31.25 7 Intrapersonal 36.67 40.00 35.48 35.48 51.52 48.48 31.87 25.00 8 Naturalis 6.67 10.00 9.68 9.68 12.12 3.03 12.50 9.13
Table 1 shows that after learning activities integrating MI theory on cooperative learning model (NHT and TPS) some types of students‘ multiple intelligences increase.
Integrating MI theory on NHT model influences the development of interpersonal, naturalistic, musical and visual-spatial intelligences, while integration of MI theory on TPS model affects only visual-spatial intelligence. Kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalistic also increased, but the improvement was very low. The increase of MI score was
6
not only show the development of students‘ multiple intelligences as well, but also the development of students dominant intelligences. Table 2 shows that integration MI theory in cooperative learning causes improvement of two dominant intelligences that are visual spatial and interpersonal.
Based on the research, it can be concluded that integration MI theory in cooperative learning models such as NHT and TPS contributes to improvement of students’ multiple intelligences. Compared to others, NHT and TPS are the simple cooperative learning model.
Research found that implementation of NHT and TPS models without integrating MI theory on them, give lower improvement of multiple intelligences. This finding proves the contribution of MI theory on the development of students’ multiple intelligences. It also proves that the improvement of students’ interpersonal intelligence not only due to integration of MI theory but also because of implementation of cooperative learning model. It accordance with research conducted by Handayani (2007) and Slavin (2004) which found that implementation of cooperative learning improves students multiple intelligences, especially interpersonal intelligence.
Interpersonal intelligence, kinesthetic and naturalistic are three types of intelligences tend to be owned by the teenagers (Lwin, 2004). Interpersonal intelligence is concerned with how student can get friends and establish good communication. Naturalistic intelligence related to the activity of teenagers knowing the environment well, and enjoy the nature, while kinesthetic intelligence relates to activity of teens who tend to be active. In this research, integration of MI theory on cooperative learning model was conducted by designing some activities that relates to multiple intelligences such as chain message, group discussion, group division based on similarity of the dominant intelligence, the use of pictures and videos to visualize science concepts, peer tutoring, and presentation of the concepts by using colorful markers. According to Armstrong (2004) word games like chain messages, visual presentation, visualization, tactile activities, cooperative learning, peer tutoring and ecological awareness are some examples of teaching activities that can be employed in teaching through multiple intelligences. Chain messages and group discussion are examples of teaching activities for those who have linguistic intelligences, visualization, the use of media and colorful markers are examples of teaching activities to improve visual spatial intelligences,
7
while cooperative learning and peer tutoring are the example ways to strengthen interpersonal intelligences.
In addition to improvement of multiple intelligences, integration MI theory in cooperative learning model also improves student achievement in science.
Table 3. Students’ Achievement on Science Chemistry by Integrating MI Theory
Scores Criterion TPS NHT
Pre (%) Post (%) Pre (%) Post (%) Cont. Exp Cont Exp Cont Exp Cont Exp
≤ 49.9 Very low 30 31 0 0 29 24 0 0
50.0 – 59.9 Low 0 0 0 0 4 7 0 0
60.0 – 69.9 Sufficient 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 2
70.0 – 79.9 Good 0 0 17 11 0 0 11 8
80.0 – 89.9 Very good 0 0 10 19 0 0 12 8
≥ 90 Excellent 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 14
Student achievement in both of MI class is higher than conventional cooperative class. The effectiveness of cooperative learning model based on MI due to learning activities which were designed in accordance with the characteristics of multiple intelligences. This causes students to be motivated to learn and therefore contributes to improvement of learning outcomes.
Improvement of students’ learning outcomes and multiple intelligences in this research show that integrating MI theory in science classroom impacts the development of multiple intelligences and indirectly influenced the students' learning outcomes. The findings of this study also proves that multiple intelligences is really exists and it characterizes each person in learning and solving problems.
CONCLUSION
Based on the results it can be concluded that instead of single intelligence every human being has multiple intelligences. Practically, Integration MI theory in simple cooperative learning models such as NHT and TPS are able to increase the effectiveness of those models which are characterized by the improvement of multiple intelligences and student learning outcomes. Specifically, integrating of MI theory in cooperative learning
8
model such as NHT and TPS is able to develop interpersonal, naturalistic, musical and visual- spatial intelligences. Theoretically, development of some types of students’ multiple intelligences after implementing MI theory proofs that multiple intelligences are really exist.
Besides, implementation of Multiple Intelligences in science classroom not only develop multiple intelligences and students' understanding of science concepts, but also change paradigm of intelligences from single intelligence to multiple intelligences.
REFFERENCES
Armstrong, T. (2004). Multiple Intelligences in the classroom 2nd Edition. Translated by Yudhi Murtanto. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Chotimah & Dwitasari. (2009). Learning Strategies to Conduct Class Action Research.
Malang: Surya Pena Gemilang.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books Hons of Learning Harper Collins Publ. Inc.
Handayani, S. (2007). “Implementation of Cooperative Learning as an Effort to Develop Students’ Multiple Intelligences”. Innovative Education Journal. 3(1) : 41-46.
Hidayani, D. N. (2007). Effect of Emotional Quotient (EQ), Spiritual Quotient (SQ), and The Level of Parents Education Towards Students’ Achievement on Accountant Subject in SMK Ardjuna 1 Malang. Thesis. Malang State University, Malang.
http://fe.um.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/ABSTRAK-dll.pdf. (Be Acesseed on May 28, 2015).
Lwin, M., et all. (2004). How To Multiply Your Child’s Intelligences. 2nd Edition.
Yogyakarta : PT Indeks.
McClellan, J. A. & Conti, G. J. (2008). Identifying the Multiple Intelligences of Your Students. Journal of Adult Education. v37, n1, p 13-31
Pociask, A. and Settles, J. S. (2007). “Increasing Student Achievement Through Brain Based Studies”, Master Thesis in Teaching and Leadership saint Xavier University Chicago, Illinois.
Slavin, R. E. (2008). Cooperative Learning: teori, riset dan praktik. Bandung: Nusa Media.
9
Suparno, P.. (2004). Multiple Intelligences Theory and Its Aplication in Schools. Yogyakarta:
Kanisius.
Winarti, A, Astarina, M.D. (2013). The Effect of Think Pair Share (TPS) Model Based On Brain Based Learning Toward the Development of Visual Spatial Intelligence and Student Learning Outcomes. Unpublished Research. Universitas Lambung Mangkurat.
Winarti, A., Nurkamalia. (2012). Effectiveness Of NHT Model Based On Multiple Intelligences In Developing Interpersonal Intelligence and Student Learning Outcomes. Unpublished Research. Universitas Lambung Mangkurat.
