MI+B1+Chapter+11

toc [|Abstract & Synthesis]

Jen T
I heard a rough statistic the other day, that only the top 15% and bottom 15% of the student body is going to get the help it needs in high school. This is especially disturbing after being in the classroom and seeing that there are many students “undiagnosed” or “misdiagnosed” with special needs. These techniques should be used on any student who is have difficulties with the curriculum, not just children with learning disabilities. While I think the one-on-one help that some students with special needs get is wonderful, it’s a damn shame how we don’t think our energy is needed with students without special needs. I don’t know if MI works, I’m sure it does, but the way it’s presented in this book is completely ridiculous. The authors make it sound like it’s going to save the world, but in truth, I wonder if MI techniques themselves are just one way students can learn, and not the answer to all of our prayers as educators.

Rachel B.
Armstrong states, “Using MI theory as a backdrop, educators, education can begin to perceive children with special needs as a whole persons possessing strengths in many intelligence area (p. 103). This is such a great quote, with a lot of truth and depth to it. Think about it for a second, “as a whole person possessing strengths in many intelligences.” Isn’t that exactly what the book has been getting at throughout its entire contents? This is particularly important in reference to students with special needs. I will keep this in mind with all students.

Rachel F.
It’s about time one of these books started talking about special education and what a great start it is. The main idea of this chapter is that teachers should work with special education students utilizing their strongest intelligences rather than dismissing them. Most special education programs figure that the student is already strong in some area so we don’t need to address it but the opposite is true. If you teach special education students making sure to focus mainly on their strongest intelligence then you are sure to get through to them that much better. This way of thinking is constantly drilled into our heads in every other chapter for every student that steps into your classroom so why not apply it to special education students as well. Students that require special education usually have specific weaknesses in some intelligences so why not harness their strong intelligences. This chapter emphasizes the idea that if teachers apply ALL of the intelligences in their lessons in the first place then their would less need to separate students into “special” classrooms because they seem to be unable to follow. All I know is that I am well aware of the many different kinds of learners out there so I will try my darnedest to make sure I’m getting through to all of them.

Courtney
This chapter introduces the fact that MI can and should be applied to not only special education students but the teachers as well. In a typical scenario a special education teacher labels each student based on their disability and knows what that is and tries to work around it in a way so as to avoid anything that their disability may limit them from. An example would be a dyslexic student, who obviously has a hard time reading. What should be recognized is that their disability in most cases will relate to an intelligence, so then they are lacking in that intelligence. But the best thing to know is that because they are lacking in that intelligence doesn't mean that it cannot be bypassed by using a different intelligence to have a better understanding in the intelligence that their disorder hinders. Just because their disability limits them in one are doesn't mean they can;t strive in another. In most cases because their disability hinders one intelligence another intelligence will grow and become more in tune to make up for the other one. So basically, one intelligence and make up for another, or at least create another route around.

Geoff
Everything in chapter 11 of //Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom// contributes to one, central, really important concept: that when we shift our focus in special education from children’s //weaknesses// to children’s //strengths//, nearly everything about special education changes, and we are all—students, educators, parents, and specialists—better off for it. Once we decide to make the shift, from what Armstrong terms the “Deficit Paradigm” to the “Growth Paradigm,” MI Theory provides the perfect framework for making it happen. Armstrong reasons that learning disabilities and special needs are often isolated to an intelligence or two, leaving the rest untouched. Once we shift paradigms, we can see that, instead of focusing on the one or two weak intelligences, we can adjust our instruction to take advantage of the other intelligences, a couple of which, like in many people without these disabilities, they may be very strong in. I can think have two friends of mine back home who fit this description perfectly. The first essentially spent his entire school career in special education, isolated from the rest of his class. While he is not particularly strong at reading and memorization, he is very good with his hands and loves to work on cars and other things. I recently had a conversation with the second, who wondered how I was so good at reading and remembering stuff while he struggled; he wanted to know what my secret was. While I am a much stronger reader than he is, I had to remind this person, who spent most, but not all, of his school career in special education, is very skilled with taking apart, fixing, and tweaking computers, much more so than I’ll ever claim to be, and that while school unfortunately valued my strengths more than his, that his strengths are no less valuable than mine. Perhaps had my school catered more to bodily-kinesthetic intelligences, they could have done better in school and could have spent more time with their classmates in the general classrooms. This leads to yet another key point in this chapter: that if we apply MI Theory to our concept of special education and our shift in paradigms, we find that what is good for those with special needs is good for all students, and that’s exactly the way it should be.

Stephanie L.
My favorite part about this chapter is definitely the chart on page 107: "Strategies and Tools for Empowering Intelligences in Areas of Difficulties". I feel like I don't know as much as I should about special education and I am a little nervous about knowing how to deal with certain situations. This chart is a great resource because it provides us with ways to help certain students become comfortable with any of the multiple intelligences that they may be having troubles with. It also gives possible strategies for how to deal with each intelligence using the fields of all the other intelligences. For example, if a student is having difficulties with linguistics, this chart provides 8 techniques of helping the student, one for each of the MIs. This is a great way of combining MIs and helping students succeed in difficult areas.

This chapter is all about the implications for special education of incorporating MI theory in the classroom. The most simple and useful implication of incorporating MI theory is the fact that it leads to fewer referrals to special education. It is fact that a student will do best in the normal classroom environment like any other student; all that is necessary for this is to just use multiple intelligence theory in teaching strategies. I learned about how it can increase the self-esteem of the students with special needs; increased self-esteem usually leads to increased academic performance. If a student feels that he or she can achieve, then he or she will achieve; it is as simple as that. This will be important in my classroom because I will make it important. There are so many important reasons to incorporate MI theory in the classroom, and the most important is its implications for special education. I believe in inclusion, and MI theory will only help to further inclusion in my classroom.

Jen P.
The most helpful part of this chapter would be the table on page 107 labeled 11.3. It addresses the area of difficulty for students and how I as a teacher can help. Not only is this attending to multiple intelligence, but also to differentiated instruction. Every student learns differently, but this does not mean that I must have an individualized plan for each student. What I must do is help every student learn and do his or her best. Luckily, this table breaks down each multiple intelligence difficulty and gives examples of how to help. I like this table because it reminds me of the multiplication table due to its set up. For Musical difficulty matched with Naturalist Strategies and Tools, I really liked the idea of recording the sounds of different ecosystems. I know that it does not necessarily pertain to history, but I could definitely modify the idea for my classroom. For example, I could have students recreate what they think it might have been like on the battle field.

Sara
“MI theory provides a context for envisioning positive channels through which students can learn to deal with their disabilities.” Students who do not achieve using certain abilities can usually compensate by using an intelligence that they have. They can find their niche and apply it to their learning. Students’ disabilities and their best form of ‘intelligence’ should be included in their IEPs. If teachers teach through the MIs there may be less of a need to outsource to special education programs, teachers just need to identify their students’ MIs. All the intelligences are important and teachers should work on including all the intelligences in their teach so that they are able to reach more students. Identification of student strengths can lead to a classroom that includes special needs learners without ‘outsourcing.’

Megan
This entire books talks about how teachers should incorporate MI into their classrooms and gives various benefits of doing that. This chapter only drove that point home. If teachers used MI in the classroom and made an effort to teach to all of the intelligences, then perhaps we wouldn’t have so many tracks. Classes wouldn’t be separated based on their level. If we used MI in the classroom we can teach disabled children the same content we teach “normal” children simply by appealing to their stronger intelligences. If we take this idea of focusing on people’s strengths and teaching to their strengths then perhaps there wouldn’t be a need to segregate classes the way we do.

Tracey Hollingsworth
Chapter 11 - MI and Special Education

Chapter 11 in //Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom// addresses how MI theory can be integrated into special education classrooms. Students with disabilities are often seen as a lost cause; however, if we consider and build upon their strengths, rather than try and try to fix their "disability", these students will begin to fulfill their true potential. All students have the ability to learn, but "how?" is the true question. How do they learn best? By integrating MI theory into the special education classroom, we let the teacher be the “strength detective” who determines what a student is capable of learning. It is their job to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of each student and give them the opportunity to improve. MI allows students to grow in areas that were otherwise thought to be curtailed. In this chapter, Armstrong explains, that by considering the MI theory it is important to teach in a way that will target the student's strongest intelligence, rather than focusing on their weakest intelligence.

Jordan
Throughout this chapter, Armstrong was describing how MI can be used to help students who are labeled as "special education," by focusing on their strengths instead of their weaknesses. Education needs to shift from the "deficit paradigm" to the "growth paradigm." I found the chart on page 107 to be very helpful when envisioning that idea. It describes different ways to empower students who show a difficulty in certain intelligences, by using tools and strategies that appeal to perhaps their strongest intelligence. For example, using rhythmic poetry to help a student with a musical difficulty who displays strengths in the linguistic intelligence or using an open ended journal for a student who displays a linguistic difficulty, but a strong intrapersonal intelligence.

John
I enjoyed this chapter a lot, specifically because of its optimistic approach to students who are placed in "special ed". It offers the suggestion that rather than dwelling on a student's weaknesses and teaching around them, the student should use their strengths to help them excel. The chart on 107 offers a variety of MI-based avenues for dealing with a problem-area, and to me it seems like one of the more practical and comprehensive charts in the book. This will certainly come in handy when I take my course with Sue Thorson next semester.