NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED448190
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2000-Nov
Pages: 32
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
The Typologies of Successful and Unsuccessful Students in the Core Subjects of Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies Using the Theory of Multiple Intelligences in a High School Environment in Tennessee.
Smith, Wade; Odhiambo, Eucabeth; El Khateeb, Hebatella
The purpose of this research was to use a Tennessee high school as a research site to assess the impact of H. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences (MI) on students' academic successes in 10th grade English, social studies, mathematics, and science classes. The research used a two-part minimally intrusive data collection protocol. The student population of the high school's 10th grade was stratified into two academic groups: honors and regular. From these 2 populations, 60 students from each group were assigned to the research participation database. Each student was surveyed to determine the multiple intelligence that they had used in English, social studies, mathematics, and science classes. This process required each student to complete the Student Multiple Assessment Reporting Test four times, completing each survey in approximately 10 minutes and the entire process in 40 minutes. Students' semester, first quarter, and second quarter grades were collected. Stepwise multiple regression with hierarchical clustering was used to determine the typologies of successful and unsuccessful students in these core subjects. There were significant differences between successful and unsuccessful students in all subject areas. Overall, however, the theory of multiple intelligence was found to be unproductive in the areas of student metacognitive activities and awareness as well as in the areas of student academic success. Under the MI theory, the more successful student should have had a significantly different typology of metacognitive awareness and activities across all subject areas from that of the unsuccessful student. The typologies were significantly different, but the typologies themselves were not the same across differing subject areas. One appendix lists metacognitive factors and regression equations, and the other contains subject times factor graphs. (Contains 5 graphs and 36 references.) (SLD)
Publication Type: Reports - Research; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: Tennessee