I'm a teacher too and have been to many PDs on Gardner's intelligences.
While I'm convinced people have different profiles of talents, I think the
proliferation of the 'intelligences' suggests some weakness in the
hypothesis. Anecdotally, I found learning to draw better increased my
skills surprisingly in apparently unrelated areas. It is nice to have a
theory that frees us from ranking people in a strict and absolute way in
terms of 'intelligence', and one that sees intelligence itself as a dynamic
quality. But at the same time, don't we relate and adapt to the internet
(or to programming or whatever) through other previously developed skills
and aptitudes? Do we need to postulate a digital intelligence? (I'm not
meaning to pour cold water. Just my reaction.)
I hope you enjoy your certificate course. I wonder what you will do in it?
And where do you get to be online professor for?
best wishes, Sue
At 11:32 PM 2/17/2005, you wrote:
>Hello to everyone,
>This is a brief introduction since I've not been courteous in greeting
>you thus far.
>I am once again, impressed by the knowledge of a listserv members, and
>so need to say upfront that I am not an academic & probably cannot share
>the same range of informational opinion as many of you here. My writing
>background is with trade magazines. Also human interest, short features,
>indepth journalism, when allowed the time by an editor, and
>self-publishing for a brief 13 months. About two years ago, I found
>poetry and have been reading and writing it since. Mostly reading it
>lately. Since my background is journalism, I am still involved in
>writing a few articles freelance. I'm in the process of preparing myself
>for a certificate as an "online professor" with the objective of
>teaching a course of poetry to noncredit students. So you can see where
>I am on the spectrum of things.
>My take on the internet: Last weekend, I took part in a workshop held by
>the Florida literacy coalition and facilitated by a local college
>professor (Catherine Rifkin), who's working on her PhD dissertation on
>"Digital Intelligence." The workshop dealt with the 1980s theory of
>multiple intelligence (MI) as put forward by Howard Gardner. Originally
>known as the "seven intelligences," I'm guessing that those of you who
>are in the teaching mode are familiar with this whole concept, which is
>correlated with areas of the brain and their functions. There are now
>ten intelligences - not all of them are accepted - with Naturalist,
>Spiritual/Existential and Digital increasing the original count by
>three. This is the first I've heard of the theory and it's exciting to me.
>My thought is that Digital Intelligence is a valid one, and that some
>folks are drawn to the internet precisely because their brains are smart
>in this way. Ansorbing and integrating information via the workings of
>the computer are easy for them. They have a high DI. I'd think they also
>have a high Spatial and Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligences as well. The
>interesting thing is that Interpersonal intelligence is not required.
>That makes me wonder about internet communities, such as this listserv -
>perhaps these serve to provide a ground for people with a markedly high
>But what about Musical intelligence, which is associated in the MI
>literature with the cadences of poetry and the rhythm of vocals &
>instruments? This was all but absent from the internet until someone
>invented devices for listening online.
>The more I think about it, the more the internet appears as the mother
>of all teaching forums.
>Yes, this is pretty simplistic but I like to rinse things down to their
>simplest form for starters. I'd love to hear comments.
>It is our duty to proceed as though the limits of our abilities do not exist.
> - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
>The Red Hibiscus http://theredhibiscus.blogspirit.com/