Howard Gardner: How Children Learn

Dr. Howard Gardner is one of the foremost social scientists today. The author of over 20 books, and holding 20 honoraray degrees from Universities and Colleges, Gardner is a world-renouned expert. Here, Gardner talks about his book "A Disciplined Mind" and discusses how children learn. Some of the topics discussed are the efficiency and need for standardized testing and college admission. For more information on Gardner or other speakers, please visit http://www.apbspeakers.com

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Howard
• Gardner
• Harvard
• Standardized
• Testing
• CNBC
• college
• admission
• education
• Public
• Speaking
• APB

[chrismca]

Videos like this present a serious ethical problem. It tells teachers to spend their valuable time using a concept (MI) that has never been shown to improve student learning. That MI has no support is widely known, and this information is easily available to any responsible, diligent adult. What's the difference between: a) recommending an unsupported concept to folks with real educational needs and, b) a doctor giving only sugar pills to a patient who could benefit from proven medicine?

[gmccall22]

@PowerRedBull.. Intelligence= genes ? Did you "LEARN" this from some guru ? Is this what you were TAUGHT?...Is intelligence better than learning ? I'll take learning everyday of the week and twice on Sunday

[chrismca]

@LeeMIlby Sorry to say, but here I just have to disagree with you. Back when I worked for a private company we employees all knew which of our coworkers knew the most about statistics, child development, research design, learning theory, etc.... and quantified this in exactly the same way that is done in school. When I worked with other companies (media, computing, state and national school administration) I saw this same phenomenon.

[LeeMIlby]

@ChuckBart100

In competition, people choose to challenge competitors for sport, for adrenaline, for dopamine. Entering the classroom with this kind of mindset, students compete with these numeric or alphabetic scores that ultimately do not identify the child's wisdom, knowledge, talents or interests. The current system reduces the value of knowledge to something quantified, and the real world just doesn't measure the value of knowledge and skill that way.

[ChuckBart100]

Hi, Thanks for the article. Trouble is, in “action research” the same person who runs the education program also evaluates the program. A parallel:

Suppose the Olympic diving competition let each competitor dive, then give himself his own score. Just as such a system could not tell which divers deserve medals, action research cannot tell which curricular elements deserve a share of the finite time and resources teachers and schools have.

So, this does not scientifically support the use of MI.

[PowerRedBull]

Integelligence = genes. If you learn someone without any artistic skills to paint, but it will never be a great painter. You can't "teach" intelligence in my idea. You can "learn" someone a way of thinking, which will make them more familair and known with that way of thinking, which may result in higher scores on a test, but but the thing is that you did not make them more intelligent...you're just learning them a (basic) skill

[fiddlinsquirrel]

Hi 'Chrismca' - check out this article in regards to your request for qualification on the MI theory in the classroom.

The Learning Revolution (IC#27)

Winter 1991, Page 12

Copyright (c)1991, 1996 by Context Institute

(Personally, it works for myself and my primary class and I have had great success addressing learning difficulties by utilising the strategies!)

[dac4710]

Einstein was rubbish at maths and had a hard time at school and university but he still did quite well for him self, some people still think he was intelligent.

But Mohammad Ali was more intelligent than every one ells because he was stronger faster and quicker than any one ells.

If you put Ali in a ring with Einstein, I guess Ali would win.

[chrismca]

Its been five months now since I asked, Can anyone provide even a single article from a serious journal or a paper from a juried conference that documents a link between the use of MI in school and improved performance?

No one has provided even ONE of these.

I dont intend this as a criticism of those who discuss MI (thats important); rather, its an accurate picture of the lack of valid support for MI.

[wilkoman3]

I would like to believe that they're different types of intelligence, I myself have lots of trouble with maths but I'm great at art and English even though I'm far more fascinated with maths than English.