Understanding the relationship of a multiple intelligences framework and differentiated instruction: A qualitative research study of the Chapel Hill-Chauncy Hall school faculty

For 30 years educators have examined Howard Gardner’s (1983) theory of multiple intelligences (M.I.) as a viable and effective framework for teaching and learning in a differentiated fashion. Understanding the value of differentiation for today’s learners and learning environs, the unique aptitudes of individual learners warrant consideration in pedagogical design. Leveraging individual student strengths through differentiated instruction suggests a compelling approach to 21st century education. Very little research, however, has endeavored to explore connections between differentiated instruction and M.I. theory. No one has conducted empirical research on the relationship between differentiated learning in a multiple intelligences framework. This study with the teaching faculty of an independent, college preparatory school examines teachers’ understanding of Gardner’s theory for informing practices in differentiated instruction. A faculty survey, teacher interviews, classroom visitations and focus groups form the data I explore pertaining to individual teacher’s understanding and use of M.I. theory, as well as how they believe it can be applied to differentiated instruction. The study was designed to provide the participants with individual and collaborative spaces for inquiry. The triangulation of these methods provides a meta-perspective on how teachers perceive the connections between M.I. theory and differentiated learning. My analysis of varied and voluminous data results in a distinctive picture of how teachers approach differentiated instruction in an M.I.-informed learning environment. The results of the study provide us with teachers’ understanding of M.I. theory and how the theory can be useful in the context of differentiated teaching and learning. I argue that teachers enhance differentiated teaching and learning when it is grounded in an M.I.-informed and -friendly learning environment. However, teachers must possess solid knowledge and understandings of both M.I. theory and differentiated instruction, respectively, as well as emerging interdependencies, to best apply the combined construct to teaching and learning. Without proper understanding, teachers tend to default to differentiated instruction absent an M.I.-informed stance while questioning the symbiotic relationship of the two constructs. I conclude by reflecting on these results for promoting teachers’ understanding in my school and others embracing M.I. and differentiated instruction