MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES

A general understanding of Howard Gardner’s theory & consider the implications for UK schools of adopting it.

KINAESTHETIC LEARNING

All of which will appeal to pupils with a kinaesthetic learning preference.

MEMORY TECHNIQUES

By the end of the day, you will be amazed how much you can remember.

IMG 0263 1100x733 1

Hands-On Learning can be delivered as

We have some of the unique ways which will allow you to perform your best during any memory activities.

  1. 1
    How the brain remembers?

    The brain has a unique way of storing information for each individual from breaking down information to Mnemonics. We can help train your brain to perform its best when you are trying to bring out your best work.

  2. 2
    The importance of ``key-words``

    This is one of the most important ways your brain tries to remember a huge chunk of information which can allow you to be amazed by the information your brain can store.

  3. 3
    Making mnemonics memorable

    Mnemonic is a tactic which allows one to remember the information for the long term with easy means which allows the people to get the information right when trying to remover the basic concept.

TESTIMONIALS

Classroom Workshops

Interactive Demonstration Lessons

74Staff Training
299Workshops
50 Pupil Sessions
21Training Events
Training Session

Creatively & To Support Learning

The Implications For The Curriculum

They have some of the best progressions into the ways they hand over the idea of learning with everyday aspect keeping the information relevant for a longer time.

Using MI To Personalize Learning

We cater to the individual needs when we are trying to bring in the required change, especially when it comes to something natural keeping memory alive.

The Classroom Of The Future

We use the digital platform as our classrooms, allowing one to their personalised learning curve which will grow in the pace that they need to have an impact.

Drama-Based Techniques

This is one of the oldest forms of technique where a concept is taught through drama which can be enacted live or in your brain.

Note-Taking & Recording Information

Taking the right notes is one of the easiest ways to bring in the right information in its chronological order which is the best way to get your information right.

From Our Blog

PhD vs DBA – Which Option is the Best for Me?

If you’ve never looked at doctoral programs in-depth, you may assume that they’re all the same. And on the surface, it may look like they are. But there are major differences between something like a PhD in business administration and a DBA. If you are considering going for one of the two, you must know what differentiates these programs so you can make the right decision. In this article, we’re going to look at what separates the PhD from the DBA, and a few questions you should ask yourself before you pick on one of the two.

What Makes a PhD and a DBA so Different?

At the core, the main difference between a PhD and a DBA is that a PhD is more targeted toward academia while a doctor in business administration is more like a continuation of the MBA and prepares candidates to face real-life challenges. So, while a PhD might be a good option for people who want to get into research, it may not necessarily help someone who wants to move up the corporate ladder. 

At the end of the day, PhDs are rarely called to solve real problems, but still play a very important role in business. They are the ones who help shape the way businesses will be managed in the future. They had a lot of work during the recent times of disruption and will continue to do so as new technology and methods keep getting introduced. Not to mention all the supply chain challenges that we’re going to have to face in the next few years.

What are the Differences Between the Curriculum?

Well, there are lots of differences in curriculum between a DBA and a PhD. In a PhD program, you can expect to look at the evolution of business management practices over time and their impact on society as a whole. A DBA, on the other hand, will have you go more in-depth into these management systems and teach you how to use them and maximise them in a business setting.

You should know, however, that you will also be involved in research during a DBA. Most DBAs come out with advanced research skills and all DBAs need to have the research skills necessary to conduct literature reviews. The only difference is that they’ll have the chance to use what they got for these reviews and apply it directly to business.

If this sounds like something that would interest you, we suggest you check out Aston University’s doctor of business administration online. A program like this will give you all the tools needed to understand business literature and research better and become a much better leader as a result.

Are You More into Theory or Practice?

One of the first things you have to ask yourself when choosing between a PhD and a DBA is whether you want to be involved in theory or if you want to get down to the nitty-gritty. If you’ve spent a lot of time as an executive and would like to move to something less stressful, then going for a PhD might be a great option. But if you need to be close to the action and affect businesses directly, then you should get a DBA.

Would You Like the Same Kind of Role as Now or Something Completely Different?

You should also look at your motives for getting higher credentials right now. Some people may want to work in a whole other role while others may simply want to become better at what they’re doing. If you’re an executive and you want to become a better executive, then getting a DBA is the best option. But, if you’d like to devise theories on how business will be done years from now or how it should be done, the PhD is the best option.

What’s Your Favourite Work Setting?

If your goal is to work on research teams, become a speaker or general business analyst, or work in academia, then you could get a PhD. You should know, however, that DBA graduates are also able to qualify for some of those positions. It’s entirely possible to get a job as a professor with a DBA degree, for instance. It’s true that the PhD is more valued by faculties and that most PhDs will have an edge over a DBA, but this is not always the case.

As we mentioned, DBAs are also involved in research, just not to the same extent as PHDs. And when institutions look at potential teachers, they don’t only look at their credentials. Work experience can make a great difference and could benefit a candidate. The amount of research that a DBA has produced as well as their publications will also be in the balance. So, know that getting a DBA won’t block you from working in academia.

Who is the PhD for?

The PhD is for people who have an analytical mind and want to solve both theoretical and real-life problems in a controlled environment. The PhD is also a prestigious title to have, so if your goal is to work with an organisation for whom prestige is important, then getting a PhD is a good way to go. Having a PhD will give you a better chance at working with national news organisations, for instance, or working in public office.

Who is the DBA for?

The DBA is the best option for people who want to find solutions to real-world complex business and management problems. It is a great choice for anyone who wants to get deeper into management methodologies and perfect them. 

DBAs can also contribute to research that will not only benefit professionals but directly change the way business is done on the ground. The DBA focuses more on human interaction and the development of soft skills as well. It is the perfect choice for those who’d like to understand the psychology of leadership so they can spot and appoint better leaders while becoming better leaders themselves.

As you can see, there are significant differences between a PhD and a DBA, and you must know what these are before you go in any direction. If you still have doubts, don’t hesitate to speak with a counsellor or people who attended each program so you can get their impressions.

Clever Ways to Compare Motor Fleet Insurance Quotes

There are many ways to compare motor fleet insurance quotes. The first step is to understand the different types of insurance policies and their cost. There are a number of factors that affect the costs of different types of fleet insurance, including Combined single limit (CSL) liability, the cost of ‘Authorised Driver’ policies, and more. In this article we will discuss how to make the most informed decision when choosing motor fleet insurance.

Factors that affect the cost of motor fleet insurance

In addition to the type of motor fleet insurance a business purchases, the drivers who operate its vehicles can also have an impact on the costs of the policy. Whether or not the drivers are experienced or new to the job can influence the premiums for motor fleet insurance. Drivers should be aware of their responsibilities and the resulting implications on the terms of the new policy. Drivers with criminal convictions or license points may attract a higher premium from all insurers.

Age of drivers is another factor. If the drivers are too young, the cost of motor fleet insurance can be higher. If you have young drivers, it might be better to insure them separately. Also, make sure your business is strong on security. If your vehicle and premises are well-protected, you may qualify for discounts. Some providers even offer discounts if the vehicles have dashboard cameras. While the cost of motor fleet insurance is more affordable for businesses with a larger fleet, the savings can be marginal for smaller fleets.

The cost of new cars will not have a significant impact on premiums. Insurers focus more on damages to third parties than on car prices. Fleet owners should reduce their risk exposure by taking appropriate actions, including reducing car prices. These measures should be documented and presented to insurers. Companies that opt for hybrid or electric cars can also lower their premiums because these vehicles emit less CO2.

The cost of motor fleet insurance will depend on the amount of coverage the company needs. Moreover, it is crucial to choose the correct insurance policy. Compare the premiums and coverages offered by different insurance firms. The best way to choose the best motor fleet insurance is to work with a broker. However, you should be careful to compare quotes. Obtaining multiple quotes will help you to find the lowest premiums and the best coverage.

Combined single limit (CSL) liability

One of the best ways to compare Combined single limit (CTL) liability motor fleet insurance is by considering the amount of coverage you need for your fleet. CSL coverage will cover more than one claim, while aggregate coverage will only cover the damages incurred in a single accident. As a result, the lower total cost of combined single limit coverage may be a better option than the higher total cost of aggregate coverage. However, you should always consult your insurance agent or broker before deciding on a coverage amount.

Combined single limit liability is different from CPL coverage in that it covers one total limit instead of several separate limits for bodily injury and property damage. For example, if you hit a driver with your car, they would receive $250,000 in medical bills each. If your car caused $70,000 in property damage, you’d be responsible for another $200,000 in damages. In this case, the combined single limit coverage would pay out the total claim of $570,000.

CSL policies are often advantageous for people who have significant assets. Normally, they have separate umbrella liability insurance, but the combined single limit policy can eliminate this need. In addition to providing coverage for injuries and property damage, a combined single limit policy allows the insurance carrier to divide the limit amount into smaller amounts. This is especially advantageous in cases where the damage to the other car is extensive.

CSL liability insurance is a great way to protect your business from high costs associated with collision and property damage. Because combined single limit liability is the same amount for both bodily injury and property damage, it can save you money by allowing you to choose the lowest limit. If you have multiple vehicles in a fleet, you’ll need to check if these vehicles have collision coverage.

Cost of fully comprehensive fleet insurance

Fleet insurance premiums are calculated based on the risk of all drivers. Insurers are unlikely to pay claims made if a driver is unlicensed or does not hold a valid license. Drivers under 25 are viewed as higher risks, but it’s important to note that some young drivers may not have any previous accident history. If the fleet has a high proportion of ‘risky’ drivers, they should have individual policies.

The cost of fleet insurance varies from company to company. Often, a smaller business can get by with a named driver policy, which is generally the least expensive. However, fleet insurance premiums are difficult to predict, since the costs vary based on a number of factors, including the types of vehicles and drivers. This is one of the main reasons why it’s important to find a quote that suits your needs.

In addition to the standard elements of fleet insurance, you may also need to include extras, such as legal costs and breakdown cover. When used for comparing motor fleet insurance quotes, make sure to ask as many questions as possible, especially if you are a first-time customer. Ultimately, you can’t go wrong with a fully comprehensive motor fleet insurance policy. Just remember that your business’s bottom line should be your priority.

One of the most important benefits of having a fleet policy is that it’s much cheaper than insuring individual vehicles. Fleet insurance is also more cost-effective because it takes into account the safety history of your team, the number of incidents the fleet has had over time, and the number of outstanding claims. Once you’ve chosen the right coverage, you’ll have peace of mind. So don’t hesitate to compare rates and find a plan that suits your needs and your budget.

Cost of ‘Authorised Driver’ policy

While it may seem like a small difference, adding an ‘Authorised Driver’ policy to your motor fleet insurance can save you money. This type of policy allows your drivers to use all vehicles on the same policy. It also makes it easier to manage your fleet and increase the size of your company. The main benefit of this type of policy is that it is cheaper than insuring each individual vehicle individually.

Although ‘Any Driver’ policies are more flexible than ‘Authorised Driver’ policies, they are also more expensive. As an owner of a small fleet, you may want to consider taking out a ‘Named Driver’ policy to make it easier to track down new drivers. ‘Any Driver’ policies are a cheaper option for small businesses, but can raise your premium if your drivers are high risk. If you need to insure a high-risk driver, you may want to look into a ‘Named Driver’ policy.

The cost of an ‘Authorised Driver’ policy on a motor fleet insurance policy will vary from provider to provider, but they’re typically the most affordable option for small businesses. However, there are many factors that affect the cost of motor fleet insurance, including the size of your fleet and your driving history. To reduce your costs, you may want to look into a risk assessment process. You can also consider hiring a professional to drive your vehicles for you, proving to the insurer that you’re serious about your drivers’ safety.

You should keep in touch with your insurer and let them know about any changes that you’re planning to make. Remember that your motor fleet insurance policy is not just about protecting your drivers, it also protects your company assets. Therefore, it’s best to do your research and shop around for the best possible price. Using the tips above, you’ll be able to find an excellent motor fleet insurance policy for your company.

Cost of ‘Combined single limit’ liability

‘Combined single limit’ liability for motor truck fleet insurance offers the same type of coverage as a split limit policy, but the difference is in the dollar amounts of the limits. In general, combined single limits are a better choice if you have a large amount of assets, such as a business building, and need a broad range of coverage. Combined single limits are also more expensive than split limits, but the extra protection is worth it.

‘Combined single limit’ liability is typically a policy that covers bodily injury and property damage as one combined total. However, if there are more than two people in an accident, combined single limits are less useful. If the combined limit is only $300,000, you’ll only be covered for bodily injury and property damage. Similarly, if you were to cause an accident with a truck, you would be personally responsible for an extra $200,000.

‘Combined single limit’ liability for motor truck fleet insurance is a great choice for many companies. While’split limits’ are good for businesses, they have several shortcomings. Combined single limits are designed to eliminate gaps, while the flexibility of ‘combined single limit’ coverage allows you to take advantage of the flexibility it provides. This coverage is also useful for commercial trucks.

‘Combined single limit’ liability for motor truck fleet insurance provides higher limits for bodily injury and property damage. This type of policy also covers medical payments for the driver and passengers in case of an accident. Another great feature of a ‘Combined single limit’ liability policy is that it doesn’t require a deductible for bodily injury and property damage. Combined single limit liability for motor truck fleet insurance provides the lowest price on motor vehicle coverage.

Developing self-esteem in your child

If you have a child approaching adolescence, you have already helped your child to achieve a phenomenal amount. With your guidance and encouragement, skills like walking, talking, feeding, playing, drawing, reading, swimming, riding a bicycle and making friends were acquired early in your child’s lifetime.

Although there may be late-starters and slow-developers, most parents are certain that their child will master these skills eventually. They accept that the child will need lots of practice and reinforcement, along with reassurance and praise. Each mistake provides feedback and information leading to ultimate success, with plenty of opportunities for celebrating each small step along the way.

“If you have high expectations for yourself, high self-esteem and the belief that you will succeed, you will have high achievement.  Think like a winner and you will win.” Bobbi DePorter

At some stage, your child has probably said something like, “I’m no good at spelling” or “I can’t draw,” and you may have tried to comfort them by replying along the lines of, “Don’t worry, you can’t be an expert at everything and in any case, you’re very good at Maths.” Whereas this affirmation of their strengths is a positive, your child may have picked up the message that it is acceptable to give up trying to succeed at some things because they will never be any good at them. Your intentions are good but your child may think that you expect them to fail in certain things. In the same way that adults give themselves reasons why they shouldn’t try things, young people too can develop a negative self-image and limit their expectations because they expect failure.

It is important to teach your child that to become proficient in any subject or skill, whether it be football skills or playing the guitar, there are times when there are difficulties to be faced. If you see a difficulty or a mistake as a message that says “I can’t do it,” then you’ll give up. “I failed this time” soon translates into “I’m a failure”. If, on the other hand, you regard a stumble or a hitch as useful feedback, it takes on a whole new meaning. You just need to take in this information and adapt your style or technique. The self-talk becomes, “ I failed this time because … so next time I will …” and this in turn leads to renewed efforts and ultimately to success.

“The only failure in life is the failure to try” – Bobbi DePorter

A sense of self-worth and high self-esteem cannot be acquired overnight.  It takes many positive comments and a lot of successes to contribute to this state.  Parents have a tremendous impact on the way a child’s self-image develops.  As a constant role model, you can influence your child’s thinking by being positive yourself and having high expectations of yourself.

Have you ever:

  • put down, ridiculed or humiliated your child? – “You’re just a big baby …”
  • compared your child unfavourably to others? – “Your sister would never have behaved like that.” – “Most kids of your age can … Why can’t you?”
  • refused to give a reasonable explanation? – “Because I say so.” – “You wouldn’t understand.”
  • labelled your child? – “You boys are all the same.”
  • been over-protective of your child, giving the impression that you regard them as stupid or incompetent?
  • been inconsistent in the messages you give, whether in terms of discipline, affection, or expectations?

How many of the following do you regularly do?

  • Tell your child that you like, admire or respect them because …
  • Listen carefully whenever your child wants to talk to you.
  • Show that you are fascinated by your child’s abilities and development.
  • Tell your child how much they have done to make you feel proud of them.
  • Actively plan periods of quality time with your child.
  • Plan holidays and leisure activities to meet the needs of all members of the family.
  • Teach your child the skills needed to be a self-sufficient adult.
  • Ask for your child’s help in a variety of areas.
  • Praise and reward your child for small as well as major achievements.
  • Ask for, and listen to, your child’s opinions and show respect for views that differ from your own.
  • Listen to and support your child in difficult and hurtful times.
  • Stand back and allow your child to take risks and make mistakes.
  • Say “I’m sorry”.
  • Say “I don’t know” rather than pretending to know all the answers.

Other articles to help you release your child’s potential.

Let me tell you a story

It’s good to talk

Developing confidence in mathematics

Problem-solving skills for kids

Gifted and talented kids

It is worth remembering that all children are individuals and we should beware trying to “pigeon-hole” them. Each child will demonstrate aspects of their abilities and personalities in slightly different ways – so the following should be treated as no more than a “rule of thumb” guide.

The following definitions are generally accepted.

“Gifted” children are those exceptional children (estimated at 2%) who show marked ability in a range of areas – and to whom many of the characteristics on the list (below) will apply.

“More able” children are those children (estimated variously between 5% and 20%) who show above average ability in one or more areas – and to whom some of the characteristics on the list (below) will apply.

“Talented” children are those children whose abilities lie in areas perceived as less academic – such as art, music, drama, sport, etc.

There is, nevertheless, some confusion about how to define children with advanced ability.

The list below shows characteristics that have been attributed to “gifted” (or “more able”) children. It is worth noting that many (if not most) of the items on the list refer to those children who demonstrate enhanced linguistic and / or mathematical skills (the traditionally recognised academic areas).

Whereas the list may go some way towards helping us identify the academically “gifted”, it is less likely to assist with identification of “talented” children.

It is obvious that not all of the characteristics on the list will apply to all “gifted” children – especially as some of the characteristics are apparently contradictory. The reason for this is that “gifted” children are not all gifted in the same way. Certain of the characteristics will apply to those children with enhanced linguistic skills, others are more likely to apply to those with enhanced logical-mathematical skills, whilst still others are much more likely to be demonstrated by children with artistic and creative skills.

One of the reasons why there has been some past confusion in defining and identifying “gifted” children is that we have tended to employ a flawed definition of intelligence – which has failed to recognise the varying characteristics of different kinds of intelligence. By adopting a more holistic view of intelligence, not only are we more likely to recognise (and value) a wider range of skills and talents – we are also more likely to contribute to the development of confidence and self-esteem in a broader cross-section of our children. This will enable us as a society to benefit from a greater pool of skills and abilities.

You may find it useful to refer to “Discover your child’s potential” which adopts a more holistic view based on Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences.

  • Extensive general knowledge
  • Versatile with many interests
  • Extremely knowledgeable in certain areas
  • Shows intense concentration
  • Asks searching questions
  • Responds to questions in diverse ways
  • Wide vocabulary
  • Verbally fluent
  • Sophisticated sense of humour
  • Outstanding memory
  • Inquisitive
  • Sceptical
  • Leaps from the concrete to the abstract
  • Recognises connections – forms hypotheses
  • Quickly makes generalisations
  • Keen and alert observer
  • Original – imaginative – creative
  • Works quickly and accurately (though maybe untidily)
  • Learns easily
  • Devises own methods and strategies
  • May not conform to accepted standards of behaviour
  • Collects things
  • Daydreams – lives in a world of their own
  • Behaves extrovertly
  • Behaves introvert-ly

Discover Your Child’s Potential

Discover your child’s abilities

It goes without saying that every parent wants the best for their child. We all want to see our offspring grow and develop new skills. Although most of us recognise that our child is unlikely to be another Einstein, that should not stop us from wanting to discover what it is they are good at. There is a growing recognition that children (and indeed adults) can be intelligent in a variety of ways. Once we recognise that children have many different abilities, then we can think about developing those skills, talents and capabilities to the full.

The information on this page will help you recognise your child’s particular strengths and the guidelines below will help you to develop them in your child.

Develop your child’s potential

Discover your child’s interests and abilities.

Be on the lookout for things to praise. We eagerly encourage a baby’s first word or a toddler’s first step – but why stop there? Keep looking for advances in your child’s abilities, then recognise and reward them (not with money or gifts but with praise and encouragement).

Encourage a wide range of interests.

Having discovered what your child is good at, it is a temptation to push them to do even better at this particular thing – but this can be harmful if taken to extremes. By all means encourage your child to develop their interest, but encourage them to explore different aspects – not just “more of the same”.

Never ridicule your child.

Of course, it may be necessary to correct your child if they do wrong – but you should never make fun of your child just because they are “different”, either in their behaviour or interests.

Acknowledge your child’s abilities.

Not just “school-type” things but other things (e.g. model-making, drawing, physical skills). This will help your child to grow in confidence – and be more prepared to tackle other things that they might not be so good at.

Encourage your child to set targets for themselves.

This will help them to develop an “aim higher” attitude to life. It is amazing what they will achieve if only they can be encouraged to set their sights high.

Make learning fun.

Your child is much more likely to want to do something if it is enjoyable. There are lots of games and fun activities that will help to develop your child’s abilities – whether mental, physical or artistic.

INTERPERSONAL (People)

Children with strong interpersonal intelligence get on well with people. They are friendly and outgoing and relate well to people both older and younger than themselves. They are good listeners, patient – and may be a “peace-keeper” amongst their friends. They notice how people are feeling and may act as a “comforter”. They have a number of close friends and may be the “leader” of the group (albeit subtly). They prefer team games and working in groups. They are likely to be a member of a club.

INTRAPERSONAL (Self)

Children with strong intrapersonal intelligence are “thinkers”, though they may be seen as “dreamers”. They prefer to “keep themselves to themselves” and may appear shy and withdrawn. They may not respond in class but prefer to talk to the teacher about the topic after the lesson. They usually have a clear idea about their future and will set themselves personal targets & challenges. They are interested in life stories and may keep a personal diary.

LOGICAL (Numbers)

Children with strong logical intelligence are likely to score highly in Maths tests. They are good at mental arithmetic and most aspects of Maths. They are interested in science and how things work. They will often counts things for no apparent reason. They may have particular ways of doing things (even to the point of obsession). They can become frustrated by people who cannot see their point of view or way of doing things. They are likely to be well-organised and punctual. They may make lists (perhaps of things to do). They may also enjoy jigsaws and mazes. They often prefer to work alone.

LINGUISTIC (Words)

Children with strong linguistic intelligence are likely to “always have their head in a book”. Not only do they like reading, they also write (stories, poems and letters) for pleasure. They usually mention things they have read about. They will have a wide vocabulary, be good at spelling, and are often fascinated by words and their meanings. They explain themselves well and like to teach others. They enjoy word games & puzzles (Scrabble, crosswords, etc.) and may also enjoy quizzes. They may be talkative (but not necessarily).

VISUAL-SPATIAL (Pictures)

Children with strong visual-spatial intelligence are “natural artists”. They notice small differences in detail and have a good visual imagination. They will be good at drawing and enjoy drawing sketches, cartoons & doodles. They have a strong sense of colour. Given the opportunity, they will enjoy taking photo’s and making videos. They can find their way around easily. They use their hands when talking or explaining. They may also enjoy jigsaws & maze puzzles.

MUSICAL (Music)

Children with strong musical intelligence like a wide range of music. They recognise tunes easily and quickly and are quick to learn songs. They may play a musical instrument (if provided with opportunity). They will probably be good singers. They are likely to hum or sing to themselves (or out loud) whilst doing other things. They may tap out rhythms. They are fascinated by different sounds.

PHYSICAL (Body)

Children with strong physical intelligence are good at sport & physical activities. They like practical activities (such as model-making, sewing, cooking, making things). They cannot help touching things and probably use their hands when talking. They have expressive facial features and may be good at drama. They are well co-ordinated with a good sense of balance, and may be good dancers.

NATURALIST (Nature)

Children with strong naturalist intelligence like all kinds of animals and may be responsible for looking after a pet. They may be interested in gardening and the countryside and will probably prefer to be outside. They may show an interest in insects, dinosaurs or archaeology and will enjoy nature programmes on TV. They probably collect things (such as Pokemon cards, etc. but especially insects, bits of rock) and may keep a scrapbook. They may be tidy and well-organised.

Find out more about Multiple Intelligences.

Multiple Intelligences

A brief introduction to Multiple Intelligences

For many years it has been recognised that the two halves of our brain (“left” and “right”) govern different aspects of our behaviour. Whereas the left half of the brain is more logical, the right half is more creative. Whereas the left brain is concerned with language, maths, and ordered material; the right brain deals with spatial awareness, music and emotions.

Having worked extensively with war veterans and others who have suffered extensive brain damage, Professor Howard Gardner (of Harvard Graduate School and the Boston Veterans Administration Medical Centre) was intrigued by the way in which certain intellectual abilities could be damaged (or spared) independently. This selectivity was also apparent in the enhanced abilities of savants and child prodigies. He proposed that intelligence was not a unitary phenomenon but comprised a number of different “strands”. Each of these represented a relatively autonomous intellectual capacity. Each could be located to a specific region in the brain. Each had its own developmental history and its own end-state of competence.

Each individual possesses all of the intelligences (although in extreme circumstances it may appear that an individual is severely lacking in one or more) but they are not all present in equal proportions. The particular combination of intelligences (and their relative strengths) forms a profile that is unique to the individual.

  • Visual-Spatial Intelligence
  • Logical Intelligence
  • Musical Intelligence
  • Naturalist Intelligence
  • Intrapersonal Intelligence
  • Interpersonal Intelligence
  • Linguistic Intelligence
  • Physical Intelligence

For Parents Who Want Their Child To Learn

It goes without saying that you will be interested to DISCOVER YOUR CHILD’S POTENTIAL, so there is a useful page that helps you do just that – whilst providing an insight into Multiple Intelligences theory.

If you believe your child may be GIFTED or TALENTED, (or if you’re not too sure what those terms might mean) then there is a page that describes the characteristics you should look for.

There are also some interesting articles that will provide food for thought on a number of matters related to bringing up your child.

  • Developing self-esteem in your child.
  • It’s good to talk.
  • Let me tell you a story.
  • Developing confidence in maths.
  • Problem-solving skills for kids.
  • Learning styles and gender.

If you are a puzzle addict (like me) there are a few things you might like to try out on the THINKING GAMES page.

Musical Intelligence

The capacity to distinguish the whole realm of sound and, in particular, to discern, appreciate and apply the various aspects of music (pitch, rhythm, timbre and mood), both separately and holistically.

CHARACTERISTICS

  • A keen sense of hearing.
  • Enjoys a wide range of music.
  • Fascination with sound.
  • Remembers tunes and may sing along with songs.
  • Good sense of rhythm and may tap along with the beat.
  • Good sense of pitch and may harmonise spontaneously.
  • Able to differentiate different instruments.

BRAIN STUFF

The majority of musical capacities (including melody recognition and generation) are localised in the right hemisphere of the brain. However rhythm, naming songs, and reading musical notation are left-brain activities.

Children who have had 2 or 3 years instrumental tuition (prior to age 9 or so) demonstrate enhanced maths and problem-solving skills.

Non-musicians focus on the overall contours of a melody using the right side of the brain: musicians are more analytical and tend to use the left-brain more.

Shostakovich had a metallic shell fragment in his brain that he was reluctant to have removed because it helped to generate melodies when he tilted his head, which he was then able to use when composing.

CAREERS

  • Performing musician.
  • Composing music.
  • Recording studio.
  • Entertainment.
  • Theatre.
  • TV & radio.
  • Film & video.
  • Creative advertising.
  • Music retailers.

HOBBIES

  • Listening to music.
  • Singing.
  • Playing a musical instrument.
  • Dancing (if also physical).

EXAMPLES

  • Seguin and Treffert reported on “Blind Tom” (the 14th child of a Negro slave – deemed to be an idiot) who was able to play lengthy piano compositions after only a single hearing. As a party piece, he was able to play different songs with left and right hands, whilst singing a third!
  • Beethoven.
  • Tchaikovsky.
  • Paul McCartney (popular musician)

DEVELOPING MUSICAL INTELLIGENCE

  • If appropriate, play different kinds of music while you work, experimenting to see which “works best” for you.
  • Use music to help create the right “mood” for what you are doing.
  • Learn to play an instrument.
  • Listen to a wide range of musical styles, including Oriental and African music.
  • Close your eyes and listen carefully to the variety of sounds around you. Pick out their direction and source.

STUDY TIPS

  • Music with a tempo of approx. 60 beats per minute (eg: Baroque) facilitates generation of beta waves in the brain, which leads to a relaxed receptivity.
  • Keywords that are incorporated into the lyrics of raps, songs or jingles are easier to remember.
  • The ability of music to evoke emotions and memories means that it can also be used as a powerful aid to revision. Play different background music for each topic you study – and the association will facilitate recall.
  • Sound-maps

EQUIPMENT

  • Paper and pencil for each student.
  • Coloured pens or pencils.

DESCRIPTION

Students work individually.

This is an exercise in active listening.

Without speaking to each other, for a period of 3 or 4 minutes, students are encouraged to listen carefully to the sounds around them. These may include ticking clocks; birds or other animals; the wind and its effect on trees, doors or windows; traffic; people talking or moving outside the room.

As they hear each sound, students locate the direction of the sound and either write it or draw it onto their paper, placing it in the appropriate position to show where the sound came from.

At the end of the listening time, students are encouraged to talk as a group about the sounds they heard, what might have made those sounds and where they were.

Students should be encouraged to think of imaginative ways of describing the sounds they hear. Do dogs always bark? Don’t they also growl, yelp, whine or whimper? Do clocks always tick? Or do they sometimes sound like pit or pink?

Drawn sound-maps could form the basis of a piece of artwork.

Written sound-maps could form the basis of a poem or piece of descriptive writing.

Face the music

Recognising & developing musical intelligence

For many years it has been recognised that the two halves of our brain (“left” and “right”) govern different aspects of our behaviour. Whereas the left half of our brain is more logical, the right half is more creative. Whereas the left brain is concerned with language, maths and ordered material, the right half deals with spatial awareness, creativity and emotions.

As part of his theory of Multiple Intelligences, Howard Gardner asserts that musical intelligence is a separate intellectual competence whose function can be located to a particular area of the brain. “Whereas linguistic abilities are lateralised almost exclusively to the left hemisphere in normal right-handed individuals, the majority of musical capacities … are localised in most normal individuals in the right hemisphere.” (Howard Gardner “Frames of Mind”)

Psychologists are divided about how to interpret the individual’s response to music. Is it merely a set of conventions (that have arisen within a cultural context) or is the brain “wired for music” in the same way as Chomsky suggests that we are genetically predisposed to learning language? Although there may appear to be parallels between the way we process music and the way we process language, we appear to develop particular schemas that are particularly dedicated to hearing music. Gardner cites Jeanne Bamberger, a musician and developmental psychologist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who insists that “musical thinking involves its own rules and constraints and cannot simply be assimilated to linguistic or logical-mathematical thinking.” Igor Stravinsky maintained that composing was not only independent of language and words but also of thinking.

Gardner suggests that new-born children are predisposed to certain aspects of music (such as pitch, melody and rhythm) and that this finds expression in the spontaneous creation of simple “songs”. During the first years of life, these come into competition with characteristic bits of familiar tunes that the child comes to learn from repetition. The melodies of the dominant culture eventually gain the upper hand, so that children (by the age of 5 or 6) have a schema of what constitutes a song (characterised by cultural influence) and can reproduce familiar tunes fairly accurately.

This natural “musical intelligence” can be enhanced or restricted by circumstance, including provision or lack of opportunity; positive or negative influences exerted by family and peers; early success or failure shaping the individual’s perception of their ability; and conflicting interests.

Those who would seek to judge an individual’s “musical intelligence” must be cautious to avoid making judgements on the basis of the candidate’s knowledge of music. This includes both the theory of music (names and values of notes; structures and progression of chords; etc) and the body of received knowledge (composers and musicians associated with the various types and styles of music, etc.) that is often evident in those who are deemed knowledgeable in this domain. Such a body of knowledge can be assumed by someone with little natural flair for producing (or even appreciating) music; whereas those with a natural ability in this domain may nevertheless have been hampered in their acquisition of such a body of knowledge (and the accompanying vocabulary) by the accident of birth or upbringing. Hence, there is a need to focus on practical competence rather than factual knowledge.

Even here, we must be cautious that we are not deceived by an individual’s ability to play a musical instrument, even if the candidate has achieved a significant level of performance (as recognised by the various examining bodies). Although present developed ability may be the result of a natural ability coupled with the opportunity to make progress in the domain, it may equally be the result of a limited (or even stunted) natural ability coupled with diligent application and nurtured by encouragement. A more reliable indicator might be the candidate’s ability to produce a musical response spontaneously and without benefit of prolonged instruction. Although the performance may be less polished, it may nevertheless be more evocative or inspirational.

In an interesting experiment at Wales Elementary School in Wisconsin, students who have taken free music lessons have shown a remarkable improvement in their problem-solving ability. Students who signed up for the twice-weekly piano lessons scored 50% higher than other children. Frances Rauscher, professor of psychology at Wisconsin University, explains that “Children are born with all the neurons they’ll ever have, but the connections between neurons are formed after birth, and it’s those connections that determine intelligence.

(Times Educational Supplement 18 December 1998)

Aileen Alexander-Bolton, a maths teacher at Bellarmine Roman Catholic Secondary School in Glasgow, is enthusiastic about using music in the classroom. “It’s amazing, the class visibly relaxes. They concentrate for longer and get better results.” Aileen favours the use of Mozart, Bach and Vivaldi.

RECOGNISING MUSICAL INTELLIGENCE

When it comes to recognising enhanced musical intelligence in a child, the primary indicator would appear to be the child’s expression of interest in music and the means of making music. This may be little more than physical and facial signs of enjoyment or it may manifest itself in a variety of ways such as singing along with songs (linguistic accuracy notwithstanding) or dancing and keeping time with music.

Some children may improvise songs or melodies as they play or may produce spontaneous rhythmic clapping, tapping or banging. This particular ability can be assessed formally by testing the child’s ability to reproduce rhythmic clapping patterns.

The child’s interest may extend, if provided with appropriate opportunity, to inquisitiveness of the means of making music. The child may show expressions of awe or wonder during instrumental performance or demonstration, accompanied by a readiness to explore or experiment with the instruments themselves. This experimentation may be accompanied by studious listening, another important indicator. Children’s ability to distinguish whether music is “going up or down”, and by how much, is a sign of a “good ear”; the ability to distinguish tonal difference. Although this can be taught to older students, evidence of the ability in younger students may be an indicator of innate musical ability. Children may also demonstrate the ability to improvise musically, either when playing simple instruments or vocally.

Several of these abilities may combine to give the impression that the child is able to learn more quickly than others.

Having identified candidates with a natural proclivity towards music, it is no less important to employ a means of developing musical skills and ability that takes account of the likely predisposition of the musically intelligent candidate for using the right brain hemisphere. Traditional musical training, although it may seek to capitalise on natural ability, often seeks to effect a shift from a figural, instinctive mode of processing towards the more formal mode of analysis. The more musical training an individual has received the more likely he is to call upon left hemisphere mechanisms to solve a musical problem which the novice candidate tackles intuitively using the right hemisphere. This may require a re-examination of those teaching techniques and methods that have long formed the mainstay of music teaching but which may have served, despite the best intentions of the tutor, merely to discourage the potential music student from pursuing their interest.

What is needed is a system for teaching music that seeks to develop the candidate’s natural right-brain approach. That is, one that seeks to develop the creative aspects of music without undue emphasis (initially, at least) on the formal aspects of reading and writing musical notation. Paul McCartney, widely recognised as one of the most popular and prolific composers of this present age, would attest to the effectiveness of just such an approach from his own experience; and the Liverpool Academy of Performing Arts, established by McCartney, upholds just such a philosophy.

Musical ability is an innate ability that, when triggered, can become the focus for success in a child’s life and the catalyst for the development of their self-esteem.

Music is the vehicle for raising children’s self-esteem and a means of stimulating their interest in learning.

A recent study at the Chinese University of Hong Kong suggests that children who learn to play a musical instrument are more likely than non-players to have good memories in later life.

Professor Agnes Chan and her colleagues compared 30 students who had taken music lessons before the age of 12 with 30 students who had never taken lessons. Candidates were set to memorise lists of orally presented words. Those adults who had taken music lessons as children demonstrated significantly better memory skills for spoken information though their performance at remembering visually presented information was not significantly improved.

Reasons for the improvement are not clear-cut. There are suggestions that it may be due to enhanced neuronal pathway capacity. Whereas musical ability is acknowledged as a right-brain function, research using brain scanning technology carried out at the Heinrich-Heine University in Dusseldorf shows that musicians have a well developed left hemisphere, particularly that region that is involved in verbal memory. This is because learning music usually involves students in a complex co-ordination of left and right brain activities. If students learn to play an instrument early enough in life, this could aid in developing patterns of thinking that later prove to be useful in forming mnemonic associations.

Alternatively, it may be that students’ competence in music serves to build their self-confidence as learners, thus enabling them to develop a wider range of learning strategies.

Whichever explanation is closer to the truth, Professor Chan’s findings would appear to emphasise the importance of including music in the curriculum for every child as a means of developing their learning capacity.

USING MUSIC TO BUILD SELF-ESTEEM

Not only do we need to address the issue of developing the musical skills of those who are “musically intelligent” – but we also need to think about how we can use the natural musical skills that some people exhibit as a means of developing their self-esteem.

Mary Wallace, a former head teacher, has a particular interest in this issue. She is certain that musical ability is independent of general or academic ability and quotes examples of children who, when provided with the opportunity, proved that they could shine at music, despite retarded reading ages and lack of either stimulation or encouragement within the home. Mary sees musical ability as an innate ability that, when triggered, can become the focus for success in a child’s life and the catalyst for the development of their self-esteem, occasionally with dramatic results. In her experience, recognition of success in music had been the turning point for an elective mute, an habitual thief and a number of truants. Discovery of their “hidden talent” provided a stimulus that generated a renewed self-perception and new behaviour patterns. Paul Carlile, also a head teacher, can also quote similar examples and is fervent in his belief that “some children have got natural ability”. Paul maintains that it is possible to detect a small number of children in each reception class whose responses to music are significantly different.

Speaking of children who have shown some disaffection with school and may be “totally uncooperative in the classroom with a teacher”, Mary Wallace has noticed nevertheless that they may be “captured” by music. “You can see by their expression and by their body language how much enjoyment they’re getting from hearing and making music.” Mary Wallace and her staff were even prepared to divert funds into activities that promote participation in music in the belief that “success breeds success and raises self-esteem.” Hence, music is the vehicle for raising children’s self-esteem and a means of stimulating their interest in learning. Similarly, Paul Carlile is a keen exponent of using the “feel-good factor” within music to engage children’s interest. Music “accesses their emotions and makes them feel good,” he says.

USING MUSIC IN THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

Although it contradicts what many of us may have been led to believe, there are a number of teachers who maintain that the use of music within the classroom creates a friendly and comfortable environment within which students find it easier to learn. Cynics may argue that students will merely stop what they are doing in order to listen dreamily, but in fact, apart from occasional protests about the choice of music, they usually exhibit a mature attitude. It is important that the music is not a distraction; hence it is wise to steer clear of anything with lyrics or a heavy beat. Those who have been bold enough to experiment have reported success with choices as diverse as Baroque music, “Tubular Bells” and the Ladysmith Black Mambazo choral group. The really daring might try using different kinds of music (soothing, relaxing, stimulating, etc.) to create different moods.

USING MUSIC AS AN AID TO MEMORY

As well as using “mood music”, there are other ways in which we can harness the potential of music as a medium for enhancing the effectiveness of learning. Many of us have no doubt been surprised by our own ability to recall lyrics of songs that we have not heard for many years; our memories apparently being stimulated by the musical association. Advertisers are well aware of this phenomenon and pay great attention to choosing and using catchy tunes to reinforce their message. As teachers and trainers, perhaps we should orchestrate those vital key points that we want our students to recall. I have encountered many examples of the ingenuity of teachers, many of whom have set to music such entertaining lyrics as “the atomic weights table” and “the square on the hypotenuse”.

I still remember graphically my experience as a young student helping out at a local Sunday school. I was “gobsmacked” (a word I had only recently learned) by the ability of a snotty-nosed five-year-old to recite all 66 books of both Old and New Testaments. The secret, of course, lay in the music that accompanied the doggerel.

Whereas we must recognise that not all teachers and trainers are budding Tim Rice-s, we should be careful not to underestimate the talents of our students. I have been delighted by the creativity of my own students on more than one occasion. Failing this, most of us can use simple rhythmic repetition to help reinforce otherwise un-memorable material. This is a tried and trusted method that requires very little effort to increase the repertoire of available chants, yet one which can prove remarkably effective for a broad spectrum of students.

Whatever our musical tastes or talents, from the accomplished performer to the tone-deaf, there would appear to be some benefit for all in exploring the use of music in the classroom. If it helps to create a comfortable climate for learning, enables our students to identify new (and more effective) learning strategies, and encourages them to think of themselves as successful learners then it is an opportunity that we cannot afford to miss.

Learning Styles

Each of us learns in different ways. Some of us prefer to study in depth before we tackle a task; others prefer to “get stuck into the job” and learn as we go along. Some of us are satisfied when the methods we use get the job done; others are more concerned with why a particular approach proved successful. Yet others spend time thinking through how the task could be tackled more effectively next time. Research by Peter Honey and Alan Mumford suggests that we might usefully consider 4 basic “learning styles”: Activist – Pragmatist – Theorist – Reflector.

Activist Learning Style

Activists involve themselves fully and without bias in new experiences. They enjoy the “here and now” and are happy to be dominated by immediate experiences. They are open-minded, not sceptical, and this tends to make them enthusiastic about anything new. Their philosophy is: “I’ll try anything once”. They tend to act first and consider the consequences afterwards. Their days are filled with activity. They tackle problems by brainstorming. As soon as the excitement from one activity has died down, they are busy looking for the next. They tend to thrive on the challenge of new experiences but are bored by implementation and long-term consolidation. They are gregarious people constantly involving them-selves with others but, in so doing, they seek to centre all activity around themselves.

You will want to get stuck in straight away! Explore and experiment by all means – you will discover all sorts of things as you do so. You may then be able to help others solve their specific problems and you can call on their help to rescue you. Try to remember, however, that not everybody has your enthusiasm and drive and they may wish to approach life (and learning) a little more slowly.

Recording learning

If you need to keep notes of what you have learned, Mindmapping is a quick and visual method of recording information that is probably suited to your style of learning.

Using IT

You might like to use short-cut key-combinations but will also find the toolbar buttons useful. The UNDO button will come in handy for when your experimenting does not produce the result you wanted

  • Jumps in at the deep end
  • Enthusiastic
  • Looks for new experiences
  • Likes to be centre of attention

STRENGTHS

  • Flexible and open-minded
  • Happy to “have a go”
  • Enjoys new situations
  • Optimistic about anything new – therefore unlikely to resist change

KEY QUESTIONS

  • Will I learn something new? (Something I didn’t know or couldn’t do before.)
  • Will there be a variety of different activities? (I get bored doing the same thing for any length of time.)
  • Will it be OK to let my hair down and have fun?
  • Will it be OK to make mistakes?
  • Will there be other like-minded people to mix with?

WEAKNESSES

  • Tendency to take the immediately obvious course of action without weighing up other possibilities
  • Tendency to do too much themselves
  • Tendency to hog the limelight
  • Often take unnecessary risks
  • Goes into action without sufficient preparation
  • Gets bored with implementation and consolidation

Pragmatist Learning Style

Pragmatists are keen on trying out new ideas, theories and techniques to see if they work in practice. They positively search out new ideas and take the first opportunity to experiment with applications. They are the sort of people who return from courses brimming with new ideas that they want to try out. They like to get on with things, and act quickly and confidently on ideas that attract them. They tend to be impatient with ruminating and open-ended discussion. They are essentially practical, down-to-earth people who like solving problems (often through trial and error). They view problems and difficulties as a “challenge”. Their philosophy is: “As long as it works, that’s fine.” – although they may also be keen to experiment to find better ways to do things.

You will appreciate having a specific task or project to work on. This will help you to focus your attention as you seek to “come up with the goods”. You may find it useful to break down larger projects into smaller sections – each of which has its own problems and difficulties to be solved.

Recording learning

If you have to record information, you may find flow charts a useful way of representing what you have learned. Using flowcharts will also help you to develop a more holistic view of your work.

Using IT

You will probably use the toolbar buttons to get things done. You can use the HELP pointer to find out what these do. There are EXAMPLES and DEMOS in the HELP menu where you can often find useful hints and tips to help you get the job done. The TIP OF THE DAY can also set you thinking.

  • Experiments with new ideas
  • Looks for practical application
  • Down-to-earth
  • Problem-solver

STRENGTHS

  • Keen to test things out in practice
  • Practical and realistic
  • Down to earth and business-like; gets straight to the point
  • Technique oriented
  • KEY QUESTIONS
  • Will there be opportunity to practice and experiment?
  • Will there be lot of practical tips and techniques?
  • Will we be addressing real problems? (Hopefully, similar to my current problems.)
  • Will I be mixing with “hands-on” experts who have shown they can do it themselves?

WEAKNESSES

  • Tendency to reject anything without an obvious application
  • Not very interested in theory or basic principles
  • Tendency to seize on the first expedient solution to a problem
  • Impatient with “waffle”
  • Task-oriented rather than people-oriented

Theorist Learning Style

Theorists adapt and integrate observations into complex but logically sound theories. They think through problems in a logical, step-by-step fashion. They assimilate disparate facts into coherent, holistic theories. They tend to be perfectionists who do not rest easy until things are tidy and fit into a rational scheme. They like to analyse and synthesise. They are keen on asking questions and challenging assumptions. Their philosophy is: “If it’s logical then it’s good.” They attempt to fit everything together into a single jigsaw that encompasses “life, the universe and everything”. They tend to be detached, analytical and dedicated to rational objectivity rather than anything subjective or ambiguous. They may rigidly reject anything that does not fit in with their own particular mind-set.

You will want to ask lots of questions. You may find it useful to make a list of everything that needs to be learned and then tick off each item as it is dealt with. You could even grade the list (e.g.: looked at – familiar with – confident). On longer courses, you will benefit from sorting out a study timetable.

Recording learning

You may find it useful to keep a notebook and jot down the main points you have learned. Dividing the notebook into sections relating to different parts of the course will also be helpful. On the other hand, you may prefer to make rough notes initially and spend some time later on organising these into order.

Using IT

You will probably use the drop-down menus much of the time – which will help you to see what else the application can do. You might like to browse through the INDEX or SEARCH FOR HELP in the HELP menu

  • Logical and objective
  • Systematic and analytical
  • Thinks things through
  • Perfectionist
  • STRENGTHS
  • Logical, “vertical” thinkers
  • Rational and objective
  • Disciplined approach
  • Good at asking probing questions

KEY QUESTIONS

  • Will there be opportunities to ask questions?
  • Is there a clear structure and purpose?
  • Will I encounter complex ideas and concepts that will stretch me
  • Are the approaches to be used and concepts to be explored “valid”?
  • Will there be other people of similar calibre to myself?

WEAKNESSES

  • Restricted in lateral thinking
  • Low tolerance for uncertainty, disorder or ambiguity
  • Intolerant of anything subjective or intuitive
  • Full of “shoulds”, “oughts” and “musts”

Reflector Learning Style

Reflectors like to stand back to ponder experiences and observe them from many different perspectives. They collect data, both first-hand and from others, and prefer to think about it thoroughly before coming to any conclusion. They tend to postpone reaching definite conclusions for as long as possible. Their philosophy is to be cautious. They are thoughtful people who like to consider all possible angles and implications before making a move. They enjoy observing other people and prefer to take a back seat in meetings and discussions. They listen to others before making their own points. They tend to adopt a low profile and have a slightly distant, tolerant unruffled air about them. When they act it is part of a wide picture that includes the past as well as the present and others’ observations as well as their own.

You may find it useful to spend a few minutes thinking through what it is you want to get out of the course you are taking. As the course progresses, make a note of any questions or problems you may have, together with the answers as you discover them.

Recording learning

You may find it a useful exercise to keep a reflective diary as a means of recording what you have learned. This need not take long and is simply a summary of the main points and procedures that you learned each day.

Using IT

You may prefer to use drop-down menus initially but you will soon discover what is best for you. You might like to browse through SEARCH FOR HELP in the HELP menu.

  • Chews things over
  • Thoughtful and analytical
  • Good listener
  • Adopts low profile
  • Likely to procrastinate

STRENGTHS

  • Careful
  • Thorough and methodical
  • Thoughtful
  • Good at listening and assimilating information
  • Rarely jump to conclusions

KEY QUESTIONS

  • Will I be given adequate time to think things through?
  • Will there be the opportunity to assemble all the relevant information?
  • Will there be a wide cross-section of people with a variety of views?
  • Will I be under pressure to get things done quickly? (I don’t like to be slapdash.)

WEAKNESSES

  • Tendency to hold back from direct participation
  • Slow to make up their minds and reach a decision
  • Tendency to be too cautious and not take enough risks
  • Not usually assertive

Learning Styles: the debate

Despite widespread acceptance and application of Learning Styles, there is nevertheless still some debate about the validity of the concept. Proponents of Learning Styles maintain that adapting classroom teaching methods to suit students’ preferred style of learning improves the educative process. However, opponents of Learning Styles theories maintain that there is little empirical evidence to support this proposition.

A report on the scientific validity of Learning Styles practices (Pashler, H.; McDaniel, M.; Rohrer, D.; Bjork, R. (2009). “Learning styles: Concepts and evidence”. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 9: 105–119) concluded that an adequate evaluation of the Learning Styles hypothesis requires a particular kind of study. The report suggested that students, having been identified (for example) as “visual learners” or “auditory learners”, should then be randomly assigned to teaching groups focusing on either “visual” or “auditory” learning strategies – so that some students are “matched” to their preferred style, whereas others are “mismatched.” Students’ test scores (for the same test) at the end of the experiment would show whether “matched” students scored better than “unmatched” students – thus indicating whether or not the Learning Styles hypothesis is correct. To date, however, no such rigorous study has been carried out and the evidence for Learning Styles theory is largely anecdotal.

Nevertheless, large numbers of teachers and trainers are persuaded that Learning Styles are a factor in the effectiveness of their students’ learning.

Although the VAK Learning Styles model is perhaps the most widely used, largely because of its simplicity, Susan Greenfield (Professor of Synaptic Pharmacology at Lincoln College, Oxford) argues that adopting such an approach is “nonsense” from a neuro-scientific point of view. She argues that human beings make sense of the world through our senses working in unison. It is connectivity within the brain that enables us to make sense of the world – and therefore any attempt to separate the senses would be detrimental (if indeed it were possible.)

However, proponents of VAK are usually holistic rather than separatist and rarely propose separation of sensory input. They tend to campaign for a broadening of input – away from the tendency within many (traditional) classrooms to focus primarily on auditory input.

Whilst acknowledging that learning is a complex process that depends upon interconnectivity between many different parts of the brain, Gardner’s work on Multiple Intelligences would suggest that certain functions are located within generalised regions of the brain and that these modules might be inherently better/worse or developed to different degrees within individuals. This argument could be used to substantiate the claim that individual learners exhibit a preference for particular types of input.

It could be argued that, in the same way that some people are better physically coordinated by contrast with the clumsiness of others, there are those who are more capable than others of extracting meaning from verbal sources. Similarly, others might be more adept at interpreting visual signals. To maintain that all individuals are equally adept at the panoply of skills and abilities exhibited by the brain would be foolish. Nor would it be wise to maintain that everybody is equally capable of development to the same levels of ability. (Interestingly, one of the starting points for Gardner’s thinking was the extraordinary capabilities of savants.)

Despite reference here to Multiple Intelligence Theory, it is worth noting that Gardner’s work is considerably more far reaching than merely being another Learning Styles model.

Less popular than the VAK model, largely because of the terminology employed, is Kolb’s learning styles model, which was developed from his work on Experiential Learning. Kolb proposed a 4-stage experiential learning cycle that applies to all learners. He suggested that immediate or concrete experiences provide a basis for observation and reflection. These are assimilated and distilled into abstract concepts which can be actively tested, in turn creating new learning experiences. Individual learners will demonstrate differences in the way they think about things and the way they do things. These differences can be plotted on a Perception continuum (along a spectrum that ranges from a preference for thinking about things in a Concrete or Abstract way) and along a Processing continuum (along a spectrum that ranges from Active to Reflective). This results in identification of 4 broad Learning Styles, which Kolb refers to as: Accommodating, Diverging, Assimilating and Converging.

Apart from the extra effort required to get to grips with the terminology, a further disincentive for many from using Kolb’s Learning Styles Inventory is the cost.

Although there is still a cost attached to use of their Learning Styles Questionnaire, Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles theory is more widely used in the UK. Peter Honey acknowledges that “there are more similarities than differences” between their work and that of Kolb.

Whereas some of us prefer to study in depth before we tackle a task; others prefer to “get stuck into the job” and learn as we go along. Some of us are satisfied when the methods we use get the job done; others are more concerned with why a particular approach proved successful. Yet others spend time thinking through how the task could be tackled more effectively next time. Peter Honey and Alan Mumford suggest that we might usefully consider 4 basic learning styles: Activist – Pragmatist – Theorist – Reflector.

Anthony Gregorc’s Mind Styles model is purported to be based on how the mind works and also proposes 4 learning styles. Gregorc proposes that we perceive the world in both concrete and abstract ways and subsequently order those perceptions in either a sequential or random fashion. The combination of these perceptual qualities and ordering abilities generates four combinations: Concrete Sequential; Abstract Random; Abstract Sequential; Concrete Random. Although both of the perceptual qualities and both of the ordering abilities are present in each individual, some will be more dominant. It is this combination that determines our preferred “Mind Style” and provides the foundation for our specific learning strengths, or learning styles.

It is notable that there are a number of “loose similarities” between each of the preceding models, insofar as they each constuct a matrix predicated on two intersecting continua (one concerned with the way we perceive, the other with how we process those perceptions.)

The model advocated by Dunn and Dunn is a more complex and comprehensive one that takes account of various environmental, emotional, sociological, physiological and psychological factors. These include such things as the learner’s need for mobility, optimal time of day for learning, and the learner’s need to chew, smoke or drink, all of which may influence a learner’s capacity to learn. Similar to the VAK model, it acknowledges that learners differ in their preferred perception processes, but also takes account of their levels of motivation and sense of responsibility.

The model is not widely known in the UK but Professors Ken and Rita Dunn (St John’s University, New York) maintain that it is the result of extensive field work and painstaking research. They are at pains to point out that peer-reviewed research papers and doctoral dissertations based on their model have been published at more than 120 universities and that the model has been validated in a wide range of geographic, socioeconomic and ethnic settings.

The model might more properly be said to ascertain learning preferences (rather than styles) and the usefulness of the instrument may reside as much in the self knowledge gained through its completion as in any tabulation of results.

Some have questioned whether the various questionnaires and instruments really indicate “Learning Style” or whether they are more of a personality test. Rather than get hung up about how to categorise or “label” Learning styles theories, it would be more appropriate to consider how the results are used – and whether that usage contributes to more effective learning.

THE CASE AGAINST USING LEARNING STYLES

Those who oppose the use of Learning Styles put forward a number of objections. Many of these are in fact criticisms of the way that Learning Styles are misused rather than a criticism of the concept itself.

It is argued that using Learning Styles could be detrimental because:

Learning Styles categories will be used as simplistic “labels” to be applied to learners – rather than develop an appreciation of the full range of factors that influence their capacity to learn. (However, see Dunn and Dunn, whose model is more far-ranging.)

Teachers who attempt to deliver learning opportunities that focus exclusively on one “style” will disadvantage their students because learning, as previously mentioned (by Greenfield, above), is an holistic activity of the brain that depends on interconnectivity between the different modules of perception. Over-emphasis by teachers on a particular Learning Style might actually reduce rather than increase the potential for absorption of learning

“Learning Styles” could be used as an excuse by some learners (in much the same way that self-diagnosed dyslexia is used by some) who will blame their failure to learn on their teachers’ failure to adopt teaching methods that do not match their Learning Style. (It may be that teachers who adopt a more “traditional” approach may feel more threatened by this.)

Teachers and learners may focus exclusively on “playing to strengths” rather than seek to develop areas of identified weakness – and thus miss out on the opportunity to develop “fully rounded” learners who are capable of calling upon a number of learning strategies. (Promoting the Kolb Learning Styles Inventory, HayGroup emphasise that it “recognises individual learning preferences, while encouraging individuals to expand their learning strengths.” Little mention is made of how teachers and trainers might apply knowledge of students’ learning styles to developing more holistic learners.)

Teachers and learners may focus exclusively on “developing areas of weakness” – and similarly miss out on the opportunity to develop fully rounded learners.

SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF LEARNING STYLES?

In the light of the various criticisms levelled at misuse of Learning Styles, those who engage with the concept may query whether the various theories and models serve any purpose at all. Although the following proposals will not escape criticism, they may provide a basis for future development of Learning Styles usage.

An understanding of Learning Styles theory may encourage teachers to utilise a broader range of teaching strategies – thus providing for all learners a more diverse learning experience – which will increase the potential for brain interconnectivity.

Use of Learning Styles questionnaires may increase students’ self awareness – and hence make a contribution to their effectiveness as learners through raising their levels of motivation and self esteem.

A basic level of understanding of Learning Styles by students could be part of an empowering process that encourages learners to take ownership of their own development.

Learners who have previously written themselves off as failures may be encouraged to make a fresh start if they believe that they can now exercise some control over their own learning.

Perhaps the most useful aspect of Learning Styles theory is that it provides a vocabulary for learners, teachers and educators to discuss how best to assist learners to acquire the knowledge, understanding and skills that they aspire to.

We might usefully conclude by reminding ourselves of the basic tenet that underlies the thinking of those schools and educators who subscribe to the Sudbury Model. Proponents of the Sudbury Model advocate that learning is a process you do, not a process that is done to you, and that every child is an individual exhibiting a learning style that is unique to them.

Learning Styles and Gender

A PRELIMINARY WORD OF CAUTION

I believe that all individuals should be treated as individuals regardless of their gender, race, colour, nationality, perceived ability or intelligence, sexual orientation, etc. This applies no less within the context of providing learning opportunities than in other areas of life.

However, providing individuals with equality of opportunity does not mean that they must all be provided with the same opportunity. (For instance, it would be inappropriate to address a mixed group of hearing, hearing-impaired and deaf students using British Sign Language alone – because that would most likely hinder the understanding of the students who do not sign. All the students would be receiving the same opportunity – but not equality of opportunity.)

“SAME OPPORTUNITY” does not equal “EQUAL OPPORTUNITY”

Likewise, we need to recognise that by putting students with different learning styles in the same classroom, although we may be providing them with the same opportunity, we are not actually facilitating their individual learning equally effectively.

In an ideal world, teachers ought to take into consideration the individual learning style(s) and preferred means of perceiving, processing and presenting information of each of their students.

In reality, we invariably pigeon-hole our students into a limited number of categories. Whether we adopt the four categories proposed by Honey and Mumford, the four identified by Kolb and McCarthy, or the eight (nine?) suggested by Howard Gardner, it is better than treating our students as if they were all moulded from the same lump – but not much better.

Although there are differences in the way in which boys and girls generally prefer to process information, we should nevertheless remind ourselves that this is the minimalist approach, in that it identifies only two broad categories. Nevertheless, differentiation on the basis of gender is a starting point – but we do need to bear in mind that it is heavily dependant on making sweeping generalisations.

GENDER DIFFERENTIATION IS ONLY A STARTING POINT.

MALE AND FEMALE BRAINS

The different sides of the brain have different functions.

LEFT BRAIN

language

logic

mathematics

analytical thinking

shaping of ideas

sequencing

fine motor skills

timing

RIGHT BRAIN

visual

perspective

spatial awareness

creative & imaginative functions

emotions

tone

quality of sound

facial recognition

The above applies to the majority of right-handed people.

In left-handed and ambidextrous people the functional specialisation is different: sometimes this is simply a swap-over – but may also be a more complex sharing of functions.

Males generally have more-developed right hemispheres – which disposes them towards spatial tasks such as map-reading or interpreting technical drawings. Females generally have more-developed left hemispheres – which is probably why they learn to speak earlier than males and are often more adept at languages. Females are also better at fine motor control, which probably accounts for their generally superior handwriting skills.

CO-ORDINATING LEFT AND RIGHT BRAIN

Joining the left and right halves of the brain, and co-ordinating their functions, is a bundle of nerve fibres called the corpus callosum. As children grow, the two brain hemispheres become increasingly more specialised, each becoming more involved in “doing its own thing”. As specialisation increases, so the corpus callosum becomes thinner and weaker – until, at puberty, the thinning stops. However, because females usually reach puberty before males, this thinning stops earlier in females – resulting in them having a thicker corpus callosum. This means that men tend to have brains that are more specialised with relatively less communication between the two hemispheres, the consequences of which are far-reaching.

Whereas men are more vulnerable to problems such as dyslexia and hyperactivity, both of which are exacerbated by lack of hemispheric co-ordination, their compartmentalised thinking enables them to isolate specific problems as they attempt to solve them. Hence, men are more likely to excel at maths, mechanics and engineering. By contrast, women are able to take a more holistic view and are more likely to integrate logic and emotion, thus demonstrating enhanced “emotional intelligence”.

Geoff Hannan

Geoff Hannan points out that this bias is evident long before puberty. “Girls tend to be brought up to have relationships with people, to be responsible for themselves and others, with a strong emphasis on communication. They are brought up as ‘the talkers’. Boys, on the other hand, are brought up to have relationships with objects. They are ‘the doers’.”

Highlighting the predominance of right-brain thinking in males, Hannan suggests that a boy’s oral skills are weaker, as are his literacy, organisational and analytical skills. Consequently, “his lack of competence (and interest) in analysing, sequencing and prioritising are central to his academic under-achievement.”

Summing up the difference in boys’ and girls’ learning styles, Hannan writes: “He does first and then (hopefully) thinks. She thinks first and then (hopefully) does. He has a trial and error, experiential learning style rooted in confidence, competence and interest in the manipulation of objects and systems. He is a speculative thinker (leading towards physics as a subject). She has a language-centred, sequential learning style, rooted in an interest in people and relationships. She is a reflective thinker (leading towards English).”

IT’S NOT COOL TO BE GOOD AT SCHOOL

Research from Homerton College, Cambridge has shown that “if you’re a boy, it’s just not cool to work hard at school.” Peer pressure militates against boys’ success because boys appear more concerned with preserving an image of reluctant involvement or disengagement. The researchers conclude: “For many boys, their emerging masculinity placed them in direct conflict with the ethos and aspirations of the school, an antagonist against whom their own masculinity was frequently tested.”

Cathy Byrne (primary head teacher) suggests that boys “paint themselves into a tight gender role corner” from as early as six years old. She noticed a deterioration in enthusiasm and a refusal to participate in any activity where they were not certain of success; much of which coincided with the child’s awakening realisation of their gender.

It’s OK to be good at sport because that’s physical, it shows you’re tough. It’s even acceptable to be good at art because that’s perceived as natural talent and you don’t have to work at it. Being good at music is acceptable for the same reason, though it depends on the instrument. Electric guitar and drums are for boys, the clarinet and cello for girls.

EXAMINING ENGLISH

In a TES article questioning whether the English GCSE exam is biased in favour of girls, Nicholas Pyke pointed out that “an increasing number of academics are coming to the conclusion that the curriculum at GCSE level plays to female strengths, and that it has probably contributed to the enormous improvement in girls’ results over the past decade.”

Examiners thought girls had an advantage in:

extended pieces

answers to open-ended questions

showing audience awareness

writing reflectively

writing empathetically

writing imaginatively

discussing character motivation

conversation/drama

writing about poems

writing about literary prose

writing about drama

preparing for assignments

discussing assignments with teachers

listening.

By contrast, boys scored better only in:

writing argumentatively

writing factually

interpreting visual material.

Boys also do well on multiple-choice test papers which do not figure in GCSE English.

SINGLE-SEX LANGUAGE TEACHING

Writing in the TES, Amanda Barton reported on 3 schools that were experimenting with single-sex teaching of modern languages.

At Hollingworth High School in Rochdale, which segregates the whole of Year 7 for French classes, Valerie McDonald is using the opportunity to foster boys’ social skills, encouraging them to adopt a more organised approach. The main benefit, however, is that the boys’ writing skills have “improved considerably”.

At Madeley High School in Staffordshire, the decision to segregate was based as much on concern for the girls as for the boys. Faced with a group of “strong, dynamic boys who were very, very vociferous” and a group of “studious, quiet girls who were gradually bludgeoned into silence”, Norma Horton (head of modern languages) decided to separate them. She reports that lessons with the boys are “more boisterous” but have resulted in their test results being elevated to almost the same level as the girls.

At Ashlawn School in Rugby, Kirsten Watkins encourages a more relaxed atmosphere with her all-boys Year 10 French group. As an extra incentive, she also encourages an element of competition with the corresponding girls group. Acknowledging that it may be frowned on by equal opportunities experts, she maintains that it creates tremendous motivation – and reports that the boys are “unexpectedly positive” about writing.

All three heads of languages are keenly aware that segregation alone is not an answer but have done much to identify the learning styles, interests and needs of the boys they teach. Perhaps it is this has led the boys at Madeley to thrive in what they describe as a “happier environment”.

CLASSROOM DOMINATION

Dr Christine Howe suggests that girls could be their own worst enemies by encouraging boys to dominate in the classroom. Boys tend to “dominate the physical context, volunteering for practical demonstrations in science and controlling the mouse and keyboard in computing”. Boys will also make more contributions than girls and their contributions will be more elaborate. Research into oral assessment suggests that boys interrupt girls more than the reverse. However, it should not be assumed that quantity equates with quality.

What is perhaps disturbing about Dr Howe’s findings is that girls acquiesce by asking boys for help. In a study that observed young children working on a jigsaw puzzle, it was observed that girls were three times as likely as boys to ask for help from the supervising adult. In the absence of an adult, girls direct their pleas for assistance to boys. This reiterates the finding that girls prefer to relate to people, whereas boys “relate” to objects.

Dr Howe makes the point that we should not necessarily assume that girls are the “losers” in this process, as “soliciting contributions is a highly active process” and the girls are being afforded an opportunity to develop their interpersonal skills.

Learning Styles: The next generation

Since Honey and Mumford first gave birth to their Learning Styles theory, in the late eighties, many a trainer has sought to present this most useful of concepts in ever more engaging ways. Honey and Mumford (in particular, the former) have sought to re-kindle flagging interest in their original product by re-packaging it in a variety of guises – though I am still awaiting the hand painted (by Peter Honey) tee-shirts, emblazoned no doubt with various appropriate mottoes:

What nobody seems to have latched onto is the obvious next phase of the theory. As a trainer, I am always careful to point out that individuals do not fall neatly into pigeon-holed categories – but that each of us employs a complex combination of learning styles – depending on context, circumstance and the nature of what we are trying to learn. Each of us possesses not merely one clearly-defined learning style but a combination of two or more. This has led me to consider how we might designate the various combinations – so as to provide not merely the “bare bones” four-category model proposed by H&M – but an additional six combinatorial categories. Not that I am suggesting we should adopt such a model wholesale (it would be considerably more difficult to handle) or attempt to replace the eminently practical traditional model – but it does set you thinking.

Here then, for your consideration, are my slightly tongue-in-cheek suggestions for the enhancement of Learning Styles theory.

At first glance you might think that the Activist-Reflector is a most unlikely combination; they do appear to be situated at opposite ends of the style-spectrum. However, I suspect that they are more prevalent than we realise – and that most of us have been their unwitting victims or apologists. They are the type of person who cannot help but acting first – who then realise that they really shouldn’t have acted that way. The kind of person who opens their mouth, puts their foot in it – and then realises what they have said. The Activist-Reflector is known in the training trade as a “REGRETTER”.

Theorists, as you will be aware, like to make connections. They constantly ask “Why?” and then seek to organise the new information elicited so that it forms a cohesive overall picture of how things are. Activist-Theorists, on the other hand, although they still have lots of questions, generally do not have the time or inclination to sort or process all the information thus obtained. They excel at brainstorming, insofar as they generate new ideas; each new idea acting as a catalyst for the spontaneous eruption of further progeny. Unfortunately they rarely stop to consider the implications of their ideas – preferring to rely on friendly passing Reflectors to take on that role. The Activist-Theorist is technically known as a “SCATTERBRAIN”.

Pragmatists are known as clearly-focused problem-solvers who relish the challenge of devising solutions to specific tasks. The Activist-Pragmatist is a slightly different animal who, typically, solves the problem – but invariably by means of utilising elastic bands, bulldog clips and the odd piece of chewing gum. The Activist-Pragmatist does not so much solve the problem as improvise a somewhat makeshift Heath Robinson affair – giving rise to them being known, in technical terminology, as a “BODGER”.

Theorist-Pragmatists, on the other hand, do not merely solve the problem. They delight in asking a whole series of “What if?” questions and then providing practical answers to the difficulties thus envisaged. They then engage in an ordered programme of implementing all the necessary safeguards to ensure that such a problem – or any associated similar or dissimilar problem – is unlikely to inflict itself in the future. In essence, the pragmatic “quick fix” is translated into a fully guaranteed solution that takes into account every conceivable potentiality for failure in order to ensure against it. Theorist-Pragmatists are known as “SAFEGUARDERS”.

The Pragmatist-Reflector also appreciates having a particular problem to address and invariably manages to devise a down-to-earth settlement. Unfortunately, they are then beset with uncertainty whether the solution they initially proposed is the best one. Did the original idea fully utilise available resources? Have all the implications been thought through? Maybe there was a cheaper alternative? They can often be found checking to make sure that the original solution is still in place and holding water. The Pragmatist-Reflector is known officially as a “TWEAKER”.

Pragmatist-Reflectors are not to be confused with Reflector-Pragmatists. These latter individuals can be found wandering aimlessly around garages or garden sheds at weekends, musing on whether they are properly equipped to rake out the gutters, mow the lawn or fix the broken gate. They spend much of their life “getting around to it” and differ from true Reflectors – who can be found lounging in the sunshine in padded garden chairs. Reflector-Pragmatists are affectionately known as “DITHERERS”.

The Theorist-Reflector is thoughtful and comprehensive; a dotter of i’s and a crosser of t’s. As something of a perfectionist, they are rarely able to complete anything to their own satisfaction. There is, they believe, always something else to be added, adapted, appended. Occasionally dubbed (somewhat unprofessionally) a “worry-guts”, the official term for a Theorist-Reflector is a “DOUBLE-CHECKER”.

Learning Style – Questionnaire

This questionnaire has been devised to assist trainers who appreciate the usefulness of Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles model but find their questionnaire rather cumbersome for use in a short training session. It is intended as a short and pithy introduction to Learning Styles that can be used at the beginning of a one-day training event or short course. This “Rough and ready reckoner” lacks the sophistication of Honey and Mumford’s questionnaire but is easy to complete, simple to score and a useful discussion starter.

Below is a list of 24 questions.

  1. Do you find it easy to meet new people and make new friends?
  2. Are you cautious and thoughtful?
  3. Do you get bored easily?
  4. Are you a practical, “hands on” kind of person?
  5. Do you like to try things out for yourself?
  6. Do friends consider you to be a good listener?
  7. Do you have clear ideas about the best way to do things?
  8. Do you enjoy being the centre of attention?
  9. Are you a bit of a daydreamer?
  10. Do you keep a list of things to do?
  11. Do you like to experiment to find the best way to do things?
  12. Do you prefer to think things out logically?
  13. Do you like to concentrate on one thing at a time?
  14. Do people sometimes think of you as shy and quiet?
  15. Are you a bit of a perfectionist?
  16. Are you enthusiastic about life?
  17. Would you rather “get on with the job” than keep talking about it?
  18. Do you often notice things that other people miss?
  19. Do you act first then think about the consequences later?
  20. Do you like to have everything in its “proper place”?
  21. Do you ask lots of questions?
  22. Do you like to think things through before getting involved?
  23. Do you enjoy trying out new things?
  24. Do you like the challenge of having a problem to solve?

Thinking Skills

What do we mean by “Thinking Skills”?

Thinking skills are the mental processes that we apply when we seek to make sense of experience. Thinking skills enable us to integrate each new experience into the schema that we are constructing of “how things are”. It is apparent that better thinking will help us to learn more from our experience and to make better use of our intelligence.

It has always been the central aim of education to improve the quality of thinking because better thinking will not only enable us to become more successful at learning but will also equip us for life, enabling us to realise our own potential and to contribute to the development of society.

Why do we need to develop thinking skills?

When I was at school (in the 1950’s and 1960’s) students were largely considered to be “clever” if they demonstrated the ability to commit to memory huge amounts of data and to recall that data on the appropriate occasion. At that time, I recall, Australia had a population of 6 million people and 60 million sheep! Oh, how I have longed for that particular piece of information to become relevant. Not only have I not been able to utilise that particular piece of information, but I suspect that it is no longer true. The problem with learning such “facts” is that they become outdated, or new research requires modification of previously accepted “knowledge”. Even more importantly, the rate of discovery of new phenomena and the theories associated with such discovery is increasing at an alarming rate. If we are merely equipped with a bank of past “knowledge” we will soon find ourselves unable to relate to the current world in which we live, and inadequately prepared for the demands of a rapidly changing future.

In “How to Create and Develop a Thinking Classroom”, Mike Fleetham writes:

“In our evolving world, the ability to think is fast becoming more desirable than any fixed set of skills or knowledge. We need problem solvers, decision makers and innovators. And to produce them, we need new ways to teach and learn. We need to prepare our children for their future, not for our past.”

Incidentally, the current population of Australia (on 20 March 2011) is 22,594,438. I know because I’ve just checked out an up-to-the-minute projection on the website of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, a facility that had not been invented when I was at school; thus highlighting the necessity to developing information-processing skills rather than cramming students’ heads with “facts”.

Is it possible to define a set of “Thinking Skills”

There are various different classifications of Thinking Skills, one of the most popular of which is based on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Thinking.

Click here to see the Thinking Skills model adopted for use as part of the National Curriculum.

Whereas it is apparent that there are differences in these two models (and there are others which are equally as useful), it is nevertheless possible to detect that there appears to be a progression from that kind of thinking that is largely “passive” towards that which is “pro-active”. As they become more proficient, thinkers move from being merely “recipients” of information, to become “manipulators” and “judges” of information, and ultimately to “discoverers” and “creators” of new information. This might also be identified as a progression from the past, through the present and into the future.

How can we teach Thinking Skills?

There is evidence to suggest that “Brain-gym”-type activities are a useful foundation for the development of Thinking Skills. Such activities can be used with children from the early years of schooling onwards. The activities described in the “BrainBites” section of this website are designed to encourage students to think in a diversity of ways. Many of them call upon a number of the brain’s modules and are intended to encourage lateral thinking.

One of the sub-goals of Feuerstein’s Instrumental Enrichment Programme is to further the student’s acquisition of vocabulary, thus providing the student with the verbal tools necessary for the analysis of internalised mental processes. From the early years of primary school, teachers can do much to encourage students to engage in a variety of talk-based activities that will help to develop their thinking skills. For a selection of strategies, see the section on using TALK in the classroom.

As students become increasingly confident about expressing their opinion, teachers can do much to foster the development of thinking skills by the imaginative use of questioning techniques in the classroom.

Edward de Bono’s “Thinking hats” is a simple but useful approach that can be used in the classroom to ensure that issues are addressed from a variety of perspectives.

Although philosophy has traditionally been regarded as an activity more suitable for older students, recently there has been a move towards introducing philosophy into primary schools. Younger children have demonstrated that, with the right stimulus, they are capable of posing philosophical questions and addressing a range of abstract issues. (See Philosophy for Children links in the column on right.)

See also “Problem-solving skills for kids”.

It is, of course, useful to know each student’s Multiple Intelligence profile. This can provide teachers with useful knowledge about the best access routes to engagement for individual students.

Similarly, it helps to know each student’s preferred (VAK) learning style. There is a brief questionnaire to help students discover their preferred style. Students with a preference for processing information visually are likely to benefit from learning how to Mindmap.