We all know that we're capable of more than we realize. In fact, many people's potential is more significant than they realize even though they may have been told differently by their parents or teachers.
In 1983, Howard Gardner proposed that intelligence wasn’t just dominated by a single, generalized ability. Gardner felt that intelligence had to fulfill eight specific criteria.
That includes Logic, Word, Visual, Music, Body, People, Self, and Nature. One or more of these aptitudes are innate in children. One of the most common criticisms of intelligence testing is that it doesn't measure something that really matters like the ability to learn. But it turns out that this is a misperception. Yes, learning is important. But it's not the only thing that matters when it comes to intelligence. There are other kinds of intelligence too — and they're all equally important for success in school and life.
Children are born with innate skills.
They're born with the skills they need to survive: motor skills, language skills, visual-spatial skills, and so on. These skills are simply part of who we are as human beings. They're what make us human; they're what make us different from other species on this planet; they're what make us individual human beings capable of communication and cooperation with others around us in society.
Using those skills as conduits can accelerate learning
Once you've learned how to use these innate abilities successfully (which means taking advantage of all their strengths but also compensating for their weaknesses), then you can accelerate your own learning process by using them as conduits for solving problems or creating new knowledge/creativity/innovation, etc. To me, the question is whether we are using our children as a tool to achieve some goal, or are we using them to help them grow into the people they want to be?
I think that parents need to ask themselves if their child's self-esteem is being damaged by the constant push for perfection, the expectation that children can do anything, and the overuse of time-management techniques.
The answer may not be in the activities you're doing with your child, but rather in what kind of activities you are using and what is the objective of the practice. By thinking about it, talking to others, modeling it, and picturing it, we can find a solution. People typically choose a way that they are familiar with and adept at. This hypothesis has been demonstrated in practice. The current difficulty is how to let kids use their preferred MIs while they study. Making various exercises with the same learning purpose but different skills is a straightforward approach.
To conclude
This is a really good point. I would suggest that you provide more variety in activities for the same learning objectives. At MITSEI we do a mix of both. We have activities where there is no fixed structure and learners can work on their own or with others. But we also have activities where people need to work together as teams and each member needs to know how the others are performing to make sure everyone gets the desired outcome.
Comments