The Relationship between Multiple Intelligences with Preferred Science Teaching and Science Process Skills
This study was undertaken to identify the relationship between multiple intelligences with preferred science teaching and science process skills. The design of the study is a survey using three questionnaires reported in the literature: Multiple Intelligences Questionnaire, Preferred Science Teaching Questionnaire and Science Process Skills Questionnaire. The study selected 300 primary school students from five (5) primary schools in Penang, Malaysia. The findings showed a relationship between kinesthetic, logical-mathematical, visual-spatial and naturalistic intelligences with the preferred science teaching. In addition there was a correlation between kinesthetic and visual-spatial intelligences with science process skills, implying that multiple intelligences are related to science learning.
Aktamis, H. & Ergin, O. (2008). The effect of scientific process skills education on students’ scientific creativity, science attitudes and academic achievements. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9 (1).
Armstrong, T. (2000). 7 Kinds of Smart. Identifying and Developing Your Multiple Intelligences. New York : A Plume Book.
Armstrong, T. (2003). The multiple intelligences of reading and writing: Making the words come alive. ASCD.
Bilgin, I. (2006). The effects of hands-on activities incorporating a cooperative learning approach on eight grade students'science process skills and attitudes toward science. Journal of Baltic Science Education, (9).
Carroll, K. (2000). Science for every learner: Brain-compatible pathways to scientific literacy. Tucson, Arizona: Zephyr.
Che Nizam Che Ahmad, Kamisah Osman & Lilia Halim. (2010). Hubungan ramalan persekitaran
pembelajaran makmal sains dengan tahap kepuasan pelajar. Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia, 35(2), 19-30
Chen, J., Moran, S., & Gardner, H. (2009). Multiple intelligences around the world. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Dunn, R. S., & Dunn, K.J. (1979). Learning styles/teaching styles: Should they . . . can they . . . be matched? Educational Leadership, 36, 238-244.
Enger, S. K., & Yager R.E. (1998). The Iowa Assesment Handbook. Iowa City, US: Science Education Centre.
Fatin Aliyah Phang & Nor Athirah Tahir. (2011). Science Process Skills among UTM’s Science Education Students. Journal of Science and Mathematics Educational, 3, 123-133. ISSN:2231-7368.
Gardner, H., 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books
Gardner, H., (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books
Gardner, H. & Hatch, T. (1989). Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational researcher, 18(8), 4-10.
Garrett, R. M. (1986). Problem-solving in science education. Studies in Science Education. 13 (1), 70-95.
Goodnaugh, K. (2001). Multiple Intelligences Theory: A framework for personalizing science curricula. School Science & Mathematics, 101, 180-194.
Gregorc, A. F. (1979). Learning/teaching styles: Potent forces behind them. Educational Leadership, 36, 234-237.
Hodson, D„ & Reid, D. (1988). Changing priorities in science education: Part I. School Science Review, 70(250), 101 -108
Hopper, B., & Hurry, P. (2000). Learning the MI way: The effects on students’ learning of using the theory of multiple intelligences. Pastoral Care, 18(4), 26-32.
Hu W. & Adey P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-403.
Kamisah Osman, Zanaton Haji Iksan & Lilia Halim. (2007). Sikap terhadap sains dan sikap saintifik di kalangan pelajar sains. Jurnal Pendidikan, 32, pp: 39-69.
Karslo,F., Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2010). Prospective chemistry teachers’ competency of evaluation of chemical experiments in terms of science process skills. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 778–781.
Kelly, G. J., Brown, C., & Crawford, T. (2000). Experiments, contingencies, and curriculum: Providing opportunities for learning through improvisation in science teaching. Science Education, 84(5), 624-657.
Kreuze, J. G. & Payne, D. D. (1989). The learning style preferences of Hispanic and Anglo college research on good teaching: A comparison. Reading Improvement, 26 (2), 166-169.
McKenzie, W. (1999). Multiple Intelligence Survey. Retrieved from:
McKenzie, W. (2009). Walking the Walk: Multiple Intelligences in Educator Professional Development. Massachusetts Computer Using Educators, pp: 11-29.
Millar, R. (1989). Bending the evidence: The relationship between theory and experiment in science education. In R. Millar (Ed.), Doing science: Images of science in science education (pp. 38–61). Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
Noor Akmar Taridi. (2007). Pendekatan inkuiri dalam pengajaran biologi secara eksperimen. (Tesis Dr. Falsafah, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi).
Pyatt, K. & Sim, R. (2007). Learner performance and attitudes in tradional versus simulated laboratory experiences.
Saban, A. I., & Bal, A. P. (2012). An analysis of teaching strategies employed in the elementary school mathematics teaching in terms of multiple intelligence theory. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education. Retrieved from http://eku.comu.edu.tr/index/8/2/
Sarrazine, A.R. (2005). Addressing astronomy misconceptions and achieving national science standards utilizing aspects of multiple intelligences theory in the classroom and the planetarium. (Tesis PhD. Indiana University, Indiana).
Shahrokhi, M., Ketabi, S., & Dehnoo, M. A. (2013). The relationship between multiple intelligences and performance on grammar tests: Focusing on linguistic intelligence. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 3(9), 189-194.