Email this article 
Hide
Show all
Links between Bloom's Taxonomy and Gardener's Multiple Intelligences: The issue of Textbook Analysis
Abstract
The major thrust of this research was to investigate the cognitive aspect of the high school textbooks and interchange series, due to their extensive use, through content analysis based on Bloom's taxonomy and Gardner's Multiple Intelligences (MI). This study embraced two perspectives in a grid in order to broaden and deepen the analysis by determining the numbers and the types of intelligences with respect to their learning objectives tapped in the textbooks and comparing them. Through codification of Bloom’s learning objectives and Gardner's MI, the results showed that there was a significant difference between the numbers of intelligences with respect to their learning objectives in the textbooks. However, the interchange series enjoyed a large number of the spatial and the interpersonal intelligences across eight levels of learning objectives, whereas they had the least number of the intrapersonal, the musical, and the bodily-kinesthetic intelligences across knowledge understanding and application levels.
Keywords: learning objectives, multiple intelligences, textbook analysis
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Akbari, R., & Hosseini, K. (2008). Multiple intelligences and language learning strategies: Investigating possible relations. System, 36(2), 141-155.
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ansari, H., & Babaii, E. (2000). Universal characteristics of EFL/ESL text book. The Internet TESOL Journal, 2, 1-8.
Armstrong, T. (2003). The multiple intelligences of reading and writing: Making the words come alive. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Azizifar, A., Koosha, M., & Lotfi, A. R. (2010). An analytical evaluation of locally product Iranian high school ELT text book. CCSE, 3, 24-75.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I. Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay.
Bloom, T. (2002). Blooming with multiple intelligences. Learning Matters, 8, 8-12.
Bloom, T. (2004). Integrating the revised Bloom's taxonomy with multiple intelligences. Teacher Collage Record, 106, 65-73.
Brown, D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. London: Longman.
Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation for selection and analysis for implementation. In M. Celce-Murcia (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 415-427). US: Heinle & Heinle, Thomsom Learning Inc.
Candlin, C. N., & Breen, M. P. (1979). Evaluating, adapting and innovating language teaching materials. In C. Yorio, K. Perkins, and J. Schacter (Eds.), On TESOL 79: The learner in focus (pp. 86-108). Washington, D.C.: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Cook, V. (2008). L2 language user. UK: Multilingual Matters.
Daoud, A. & Celce-Murcia, M. (1979). Selecting and evaluating a textbook. In M. Celce-Murcia and L. McIntosh (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 302-307). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Darali, G. (2007). Pragmatics dimension in spectrum text books (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Shiraz University, Shiraz.
Farjami, H. (2002). The applications of MI theory in designing activities and for teaching English (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of Semnan, Semnan.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Jahangard, A. (2007). The evaluation of the EFL materials taught at Iranian public high schools. Karen’s Linguistics Issues. Retrieved from http://www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/bymonth.html
Noble, T. (2000). Integrating Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory with a revised Bloom’s taxonomy: A new model for school reform? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Sydney, Sydney.
Noble, T. (2004). Integrating the revised Bloom’s taxonomy with multiple ıntelligences: A planning tool for curriculum dif¬ferentiation. Teachers College Record, 106, 193-211.
Palmberg, R. (2002). Catering for multiple intelligences in EFL course books. Humanizing Language Teaching, 4, 22-31.
Richards, J. C. (2005). Intero (3rd ed.). Cambridge: CUP.
Richards, J. C. (2005). Interchange 1 (3rd ed.). Cambridge: CUP.
Richards, J. C. (2005). Interchange 2 (3rd ed.). Cambridge: CUP.
Richards, J. C. (2005). Interchange 3 (3rd ed.). Cambridge: CUP.
Riazi, M., & Mosalanejad, N. (2010). Evaluation of learning objectives in Iranian and pre-university text book using Bloom's taxonomy. Journal for English as a Second Language, 13, 110-127.
Roohani, A., & Rabiei, S. (2013). Exploring language learning strategy use: The role of multiple intelligences, proficiency and gender. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 5(3), 41-64.
Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42 (4), 237-246.
Shirvani, K. (2010, October). An MI-based approach to the evaluation of EFL textbooks. Paper presented at the 8th International TELLSI Conference, Tehran, Iran.
Snider, D. (2001). Multiple intelligences theory and foreign language teaching (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Utah, Utah.
Tavakoli, F. (1995). Functional analysis of the dialogues in Iranian senior high school English textbooks (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran.
Tucker, C. A. (1975). Evaluating beginning textbooks. English Teaching Forum, 13, 355-361.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, D. (1983). Developing criteria for text book evaluation. ELT Journal, 37, 251-261.
Yarmohammadi, L. (2006). Communication within critical discourse perspectives. Tehran: Hermes Publication.
Zohrabi, M. (2011). Course book development and evaluation for English for general purpose course. CCSE, 4, 24-75.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
2010-2023 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.
Advances in Language and Literary Studies
You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.