Categorizing Multiple Intelligences of Pre-Service Mathematic
Teachers
Riva Lesta Ariany, T. T. Widiastuti, A. H. Syaf, N. Sobarningsih and Rahayu Kariadinata
Prodi. Pendidikan Matematika, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Jl. A.H. Nasution No. 105, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: Education, Multiple Intelligences, Mathematic.
Abstract: Someone will find it easier to learn something by using the most dominant intelligence within them, so it
needs to be identified the prominent intelligence in a person towards an effective learning process. This study
aims to determine the plural intelligence of teachers pre-service mathematically. The research method used is
descriptive qualitative. The results of this study indicate that every student has a dominant intelligence,
interpersonal intelligence is the dominant intelligence that most students have from the eight types of
intelligence in multiple intelligences. The implications of this study are that students become aware of their
dominant intelligence so that they are more confident.
1 INTRODUCTION
Gardner suggested that there are at least eight types
of human intelligences. They are also known as
multiple intelligences. The firs intelligence is
kinesthetic intelligence. It is the ability to use the
whole body to express ideas and feelings and the
competency in using the body to produce or change
something (Gardner, 1983).Interpersonal intelligence
is one's skill in understanding other people mood,
purpose, motivation, and emotions(Gardner, 1983).
Intrapersonal intelligence has self-concept and
positive life direction. This refers to competence in
knowing self-identity and acting self-development
(Gardner, 1983).Logical-Mathematical intelligence is
indicated by high skill in manipulating and
understanding numbers and the ability to think
effectively (Gardner, 1983).Musical Intelligence is
the ability to appreciate, differentiate, write, and
perform in different types of music (Gardner,
1983).Naturalist intelligence is the ability to
appreciate, categorize, classify, explain, and connect
things in nature(Gardner, 1999).Linguistic
Intelligence is the ability to comprehend, use, and
manipulate written or spoken words productively
(Gardner, 1983)Visual / Spatial intelligence is
characterized by the ability to understand pictures or
situations and quickly(Gardner, 1983)..
Therefore, it is important for prospective teachers
to recognize their own intelligence domain to
facilitate them to learn. In fact, math teacher
candidates are generally unaware of their dominant
intelligence and have not utilized that intelligence in
the learning process. Based on the results of previous
research it is suggested that the intelligence domain
of prospective teachers should be determined starting
from the first semester, and the environment must
accommodate all intelligence domains (Yenice and
Aktamis, 2010).It is important since every individual
is unique (Kilic and Serf, 2015).Recognizing and
understanding the classroom diversity have been
proven significant (Katwibun, 2013). Significant
progress has been achieved over the last decade to
understand and define diversity in mathematics
classes, and how this diversification is concerned
with teaching and learning mathematics. According
to recent research, in order to have an effective
educational process, it is important to identify areas
of intelligence and know the exact parameters in
identifying them. (Aydemir and Karali, 2014).
Consequently, at the level of mathematics
education at the University, prospective teachers need
to know what are their most dominant intelligence are
so they can learn better and are confident in utilizing
the intelligence. Multiple Intelligences theory for
beginning teachers is also useful for improving
Ariany, R., Widiastuti, T., Syaf, A., Sobarningsih, N. and Kariadinata, R.
Categorizing Multiple Intelligences of Pre-Service Mathematic Teachers.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education (ICSE 2017) - Volume 2, pages 95-98
ISBN: 978-989-758-316-2
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
95

confidence in the transition from student to teacher
(Roxana, 2014)Therefore, the mathematics teacher
prospective needs to be facilitated to be able to learn
effectively in the classroom. The lecturer also needs
to know the dominant intelligence in the students so
that the lecturer can plan the learning which is
relevant to the students’ intelligence. Knowing the
students' intelligence profiles will allow lecturers to
familiarize themselves with their students and
understand their similarities and differences better.
This is consistent with the theory of Multiple
Intelligences implying that educators should
recognize and teach students to develop their broader
talents and skills (McClellan and Conti, 2008) In
addition, with the categorization of students' multiple
intelligences, students can know that they are smart
and special. Every student is smart and excels in their
respective fields and deserves an award for it. The
appreciation of different intelligences in the
mathematics class will make the students of
mathematics teachers have confidence, so they are
more motivated to do their best in learning. Variation
is the most common metaphor for recognizing and
accepting differences among people in society
(Siegel, 2003).
The dominant intelligence fields of mathematics
teacher candidates must be taken into account when
planning education, they will be encouraged to
participate in educational status proactively. Giving
them assignment according to their preferred field
will contribute to their personal development. It is in
line with Ahmed and Gasm (2013) claiming that by
knowing the dominant intelligence, students will have
the opportunity to get a better education that suits
their individual characteristics. As a result, they will
be so motivated that failure to achieve educational
goals can be minimized.
This study aims to categorize the multiple
intelligence of prospective teachers. Efforts to
categorize the intelligence of prospective
mathematics teacher students was adapted from a
multiple intelligence assessment in the form of
multiple intelligences checklist. This is done so that
the future lecturers can develop the lecture plan by
considering the characteristics of the dominant
intelligence of each student, also to give appreciation
for all the intelligence that students have in the math
class that is not currently done. The appreciation is
only given to students who have logical mathematical
intelligence, students who are dominant in other
intelligences are less appreciated so they are less
confident.
2 METHODS
This study used descriptive qualitative study. The
subject was junior students of mathematic teachers.
The sample was 24 students chosen randomly.
The instrument in this study was MI test using
Multiple Intelligences Indicator based on Howard
Gardner (Chapman and Chislett, 2005) the
questionnaires consists of 24 statements measuring
eight types of intelligences. It used Likert scale
answer with the following options: highly disagree,
disagree, agree, and highly agree.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Based on the data, it was revealed that most students
has more than one dominant intelligence.
Table 1: Multiple intelligence categorization.
Type of Intelligence Numbe
r
of Students
Linguistic 8
Logical Mathematics 8
Visual S
p
atial 5
Inter
p
ersonal 14
Intra
p
ersonal 8
Kinesthetic 4
Musical 5
Naturalist 2
Table 1 shows that students with dominant
interpersonal intelligence are 58.3%, linguistic
intelligence, logic mathematic and interpersonal are
33% respectively, musical and visual intelligences are
both 20.84%, kinesthetic is 16.6% and naturalist is
0.083%. In addition the students with more than one
dominant intelligences are 58.3%.
The most developed intelligence is interpersonal
intelligence because many courses require the
students to be able to learn and complete group tasks.
Furthermore, intelligences that have the same
percentage are linguistic, intrapersonal and logical
mathematic intelligence. These intelligences develop
because mathematics students are required to be able
to solve mathematical problems, communicate the
problems and minimize error in solving the problems.
Ideally, mathematical logical intelligence can be
further developed in learning, since it is the dominant
domain in mathematics, the effort to improve
mathematical logical intelligence can be done by
providing many opportunities involving
mathematical logical intelligence such as identifying
patterns for certain patterns to come up with
generalization. Activities that require students to
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
96

modify, use props or measuring tools should be given
special attention so that student’s kinesthetic
intelligence can develop and the activities will then
develop student skills in using mathematical tools.
Visual intelligence may be facilitated by designing
instructions containing more pictures, maps and
object designs. The visual and non-visual methods
used in solving problems by students of mathematics
teacher candidates are very important for their
students (Yasemin, 2014) Therefore, the instructions
involving more types of intelligences are suggested to
improve all types of intelligence potential. It is in
accordance with the purpose of multiple intelligences
that increase the ability that is not dominant in a
person (Gardner, 1999) Contextual and daily life-
based mathematical learning should also be able to
give the space of naturalist intelligence to be better
developed. Then to develop musical intelligence
mathematics class, learning design needs to connect
mathematics with music. Ideally, learning method is
supposed to facilitate all types of intelligences to
develop. Various learning method utilizing different
types of intelligences will enable people with
different types of intelligence to understand what they
are learning as for example by using words, pictures,
gestures, rhythmic expressions and individual and
group experiences (Nasrin, 2012) Mathematic skill is
not merely influenced by logical intelligence, and
logic mathematic intelligence is not dominant and
superior to other types of intelligences. It is in line
with Gardner stating that logic mathematic
intelligence is not better than any other intelligences.
In traditional method, to learn mathematics, students
have to use their logic mathematic. This is no longer
relevant to today’s condition (Mousavi and Ahmadi,
2013). Other research suggest that teachers need to
equip themselves with more flexible approaches
(Galton and Eggieston, 1979) in teaching science and
mathematics. This alternative method attempts to
fulfill various students’ needs (Sulaiman, et al.,
2010).
4 CONCLUSIONS
The categorization of intelligence into eight types of
intelligence help mathematics teacher candidates to
recognize their own strengths and weaknesses.
Recognizing their own intelligence helps them to be
more confident. Intelligence identification has
enabled the students to use their dominant
intelligence in achieving a more effective learning
process. The students’ intelligence classification is
also beneficial for the lecturers in designing
instructions and assignments in accordance with the
type of intelligence the students have.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We express our sincere gratitude to UIN Sunan
Gunung Djati Bandung research institutes and
community service for their support.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, A., Gasm, A., 2013. The Relation Multiple
Intelligences Theory and Methods of ELT.
International Journal of Learning, pp. 24-41.
Aydemir, H., Karali, Y., 2014. Study of Secondary School
Student's Multiple Intelligences Areas. Procedia Social
and Behavioral Sciences, pp. 167-172.
Chapman, A., Chislett, V., 2005. Multiple Intelligences Test
Based on Howard Gardners MI Model. [Online]
Available at: http://www.bussinesballs.com
Galton., Eggieston, J., 1979. Some Characteristics of
Effective Sciences Teaching. International Journal of
Science Education, pp. 75-86.
Gardner, H., 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory in
Practice. New York: Basic Book.
Gardner, H., 1999. Are There Additional Intelligences? The
Case for Naturalist, Spiritual, and Existential
Intelligences.. Englewood Cliffs : Prentice Hall.
Gardner, H., 1999. Coklu Zeka Gorusmeler ve Makaleler.
Istanbul: Enka School.
Katwibun, D., 2013. The Need for Preparing Mathematics
Teachers for Diverse Classroom in Thailand. Procidea
Social and Behavior Sciences, pp. 756-761.
Kilic, M. S., Serf, H., 2015. Primari School 5th Grade
Sciences and Technology Lesson Book's Investigation
on Multiple Intelligences Theory. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, pp. 2577-2581.
McClellan, J. A., Conti, G. J., 2008. Identifiying The
Multiple Intelligences of Your Students. Journal of
Adult Education, Volume 1, pp. 13-38.
Mousavi, S. S., Ahmadi, F., 2013. Education Effect Based
on Gardner Multiple Intelligences Hypothesis in
Students Mathematics Education Progress of High
School Secon Grade. International Journal od Social
Sciences, 2(1), pp. 25-31.
Murat, T., 2015. A Case Study on The Effect of Geometry
Course in High School by Multiple Intelligences
Theory. Procedia Social And Behavioral Sciences, pp.
31-34.
Nasrin, K., 2012. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences and
Mathematics Education. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, pp. 778-781.
Roxana, S. C., 2014. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences
Application in Mentoring Beginning Teachers.
Procedia Sosial and Behavior Scinces, pp. 3345-3349.
Categorizing Multiple Intelligences of Pre-Service Mathematic Teachers
97

Siegel, D. J., 2003. The Call for Diversity Presure
Expectation and Organization Response in The
Postscondary Setting. New York: Taylor and Francis
Group.
Sulaiman, T., Abdurahman, A., RAhim, S., 2010. Teaching
Strategies Based on Multiple Intelligeces Theory
Among Science and Mathematics Secondary School
Teachers. s.l., s.n., pp. 512-518.
Yasemin, S., 2014. Visual Preferences and Teaching
Anxiety of Preservice Mathematics Teachers. s.l.,
Elvasier, pp. 1270-1274.
Yenice, N., Aktamis, H., 2010. Determination of Multiple
Intelligences Domains and Learning Styles of The
Teacher Candidats. Procedia Social and Behavioral
Sciences, pp. 3274-3281.
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
98