• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 2 – August 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 3 – November 2025
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

A Multiple Intelligences Road to an ELT Classroom

July 1999 — Volume 4, Number 1

A Multiple Intelligences Road to an ELT Classroom

Michael Berman (1998)
Wales, UK: Crown House Publishing Limited
Pp. 198
ISBN 1899836-23-3
UK £19.99

Introduction

Until recently tests of intelligence that were used to assess the academic potential of school children were those developed early this century by Binet. However, the traditional definition of intelligence, on which such tests were based, is now regarded as disputable and too narrow. Far from still considering intelligence as a linguistic and logical-mathematical concept, a change of attitude has taken place. This change is based largely on the work of Howard Gardner (1983, 1995), educational psychologist and creator of the theory of multiple intelligences. Gardner’s work emphasises that intelligence, rather than being an innate, fixed entity, is something that may be developed. Gardner’s work has relevance to all forms of teaching, but Michael Berman’s book is the first to apply it to the English language classroom.

Multiple Intelligences

Gardner initially identified seven intelligence types: kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, linguistic, logical-mathematical, intrapersonal and spatial. An eighth intelligence, naturalistic, was added recently. According to Gardner’s theory, learners’ intelligence profiles consist of various combinations of each type. In this book Berman provides brief but motivating language activities that will appeal to learners with each of the intelligences.

Activities for Developing Intelligence Type

Throughout this book activities cater for specific intelligence types. The activities in unit 1 involve movement and cater for learners with kinesthetic intelligence. They require students to circulate around the classroom to find someone, locate missing information, or engage in a role-play. These activities are samples and suggestions rather than prescriptive techniques, as are the activities in unit 2, on catering for musical intelligence. Many of these draw upon work published in the 1970s by the Bulgarian psychotherapist Lozanov (1978, 1988) on Suggestopaedia and the power of music to remove barriers in order to create the possibilities of incidental learning. [-1-]

Units 4, 5, and 6 focus on catering for interpersonal, logical-mathematical and linguistic intelligence. The unit on interpersonal intelligence occupies a quarter of the whole book, which made me wonder if all types were really of equal importance for language learning.

Catering for the remaining three intelligence types, spatial, intrapersonal and naturalistic, includes tasks that involve guided visualisations (e.g., trips across lakes to talk with monsters and other creatures), introspective activities (e.g., “Love is . . . ,” “Who am I?”), plus identifying relationships between words in mixed groups and then classifying them. One example of the latter is as follows: learners locate, list and then classify lesson, student, homework, classroom, and teacher as words all related to the subject of school. I found the activities in these three units to be the most stimulating for intermediate learners.

Learner Levels and Using this Book

Too often, especially in the unit on catering for interpersonal intelligence, the author includes terms, phrases and vocabulary in what he classifies as elementary level tasks that are more suited to intermediate users of English. One further criticism I have is that although it is interesting to introduce cultural aspects to course books for English language teaching (ELT), too many times sociocultural knowledge is required to complete the tasks. From the many examples related to tourist London, the royal family, and the British monarchy, it seems that users most suited to this book would be those studying on or returning from a summer in the UK. It would also be useful for learners resident in the UK and studying English as a second, rather than a foreign language. How else could learners be expected to know the names of two royal residences or where to find Speakers’ Corner? Indeed, non-British teachers using this book would need help from teachers’ notes, which are too often sadly lacking. A future edition could rectify this omission.

The SAFER approach to ELT

Unit 10 presents an alternative model to traditional ELT classroom pedagogy and incorporates techniques such as educational kinesiology and Suggestopaedia. The result is Berman’s SAFER model for language teaching:

S: Setting the scene
A: Authenticity
F: Focusing on main features of each intelligence type
E: Error correction
R: Review

[-2-]

I’m fairly certain that most teachers, especially those in the early stages of their careers, would not readily adopt the SAFER approach as it stands, but feel the author has made a great stride towards applying contemporary pedagogical thought to ELT.

References

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences: Myths and messages. Phi Delta Kappan 76, 200-209.

Lozanov, G. (1978). Suggestology and an outline of Suggestopedia. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.

Lozanov, G. & Gateva, E. (1988). The foreign language teacher’s Suggestopedic manual. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.

Wayne Trotman
Özel Çakabey Lisesi, Izmir, Turkey
<wayne@egenet.com.tr>

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the end of each page for purposes of citation.

[-3-]

© 1994–2025 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.