Multiple Intelligence of AES Teachers: A Basis for Coaching Activities to Enhance Instructional Skills

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The clamor for quality education is heard all around the corner for a long time but still we are not having it. There may be several factors which were overlooked as we focused on other areas of our educative process and keeping abreast with the changes and technological advancement. Educative process is composed of the learner, the teacher, and the curriculum or content. Among the three, the teacher plays a significant role because he facilitates the learning process. His role is indeed significant. The success or failure of the learning process is on his hand.

METHODS

Descriptive type of research was used involving 20 teachers as respondents. Data were collected using MI Inventory Checklist devised by SEAMEO Innotech. Additional information was secured through interviews, then tallied, tabulated, analyzed and interpreted using weighted mean, percentage, ranking, and four-point Likert Scale.

RESULTS

The respondents showed a great extent of development in verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal and naturalists intelligence with a weighted mean ranging from 1. 545 to 1. 825. While visual-spatial, musical-rhythmical and intrapersonal with a weighted mean ranging from 1. 384 to 1. 485 interpreted as developed to some extent. Five or 25% of the respondents have considered themselves as intrapersonal intelligent people which ranked first. Second in rank was the verbal intelligence with a frequency of 4 or 20% of the respondents. It was followed by the interpersonal intelligence which ranked third. On the other hand, nobody among the respondents labeled themselves as visual-spatial intelligent persons.

DISCUSSIONS

The development of the domains of multiple intelligences among the respondents differs from one domain to another. Visual-spatial, musical-rhythmical and intrapersonal intelligence described as developed to some extent while the other five domains were developed toa great extent among the respondents. The most prevalent multiple intelligence among the respondents was the intrapersonal intelligence which hinders the promotion of collaboration among them. Most of the respondents considered themselves to perform at their best when working by themselves which is far on the promotion of collaborative work furthermore, nobody considered themselves as visual intelligent people, there is a need to enhance these domains of intelligence for the benefits of learners.