The Relationship between Learners’ Intelligence Profiles and Performance in Computer Application Skills

Eugenia J. Kafanabo


This paper reports on an investigation that was conducted to explore the relationship between learners’ intelligence profiles and their skills and ability to use computer applications while working on open-ended digital learning tasks. The theory of Multiple Intelligences by Howard Gardner (1983) was used as a framework for the study. The qualitative research approach was used, which involved 40 secondary school learners in Tanzania, who completed three open-ended digital learning tasks.  Performance assessment procedures were used to assess the learners’ performance abilities, identify the relationship between the learners’ intelligence profiles and their skills and ability to use computer applications. The results of the study suggest that there is a positive relationship between learners’ cognitive abilities (intelligence profiles), and the open-ended, digital learning tasks that are related to their academic level. As a result, the study recommended the use of learner-centred instruction that appreciates learners’ diverse skills, abilities, talents and performance as they work on open-ended tasks.

Full Text:



Alexander, P.A., Murphy., P.K., & Woods, B.S. (1997). Unearthing academic roots: Educators’ perceptions of the interrelationship of philosophy, psychology, and education. Educational Reform, 61, 172-186.

Armstrong, T. (1993). 7 kinds of Smart: Identifying and Developing Your many Intelligences. New York: Plume.

Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple Intelligences: Seven ways to approach curriculum. Educational Leadership, 52(3), 27-30.

Bracewell, R., Breuleux, A., Laferriere, T., Benoit, J., & Abdous, M. (1998). The Emerging Contribution of Online Resources and Tools to Classroom Learning and Teaching. Retrieved on 12th February, 2008 at

Campbell, L. (1997). Variations on a theme –How teachers interpret multiple intelligences theory. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 14-19.

Campbell, B. (1991). Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. The Learning Revolution, 27, 2-13.

Child, D. (1997). Psychology and the Teacher. London: Castel.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education (5th edition). New York: Routledge Falmer, Taylor and Francis Group.

Coley, R.J., Cradler, J., & Engle, P.K. (1999). Computers and Classrooms: the status of technology in U.W Schools. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Centre.

Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Designs: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage.

de Lange, J. (1987) Mathematics insight and meaning. Utrecht, The Netherlands: OW & OC.

Doppelt, Y. (2003). Implementation and Assessment of Project-Based Learning in a Flexible Environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13(3), 255-272.

Doppelt, Y., & Barak, M. (2002). Pupils Identify Key Aspects and Outcomes of a Technological Learning Environment. Journal of Technology Studies, 28(1), 12-18.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind; The theory of Multiple Intelligences: Tenth anniversary edition. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1985). ‘On Discerning New Ideas in Psychology’. New Ideas in Psychology, 3, 101-104

Gardner, H. (1987). Developing the Spectrum of human Intelligences. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 187-193

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1996). Intelligences: Multiple Perspectives. Orlando, Harcourt Bruce College Publishers.

Gardner, H. (1999). Are there additional intelligences: The case for naturalistic, spiritual, and existential intelligences. In J. Kane (ed.), Education, information and transformation: Essays on learning and thinking (pg. 111-131). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple Intelligences go to school: Educational Implications of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-10.

Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M.L., & Wake, W.K. (1996). Intelligence: Multiple Perspectives. Forth Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Goodnough, K. (2003). Facilitating Action Research in the Context of Science Education: Reflection of a University Researcher. Educational Action Research, 11(1), 41-63.

Haertel, E. (1992). Performance Measurement. In A. Alkin (ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Research (6th edition) (pg. 984-989). London: Macmillan.

Hannafin, M., Land, S.M., and Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods and models. In C.M. Reigeluth (ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models Vol. II (pg. 115-140). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hatch, T., & Gardner, H. (1986). From testing intelligence to assessing competencies: A pluralistic view if intellect. The Roeper Review, 8, 147-150.

Hoerr, T.R. (2004). How Multiple Intelligences Informs Teaching at New City School. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 40-48.

Hoerr, T.R. (1992) How our school applied multiple intelligences theory. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 67-68.

Jonassen, D.H. (1995). Operationalizing mental models: strategies for assessing mental models to support meaningful learning and design –supportive learning environments. Proceedings of the CSCL 1995, first international conference on computer support for collaborative learning.

Kallenbach, S. (1999). Emerging Themes in Adult Multiple Intelligences Research. Focus on Basics, 3(A), 16-20.

Kallenbach, S., & Viens, J. (eds.) (2001). Multiple intelligences in practice. Teacher research reports from the Adult Multiple Intelligences Study. Cambridge, MA: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy.

Krechevsky, M. (1991). Project Spectrum: An Innovative Assessment Alternative. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 43-48.

Krechevsky, M., & Gardner, H. (1990). Multiple chances, multiple intelligences. In D.E. Inbar (ed.), Second chance in education: An interdisplinary and international perspective. London: Falmer Press.

Lambert, N.M.,& McCombs, B.L. (1998). Introduction: Learner-Centered Schools and Classrooms as a Direction for School Reform. In N.M Lambert and B.L. McCombs (eds.), How students learn: Reforming Schools Through Learner-Centred Education. Washington D.C., American Psychological Association.

Lane, S., Stone, C.A., Ankenmann, R.D., &Liu, M. (1992). Empirical evidence for the reliability and validity of performance assessments. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco.

Lazear, D.G. (1992). Teaching for Multiple Intelligences. Fastback 342 Bloomington. Phi Delta Kappan. Educational Foundation ED 356227.

Leutner, D. (2002). The fuzzy relationship of intelligence and problem solving in computer simulations. Computers in Human Behaviour, 18(6), 685-697.

McCombs, B.L., & Whisler, J.S. (1997). The Learner-centred classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

McKenzie, W. (1999). Surf Aquarium Consulting. Retrieved on 1st August, 2003

Means, B.,& Oslon, K. (1995). Technology’s Role in Education Reform: Findings from a national study of innovating schools. Washington, DC, US Department of Education: Office of Educational Research Improvement.

Mehrens, W.A. (1992). Using Performance Assessment for Accountability Purposes. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(1), 3-9, 20.

Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and Expanded from Case Study Research in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Morrison, G.R., Lowther, D.L., & DeMeulle, L. (1999). Integrating Computer Technology into the Classroom. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Murphy, P.K., & Alexander, P.A. (2002). The Learner-Centered Principles: Their value for Teachers and Teaching. In W.D. Hawley and D.L. Rollie (eds.), The Keys to effective Schools: Educational Reform as Continuous Improvement (pg. 10-27). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Sage Publications.

National Information Communication and Technologies (ICT) Policy (2003). The United Republic of Tanzania: Ministry of Communications and Transport.

Oliver, K. & Hannafin, M. (2001). Developing and Refining Mental Models in Open-ended Learning Environments: A Case Study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 5-32.

Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd edition). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Pellegrino, J.W., Baxter, G.P., & Glaser, R. (1999). Addressing the “two disciplines” problem: Linking theories of cognition and learning with assessment and instructional practice. In A. Iran-Nejad and P.D. Pearson (eds.), Review of research in education, Vol. 24 (pg. 307-353). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Pelgrum, W.,& Anderson, R. (1999). ICT and the Emerging Paradigm for Life Long Learning: A worldwide educational assessment infrastructure, goals, and practices. Amsterdam: IEA.

Quellmalz, E.S., & Kozma, R. (2003). Designing Assessments of Learning with Technology. Assessment in Education: In Principles, Policy and Practice, 10(3), 389-407.

Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Suess, H.M. (1996). Intelligenz, Wissen and problemloesen. Kognitive Voraussetzungen fuer erfolgreiches Handeln bei computersimulierten problemen. Intelligence, Knowledge and Problem Solving. Goettingen: Hogrefe.

Suess, H.M., Kersting, M., & Oberauer, K. (1991). Intelligenz und Wissen als Praediktoren fuer Leistungen bei computersimulierten komplexen Problemen Intelligence, Knowledge as predictors for achievements with computer-simulated complex problems. Diagnostica, 37, 334-352.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). The Past and Future of Mixed Methods Research from Data Triangulation to Mixed Model Designs. In A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research (pg. 671-701). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Teele, S. (2000). Rainbows of intelligence: Exploring how students learn (Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press).

The United Republic of Tanzania (1996). Biology Syllabus for Secondary Schools: Form 1-4. Ministry of Education and Culture, Dar es Salaam: Tanzania Institute of Education.

The United Republic of Tanzania (1996). Computer Studies Syllabus for Secondary Schools: Form 1-6. Ministry of Education and Culture, Dar es Salaam: Tanzania Institute of Education.

Wiggins, G. (1998). Education Assessment Designing to Inform and Improve Student Performance. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.

Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessing Student Performances. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.

Wiggins, G. (1989). ‘Teaching to the (Authentic) Task’. Educational Leadership, 46(7), 41-47.

Worthen, B.R. (1993). Critical issues that will determine the future of alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(6), 444-454.

Zevenbergen, R., Sullivan, P., and Mousley, J. (2001). Open-ended tasks and barriers to learning: Teacher’s perspectives. APMC, 6(1), 4 – 9.


  • There are currently no refbacks.