Instructional Strategies

The Problem of the One and the Many

     What would Heraclitus Say about individual learning abilities? – that is, the problem of the one and the many ways learners process information. Whatever information is received, is received according to the mode of the receiver.

 Heraclitus (500 BCE) and other philosophers wrestled with understanding the complexities of the universe perceived as one; thus, the problem of the “one and the many.” He writes, “All things come out of the one, and the one out of all things.”  Why even on the dollar bill and other currency, the Latin phrase, “E pluribus unum” gives credence to the constitutional underpinnings of the United States. We are many, yet one or out of one, we are many. Walking through the corridors of school, posters announce the importance of multi-cultural and cultural pluralism as the lifeblood of society. These posters highlight the importance of the strength that is found in the unity of diversity and the diversity of our unity. Without diversity we dry up, become one dimensional, and vulnerable to the lethal limitations of sameness, repetition, and routine. We then become one with the many “walking-dead” in our midst. The one is interconnected with the many and the many interrelates with the one. We speak of “synergy” as the sum of the whole is greater than any of the individual parts. We need one another. We are interconnected and interrelated as one. Yet, we maintain our individuality and our uniqueness which constantly promotes on-going change which is another principle of Heraclitus who maintained that it is impossible to step twice in the same place of a flowing river. All of life is in flux, yet it appears as a static and solid entity.

   If Heraclitus were alive today and he accompanied us into the classroom, what pedagogical insights would he suggest? He might pose the question, “Do you teach as your students learn or do your students learn how you teach? Or is it a combination of the two? Heraclitus might offer another question, “What about multiple intelligences?” Daily, do we encounter many students and does one teaching style fit them all? As we lecture far into the hour or beyond, have the students become mentally more distant from us? Do all students learn the same way? Are they all linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal  or a combination of the one and the many? How do I find out what their learning styles are? Rather, in their multiplicity of learning capacities, should I, as an instructor, become multiple in my teaching style as I interact with my class which is a compilation of the one and the many. I need to use assessment tools that cover a wide range of instruments, measures, exercises, and methods. Initially, I would want to have my students take a self-assessment survey of their various levels of intelligences to establish a class profile upon which to build my learning plans.

Twenty minute learning plans (it is said that our average attention span is 12 minutes!)  that are instructional, interactive, and interconnected. The 20-minute learning exercises reflect the seven dimensions of multiple intelligences to better understand the goals and objectives of the learning plan. Thus, if we are studying the ethical topic of capital punishment, we will tap into the 7 dimensions of multiple intelligences relative to capital punishment:

  1. Excerpts from literature (linguistic),  The Green Mile;
  2. listening to the lyrics of a song or poem –“To Althea, from Prison” –“Stone walls do not a prison make, nor iron bars a cage…” by Richard Lovelace – he wrote this song while imprisoned for his Royalist views in 1642 -(linguistic and musical);
  3. view a video – “You don’t want to live in my  house”- (intrapersonal),   
  4. work as a group to re-create the size and shape of a  prison cell (mathematical-spatial-bodily/kinesthetic);
  5. lecture about the ethical pros and cons of capital punishment (logical – pro/con.org);
  6. discussing financial facts and the overall cost of maintaining the prison system (mathematical);
  7.  and sharing any personal experience individuals may have had with someone in prison(interpersonal and intrapersonal).  

   Thus, all seven dimensions of multiple intelligences are included which hopefully will address the problem of the one and the many types of learning capabilities,  thus fulfilling  the goal of quality learning, and understanding by giving life and meaning to the competencies for that learning plan. Assessing the quality, breadth, and depth of learning and understanding will be measured by the student’s ability to tap into the multiplicity of his or her various levels of multiple intelligences. Therefore, and at times, much to the surprise of the student, there is more than one right answer. Memorization and recall are kept to a bare minimum whereas understanding, thinking critically and creatively, relevance, depth, breadth, and significance are applauded, measured, and celebrated.

   Heraclitus would be proud of individual educators such as Howard Gardner and Thomas Armstrong who are and have been the pioneers of Multiple Intelligences in the classroom. They attempt to address the issue of the problem of the one and the many:  “It is of the utmost importance that we recognize and nurture all the varied human intelligences, and all the combinations of intelligences. We are all so different largely because we all have different combinations of intelligences. If we recognize this, I think we will have at least a better chance of dealing appropriately with the many problems that we face in the world.”  And might I add, in our classrooms. (1)

Endnotes:

  1. Thomas Armstrong, Multiple Intelligences in the Class, (Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development).

Leave a comment