Multiple Intelligences among Ninth-Grade Students in the Sultanate of Oman
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the multiple intelligences among the ninth-grade students in the North Al Batinah Governorate in the Sultanate of Oman. The study sample contained 112 randomly selected students. For the purposes of this study, the researchers designed two multiple intelligences scales, consisting of the eight types of intelligences: linguistic-verbal, visual-spatial, logical-mathematical, interpersonal, naturalistic, bodily-kinesthetic, intrapersonal, and rhythm-musical. Each type of intelligence includes 8 descriptive items, with a total of 64 items for the whole scale. The results showed that the first, second, and third ranks came in favor of interpersonal intelligence, mathematical-logical, and visual-spatial, respectively, among students in general, whereas the results also revealed that interpersonal intelligence, logical-mathematical, and naturalistic were ranked in the first three ranks among male students. The interpersonal intelligence, visual-spatial intelligence, and the mathematical-logic intelligence were ranked in the first three places, respectively, among the female students. The results showed there are statistically significant differences at the 0.05 significance level between the arithmetic means of students in multiple intelligences due to the gender variable in favor of women in each of the visual-spatial and intrapersonal intelligences. Based on the findings of the study, a number of recommendations were proposed, most notably the following: Applying multiple intelligences scales at the beginning of each academic year, classifying students according to their intelligence to build and implement lesson plans in light of these classifications, preparing educational curricula in light of students’ multiple intelligences to take into account the differences between them, diversifying the learning environments according to the intelligence differences among students, conducting diagnostic studies for the prevalent multiple intelligences among all students in all classes and educational stages, and engaging in studies that test the effectiveness of employing the theory of multiple intelligences and its educational applications in developing language and intrapersonal skills and enhancing academic achievement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".