Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the ILI Students' MI Profile (Children)
This study aimed at investigating children and young adult EFL learners of Iran Language Institute(ILI) and their course books in the light of Multiple Intelligence (MI) Theory. To achieve this aim, 240 EFL learners participated in this study. First, the students' intelligence profiles were identified by adapting and using Lazear's (1994) children's questionnaire and Christion's (1996, 1998) young adults' MI survey. Secondly, all the nine children's course books along with seven young adults' taught in Iran Language Institute (ILI) were evaluated through the MI checklist to determine the extent to which MI theory is reflected in these course books. The analysis of the course books' activities revealed that both series of course books mostly catered to verbal/linguistic and visual/spatial intelligences. The least dominant intelligences were intrapersonal and naturalist intelligence types, and no example of the naturalist intelligence was found in the young adult coursebooks' activities. The results of the study also showed the discrepancies between students' and course books' MI profiles. As opposed to the course books' MI profile, a balanced distribution of intelligence types were observed among both children and young adult students; i.e., students preferred all types of intelligences in varying approximate degrees. The findings of the study have some pedagogical implications for teachers, coursebook designers, teacher educators and material developers to consider MI theory and language learners' MI profile in designing course books and using classroom activities.
From the traditional point of view, intelligence was defined as a measurable, single and inborn entity. In this view, intelligence was assumed to be a fixed construct that cannot be developed after age five (Williams & Burden, 1997). The scientific concern about the nature of intelligence started in the nineteenth century with Alfred Binet, a French psychologist who designed the first and most practical intelligence test, named intelligence quotient (IQ) test. This test was used to recognize those students who needed to be supported in getting along with the school schedule.
In the 1980s, Howard Gardner introduced the Multiple Intelligence Theory that challenged the conventional notion of intelligence defined as Intelligence Quotient (IQ). He suggested that each individual possesses different capabilities and aptitudes in several subjects so that each person has several kinds of intelligences which are combined differently. Gardner (1983) mentions that each individual can develop his/her intelligence types to different extents in the process of education, especially at an early age. He believes that each individual has eight types of intelligences namely verbal-linguistic, logicalmathematical, spatial-visual, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and natural intelligences.
Due to the emergence of MI theory, many changes have been made in the school curriculums in order to consider the new perspectives toward human intellectual capacities. After the publication of Gardner's Frames of Mind in 1983, many public schools and private institutes have started to consider the MI theory when planning their curriculums (Weiner, 2001). Nowadays, language teachers and course book developers try to relate the MI model with learning styles in order to enhance students' abilities and to meet individual needs. Snider (2001) states, “MI theoryrelated materials have the strong potential to improve the foreign language (FL) instruction because they engage learners' innate abilities” (p.6).
Christison (1996) emphasizes the importance of singling out the activities and exercises that are repeatedly used in the language teaching process and categorizing them based on the eight intelligences. Moreover, he suggests that teachers can familiarize the students with the MI theory to help them use their intelligences while learning. Gardner (1993) believes that this helps to create a learner-centered setting, and consequently leads to development of each student's cognitive profiles (Razmjoo & Farmer, 2012; Razmjoo & Jozaghi, 2010; Taasheh et al., 2014; Taase et al., 2014; Ebadi et al., 2015).
Although many teachers consider the students' profiles while planning their lessons, what usually determines the curriculum in most of the language institutes is the course book. Since most language institutes in Iran choose course books without much information and guidance, so there is a need to provide teachers, institute managers and policymakers with some suggestions on how to select and exploit course books and teaching materials to meet the learners' needs and their MI profiles.
Regarding the situation at Iran language Institute, the students have different backgrounds when enrolling at different levels. So they are expected to have different MI profiles. However, there is a need for a study to figure out whether the activities and exercises used in the course books represent different intelligences. The present study will mainly focus on the application of the MI theory at the ILI by analyzing the course books and extracting the students' MI profiles.
The MI Theory emphasizes the individuality of the learners and their different learning styles (Gardner, 1983). It helps students know their potentials and find ways through which they can learn more skillfully. Since course books are the major and the most useful source in classrooms to transfer curriculum objectives, analyzing them in the light of multiple intelligence theory is essential.
With this perception in mind, this study aims at exploring the relationship between the students' MI profiles and the MI profiles of the EFL course books, which are currently being used at children and young adults departments of the Iran Language Institute. To this aim, firstly, the students' MI profiles will be identified using two different multiple intelligence questionnaires (one designed for children and one designed for young adult students). Secondly, the multiple intelligence profiles of the course books taught at these two levels will be found out. Therefore, the present study seeks to answer the following questions: 1: What are the MI profiles of the children and young adult students? 2: What are the MI profiles of the ILI's children and young adult course books? 3: To what extent do the MI profiles of the ILI course books relate to the MI profiles of the students at children and young adult levels?
Gardner's MI theory can be considered as a phenomenon which brought out new visions regarding the traditional concept of intelligence. It revolutionized the field of cognitive psychology and education. Many researchers and psychologists have become interested in this theory and have developed it in a way that can be applied not only as a psychological basis but also as an independent educational system.
Gardner defined intelligence as “a bio-psychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture” (Gardner, 1999, p. 33-34). Based on his theory, each person possesses some strong intelligences and some that are not developed appropriately. He claimed that individuals could change and improve their intelligence profiles through education. Gardner (1999) stated that depending on some aspects such as “the values of a particular culture, the opportunities available in that culture, and the personal decisions made by individuals and their families, school-teachers, and others” (p. 34), each person's potential can be activated.
According to the result of a detailed research, seven areas of intelligence were eventually proposed by Howard Gardner. He identified: verbal/linguistic, logical/ mathematical, spatial/visual, bodily/kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, and intrapersonal types of intelligences. Later he proposed two more types of intelligences, namely naturalist and existentialist, but the latter (existentialist) was later omitted. However, the eight types of intelligences suggested by Gardner are considered as the default in this research, while the number of intelligence types in other studies might differ. Therefore, using a combination of data from different characteristics available in the studies of MI theory, all eight types of intelligences are given full definitions.
Accepting Gardner's MI theory can provide teachers with several implications in classroom instruction. Since individuals need all types of intelligences, teachers should pay equal attention to all intelligences while teaching to a group of students. Within a group, while some students wish to use some specific types of intelligences, other students will prefer using different ones. This education system is in contrast to the traditional one, which focused mainly on logical-mathematical and verbal-linguistic intelligences, as the most prominent skills in education. Therefore, depending on the Multiple Intelligence Theory, educators and teachers should recognize a variety of learning styles and teach to a broader range of skills and talents. In the words of Chen et al. (2009),
MI Theory can be a very helpful vehicle for broadening the limit of education: to include subjects that address the several intelligences and ways of thinking, as well as teaching methods that speak to individual differences and assessments that go beyond standard, short-answer language-and-logic instruments. (p. 14).
One fundamental implication in using the Multiple Intelligence theory is to identify the students' MI profiles. According to Christison (1998), the more awareness the students find about their own MI profile, the more they will be able to apply this information to their learning process. Therefore, one of the essential stages of teaching with MI theory is activating students' intelligences using specific teaching techniques that utilize intuition, metacognition or the five senses. Then, the teacher should encourage the students to extend their preferences to use more types of intelligence and practice them.
Another implication in using the Multiple Intelligence Theory is to figure out how the course books' activities can help language learners to enhance their intelligences. Thus, there is a need to analyze course books used in ELT. Moreover, the criteria for selecting and evaluating course books are important issues to be considered as well. Therefore, the role of course books in ELT will be discussed generally, and then a link will be made between course books and MI specifically. Many researchers (Ibragimova, 2011; Botelho, 2003; Palmberg, 2001) have discussed the importance of course books and their roles in the realm of education and language teaching.
In order to take the students' needs, styles and differences, into account and due to the important role of course books in ELT, researchers state that teachers need to be better prepared to select texts more carefully. According to Garinger (2001), “due to the growth of the ESL publishing market, teachers need to be increasingly knowledgeable and sophisticated concerning textbooks in order to sort through the masses of books available”(p.2). Richards (2001) also states that “learning how to use and adapt textbooks is hence an important part of a teachers' professional knowledge” (p.1).
To find out why course books are considered as the most important tools in the teaching-learning process, some researchers have tried to discover the factors contributing to the application of course books in most language classes all over the world. According to Sheldon (1988), there are a number of reasons that contribute to the constant application of course books: 1) it is difficult for teachers to create new teaching materials. 2) It is too timeconsuming for teachers to develop their own materials. 3) There are some external restrictions that prevent teachers from developing materials.
In order to investigate the representation of Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences in ILI textbooks, Razmjoo and Farmer (2012) evaluated text book activities taught at the intermediate level of adult and young adult departments using Botelho's (2003) MI checklist. According to the results, verbal/linguistic, logical/mathematical, and visual/spatial were respectively the most predominant types of intelligences in text book activities while naturalist and bodily/kinesthetic were the least common types. It was confirmed that there was a significant difference between adults and young adults' course books in terms of the occurrence of multiple intelligences. Razmjoo and Farmer claimed that “Verbal/linguistic intelligence type was present in all activities. This may be the cause of the success of a group of language learners studying these verbally intelligent books and also the failure of those who are not intelligent in this way” (p. 183).
Ebadi et al. (2015) investigated the representation of multiple intelligence types in Touchstone series course books. The evaluation of the course books 27 activities revealed that verbal/linguistic and spatial/visual were the most prevalent types of intelligences, and musical, bodily/kinesthetic, and natural were the least repeated ones. It was also showed that the distribution of multiple intelligences in the student books and workbooks of these series was not well balanced; i.e., student books were more representative of the intelligences than workbooks.
In a study conducted by Taase et al. (2014), researchers tried to explore the application of MI theory in English language teaching. To this end, they examined Pacesetter series textbooks and EFL learners' intelligence profiles in the Kish Institute of Science and Technology in Iran. The results of the study showed that verbal/linguistic, visual/spatial, logical/mathematical, and interpersonal were the most common types of intelligences embedded in textbook activities. However, EFL learners in varying but near degrees preferred all types of intelligences specially interpersonal and logical/ mathematical. It was also concluded that text book level had a significant effect on the frequency and application of multiple intelligences in the activities of these books, whereas EFL learners' level of proficiency does not have much effect on their MI preference.
Taaseh et al. (2014) tried to investigate the relationship between students' intelligence profile and textbooks intelligence types. To accomplish their goal, they analyzed three textbooks (grades 1, 2, & 3) used in senior high schools of the Iranian education system. It was showed that text book representation of intelligences were far from students' MI profiles; verbal/linguistic, visual/spatial, logical/mathematical and interpersonal/ intrapersonal intelligences were respectively the most predominant ones in textbooks whereas students possessed all types of MI in varying approximate degrees. They preferred interpersonal, naturalist, logical/mathematical, verbal/linguistic, visual/spatial, musical and bodily/kinesthetic intelligences. They stated that “the knowledge and application of multiple intelligences can help teachers in providing enough variety in activities and exercises to tap students' different learning potentials” (p. 28).
Botelho (2003) examined the representation of multiple intelligence types in six ELT textbooks (Exploration 1, American Headway 2, Gateways 1, New Interchange 1, Passages 1, and Go for it 4!) in Brazil. The findings of the study determined verbal/linguistic, visual/spatial, intrapersonal and interpersonal as the most predominant intelligences in the books. Logical/mathematical, bodily/kinesthetic, musical, naturalist, and existential were respectively the least common ones. Teachers reported awareness and concern in the use of MI teaching materials. At the end of the study, a widely used checklist was designed by the researcher based on the framework of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences.
This study took a mixed-method approach to investigate the application of multiple intelligence theory in EFL teaching at the Iran Language Institute. According to Creswell and Creswell (2017), mixed-method refers to an approach that integrates both qualitative and quantitative methods of data analysis. The cornerstone of this kind of inquiry is the fact that the combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches results in a more comprehensive and reliable understanding of a research problem.
In total, 240 EFL learners who were learning English at the Iran Language Institute, in Kermanshah, participated in this study. Of these 240 language learners, 120 learners (60 male & 60 female) were chosen from the children's department, and 120 learners (60 male & 60 female) were selected from the young adult's department through convenience sampling. Convenience sampling is used when participants meet with certain criteria including easy accessibility, geographical proximity, availability at a given time, or the willingness to participate in the study (Dörnyei , 2007).
The children's age range was between 8 and 10, and the young adult's age range was between 11 and 14 years old. Since each department at the ILI consists of different levels, the researcher tried to select the participants from all levels of each group equally. All the participants of the study were from Iran, and their first languages were either Farsi or Kurdish.
The course books chosen for this research were the books taught at children and young adult sections of the ILI. At the children's section of this institute, which includes fourteen levels (English Primer 1 & 2, Step Up 1,2,3 & 4, Move-Up 1,2,3 & 4, Jump Up 1,2,3 & 4), nine course books are taught under the names of English Primer, Up and Away in English 1-4, and Jump Up 1-4. At the young adult section which consists of 13 levels (start, Run 1,2,3 & 4, Race 1,2,3 & 4, Reach 1,2,3 & 4) seven books are taught under the titles of Magic Time and English Time 1-6. In order to provide information about the application of Multiple Intelligence theory in the biggest language institute in Iran, these course books were analyzed to figure out their intelligence profiles. The researchers identified which types of intelligence were predominant, and which types were less addressed. The difference between the course books' intelligence profile taught at the children, and young adult sections was also discovered.
Questionnaires
Lazear's (1993) MI questionnaire was adapted and used to assess students' MI profile. This MI questionnaire contains eight sections; each section addresses one type of intelligence, with every section including one statement.
To make sure that the participants would understand all the items, the Persian version of the MI questionnaire was adapted and used. The adapted version of the children's MI questionnaire comprised of two parts: The first part was the instruction by which the students could understand how to complete the questionnaire. The second part contained eight statements each one addressing one intelligence type. The first statement referred to verbal/linguistic intelligence. The second statement addressed logical/ mathematical intelligence. The third statement emphasized visual/spatial intelligence. The fourth statement focused on bodily/kinesthetic intelligence. The fifth statement addressed musical intelligence. The sixth statement was devoted to interpersonal intelligence. The seventh statement referred to intrapersonal intelligence. Finally, the eighth statement addressed naturalist intelligence. The students were asked to complete the questionnaire by placing “ ” in front of the statement they completely agreed with, putting “ ” in front of the statement they agreed with to some extent, and drawing “ ” in front of the statement they disagreed with.
Christison's (1996, 1998) Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire was adapted and applied to assess students' MI profile. This questionnaire also contains eight sections; each section addresses one type of intelligence, with every section including six statements. To ensure that the participants would understand all the items, the Persian version of the MI questionnaire was adapted and used. The adapted version of this MI questionnaire consisted of two parts: The first part was the instruction by which the students could understand how to fill out the questionnaire. The second part contained eight parts each one referring to one intelligence type. The first part referred to verbal/linguistic intelligence. The second part addressed logical/ mathematical intelligence. The third part emphasized visual/spatial intelligence. The fourth part focused on bodily/kinesthetic intelligence. The fifth part addressed musical intelligence. The sixth part was devoted to interpersonal intelligence. The seventh part referred to intrapersonal intelligence. Finally, the eighth part addressed naturalist intelligence. The students were asked to complete the questionnaire by placing “2” In front of the statement they completely agreed with, putting “1” In front of the statement they agreed with to some extent, and writing “0” in front of the statement they disagreed with.
In order to analyze the two series of course books taught at the children and young adult sections of the ILI in Kermanshah, a checklist was designed and adapted by the researchers based on the theoretical framework of Haward Gardner's Multiple Intelligence Theory and by referring to a variety of sources (Botelho, 2003; Ibragimova, 2011; Kirgoz, 2010; Razmjoo & Jozaghi, 2010). The checklist included eight types of intelligences, definitions, lists of activities, and sample activities extracted from the analyzed course books' activities( See Appendix A). In other words, the activities were classified based on the intelligence types that they addressed. To make sure of the validity, expert opinion was obtained from three instructors who revised the course book evaluation checklist. They were all educated and experienced, having Ph.D. and MA degrees in applied linguistics. In order to assure the reliability, two raters evaluated the course books using this checklist, and the inter-rater reliability of 0.93 was attained.
As Mackey et al. (2006) state, “a pilot study is an important means of assessing the feasibility and usefulness of the data collection methods and making any necessary revisions before they are used with the research participants” (p. 43).
Before the administration of the two questionnaires (children and young adult MI questionnaires) to the students (participants of the study), the questionnaires were piloted by 60 students (30 children & 30 young adult students) from both children and young adult sections of the ILI. The pilot testing showed that the students of the two sections experienced a few problems completing the questionnaires. In order to remove the problems the students encountered in the pilot testing, the researchers consequently revised the questionnaires. Cronbach's alpha reliability for the translated versions of the children's MI questionnaire and young adult MI questionnaire were respectively found to be .91, .89.
The data of this study were collected through a variety of stages using different instruments. After obtaining written permission from the director of the Iran Language Institute, the data collection procedures started. The data were collected during the fall semester of the academic year 2014-2015 at the Iran Language Institute in Kermanshah.
Lazear (1993) and Christison's (1996, 1998) MI questionnaires were adapted and used to identify students' MI profile. To ensure the validity, these questionnaires were reviewed by three experts with enough knowledge of MI theory, having Ph.D. and M.A degrees in applied linguistics. After the piloting phase, the hard copies of the two questionnaires were administered among the target samples of the study (120 children & 120 young adult students) at the ILI in Kermanshah.
It took about 5 minutes for the children participants to complete the questionnaire, but the young adult students filled out the questionnaire in about 15 minutes.
One of the aims of the study was to analyze current EFL course books taught at the children and young adult sections of the ILI in order to know if they respond to MI theory, and to what extent they engage MI in the students of this institute. To this end, the researchers selected all the 16-course books used in the children and young adult sections of the ILI and analyzed the sample activities in the course books in order to find out the percentage of activities that address each of the eight intelligences. For the sake of the feasibility of the study, one-third of the units of each book were purposefully selected to be evaluated. To be more specific, some units from the beginning, some from the middle, and some from the last part of the course books were purposefully selected. Since the selected course books had all different number of units, the selected numbers of units from each book of the two sections (children & young adult) are as follows:
Children Course Books:
Young Adult Course Books:
In order to identify the suitable intelligence a particular activity caters to, the primary procedure was to decide which type or types of intelligences dominated that activity.
For example:
-Verbal / linguistic Intelligence: e.g., listen and repeat; let us write.
-Logical / Mathematical Intelligence: unscramble the sentences; recognize the beginning sound of each word.
-Spatial/visual intelligence: join the dots to help the animal finds its home.
-Bodily / Kinesthetic: let us act; clap once for each syllable.
-Musical Intelligence: let us sing; chant.
-Interpersonal Intelligence: work in pairs; ask and answer.
-Intrapersonal Intelligence: write about what to be in the future; describe yourself.
-Naturalist Intelligence: look outside the classroom, what is the weather like?
However, some activities included more than one type of intelligence. For instance, the activity “point to the picture and practice with a partner” is a mixture of both spatial/visual and interpersonal intelligences. These types of activities were classified as more than one intelligence type.
Regarding data analysis, this study made use of both qualitative and quantitative data. In order to analyze the quantitative data obtained from the two questionnaires, statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) was used subsequently.
Descriptive statistics was used to calculate the frequencies of responses and analysis of the data. Then, frequencies for each statement in both children and young adult questionnaires were obtained. Finally, the mean scores for eight types of intelligences were calculated.
After identifying intelligence types in each activity, the number of occurrences of each intelligence type was calculated for each unit. Then, the number of activities and the number of occurrences of each intelligence type per book were summed up. All the results were put in Spread Sheet in order to create related graphs. The results obtained from Excel Spread Sheet contained the total number of activities in all 16 books of both children and young adult sections as well as the sum of occurrences of each intelligence type in the 16 books, and the percentage of occurrence of each intelligence in all the books. The results represent the profiles of the 16-course books analyzed in this study.
Finally, the MI profiles of the course books in each age group were compared to the MI profiles of the students of that group, in order to identify the amount of conformity between language learners' MI preferences and course books' MI profiles.
This section presents the results of multiple intelligences questionnaires for students of the ILI at the children's department. Table 1 displays the descriptive statistics used to analyze the collected data.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the ILI Students' MI Profile (Children)
As Table 1 shows, bodily/kinesthetic intelligence ranked first among the ILI students of the children's department. In other words, the mean score for bodily/kinesthetic intelligence was 1.87 (i.e., 18.70%). Interpersonal intelligence ranked second, with a mean score of 1.80 (i.e., 18.00%). The third type of intelligence preferred by students was verbal/linguistic intelligence, with a mean score of 1.73 (i.e., 17.30%).
This intelligence was followed by Spatial/visual (1.55), Natural (1.55), and Logical/mathematical (1.50) intelligences, respectively. Musical intelligence ranked seventh, with a mean score of 1.28 (i.e., 12.80%). The last preferred intelligence type was intra personal intelligence, with a mean score of 0.42 (i.e., 04.20%). Overall, the results show that the mean scores for different types of intelligence ranged from 1.87 to 0.42, with bodily/ kinesthetic being the most dominant and intra personal the least dominant intelligence types. Table 2 shows Friedman test for ranking children's multiple intelligences and Figure 1 graphically represents the statistics for the ILI students MI profile at the children's department.
Table 2. Friedman Test: Ranking Children's Multiple Intelligences
Figure 1. Graphical Representation of Statistics for the ILI Students MI Profile at the Children's Department
This section presents the results of multiple intelligences questionnaire for students of the ILI at the young adult department. Table 3 displays the descriptive statistics used to analyze the collected data.
As Table 3 displays, Intrapersonal intelligence ranked first among the ILI students of the young adult department.
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for the ILI Students' MI Profile (Young Adults)
In other words, the mean score for Intrapersonal intelligence was 1.62 (i.e., 16.20%). Bodily/kinesthetic intelligence ranked second, with a mean score of 1.43 (i.e., 14.30%). The third type of intelligence preferred by students was verbal/linguistic intelligence, with a mean score of 1.36 (i.e., 13.60%). This intelligence was followed by Spatial/ visual (1.36), musical (1.26), and natural (1.25) intelligences, respectively. Interpersonal intelligence ranked seventh, with a mean score of 1.06 (i.e., 10.60%). The last preferred intelligence type was Logical/ mathematical intelligence, with a mean score of 0.99 (i.e., 09.90%). Overall, the results indicate that the mean scores for different types of intelligence ranged from 1.62 to 0.99, with intra personal being the most dominant and logical/mathematical the least dominant intelligence types. Table 4 shows friedman test: ranking young adults' multiple intelligences and Figure 2 graphically shows the statistics for the ILI students' MI profile at the Young Adult Department.
Table 4. Friedman Test: Ranking Young Adults' Multiple Intelligences
Figure 2. Graphical Representation of Statistics for the ILI Students' MI Profile at the Young Adult Department
Based on the descriptive statistics used to analyze the collected data, this section emphasizes the similarities and differences between the MI profiles of children and young adult EFL learners of the ILI. Table 5 displays the statistical differences and similarities between the MI profiles of the ILI's children and young adult students.
As Table 5 displays, apart from the musical intelligence, there are meaningful differences between the two groups of EFL learners in terms of their preferences toward different intelligence types. For instance, intra personal intelligence is the most preferred intelligence type among young adult learners with a mean score of 1.62, while this intelligence is the least dominant intelligence type among children EFL learners with a mean score of 0.42. Figure 3 graphically represents the MI profiles of the ILI's children and young adult students.
Table 5. The Result of the Independent T-Test to Compare the MI Profiles of the ILI's Children and Young Adult Students
Figure 3. Children's MI Profile vs Young Adults' MI Profile
In order to identify the ILI course books' intelligence profiles, which refers to the combination of intelligences in the course books, all the nine children course books, and the seven young adult course books were analyzed in the light of MI theory. The occurrence of each type of intelligence was counted, and the percentage of each of intelligence was identified. The following sections present the results of each group's course books' evaluation, separately.
The profile of the nine course books was predominantly the combination of three intelligences: verbal/linguistic, spatial/visual, and logical/mathematical. These intelligences have the mean percentage as 1.73 1.5 1.55 1.87 1.28 1.8 0.42 1.55 1.36 0.99 1.36 1.43 1.26 1.06 1.62 1.25 Children and young adults contained more than 85% of the total number of counted intelligences. The other intelligences included less than 15% of the total number of intelligences. Table 6. displays the distribution of the eight intelligence types in nine children's course books of the ILI. One-third of each book's units were analyzed, and 521 intelligences were identified in all the nine course books' activities. As Figure 4 indicates, verbal/linguistic intelligence was the most frequently used intelligence type with a percentage of 41.07%. This means that out of the 521 intelligences identified in all nine children's course books, 214 intelligences were verbal/linguistic type. Spatial/visual intelligence was the second most frequently addressed intelligence type that made up 29.37% of the total number of intelligences indicating that of the 521 intelligences identified in the analyzed activities, 153 intelligences were spatial/visual. The third widely used kind of intelligence was logical/mathematical intelligence comprising 18.04% of the total number of intelligences; i.e., 94 intelligences addressed logical/mathematical intelligence. Interpersonal (5.76%), musical (2.69%), bodily/kinesthetic (1.54%), intrapersonal (0.96%), and natural (0.58%) intelligences were the least addressed intelligence types in the nine children course books of the ILI.
Table 6. Distribution of Intelligences in Children's Course Books
Figure 4. Children's Course Books' MI Profiles
As Table 7 displays, the Chi-square test gives us a significant result (Sig=.000) for all nine children's course books. This means that the distribution of the intelligence types was not equal in these course books. In other words, the eight intelligences are not distributed evenly among the children's course books. Therefore, it can be concluded that the differences between the frequencies of occurrence of different intelligence types did not have a specific pattern in children's course book series. Figure 4 shows the MI profile of the children's course books.
Table 7. Chi-Square Test for Nine Children's Course Books in Terms of MI Theory
The profile of the seven course books was predominantly the combination of five intelligences: verbal/linguistic, spatial/visual, bodily/kinesthetic, logical/mathematical, and interpersonal. These intelligences included more than 95% of the total number of counted intelligences. The other intelligences contained less than 5% of the total number of intelligences.
Table 8 displays the distribution of the eight intelligence types in seven young adults' course books of the ILI. Onethird of each book's units were analyzed, and 1143 intelligences were identified in all the seven course books' activities. As shown in the table, verbal/linguistic and spatial/visual intelligence types were the most dominant in the young adults' course books. Verbal/linguistic intelligence had a frequency of 39.28%. This means that out of 1143 total number of intelligences, 449 intelligences addressed verbal/linguistic type. Spatial/visual intelligence ranked second, catering for 29.92% of the total number of counted intelligences, followed by bodily/kinesthetic (11.20%), logical/mathematical (7.96%), and interpersonal (7.70%) types. The least commonly addressed types of intelligence were musical (3.15%) and intrapersonal (0.79%). No example of natural intelligence type was found in the young adults' course books.
Table 8. Distribution of Intelligences in Young Adults' Course Books
As Table 9 displays, the Chi-square test gives us a significant result (Sig=.000) for all seven young adults' course books. This means that the distribution of the intelligence types was not equal in these course books. In other words, the eight intelligences are not distributed evenly among the young adults' course books. Therefore, it can be concluded that the differences between the frequencies of occurrence of different intelligence types did not have a specific pattern in young adults' course book series. Figure 5 graphically represents the MI profile of the young adults' course books.
Table 9. Chi-Square Test for Seven Young Adults' Course Books in Terms of MI Theory
Figure 5. Young Adult's Course Books' MI Profile
In order to find out the similarities and differences between the MI profiles of the two groups of course books, the general distribution of intelligences in these two series are compared.
As can be observed from Table 10 the intelligence profile of the two groups of course books is roughly similar. Verbal/linguistic and spatial/visual intelligences were the predominant types of intelligence in both groups of course books. Considering the least collective intelligences, intrapersonal and natural types of intelligences were also the least addressed intelligences in both course book series. However, logical/mathematical intelligence ranks third in children's course books, followed by interpersonal, musical and bodily/kinesthetic intelligences. The third common intelligence type in young adults' course books was bodily/kinesthetic intelligence, followed by logical/ mathematical, interpersonal and musical intelligences. Graphically, Figure 6 shows the MI profiles of both groups' course books.
Table 10. Distribution of Intelligences in Young Adults' Course Books
Figure 6. Children's Course Books' MI Profiles vs Young Adult's Course Books' MI Profiles
When the data regarding students' MI profiles were compared with those about course books' MI profiles, the following results presented in Tables 11 and 12 were found out.
Table 11. Distribution of Intelligences in Young Adults' Course Books
Table 12. Students' MI Profiles and Course Books' MI Profiles (Young Ault)
As can be seen in Table 11 bodily/kinesthetic intelligence ranks first in students' MI profiles with a mean score of 1.87, which means that this group of students has bodily/ kinesthetic intelligence as the most dominant intelligence. However, the children's course books' most dominant intelligence type is verbal/linguistic intelligence, which covers 41.07% of the total number of intelligences. Moreover, interpersonal intelligence ranks second in students' profiles with a mean score of 1.80, followed by verbal/linguistic (1.73), spatial/visual (1.55), natural (1.55), logical/mathematical (1.50), musical (1.28) and intra personal (0.42). Diversely, the second most dominant type of intelligence in the children's course books is spatial/visual with a percentage of the occurrences of 29.37%, followed by logical/mathematical (18.04%), interpersonal (05.76%), musical (2.69%), bodily/kinesthetic (1.54%), intra personal (0.96%) and natural (0.58%). Therefore, none of the intelligence types preferred by the students are ranked the same as the most dominant intelligences in the children's course books.
As shown in Table 12, intra personal intelligence ranks first in students' MI profiles with a mean score of 1.62; this means that this group of students has intra personal intelligence as the most dominant intelligence. However, the young adult course books' most dominant kind of intelligence is verbal/linguistic intelligence, which covers 39.28% of the total number of intelligences. Moreover, bodily/kinaesthetic intelligence ranks second in students' profiles with a mean score of 1.43, followed by verbal/linguistic (1.36), spatial/visual (1.36), musical (1.26), natural (1.25), interpersonal (1.06) and logical/mathematical (0.99). Diversely, the second most dominant type of intelligence in the young adults' course books is spatial/visual with a percentage of the occurrences of 29.92%, followed by bodily/kinesthetic (11.20%), logical/mathematical (07.96%), interpersonal (7.70%), musical (3.15%), intrapersonal (0.79%) and natural (0.00%). So, none of the intelligence types preferred by the students are ranked the same as the most dominant intelligences in the young adults' course books as well.
In this section, the results are discussed under the research questions of the study.
As a result of the analysis of responses obtained through the MI questionnaires, students' MI profiles were identified. While bodily/kinesthetic intelligence was the most dominant intelligence type among students of the children's department, it ranked second among the young adults.
This means that these students possess the ability to use the body to express ideas and feelings and to solve problems. Interpersonal intelligence ranked second among children whereas it was the seventh preferred intelligence type by young adults. These students can understand another person's feelings, moods, intentions and motives. They also possess a good sense of cooperation, respond to other people effectively and resolve conflicts well. The third and fourth preferred types of intelligence among the students of both children and young adult departments were verbal/linguistic and spatial/visual intelligences. Students who possess verbal/linguistic intelligence can use words effectively both in oral and written forms. They are good at writing compositions, remembering information and talking about language.
Furthermore, students with spatial/visual intelligence possess the ability to think in forms, colors, pictures, shapes, and images. Natural intelligence ranked fifth in children's MI profile and sixth in young adults' MI profile. Students with natural intelligence are sensitive to nature; they are good at recognizing and classifying plants, animals, minerals and all variety of flora and fauna. While logical/ mathematical intelligence ranked sixth among children, it was the last (eight) preferred type of intelligence among young adults. Students who have logical/mathematical intelligence are skillful at recognizing abstract patterns, creating codes and using numbers effectively. Musical intelligence ranked seventh among the students of the children's department while it ranked fifth among the young adult students. People with musical intelligence can recognize musical patterns, rhythms, tones and pitch well. Intrapersonal intelligence was found to be the least preferred intelligence type among children; however, this type of intelligence was the most dominant type of intelligence among young adults.
People, who possess this kind of intelligence? Have the potential to understand themselves, their strengths, weaknesses, intentions and desires. They are also good at reminding themselves to do something and handling their feelings. In general, since the range of the mean scores was not extensive, the results can be analyzed in the following way: due to the students' different circumstances, background and cultures, a balanced distribution of eight intelligence types is expected in their MI profiles. Moreover, the results of the present study are in line with those of Ibragimova (2011) who also found a balanced distribution of eight kinds of intelligences in students' MI profiles.
Analysis of the ILI's course books in terms of MI theory revealed a wide range of distribution of eight intelligence types in the children and young adult coursebooks' activities. The results showed that 41.07% of the total number of intelligences identified in the children's course books and 39.28% of the young adult coursebooks' intelligences catered for verbal/linguistic intelligence type. This can be because language course books naturally contain various exercises and activities that cater to listening, reading, speaking and writing skills as well as grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation areas. Therefore, the result of verbal/linguistic intelligence being the most dominant intelligence type in the course books was predicted. Furthermore, this finding is in line with those of the previous studies (Botelho, 2003; Estaji & Nafisi, 2014; Ibragimova, 2011; Razmjoo & Famer, 2012) that language course books predominantly represent verbal-linguistic intelligence.
Spatial/visual intelligence was the second-highest dominant intelligence type in both series of course books with percentages of 29.37% in children and 29.92% in young adults' course books. This result might be due to the majority of language course books integrating visual illustrations such as pictures, charts, graphs and tables into their activities in order to attract students' attention.
Logical/mathematical intelligence ranked third in children coursebooks' MI profile (18.04%) and fourth in young adult coursebooks' (07.96%). The constant representation of logical/mathematical intelligence can be because language course books include exercises and activities such as predicting ordering, matching, categorizing, logical puzzles and games, and story problems with numbers to liven up students' intellectual potentials.
Interpersonal intelligence ranked fourth in children coursebooks' MI profile (05.76%) and fifth in young adult coursebooks' MI profile (07.70%). Board games, group works and pair works are considered as the most common kinds of activities that create interaction among students and strengthen the interpersonal type of intelligence. However, frequencies of 05.76% and 07.70% addressing interpersonal intelligence cannot be considered high. More group work and pair work activities are needed to empower students' communicative competence (Ibragimova, 2011).
Musical intelligence was the fifth intelligence type in children coursebooks' MI profile (02.69%) while it ranked sixth in the MI profile of the young adults' course books (03.15%). Analyzed activities that catered for musical intelligence included exercises such as recognizing sound patterns and songs.
Bodily/kinesthetic intelligence appeared to be one of the least common intelligence types in children's course books (01.54%) while it ranked third in young adult coursebooks' MI profile (11.20%). As a result of the analysis of the children and young adult course books of the ILI, only a few activities such as role-plays, creative movements, and hands-on activities were found.
Finally, intrapersonal and naturalist intelligences were found to be the least common intelligence types in both series of course books. Intrapersonal intelligence ranked seventh in both children and young adults' coursebooks (children: 00.96%, young adult: 00.79%). The result of the study showed a shortage of tasks, exercises and activities that cater to self-evaluation elements and personal opinions. Naturalist intelligence was present in 00.58% of the total number of intelligences identified in the children's course books. There seemed to be few activities that addressed natural phenomena such as animals, plants, and minerals in these series of course books. However, this kind of intelligence was absent in young adult coursebooks' MI profile.
Overall, analysis of the ILI's children and young adults' EFL coursebooks revealed that there is not a balanced distribution of the intelligence types in these series of course books; i.e., the coursebook series mentioned in this study have not been designed based on the principles of MI theory. According to Botelho (2003), although EFL textbooks have not taken the principles of MI theory into account, teachers can use some other available resources to integrate MI theory into their teaching.
Analysis of the MI profiles of the ILI's children and young adult students and their course books showed discrepancies between the two pairs of profiles; i.e., the two pairs of MI profiles (children and young adult MI profiles & their course books MI profiles) differed from each other in terms of both intelligence ranking and the range of their distribution. While there was a balanced distribution of eight intelligence types among students of both age groups, the distribution of these intelligence types was not balanced in the two groups of course books. Considering the ranking of the intelligences, the students' preferred intelligences of both children and young adult groups differed entirely from the intelligence types that the two series of course books catered to. For instance, the course books of both groups predominantly catered to verbal/linguistic and spatial/ visual intelligences, while the students of both groups preferred all types of intelligences in various approximate degrees.
Moreover, bodily/kinesthetic and interpersonal intelligences ranked first and second by children group of students while these two intelligences were among the least common intelligence types in the children coursebooks' MI profile. Intrapersonal intelligence ranked first in the MI profile of the young adult students, whereas this intelligence type ranked seventh in the young adult course book's MI profile.
As the two primary components of the educational context, this study evaluated the ILI's EFL students and their course books in light of MI theory. Since course books are considered the main materials in language teaching, one of the primary aims of the present study was to analyze the ILI's course books to find out how they responded to Multiple Intelligence theory.
Analysis of sixteen children and young adults' course books in terms of MI theory revealed that both series of course books predominantly catered to verbal/linguistic and spatial/visual types of intelligence. However, the least common types of intelligence in these two course book series were found to be intrapersonal and natural intelligences. Besides, no occurrence of natural intelligence was seen in young adults' course books. The other four types of intelligences namely, logical/ mathematical, interpersonal, musical and bodily/ kinesthetic intelligences included less than 30% of the total number of intelligences.
The findings highlighted that while the ILI students of both children and young adult departments preferred all types of intelligences to approximate degrees, there was no balanced distribution of intelligence types in their coursebook series. That is, the ILI's children and young adults' course book series do not cater to students' MI profile. This is considered as a shortcoming of the educational system since course book activities have not taken students' differences and unique styles into account. According to Botelho (2003), using various kinds of activities, techniques and extra materials, one can include the less common intelligences in his/her instruction.
The results of the study also revealed that course book activities do not cater to the learners' MI profile. Unlike the conventional educational system that mainly focused on verbal and logic kinds of intelligence, the current system need to consider all types of intelligences as equally important. Therefore, the results of the present study may have some pedagogical implications for teachers, educators, curriculum designers and material developers in the field of language teaching.
In order to encourage students, and raise their interest and motivation, teachers are supposed to consider MI theory while shaping the material and choosing teaching techniques to apply to their classes. Furthermore, to improve the process of learning, course book designers and material developers are suggested to have the principles of MI theory in mind when developing teaching materials and designing course books. Finally, administrators and teachers in the English Language Teaching Center of the Iran Language Institute could make some modifications in order to adapt teaching materials and syllabus. Although there is not a balanced distribution of the eight types of intelligences in these course book series, teachers could fill this gap using a variety of activities, exercises and supplementary materials. Another short coming with the course books was the total absence of natural intelligence in the young adults' course books. To solve this problem, course book designers can benefit from sample activities such as classifying animals, recognizing plants and minerals, and other kinds of flora and fauna.
The focus of the present study was limited to children and young adult departments of the ILI. Therefore, further studies can be carried out by analyzing the adult department's teachers and students as well as evaluating their course books. In this study, since only the student versions of the two coursebook series were evaluated, it can be suggested that further studies expand the scope of investigation through evaluating course books along with workbooks and supplementary books. The possible impact of some other variables such as gender, age-range and proficiency level can be considered in future researches. Finally, teachers in different teaching-learning contexts can also use the framework used in this study for the evaluation, analysis and adaptation of their teaching system.
Appendix A: MI Checklist and Sample Activities Addressing Various Intelligences as Represented in the Course Books