INTEGRATING MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES THEORY IN PAKISTANI UNDERGRADUATE ESL CLASSROOMS: ENHANCING THE ENGLISH PROFICIENCY OF LOW-ACHIEVING LEARNERS

Authors

  • Muhammad Anwar Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, Bahria University Karachi Campus. Author
  • Afshan Saleem Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, Bahria University Karachi Campus. Author
  • Saqib Abbas Assistant Professor, Department of English, Benazir Bhutto Shaheed University, Lyari, Karachi. Author
  • Muhammad Zaman Lecturer, Department of English, Federal Urdu University of Arts, Sciences & Technology, Karachi. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18050929

Keywords:

Multiple Intelligences Theory, ESL Instruction, Low-Proficiency Learners, Undergraduate Students, Pakistan

Abstract

This study examines the effectiveness of Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (MI) theory in improving the English language proficiency of low-achieving undergraduate ESL learners in Pakistani universities. Given the persistent challenges of low English proficiency at the tertiary level, the study investigates whether MI-based instructional strategies can offer an effective alternative to traditional teacher-centred approaches. Using a quasi-experimental design, two intact classes of non-English major undergraduates were selected: the experimental group received MI-informed instruction, while the control group followed conventional teaching methods. The intervention lasted sixteen weeks and incorporated activities targeting diverse intelligence domains, including linguistic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, musical, and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences. Data collected through pre- and post-tests, motivation questionnaires, and classroom observations revealed that the experimental group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in listening, reading, and writing skills, along with increased motivation and engagement. The findings suggest that MI-based instruction provides a viable framework for differentiated teaching and supports the learning needs of low-proficiency ESL undergraduates in Pakistan.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmad, P. (2022). Integrating multiple intelligences theory in English language teaching.Premise Journal of English Education, 11, 348. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v11i2.4823

Al Ghaithi, A., & Behforouz, B. (2023). EFL low-achieving learners and effectiveness of remedial instruction. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 34, 35–48. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1401038.pdf

Armstrong, T. (2017). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (4th ed.). ASCD. https://files.ascd.org/staticfiles/ascd/pdf/siteASCD/publications/books/Multiple-Intelligences-in-the-Classroom-4th-Edition-Sample-Chapters.pdf

Berrios Aguayo, B., Arazola Ruano, C., & Pantoja Vallejo, A. (2021). Multiple intelligences: Educational and cognitive development with a guiding focus. South African Journal of Education, 41(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v41n2a1828

Cahapay, M. (2020). Rethinking education in the new normal post-COVID-19 era: A curriculum studies perspective. https://doi.org/10.29333/aquademia/8315

Cai, Y. (2024). Integrating Bloom's taxonomy and the cognitive academic language learning approach in teaching college English in China. Frontiers in Educational Research, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2024.070425

Chen, L., & Li, W. (2022). Language acquisition and regional innovation: Evidence from English proficiency in China. Managerial and Decision Economics, 43(1), 178–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3374

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage. https://s1.papyruspub.com/files/demos/products/ebooks/academicbooks/applied-linguistics/Preview-Research-Design-Qualitative-Quantitative-and-Mixed-Methods.pdf

Davis, K., Christodoulou, J., Seider, S., & Gardner, H. (2011). The theory of multiple intelligences. In R. J. Sternberg & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 485–503). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977244.025

Díaz-Posada, L.-E., Varela-Londoño, S.-P., & Rodríguez-Burgos, L.-P. (2017). Multiple intelligences and curriculum implementation: Progress, trends, and opportunities. Revista de Psicodidáctica (English ed.), 22(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1387/RevPsicodidact.15614

Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667343

English Assessment and Teaching Annual Report Compilation Group. (2023). 2022 English assessment and teaching annual report. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. ISBN 9787521343779

Gao, C., & Shen, H. (2021). Mobile-technology-induced learning strategies: Chinese university EFL students learning English in an emerging context. ReCALL, 33(1), 88–105. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344020000142

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: A theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons (Rev. ed.). Basic Books/Hachette Book Group.

Ghaznavi, N., Haddad Narafshan, M., & Tajadini, M. (2021). The implementation of a multiple intelligences teaching approach: Classroom engagement and physically disabled learners. Cogent Psychology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2021.1880258

He, H. (2021). Students' learned helplessness and teachers' care in EFL classrooms. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 806587. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.806587

Huang, X., Wu, Y., & Dou, A. (2024). AI-enhanced task-based language teaching: Fostering personalized college English learning. Frontiers in Educational Research, 7(10), 204–209. https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2024.071033

Jiang, L., & Luk, J. (2016). Multimodal composing as a learning activity in English classrooms: Inquiring into the sources of its motivational capacity. System, 59, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.04.001

Kotob, M., & Ali, M. (2019). The influence of differentiated instruction on academic achievement of students in mixed ability classrooms. International Linguistics Research, 2, 8. https://doi.org/10.30560/ilr.v2n2p8

Lei, L., & Qin, J. (2022). Research in foreign language teaching and learning in China (2012–2021). Language Teaching, 55(4), 506–532. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444822000155

Liu, Z. (2019). Multi-intelligence theory and classroom teaching evolution. Jiangsu Education Research, 26(9), 9–12.

Mardhatillah, M., & Suharyadi, S. (2023). Differentiated instruction: Challenges and opportunities in EFL classroom. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 8(1), 69–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v8.i1.1022

Pang, Y., Hashim, H., & Said, N. E. M. (2024). Learning strategies for Chinese as foreign language learners in college: A qualitative study. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 6(4), 463–473. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v6i4.6795

Pawliszko, J. (2025). Integrating translanguaging and multimodal resources in EMI classrooms: A comparative study of inclusive strategies. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2025.2462112

Ruan, Y., & Jacob, W. J. (2009). The transformation of college English in China. Frontiers of Education in China, 4(4), 466–487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11516-009-0025-y

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

Teng, Y., & Wang, X. (2021). The effect of two educational technology tools on student engagement in Chinese EFL courses. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00263-0

Usuluddin, U., Fikni, Z., Husnu, M., & Nadia, R. (2024). Exploring the impact of kinesthetic learning strategies on speaking ability: A study for integrating movement and English language. Culturalistics: Journal of Cultural, Literary, and Linguistic Studies, 8, 54–62. https://doi.org/10.14710/ca.v8i2.24128

Wang, L. (2023). The impact of student-centered learning on academic motivation and achievement: A comparative research between traditional instruction and student-centered approach. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 22, 346–353. https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v22i.12463

Wang, Y. (2022). A comparative study on the effectiveness of traditional and modern teaching methods. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-89-3_32

Wu, X., & Tarc, P. (2021). Challenges and possibilities in English language learning of rural lower-class Chinese college students: The effect of capital, habitus, and fields. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(4), 957–972. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2021.1931249

Xu, J. (2021). A task-based teaching approach with multiple intelligences features in developing Chinese students’ speaking competency. Arab World English Journal, 12(2), 209–221. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no2.14

Zaman, M., Jawad, M., & Buriro, G. S. (2025). Understanding ESL lecturers’ beliefs and teaching methodologies in the context of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in Karachi. ACADEMIA International Journal for Social Sciences, 4(1), 447. https://doi.org/10.63056/ACAD.004.01.0057

Published

2025-12-30

How to Cite

Muhammad Anwar, Afshan Saleem, Saqib Abbas, & Muhammad Zaman. (2025). INTEGRATING MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES THEORY IN PAKISTANI UNDERGRADUATE ESL CLASSROOMS: ENHANCING THE ENGLISH PROFICIENCY OF LOW-ACHIEVING LEARNERS. International Premier Journal of Languages & Literature, 3(4), 390-401. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18050929