Navigating Teachers’ and Tourism students’ Preferred Intelligence Types in English for Tourism Purposes
محورهای موضوعی : Geography and tourism planning, geography and urban planning, urban planning, architecture, geography and rural planning, political geographyElham Mehrdelan 1 , Hamed Barjesteh 2 , Fereshteh Azizmohammadi 3
1 - Department of English Language and Literature, Ayatollah Amoli Branch, Islamic Azad University, Amol, Iran
2 - Department of English language and literature, Ayatollah Amoli Branch, Amol, Iran
3 - Department of English Language and Literature, Ayatollah Amoli Branch, Islamic Azad University, Amol, Iran
کلید واژه:
چکیده مقاله :
This study sought to navigate multiple intelligence (MI) theory in the First Friend Series with the tourism English courses. To comply with the objective, 15 teachers were asked to uncover their perceptions of MI theory and its application in their classes. The secondary aim of this study was to probe tourism learners’ preferred intelligence types concerning different kinds of intelligence provided in the textbooks. To do this, 42 tourism students were asked to fill out the MI inventory developed by Christison (1996). The findings indicated that the textbook series dominantly represented verbal/linguistic and special/visual linguistic intelligence types. In addition, the most preferred intelligence types were interpersonal, logical-mathematical, musical, and special-visual, respectively. However, the least intelligence types were naturalistic and bodily-kinesthetic. The findings revealed that female learners displayed higher mean rank in answering the MI inventory, but the difference between the male and female learners in their MI type was not significant. Categorizing data obtained from teachers’ interviews (N= 15) showed that MI brings positive outcomes related to teaching practices and the learners’ learning. Teachers reported positive attitudes towards considering MI theory in teaching and applying it in their classes. The findings have implications for the tourism students, English for specific courses, and language policy makers.
Abbasian, R., & Khanjavi, Y. (2012). English language teaching program of universities: Does it cater for multiple intelligences of students. Porta Linguarum, 17, 111-131.
Afzali, K., & Fakharzadeh, M. (2009). A needs analysis survey: The case of Tourism letter writing in Iran. ESP World, 8, 1-19.
Al-Khatib, M. (2005). English in the workplace: An analysis of the communication needs of tourism and banking personnel. Asian EFL Journal, 7(2), 42-52.
Anning, A. (1991). The first year at school. Ballmoor: Open University Press.
Armstrong, Th. (2000). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Modern English Teacher, 10(1), 52-56.
Botelho, M. (2003). Multiple intelligences theory in English language teaching and analysis of current textbooks, materials, and teachers’ perceptions. Unpublished MA thesis. Ohio University, Ohio.
Chen, J. Q., Moran, S., & Gardner, H. (Eds.). (2009). Multiple intelligences theory around the world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Choi, K. (2010).Needs analysis of students of Tourism English. In proceeding of the10th Conference of PAAL (pp. 57-68). Seoul: Hanyang Women’s University.
Christison, M. A. (1996). Teaching and learning languages through multiple intelligences. TESOL Journal, 6(1), 10-14.
Cravotta, J. S. (1990). English for Tourism Purposes: A new approach in the field of English for Specific Purposes. Retrieved on January 18, 2020 from http://www.espfortourism.blogspot.my/2012/05/english-for-tourism-purposes.html
Ellis, D. K., Ellis K. A., Huemann, L. J., & Stolarik, E. A. (2007). Improving mathematics skills using differentiated instruction with primary and high school learners. (Action Research Project). Saint Xavier University.
Fenner, D., Mansour, S. K., & Sydor, N. (2010). The effects of differentiation and motivation on learners’ performance. (Action Research Project). Saint Xavier University.
Fuentes, A. C. (2004). The use of corpora and IT in evaluating oral task competence for tourism English. CALICO Journal, 22(1), 5-24.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (2000). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic.
Ghamrawi, N. (2019). Multiple intelligences and ESL teaching and learning: An investigation in KG II classrooms in one private school in Beirut, Lebanon. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(1), 25-46.
Hasenekoğlu, İ., & Ve Gürbüzoğlu G. (2009). Coklu zeka kuramına dayalı iş protein sentezi konusunun .ğrencilerin bilgilerindeki kalıcılığına etkisi. Ahi Ev Universitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 49-59.
Haggag, H. (2008). The effectiveness of a content-based program for developing English writing skills and languages proficiency of tourism and hospitality students. M.A. Dissertation. Egypt: Qena University.
Ibragimova, N. (2011). Multiple intelligences theory in action in EFL classes: A case study. Eastern Mediterranean University: North Cypru.
Kahraman, S., & Bulut Beduk, S. (2014). A study of multiple intelligences in 6th-7th-8th grade gifted learners. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 2(1), 58-73.
Kirkgoz, Y. (2010). Catering for multiple intelligences in locally-published ELT textbooks in Turkey. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3(1), 127-130.
Kouro, A. A., & Al-Hebaishi, S. M. (2014). The relationship between multiple intelligences, self- efficacy and academic achievement of Saudi gifted and regular intermediate learners. Educational Research International, 3(1), 48-70.
Lannuzzi, S. (2006). First friends. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larson-Freeman, D. (2000). On the appropriateness of language teaching methods in language and development’ in J. Shaw, D. Lubelske, and M. Noullet (eds.). Partnership and Interaction: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language and Development. Hanoi, Vietnam (pp. 65–71). Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology.
Lo, Y., & Sheu, C. (2008). The design, implementation, and evaluation of an English tour guide project. The Asian ESP Journal, 4(2), 79-95.
Luka, I. (2009). Development of students’ English for Special Purposes competence in Tourism studies at tertiary level. ESP World, 8, 4.
Martin, A., & Davies, S. (2006). An evaluation of the language skills in Scottish hotels. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 5(1), 4-15.
Palmberg, R. (2001). Catering for multiple intelligences in EFL course books. HLT Magazine, January 2002. Retrieved November 9, 2019, from http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jan02/sart6
Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(2), 12-26.
Shieh, W. (2012). Hotel employees’ perception on their workplace English use: An example from Taiwan. US-China Foreign Language, 10(11), 1729-1733.
Snider, D. P. (2001). Multiple intelligences theory and foreign language teaching. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Utah, U.S.A.
Taase, Y. (2012). Multiple intelligences theory and Iranian textbooks: An analysis. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 73-82.
Tipmontree, S. (2007). The use and the problems of English and intercultural communication skills of Thai tourist police officers. M.A. Dissertation. Thailand: University of the Thai.
Vaziri, A., & Barjesteh, H. (2019). The Relationship between teaching reading strategies to hotel staff and its effects on their attitudes: Learners’ Autonomy, Reading Strategies, and Reading Comprehension. Journal of Tourism & Hospitality Research, 6(4)45-58.
Winarti, A., Yuanita, L., & Nur, M. (2019). The effectiveness of multiple intelligences based teaching strategy in enhancing the multiple intelligences and Science Process Skills of junior high school students. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(2), 122-135.
