The Impact of Multiple Intelligence-Oriented Writing Tasks on the Accuracy, Fluency, and Organization of ELT Students’ Writing

Document Type: Research Paper


1 Department of English, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran

2 Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran


Correlational studies supporting the link between learners’ multiple intelligences and their learning are superseded by interventionist attempts to explore direct applications of Multiple Intelligence (MI) Theory in language teaching and learning. This quasi-experimental study examined the extent to which engaging ELT major university students in writing tasks, compatible to their dominant intelligences, might enhance the accuracy, organization, and fluency of their writing.  The participants were 64 male and female English major sophomores. They were in three intact classes, randomly assigned to a control no task (NT) group, a task-supported (TS) group, and an MI-oriented task (MIT) group after their initial homogeneity was assessed. The fifteen-session treatment comprised pre-writing brainstorming activities in the NT group and a set of pre-writing tasks performed by the TS group. In the MIT group, however, individuals with the same dominant intelligences were grouped together to perform tasks that were compatible with their dominant intelligences. The one-way ANOVA analysis of the research data obtained from the post-test writing scores revealed that the MIT group surpassed the other groups in accuracy, fluency and organization. The findings underscore the necessity of taking learners’ intelligences into consideration as a criterion for task selection and offer important pedagogical implications for teaching writing.


Ahmadian, M., & Hosseini, S. (2012). The relationship between Iranian English learners’ linguistic intelligence and their writing ability, and writing assessment criteria. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 1(2), 1-22.

Ahour, T., & Abdi, M. (2015). The relationship between EFL learners’ multiple intelligences and vocabulary learning strategy use with a focus on gender. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(4), 800-809.

Al-Balhan, E. M. (2006). Multiple intelligence styles in relation to improved academic performance in Kuwaiti middle school reading. Digest of Middle East Studies, 15(1), 18-34.

Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Arnaudet, M.L., & Barret. M.E. (1990). Paragraph development: A guide for students of English. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

Bachman, L. F. (2005). Statistical analysis for language assessment. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Christison, M. A. (1996). Applying multiple intelligence theory in the foreign language classroom. MEXTESOL Journal, 19(3), 27-43.

Ekstrom, R.B., French, J. W., Harman, H. H., & Derman, D. (1976). Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.

Faravani, A., Atai, M. R. (2015). Merging multiple intelligences with dialogic-based portfolio assessment to expedite Iranian EFL learners’ higher order thinking skills. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 6(4), 19-44.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rded.). London: SAGE.

Fleetham, M. (2006). Multiple intelligences in practice: Enhancing self-esteem and learning in the classroom. London: MPG Books Ltd.

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299-324.

Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (2003). Multiple intelligences after twenty years. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York: Basic Books.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Johnson, K. (2003). Designing language teaching tasks. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Mahdavi, B. (2008). The role of multiple intelligences (MI) in listening proficiency: A comparison of TOEFL and IELTS listening tests from an MI perspective. The Asian EFL Journal, 10(3), 109–126.

McKenzie, W. (1999). Multiple intelligences survey. Retrieved  from

Naseri, F., & Nejad Ansari, D. (2013). The relationship between MI and Iranian high school students’ L2 writing achievement. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioural Research, 2(5), 282-290.

Ong, J., & Zhang, L.J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 218–233.

Pakdel Estalkhbijari, Z., & Khodareza, M. (2012). The effects of warm-up tasks on the Iranian EFL students' writing ability. International Education Studies, 5(2), 190-203.

Parrott, M. (1993). Tasks for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Piri, F., Barati, H., & Ketabi, S. (2012). The effects of pre-task, on-line, and both pre-task and on-line planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy: The case of Iranian EFL learners’ written production.’ English Language Teaching, 5(6), 158-168.

Pourdana, N., & Karimi Behbahani, S. M. (2012). Task types in EFL context: Accuracy, fluency, and complexity in assessing writing performance. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(1), 80-84.

Razmjoo, S. A. (2008). On the relationship between multiple intelligences and language proficiency. The Reading Matrix, 8(2), 155-174.

Razmjoo, S. A., Sahragard, R., & Sadri, M. (2009). On the relationship between multiple intelligences, vocabulary learning knowledge and vocabulary learning strategies among the Iranian EFL learners. The Iranian EFL Journal Quarterly 3, 82-110.

Rezazadeh, M., Tavakoli, M., & Eslami Rasekh, A. (2011). The role of task type in foreign language written production: Focusing on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. International Education Studies, 4(2), 169-176.

R.I.C. Publication. (2004). Multiple intelligences: A thematic approach. RIC Publication. Richards, J.C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2002). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sadeghi, K., & Fazelijou, E. (2012). The role of task-supported language teaching in EFL learner’s writing performance and grammar gains. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18(1), 117–127.

Sajjadi Rad, R., Khojasteh, L., & Kafipour, R. (2014). The relationship between MIs and writing skill of medical students in Iran. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 7(3), 1-10.

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson, (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Seifoori, Z., & Vahidi, Z. (2012). The impact of fluency strategy training on Iranian EFL learners’ speech under online planning conditions. Language Awareness, 21(1-2), 101-112.

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38-62.

Soleimani, H., Moinnzadeh, A., Kassaian, Z., & Ketabi, S. (2012). The effect of instruction based on multiple intelligences theory on the attitude and learning of general English. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 45-53.

Stankov, L. (2000). Structural extensions of a hierarchical view on human cognitive abilities. Learning and Individual Differences, 12, 35–51. 

Thornbury, S. (1997). Reformulation and reconstruction: Tasks that promote ‘noticing’. ELT Journal, 51(4), 326-335.

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.