The Effect of Multiple Intelligences on DDL Vocabulary Learning

Asma’a Abdulrazzaq Al-Mahbashi, Noorizah Mohd Noor, Zaini Amir


Over the past decades, the potential for the direct use of corpora known as data driven learning (DDL) has gained great prominence in English language classrooms. A substantial number of empirical studies demonstrated that DDL instruction positively affects students’ learning. As learning outcomes can be affected by individual differences, some researchers have investigated the efficiency of DDL in the light of learners’ different characteristics to determine the type of learners who were more responsive to DDL. The DDL literature has indicated the need for more research addressing for whom DDL best suits. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to examine whether or not learners’ predominant intelligences were significant predictors of DDL learning outcomes. The sample for this study included 30 female EFL Yemeni students at Sana’a University. The study used three primary instruments:  a multiple intelligence questionnaire, a posttest and a delayed test on the vocabulary that was taught using DDL. The result of the correlation analyses between the participants’ three identified predominant intelligences and their performances in the posttest and delayed test showed an insignificant relationship between the variables. The regression analyses results also revealed that the predominant intelligences insignificantly predicted the participants’ posttest and delayed test performances.  Based on these findings, learners’ needs and preferences should be activated and addressed by classroom instructions for creating a diverse and motivating learning environment.



Corpora, DDL, individual differences, IQ, multiple intelligences

Full Text:



Al Azri, R. H., & Al-Rashdi, M. H. (2014). The effect of using authentic materials in teaching. International journal of scientific & technology research, 3(10), 249-254.

Al- mahbashi, A., Noor, N. M., & Amir, Z. (2015a). Learning diversity: multiple intelligences profile of Yemeni EFL university students. International Journal of Development Research, 5(12), 6380-6383.

Al-mahbashi, A., Noor, N. M., & Amir, Z. (2015b). The Effect of Data Driven Learning on Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge of Yemeni University Learners. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 21(3).

Alsied, S. M., & Pathan, M. M. (2013). The use of computer technology in EFL classroom: advantages and implications. IJ-ELTS, 1(1), 61-71.

Bas, G. & Beyhan, O. (2010). Effects of multiple intelligence supported project based learning on students’ achievement levels and attitudes towards English lesson. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(3).

Baum, S, Viens, J & Slatin, B. (2005). Multiple intelligences in the elementary classroom: A teacher’s toolkit. Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Biber, D., S. Conrad & R. Reppen (1998): Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Biria, R; Boshrabadi, A., & Nikbakht, E. (2014). The relationship between multiple intelligences and Iranian EFL learners’ level of L2 lexical knowledge: The case of gender. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 5 (3), 1-17.

Boulton, A., & Tyne, H. (2013). Corpus linguistics and data-driven learning: a critical overview. Bulletin suisse de Linguistique appliquée , 97, 97-118.

Boulton, A. (2011). Blending research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches to researching computer corpora for language learning. Proceedings of KAMALL 2011: New Directions for Blended Learning in EFL. Daejeon: Pai Chai University, South Korea.

Çelik, S. & Elkatmiş, M. (2013). The Effect of Corpus Assisted Language Teaching on the

Learners’ Proper Use of Punctuation Marks. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(2), 1090-1094.

Champers, A. (2010). What is data driven learning? In A. O'Keeffe & M. McCarthy. The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 345-358). Routledge.

Chan, P-T. and H-C. Liou. (2005). Effects of web-based concordancing instruction on EFL students’ learning of verb–noun collocations. Computer Assisted Language Learning,18(3), 231–251.

Donesch-Jezo, E. (2013).Using Language Corpus in Teaching Foreign Language Vocabulary. International Multidisciplinary e-Journal, 2(1),11-25.

Dung, N. T., & Tuan, L. T. (2011). Accommodating classroom activities to EFL learners’ multiple intelligences. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 79.

Farahani, A. A. K., & Kalkhoran, E. L. 2014. The relationship between incidental vocabulary learning and multiple intelligences of Iranian EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(1), 58.

Gan, Z. (2011) L2 Learner Individual Differences: An integrative and contextualist perspective. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 10 (1), 67–88.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic books.

Ghadirian, S. (2002). Providing controlled exposure to target vocabulary through the screening and arranging of texts. Language Learning and Technology, 6, 147–164.

Johns, T. (1990). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of datadriven learning. CALL Austria,10, 14-34.

Jonassen, D. & Grabowski, B. (2.11). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Routledge.

Kutz, M., Dyer, S., & Campbell, B. (2013). Multiple intelligence profiles of athletic training students. Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 11(1), 9.

Lee, C-Y. and H-C. Liou. (2003). A study of using web concordancing for English vocabulary learning in a Taiwanese high school context. English Teaching and Learning, 27(3), 35–56.

Lujan-Ortega, V. and Clark-Carter, D. (2000). Individual differences, strategic performance and achievement in second language learners of Spanish. Studia Linguistica, 54(2), 280-287.

Mann, R. L. (2001). Eye to eye: Connecting with gifted visual-spatial learners. Gifted Child Today, 24(4), 54–57.

McEnery, T.& Xiao, R. (2011). What corpora can offer in language teaching and learning. In E. Hinkel. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 364-380). Routledge.

McKenzie, W. (2002). Multiple intelligences and instructional technology: A manual for every mind. International Society for Technology in Education.

Moran, S., Kornhaber, M., & Gardner, H. (2006). Orchestrating multiple intelligences. Educational Leadership,64(1), 22-27.

Muthanna, A., & Karaman, A. C. (2011). The need for change in teacher education in Yemen: The beliefs of prospective language teachers.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 12, 224-232.

Nation, I. S. P. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook and research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 581-595). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Oghigian, K., & Chujo, K. (2010). An effective way to use corpus exercises to learn grammar basics in English. Language Education in Asia,1(1), 200-214.

O'Keeffe, A., & McCarthy, M. (2010). The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics. Routledge.

Oskooei, S, K., &Salahshoor, F. (2014). The relationship between multiple intelligences and L2 reading skill among Iranian EFL university students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature , 3(5), 229-283.

Paribakht, T. & Wesche, M. (1993). Reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL Canada Journal, 11(1), 9-29.

Rahimi, M., Mirzaei, A., & Heidari, N. (2012). How do successful EFL readers bridge between multiple intelligences and reading strategies?. World Applied Sciences Journal,17(9), 1134-1142.

Saeidi, M. (2009). The implementation of multiple intelligence theory in the classroom: Different ways of learning and teaching. Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Literature, 1(1), 103-116.

Tajeddin, Z., & Chiniforoushan, N. (2011). Visual intelligence and lexical enhancement tasks: Their impacts of EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(3), 109-134.

Talai, T. & Fotovatnia, Z. (2012) Data- driven Learning: A student- centered technique for language learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(7), 1526-1531.

Tian, S. (2005). Data-driven learning: Do learning tasks and proficiency make a difference. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics. Tokyo: Waseda University Media Mix Corp (pp. 360-71).

Stockwell, G. (2007). A review of technology choice for teaching language skills in areas in the CALL literature. ReCALL Journal, 19(2), 105–120.

Sriphicharn, P. (2002). Introducing Data-Driven Learning: Theory, Practice, and Evaluation. Journal of Liberal Art, 2(2), 100-111.

Tajeddin, Z., & Daraee, D. (2013). Vocabulary Acquisition through Written Input: Effects

of Form- Focused, Message- oriented, and Comprehension Tasks. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 16,1,13.

Zarei, A. A., & Afshar, N. S. (2014). Multiple intelligences as predictors of reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 23-38.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2023 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.