Jsou autorky blogu rozmanitě inteligentní? Samy pátraly a vyzkoušely pro Vás testy na určení Vašich silných a slabších stránek!
Michaela Cihelníková is multiply intelligent!
Type of intelligence | bgfl.org test | nedprod.com test |
Naturalistic | 50% | 56% |
Musical | 90% | 84% |
Logical | 60% | 84% |
Existential | 20% | - |
Interpersonal | 30% | 40% |
Kinesthetic | 0% | 36% |
Verbal / linguistic | 80% | 56% |
Intrapersonal | 100% | 96% |
Visual | 40% | 56% |
Michaela Hájková is multiply intelligent!
Linguistic |  28 |
Mathematics |  31 |
Visual/Spatial |  42 |
Body/Kinesthetic |  32 |
Naturalistic | 32 |
Music |  23 |
Interpersonal |  34 |
Intrapersonal | 34 |
· Spatial Learner
I like to: draw, build, design and create things, daydream, look at pictures/slides, watch movies and play with machines.
I am supposed to be good at: imagining things, sensing changes, mazes/puzzles and reading maps, charts.
I should learns best by: visualizing, dreaming, using the mind's eye and working with colors/pictures.
· Bodily/Kinesthetic Learner
I like to: move around, touch and talk and use body language.
I am good at: physical activities (sports/dance/acting) and crafts.
I learn best by: touching, moving, interacting with space and processing knowledge through bodily sensations.
· Interpersonal Learner
I like to: have lots of friends, talk to people and join groups.
I am good at: understanding people, leading others, organizing, communicating, manipulating and mediating conflicts.
I learn best by: sharing, comparing, relating, cooperating and interviewing.
· Intrapersonal Learner
I like to: work alone and pursue own interests.
I am good at: understanding self, focusing inward on feelings/dreams, following instincts, pursuing interests/goals and being original.
I learn best by: working alone, individualized projects, self-paced instruction and having own space
Firstly, I was surprised by being a kinetic learner; some of those characteristics did not suit me at all. But I find out that I use the kinetic way of learning very often. I have to admit that most of the results do fit on me, mainly my strongest strength being a visual learner. My abilities showed from my childhood when I attended an art school (drawing class) and later on when I chose my secondary school (I studied fashion design).
Lenka Sobková is multiply intelligent!
The best results were according to my expectations in kinesthetic and naturalist part. It was as well no big surprise for me that the verbal part was one of the worst. Really the worst was the musical part which I am not sure if I can agree with. On the contrary I did quite well in the intrapersonal part but in reality I do not feel so strong in it. Sometimes it is very difficult to evaluate oneself or decide whether I prefer something or not because it can also depend on circumstances.
Type of intelligence | Results according to nedprod.com |
Naturalist | 80% |
Musical | 20% |
Logical | 50% |
Existential | 60% |
Interpersonal | 40% |
Kinesthetic | 90% |
Verbal / linguistic | 30% |
Intrapersonal | 70% |
Visual | 60% |
Zlata Šlajchrtová is multiply intelligent!
When we were given a task of taking tests concerning multiple intelligences set by Gardner, I was truly exited. For one thing, I love filling up quizzes. The other thing is that I thought I would finally learn what I am good for, because although I should have decided years ago, I still do not know what to do in my life. I was full of hopes. I somehow imagined the test will show that I am a genius artist and I should start this career path immediately. But I feared that the tests will show that I am partially intelligent in everything, but I have no specialty I am really good at. I suspected or maybe the better word is that I wished I will get a good score in visual/spatial and language intelligence and on the other hand I knew I will be an utter looser when it comes to kinaesthetic smarts. When I proceeded, I tried not to solve quizzes with similar questions, although it is obvious that all of these are made on the same basis.
The fist test I made was pretty strange and also the results were disappointing. The test used a scale starting with ‘This is not like me at all,‘ ‘I am very rarely like this,‘ over ‘This is a bit like me,’ ‘This is sometimes like me,’ to ‘I am like this more often than not,’ and ‘I am always like this.’ Overall there were two ‘no’ answers and four ‘yes’ answers. The results were surprising. I was apparently of all the things most sensitive to music, which was not that out of line, but the second best result I got, was that I am truly ‘body smart’ and finally I was judged to be a language idiot. I laughed at that and tried a different one.
The other one was created on Yes/No basis. It contained 100 questions, sorted by the intelligences. My results ranged from the lowest, 33/100 points in naturalistic intelligence, which I was not satisfied with since in comparison with other people I find myself very nature loving and caring even though I am not a ‘keen gardener’ and I can not ‘envision myself as a farmer,’ and 35/100 points that claimed I have almost no sense of introspection, although the next tests proved exactly the opposite, to highest 77/100 points in music (again) and second highest 68/100 points in logical/mathematical intelligence, which was shocking since till today I sometimes use my fingers to count.
The third test I went through was again on 1/0 basis. This quiz, unlike others, involved questions of existential intelligence concerning religion, meditation, inspiration and philosophy in which I scored the highest and total 100 out of 100 points. My answers also showed that I am highly visually sensitive and I stand out when it comes to intrapersonal skills. This concrete test disagreed with the rest on my musical intelligence, because it marked this area only as average. I also learned I essentially hate people and had no sense what so ever how to get along with them. To some extend it makes sense: being so self-centred and self-absorbed, how can I not be asocial.
The last quiz seemed to me the most balanced one. It was based on truthfulness of claims, with four possibilities: mostly agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree and mostly agree. This test fulfilled my expectations. It showed I am not good with numbers and with physical activity, but it proved that my field is language, music and probing my soul. The reason why I constantly fail to get a good score with visual/spatial intelligence is that I am really bad with maps and special orientation. On the other hand, I can easily recognize a good piece of visual let’s say arrangement from bad one (as in posters etc, for I do not want to say I can distinguish bad art from a good one) and I love imagining scenes in my head.
What do I get from my results? Well the thing that shouts out is, that I have now pretty solid evidence that if my parents had forced me to take up music classes, I could be famous by now. No, I am just joking. I never thought that one can be seen as this musical and not to play any instrument. Nevertheless, music really is ‘easy’ and important for me. I was always convinced that I am a person of senses. I believe my feelings, I can understand art. But thanks to these quizzes I realized I am far more systematic and reason-seeking person than I thought I was. On the other hand, the results can merely mean that I searched so long until I find the most suitable test for my needs and beliefs, or I simply unconsciously adapted my answers to the anticipated and wished outcome.
