University of Sistan and Baluchestan

Faculty of Humanities
Department of English Language and Literature

Exploring the Relationship Between Iranian EFL

Learners' Multiple Intelligences, Locus of Control
and Reading Proficiency

M.A. Thesis
Submitted to the English Department of the Faculty of Humanities,
University of Sistan and Baluchestan, in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the M.A. Degree in Teaching English as a Foreign
Language

Supervisor: Dr. Farrokhlagha Heidari

Advisor: Dr. Abdollah Sarani

BY
Najme Khorasaniha

Zahedan, Iran
January, 2012
 In the Name of God

University of Sistan and Baluchestan

Faculty of Humanities
Department of English Language and Literature

Exploring the Relationship Between Iranian EFL

Learners' Multiple Intelligences, Locus of Control
and Reading Proficiency

M.A. Thesis
Submitted to the English Department of the Faculty of Humanities,
University of Sistan and Baluchestan, in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the M.A. Degree in Teaching English as a Foreign
Language

Supervisor: Dr. Farrokhlagha Heidari

Advisor: Dr. Abdollah Sarani

BY
Najme Khorasaniha

Zahedan, Iran
January, 2012
In the Name of God
 University of Sistan and Baluchestan
Faculty of Humanities
Department of English Language and Literature

We hereby approve that this thesis by Najme Khorasaniha entitled:

Exploring the Relationship Between Iranian EFL

Learners' Multiple Intelligences, Locus of Control
and Reading Proficiency
be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of
Arts (M.A.) in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL).
Committee on the Oral Examination
Supervisor : Dr. Farrokhlagha Heidari

Advisor : Dr. Abdollah Sarani

Internal Examiner :

External Examiner :

Head of the Department of the English Language and Literature:

University of Sistan and Baluchestan

Faculty of Humanities
Department of English Language and Literature

Zahedan, Iran
January, 2012
 ‫چکیده‬

‫تفاوتهای فردی‪ ،‬به عنوان خصوصیات روانشناختی غالب‪ ،‬باید در سطوح مختلف تدریس و‬
‫یادگیری زبان کامالً مورد مالحظه قرار گیرند ‪ .‬از میان تاثیرگذارترین سازه های روانشناختی که‬
‫منجر به تفاوت های فردی می شوند‪ ،‬می توان ازهوش چندگانه و منبع کنترل نام برد ‪ .‬هوش چندگانه‬
‫با جنبه های متفاوتی از هوش سر و کار دارد که ممکن است هر شخص از آن برخوردار باشد ‪ .‬منبع‬
‫کنترل‪ ،‬به عنوان مفهوم روانشناختی دیگر‪ ،‬به استنباط افراد از دالیل اصلی و شالوده ای رخدادهای‬
‫زندگیشان اطالق می شود‪ .‬این تحقیق نتایج مطالعه ای برای بررسی هر گونه ارتباط بین هوش‬
‫چندگانه و منبع کنترل از یک سو‪ ،‬و از سوی دیگر هر ارتباط ممکن بین هریک از این دو سازه و‬
‫مهارت خواندن به عنوان یک جزء زبانی را گزارش می دهد‪ .‬هفتاد و شش پاسخ دهنده در رشته های‬
‫ادبیات انگلیسی‪ ،‬آموزش زبا ن انگلیسی‪ ،‬و مترجمی زبان انگلیسی‪ ،‬که از دانشگاه سیستان و‬
‫بلوچستان و دانشگاه آزاد اسالمی زاهدان انتخاب شدند‪ ،‬به پرسشنامه ی ‪ 90‬سئوالی هوش چندگانه‪،‬‬
‫پرسشنامه ی ‪ 28‬سئوالی منبع کنترل‪ ،‬و بخش درک مطلب یک آزمون تافل پاسخ دادند ‪ .‬نتایج به دست‬
‫‪ .‬به هرحال‪ ،‬ارتباط‬ ‫آمده حاکی از هیچ ارتبا ط معناداری بین هوش چندگانه و منبع کنترل نبود‬
‫معناداری بین هوش چندگانه و مهارت خواندن مشاهده گردید ‪ .‬از میان حیطههای مختلف هوش‪ ،‬هوش‬
‫دیداری بیشترین سهم را در پیش بینی مهارت خواندن داشت ‪ .‬ارتباط بین منبع کنترل و مهارت خواندن‬
‫و مهارت‬ ‫نیز معنادار نشان داده شد ‪ .‬به بیان دیگر‪ ،‬همبستگی معنادار مثبتی بین سویگری درونی‬
‫خواندن و همچنین بین هوش دیداری و نمرات خواندن تشخیص داده شد ‪ .‬چنین می توان نتیجه گیری‬
‫کرد که هوش چندگانه و منبع کنترل متغیرهای مهمی در خصوص توانایی خواندن هستند و هنگام‬
‫پیشبرد راهبردهای آموزش خواندن باید عمیقا ً مورد توجه قرار گیرند‪.‬‬
 Dedications

To my dear parents
whose endless love and support throughout my life is the greatest
blessing
and
my dear husband
who was kindly beside me during this long journey
 Acknowledgements

In particular, I appreciate Dr. Heidari's multi-faceted support as my thesis supervisor,

for encouraging me to look at things from a unique perspective, for challenging me when
necessary, and for sharing her infinite wisdom as she guided me to the finish.

Special thanks are due to Dr. Sarani for always having a kind word and a
helpful suggestion.

I consider myself truly blessed for having had the opportunity to learn from the
great scholars and professors during my M.A. education in University of Sistan and
Baluchestan. I would like to express my gratitude to all those who gave me the
possibility to complete this thesis.

I am simply at a loss of words to express my warmest feelings of appreciation to

my parents and my husband who have been strong sources of motivation and
encouragement in me.

i
 Abstract

Individual differences (IDs), as dominant psychological

characteristics, must be highly considered during the various
stages of language teaching and learning. Among the most
influential psychological constructs that lead to IDs, one can name
multiple intelligences (MI) and locus of control (LOC). MI deals
with the various aspects of intelligence each individual may
possess. LOC, as another psychological construct, refers to
individuals' perceptions about the underlying main causes of
events in their lives. This study reports the results of a study
designed to examine any relationship between MI and LOC on the
one hand, and any possible relationships between each of these
two constructs and reading proficiency, as a language component,
on the other. Seventy-six respondents majoring in English
Literature, English Language Teaching, and English Translation,
chosen from University of Sistan & Baluchestan and Islamic Azad
University of Zahedan, answered a 90-item multiple intelligences
questionnaire, a 28-item LOC questionnaire, and a reading
comprehension section of a TOFEL test. The results indicated no
significant relationship between MI and LOC. However, a
significant relationship was observed between MI and reading
proficiency. Among the different domains of intelligence, the
visual intelligence made the greatest contribution in predicting
reading proficiency. The relationship between LOC and reading
proficiency was also significant. In other words, a significant
positive correlation was found between internal orientation and
reading proficiency as well as visual intelligence and reading
scores. It can be concluded that MI and LOC are significant
variables regarding reading proficiency and should be highly
considered while developing strategies for reading instruction.

ii
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements……………………………………………………...….i
Abstract……………………………………………………………………..ii
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………...iii
List of Appendices…………………………………………………………v
List of Tables…………………………………………………………….....vi
List of Figures………………………………………………………….…..vii

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study……..………………………………………...1

1.2 Statement of the Problem and Purpose of the Study……………….…...2

1.3 Significance of the Study…………………………………..…………...4

1.4 Research Questions……………………………………………………...5
1.5 Null Hypotheses………………………………………………………....6
1.6 Definition of the Key Terms…………….……………………………...6

1.6.1 Multiple Intelligences Theory……………………………………..6

1.6.2 Locus of Control…………………………………………………..7

1.6.3 Reading Proficiency……………………………………………….8
1.7 Limitations of the Study…………………………..………………….…8

Chapter 2: REREVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction………………………………………….……………..…..9

2.2 Multiple Intelligences………………………….……...…………..…..10

2.2.1.1 Linguistic/Verbal intelligence…………………...……………11

iii
 2.2.1.2 Logical/Mathematical intelligence……………..….………….11

2.2.1.3 Visual/Spatial intelligence…………………………...………..11

2.2.1.4 Bodily/Kinesthetic intelligence…………………………..…....11

2.2.1.5 Musical intelligence…………………………………………...12

2.2.1.6 Interpersonal intelligence………..………..…………..…….....12

2.2.1.7 Intrapersonal intelligence…………………..……………..…..12

2.2.1.8 Naturalistic intelligence……………….……………………....13

2.2.1.9 Existential intelligence…………………….…………………..13

2.2.2 MI Historical Background…………………………………………15

2.3 Locus of Control…….…………………………………………………24

2.3.1.1 Internal LOC…………………………………...…………..24

2.3.1.2 External LOC……………………………..………………..24

2.3.2 LOC Historical Background……………………………………...26

2.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………32

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction……………………………………..……………….…….33

3.2 Participants………………………………………...……..……………34

3.3 Instrumentation…………………………………..……………….…..34

3.3.1 MI Questionnaire………………….…………...……….……….34

3.3.2 Internal Control Index………………………....….……………..35

iv
 3.3.3 TOEFL Reading Test…………………………...……….….…...36

3.4 Data Collection Procedure…………………………….……………….36

3.5 Data Analysis………………………………………….…………….....38

Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction………………………………………….…………………39

4.2 Data Analysis……………………………..………….………………...39

4.3 Discussion………………………………………...……………………48

4.3.1 Research Question 1………………………………………………..48

4.3.2 Research Question 2……………………………………………….48

4.3.3 Research Question 3………………………………………………..49

4.3.4 Research Question 4………………………………………………..50

4.3.5 Research Question 5………………………………………………...50

Chapter 5: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

5.1 Overview of the study…………………….……..………………51

5.2 Conclusions…………………………………………………...……...53

5.2 Implications for Teaching……………………...……...……………….55

5.2.1 Theoretical Implications…………………………...……………..55
5.2.2 Pedagogical Implications…………………………...…………….56
5.3 Suggestions for Further Research…………………….…..……………57

v
References…………………………………………………………..…..59
Appendices
Appendix A: MI Questionnaire…………………………………..………...67
Appendix B: LOC Questionnaire………………………………..…………73
Appendix C: TOEFL Reading Test……………………………..………….77

vi
List of Tables

Table Page

Table 4.1 Basic Descriptive Statistics for the Reading Scores…….………39

Table 4.2 Correlation for Types of Intelligence and Reading……………..41

Table4.3 The relation between LOC and L2 Reading Proficiency………..42

Table 4.4 A Comparison of Externalizers' and Internalizers' Mean Scores in

L2 Reading Proficiency………………………………...………….........43

Table 4.5 Determining the Significance of the Mean Score Differences in L2

Reading Proficiency…………………….…………….…………….......43
Table 4.6 Basic Descriptive Statistics for the LOC…………….……….44
Table 4.7 Spearman Product Moment Correlation for Types of Intelligence
and LOC…………………………………………..........……………..….45
Table 4.8 Multiple regressions for Types of Intelligences and LOC……...45
Table 4.9 Multiple Regressions for Types of Intelligences and Reading….46

vii
List of Figures

Figure Table

Figure 2.1 MI pizza……………………………………………………….14

Figure 4.1 Presentation of Reading Proficiency Scores………………….40

Figure 4.2 Presentation of the LOC Scores………………………...…….44

viii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Educators all over the world are in search of teaching methods or strategies
that may increase learner achievement. Factors influencing learner
achievement must be highly considered when it comes to second language
learning investigation. Among the many factors that might have direct
influence on language acquisition are learners' individual differences in
terms of psychological variations. Based on Dörnyei (2005), the field of
psychology has two objectives: to find out the general principles of human
mind and to explore the uniqueness of the individual mind also called
differential psychology or individual differences (IDs). IDs refer to
characteristics unique to each individual. However, IDs are the "most
consistent predictors of L2 reading success" (Dörnyei, 2005, p. 2).

Recently much attention has been given to such variations and many
scholars have been seeking to find out whether there is any relationship
between students' performance in a second language (L2) and their
individual variations. In other words, they are seeking to explore whether
learner differences, mostly psychological, have anything to do with language
proficiency. This study aims to investigate the relationship between two of
the most dominant psychological constructs, namely locus of control (LOC)
and multiple intelligences (MI), which lead to IDs.

1
1.2 Statement of the Problem and Purpose of the Study

Traditionally, according to Richards and Rodgers (2001), students were

judged based on logic and language only with the assumption that
intelligence is a unitary quality and also an innate capacity. Any poor
performance in such tests was a symptom of disability (Richards & Rodgers,
2001, p. 115).

Alfred Binet, a French psychologist, was the first one who designed
the first intelligence test in order to discriminate between the sharp students
and the slow ones. He ascertained questions that predicted success if
answered correctly and those that "foretold school difficulties" if answered
wrongly (Gardner, 1999a, p.67). However, based on Hoerr (2000), a single
test and a single score may not feasibly capture all the individuals' potential
and abilities.

Howard Gardner's proposal of Multiple Intelligences Theory (MIT) in

1983 challenged the traditional notion of intelligence as a unitary concept.
Gardner (1983) believed that intelligence has to do with the capacity for
problem-solving and fashioning products in a natural setting. Therefore,
sitting students at their chairs, asking them to take an intelligence test and
deciding on the students' abilities on the basis of the scores does not seem
logical.

He suggested the existence of 7 areas of intelligence. The eighth and

the ninth intelligence profiles were also added later on. Gardner enumerated
these intelligences as linguistic/verbal, logical/mathematical, visual/spatial,
musical/rhythmic, bodily/kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal,
naturalistic and existential intelligences. He suggested that the individuals do

2
not possess the same profile of intelligences and no intelligence type is
considered to be superior to others (Gardner, 1983).

Early decades of studies on IDs labeled learners as good or bad,

intelligent or dull, motivated or unmotivated ones (Horwitz, 2000). Recently
more research has concentrated on considering why some learners are more
successful than others (Fatemi & Elahi, 2010). In other words, the way in
which individuals perceive the world and themselves plays a crucial role in
their learning. One important area which is related to the individuals' belief
about themselves and the world around is Locus of Control (LOC), which is
derived from Rotter's (1966) social learning theory. LOC is '' a generalized
expectancy reflecting the degree to which individuals perceive consequences
as contingent on their own behavior and abilities (internal control) rather
than on some external force such as luck, chance, fate, or powerful others
(external control)" (Janssen & Carton, 1999, p.1).

The sense of control that individuals believe they have over their
academic performance is a crucial factor to take into consideration when
working towards improving academic achievement. Therefore, LOC was
chosen as a variable worth investigating in this study. A need also exists to
investigate students' potential based on their intelligence profiles to predict
any possible contribution of MI to second language learning. The crucial role
of individuals' control belief over their language learning achievement on the
one hand, and the significance of considering IDs in terms of dominant
intelligence types on the other, urged the researcher to conduct this study to
tackle any possible relationship between these two cognitive variables, MI
and LOC, and between each of these constructs and reading proficiency as a
component of second language ability in an EFL context.

3
1.3 Significance of the Study

Nowadays, English language teaching plays a crucial role in educational

system of Iran. MI theory and language studies seem to be interrelated.
There are a number of researches done on the relationship between MI
theory and language studies. Akbari and Hosseini (2008), for example,
investigated the relationship between MI and language learning strategies in
an EFL context. The result showed some relationship between the use of
language learning strategies and MI. Musical intelligence did not correlate
with any aspect of strategy use, and kinesthetic intelligence correlated only
with memory learning strategies.

Although many scholars are going ahead with MI theory, Gardner

himself believes that his theory lacks experimental research: "while MI
theory is consistent with much empirical evidence, it has not been subjected
to strong experimental test" (Gardner, 1993, p.33).

Rotter (1966) has empirical support for hypothesis that internals have
stronger accademic motivation. However, studies attempting to establish the
relationship between LOC and accademic achievement have reported
conflicting results.

Eiεenman and Platt (1968), for instance, found no correlation between

grades, as evidence of achievement, and LOC scores, while Brown and
Strickland (1972) found internality to be positively correlated with higher
grades in males.

Reading ability as a skill in language instruction is the focus of

attention for most educators that is worth considering and improving.
Investigating the theory of multiple intelligences, LOC and their
relationship to reading proficiency can be both theoretically and practically

4
significant. There are a couple of studies done investigating the relationship
between either MI or LOC and some other factors. To the best of my
knowledge, no comparative study in Iran has concentrated on the
relationship between MI and LOC in an EFL context. Consequently, this
study aims to focus on the relationship between these two psychological
constructs on the one hand, and the influence they may have on reading
proficiency as an inseperable skill from the phenomenon of language on the
other.

The results of this study may be worth considering for policy makers,
curriculum designers, tertiary education specialists, educational
organizations, academic specialists, textbook developers, language
instructors, classroom teachers as well as the students. Applying the findings
of such an investigation in hierarchical stages of policy making and language
instruction would improve learners' status, increase their motivation and
pave the way for them in the process of language learning.

1.4 Research Questions

Within the scope of this study the following research questions are
concerned to be answered:

Q1. Is there any significant relationship between Iranian EFL learners'

different types of multiple intelligences and their reading proficiency?

Q2. Is there any significant relationship between Iranian EFL learners' LOC
and their reading proficiency?

Q3. Is there any significant difference between internalizers and

externalizers’ reading proficiency in Iranian EFL context?