Influence of Psyhosocial Stimulation at Home and at School Learning Process on Children’s Multiple intelligences

Dian Novita, S.Pd., M.Si. (d.novita@ut.ac.id) and 
Drs. Denny Setiawan, M.Ed. (dennys@ut.ac.id) 

Open University Indonesia

ABSTRACT
This study is aimed at examining the influence of psychosocial stimulation at home and in school learning process on children multiple intelligence levels. This research was conducted in four kindergartens located in districts Pamulang consist of two public schools and two faith- based schools selected by purposive random sampling. The samples of this study are 30 children taken from each kindergarten who are in the range of age 5-6 years. Results of this study showed that there is no significant difference in psychosocial stimulation both in children public schools and faith-based schools. The psychosocial stimulation of the samples (76.5%) classified as high category. Furthermore, there is no significant difference in total learning process between public schools and faith-based schools, however public schools have higher score (significantly difference at α = 0.01) than faith-based schools in developing themes, making lesson plan, assessment results and general impression. For the case of multiple intelligences, there is no difference in total score, but the samples in faith-based schools have higher score (significantly difference at α = 0.01) than public schools in mathematics and musical intelligences. Furthermore, the samples of the public schools have better score (significantly difference at α = 0.10%) than faith-based schools in intrapersonal and visual-spatial intelligences. Learning process significantly has a positive correlation with multiple intelligences (at α = 0.05 level), especially with lesson plan, interaction in classroom and assessment conducted by teachers. While the multiple regression significant factor (p <0.10) on multiple intelligences in both types of school children are learning (α = 0.083) with adjusted R Square value of the analysis is 0.040, which means that four percent of the value of child’s multiple intelligences influenced by learning process at schools.

Keywords: psychosocial stimulation, learning, multiple intelligences, preschoolers

I.	INTRODUCTION

	Early childhood is an age group in a unique development process in it goes along with the golden age (sensitive phase). In other words, children in preschool age are in the golden age. Theresia (1983) said that preschool children are at an important developmental process moving from dependent to independent, limited coordination to be more skillful, body language to verbal, faith to outer control to inner control and personal to social awareness. In line with that matters, Myers (1992) defined that child development is a metamorphosis in which a child learns in a more complex level of thinking, movement, feeling and relationship with others.        
In fact, most of current educational programs are conducting by generalizing child potential and ability. This matter happened because of lack of understanding from educators about individual characteristic. In addition to education at school, education in a family also has an important role in improving child’s intelligence.  In order to avoid some mistakes in educating children that probably done by parents or educational institutions, a harmony in cooperation between both sides becomes important. 
  	Gardner (in Amstrong 1996) said that everybody has multiple intelligences, not just have single intelligence. He mentioned that there are seven basic intelligences possessed by someone, these are linguistic, logical mathematic, visual-spatial, kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and musical intelligence. Basically, every child has the multiple intelligences, but unfortunately these potencies are not taken into account either by parents or by educators at school or even by educational system (national curriculum) so these potencies fail to maximally developed.  

Goal
	The goal of this research is to examine the influences of psychosocial stimulation and learning process on preschool children’s multiple intelligences in Pamulang district, South Tangerang.  

Objectives
1.	To identify the characteristics of family, the characteristic of children and parents’ psychosocial
2.	To identify the characteristics of school and learning process in two groups of kindergartens
3.	To identify children’s multiple intelligence levels in two groups of kindergartens
4.	To analyze the relationship of children’s characteristics, family characteristics, and psychosocial simulation with children’s multiple intelligence levels.     
5.	To analyze the relationship of learning process with children’s multiple intelligence levels
6.	To examine the influences of psychosocial and learning process on children’s multiple intelligence levels

2	THEORIES

Preschool children are they who are in the age of three to six years old (Patmonodewo, 2003). In the age of three to six years old, children are not the same with children in other ages. Preschool children are persons who have a lot of potential. The potential should be planned and developed in order to make the children’s personality optimally developed. Munandar (1992) said that preschool time is the time for playing and a preparation for entering kindergarten. Playing time is the time for children to grow in a certain circumstance and to prepare themselves to enter formal learning (Gunarsa, 2004).  Furthermore, Hurlock (1977) said that the characteristic of preschool children includes physic, motor, intellectual, and social. The physical characteristic of children can be seen from strong muscles as well as big and hard bones. Preschool children use basic movements like running, walking, climbing and jumping as parts of their playing. Then, by using fine and gross motor they can manipulate small objects, use blocks and other things with various sizes and shapes. Besides, the children have the feeling of curiosity, emotion, envy and jealous. These feelings appear because they don’t have something like their friends’ belonging. Socially, the children are able to make a social contact with people outside their homes, so they have higher desire to play with their friends, adults, and brothers/sisters inside the community of their family.   
Most parents hope their children will grow up smart and successful in their live. To develop intellectual and ability of their children, they provide education facilities the best they can. Most parents consider that intelligence has a direct connection with learning achievement. In fact, intelligence has a broader meaning. Intelligence can be defined as whole capacity or ability to learn, to understand environment, and to solve a problem. Meanwhile, intelligence in many aspects, in our daily life, is called multiple intelligences (Mini, 2010). According to Gardner (1983) multiple intelligence includes verbal-linguistic (words intelligence), logical-mathematic (numbers intelligence), visual-spatial (picture and color intelligence), musical intelligence (music-song intelligence), kinesthetic (movement intelligence) interpersonal (social intelligence), and intrapersonal (self intelligence). Every intelligence of multiple intelligences has its’ own indicator. Children’s multiple intelligences are identified through observation toward behavior, action, tendency to do an action, children’s sensitivity toward something, extraordinary capability, reflexive reaction, attitude and pleasure. Accordingly, there is no learning strategies combination that can properly work together for all children. Every child has a specific tendency to nine intelligences in multiple intelligences. A strategy may work properly on a group of people, but may fail working on other people. (Amstrong, 2003).  Based on the fact, we can say that multiple intelligences direct child development activities because strategy used in intelligence stimulation has direct effect to child development.
Learning which is happened to early childhood children, including they who are engaging in kindergarten, is specific. This learning activity put playing while studying as a priority. Naturally, playing will motivate children to know something deeper and they will spontaneously develop their skills. Bredecamp (1977) said that basically playing priorities “the process” rather than “the result” because playing is an important vehicle to develop social, emotional, and cognitive of the children which is reflected to activities. Planning is very important for learning process execution in kindergarten because it will provide children with best opportunities to have a progress in development and learning. Therefore, teacher will be able to understand their roles and duties in helping children developed and learn something. Something that important to be prepared by a teacher in order to support learning process is to provide learning resources to support learning activities so the children will be pleased and motivated to follow the activities. 
Psychosocial stimulation is a part of a good quality nursing practice done by parents. This is in line with what Houghughi (2004) said that the main conditions for doing treatments are warmness, intelligence, stability, and communication skill, so that will effectively build physical health. Another opinion posed by Hastuti (2009) about the meaning of nursing which includes experience, skill, quality, and responsibility done by parents in educating and nursing their children, so the children will be able to grow to be expected persons in family and society. Stimulation comes from outside of the children. Psychosocial stimulation is a way to give educational experiences to children.                         

3.	Influence of Psyhosocial Stimulation at Home and at School Learning Process on Children’s Multiple intelligences

Research Design, Location and Execution Time
	This research employed cross sectional study design conducted in four kindergartens in Pamulang district, South Tangerang from April to May 2012. The reasons to take Pamulang district as the research location is that Pamulang district is the central of South Tangerang city. In this district two public kindergartens and two faith- based kindergartens were chosen as the place for doing the research.

Sampling Method
	Based on data from Educational Affair of South Tangerang City, in 2010/2011 there are 625 kindergartens including faith- based kindergartens. From this numbers eight of them are government kindergartens and 617 are private kindergartens. The unbalance numbers of government and private kindergartens caused by the condition in which the Government hasn’t paid much attention to early childhood education yet and it makes society fills its need of early childhood education by building private kindergartens.   
	The number of students who are studying in the kindergartens are 25.194 consist of 225 children studying in Government kindergartens and 24.969 children are in private kindergartens. Based on age groups it can be grouped as 8.011 children in group A (4-5 years old) and 12.175 in group B (5-6 years old).
   
Based on the data, the researcher takes samples randomly. Through the random sampling method, eight kindergartens were chosen represent Pamulang District, South Tangerang. The eight schools were chosen by using purposive sampling as criteria, these are (1) the schools have more than 100 students every year (2) the students come from middle economic social status or higher (3) the schools use centre system as their learning process (4) the schools can be categorized as public or faith- based schools. These criteria were employed in order to guarantee that the data represent population as well as have a precision and standard error. The next criterion to choose samples for this research is that the students should be in the range of 5 to 6 years old (group B). Hence, 4 schools were selected with has 30 children each studying in group B. Therefore, the whole samples are 120 children from 4 schools (2 public schools and 2 faith- based schools).

Data Collection Technique
	This research used primary and secondary data. Primary data, including children and family characteristics, psychosocial simulation, learning process, and multiple intelligences, were collected by using questionnaire and observation, meanwhile secondary data, including the number of children, schools profile, schools characteristic, and schools general condition, were collected by using schools’ available data.
The questionnaire for collecting data about psychosocial simulation used Home Observation for Measurement of Environmental (HOME) Inventory developed by Caldwell, (1984) with α= 0.777 consists of 55 items of statement including 11 questions about learning stimulation intelligences, 7 questions about language stimulation, 7 questions about physical environment, 7 questions about warmness and acceptance, 5 questions about academic stimulation, 5 questions about modeling, 9 questions about the variation of stimulation, and 4 questions about punishment.   
The questionnaire for collecting data about learning process consists of 36 questions including 4 questions about theme, 4 questions about Daily Activity Unit, 9 questions about Teaching-Learning Activity, 8 questions about interaction, 5 questions about class management, 2 questions about assessment result, and 4 questions about general impression. The questions about multiple intelligence developed by Hastuti (2006) with a = 0,793 consists of 40 items of statement with 5 questions for each intelligence (gross motor, fine motor, linguistic, mathematic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, music, and visual-spatial).      

Data Analysis
Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistic analysis and inferential statistic analysis. In this case, the inferential statistic analysis being used is correlation examination from Spearman and Pearson, as well as t-test differentiation examination and regression examination.
 
Result and Discussion

Children and Family Characteristics
	Percentages of samples are as follows (see table 1): Sample girls in this research are 57,5 % and boys are 42,5%. The average of sample children are 69,42 months, almost half of the samples are eldest children, these are 49,2 %. Meanwhile, the characteristics of family in this research are as follows: three forth of the fathers are in the average of ages of 38,45 years, and half of the mothers are in the average of ages 34,45 years. The average of monthly family income is Rp. 11.717.500,-. Gunarsa (2000) in Rahmaulina (2007) said that a family with high economic status will have more time to guide their children because the parents no longer have to think about their economy because the main compulsory of the parents in providing a living has been implemented properly.       

Table 1 Children and Family Characteristics 
Variable	General School
(GS)	Faith- Based School (RS)	The Average of  Deviation Standard	
	Minimum-Maximum		
The whole age of children (month)	
69.70 ± 3.98                                 	
69.13± 3.73	
69,42  ±  3,85	
The whole age of father (year)	
38.65 ± 5.948	
37.62 ± 4.377	
38,13 ± 5,226	
The whole age of mother (year)	
34.32 ± 4.983	
34.58 ± 3.894 	
34,45 ± 4,455	
The whole income  (Rp/month)	          
9.916.666.7	
13.518.333.3	
11.717.500	

Psychosocial  Stimulation 
Results showed in general there is no real difference in public schools and faith-based schools. However, the average psychosocial stimulation score of public school provided by family shows higher score ​​in average and it can be seen from the stimulation of learning (9:37), stimulus variation (7:17) and academic stimulation (4.93) while the average psychosocial stimulation score of religious schools given by family have higher values ​​on the physical environment (6:58), the warmth of the reception (6:08), exemplary (3.90) and penalty (2.95). But the real difference in the level of α = 10% was found in the dimensions of exemplary psychosocial stimulation (modeling).

Table 2.  Distribution of the average achievement scores of psychosocial stimulation on family by the types of school.

Psychosocial Stimulation	General School
(GS)	Faith-based schools (FS)	P-Value	
		Average  			Average			
1.	Learning Stimulation (11 items) 		9,37			9,23		0,538	
2.	Language Stimulation (7 items)  		6,75			6,75		1.000	
3.	Physical Environment (7 items) 		6,48			6,58		0,540	
4.	Warmth of Reception (7 items) 		5,93			6,08		0,344	
5.	Academic Stimulation (5 items)  		4,93			4,92		  0,758	
6.	Exemplary (5 items)		3,50			3,90		  0,056**	
7.	Stimulus Variation (9 items) 		7,17			7,02		  0,352	
8.	Punishment (4  items) 		2,73			2,95		  0,376	
Total (55 items) 		46,87			47,43		0,357	
Notification : *) significance at level α=10%

Learning Process
Totally, learning process in general school and faith based school significantly difference in level α=1% in which general school has a higher score compare to those in faith based school. In one side, general school has significant differences in developing themes, lesson plans, assessment results, and general impressions. On the other side, faith based school has higher scores in teaching-learning process and class management. Besides, it seems that faith based school has a higher score in interaction item compare to those in general school. It is to say that teachers in faith based school show better capability in using thematic approach, children’s need oriented, the use of “learning while playing” principle, creating innovation, and life skill (Table 3)        

Table. 3 Score distribution based on learning process 
Learning Process	General School 
(GS)	Faith-based School 
(FS)	P-Value	
		Average			Average			
Thems (4 items)		14.33			13.09		0,000***	
Lesson Plan (4 items)		13.83			13.27		0,000***	
Teaching-Learning Activity (9 items)		32.33			    32.91	  	 0,012**	
Interaction (8 items)		26.50			26.55		1,000	
Class Management (5 items)		16.17			16.55		0,000***	
Assessment Result (2 items)		6.33			6.18		0,000***	
General Impression  (4 items)		12.83			12.45		0,000***	
Total  (36 items)		122.33			121.00		0,000***	
Notification: ***)significance at level α=1%
         **)significance at level α=5%

In creating a learning process, a teacher needs to notice criteria of successful learning. It is in order to maintain his/her motivation to achieve the criteria. According to Sudjana (1989) the   criteria of successful learning can be seen from two aspects, these are learning process and result of children’s learning achievement 

Multiple Intelligences 
There is no significant differences in having multiple intelligences owned by samples in general school and faith-based school.  The Average scores for each intelligence is relatively the same, however at Table 4 it can be seen the samples in general school have higher average scores in fine motor, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and spatial intelligence compare to those in faith-based school. In contrary, the samples in faith-based school have higher average scores in gross motor, language, mathematic, and music intelligence compared to those in general school. The disappearance of differences in multiple intelligences could be caused by the fact that samples and family have the same characteristics.            

Table. 4 Distribution of multiple intelligences scores

Multiple Intelligences	General School
 (GS)	Faith-based Sxhool (FS)	P-value	
		Average			Average			
1.	Gross Motor (5 items)		8,03			8,07		0,890	
2.	Fine Motor (5 items)		9,03			9,02		0.915	
3.	Language (5 items)		9,20			9,25		0,744	
4.	Mathematic (5 items)		9,07			9,22		0,251	
5.	Interpersonal (5 items)		8,98			8,95		0.843	
6.	Intrapersonal (5 items)		9,47			9,23		0,150	
7.	Music (5 items)		9,10			9,33		0,165	
8.	Spatial (5 items)		9,07			8,87		0,171	
Total (40 items)		71,95			71,93		0,976	

The essence of multiple intelligences theory according to Gardner (Amstrong, 1994) is to appreciate the uniqueness of individual, learning strategy variation, the creation of some assessment models and the almost unlimited way to express him/herself in this world. Accordingly, there is no better or more important intelligence of one another. It means that the samples have had awareness of feeling inside him/herself, motivation, temper and desire, skill for self discipline, acknowledgement of him/herself, and self esteem (Moleong. 2004)         

Connection between both child and family characteristics with Psychosocial Stimulation.  

In Table 5 it can be seen that child characteristics, either the age or birth order has no real connection with psychosocial stimulation accepted by the samples, but not like family characteristics, there are some variables that have real connection with psychosocial stimulation (Table 5). The Family characteristics that have real connection with psychosocial stimulation are father’s education background, mother’s education background, mother’s income, and family income. It means that the higher parents’ education background the better  psychosocial stimulation can be given by parents to their children.   

Besides, family’s income has a positive connection with psychosocial stimulation. The higher family’s income, the better psychosocial stimulation can be given. However, only mother’s income has a real and positive connection with psychosocial stimulation. In other words, family income that has connection with psychosocial stimulation is dominated by mother’s income. The higher mother’s income the bigger psychosocial stimulation can be given to her children like easier to buy toys, books, and other facilities for the children.   
  
Table 5. Connection between child characteristics and family with psychosocial simulation
Variable	Learning
Stimulus	Language
Stimulus	Physical Environ-ment	Warmth Acceptance	Acade-mic Stimulus	Model
ling	Stimulus 
Variation 	Punish-ment	Total Home	
Child Characteristic										
The age of child	 0.049	-0,037	-0,029	0,080	0,033	-0,223*	0,047	-0,071	-0,108	
Birth Order	-0,015	 0,043	-0,049	0,101	0,031	-0,051	0,022	-0,015	-0,001	
Family Characteristic										
The age of 
father	-0,089	-0,056	0,072	-0,047	0,069	-0,091	0,050	-0,022	-0,065	
The age of mother	-0,038	 0,042	0,110	 0,200*	-0,056	0,094	-0,022	0,081	0,143	
Father’s education back	 0,202*	 0,160	0,044	0,052	0,021	0,205*	-0,045	0,322*	0,367**	
Mother’s
education back	 0,135	 0,094	0,030	0,189*	0,035	0,326**	-0,093	0,060	0,279**	
Father’s 
income	-0,023	 0,021	0,303**	0,025	0,082	0,214*	0,047	0,026	0,182*	
Mother’s income	 0,024	 0,157	0,214*	0,103	0,190*	0,315**	0,054	0,001	0,236**	
Family 
income	 0,007	 0,097	0,305*	0,104	0,175	0,308**	0,063	0,015	0,256**	

According to Hurlock (1998) in Rusyantia (2006), a child who comes from middle until low SES family will prefer to choose a less-cost game. Reading materials, movie film, and recreation introduced to a child will hardly depend on SES of his/her family, so it is clear that stimulus given by parents to a child will depend on SES like income and educational background of the parents.     

Connection between child and family characteristics with multiple intelligences
 
Spearmen correlation resulted at Table 6 shows that there is no significant connection between family characteristics and multiple intelligences. Like what Piaget said (Hastuti, 2006) that an intelligence is like an equilibrium, balance and adaptation harmony or exchange between humans and their environment. The strategy of multiple intelligences stimulation leads as well as strives for some children development activities. 
Development of one aspect can be integratively stimulated from many directions. Amstrong (2003) explainds that there is no a series of learning strategy effectively work all the time for children. Every child has a particular tendency to a whole intelligence aspects. Multiple intelligences lead the development of child activities because intelligence strategy directly effects child development. Each child development aspect influences each other, if one aspect meets an obstacle therefore other aspects will also stuck on the obstacle. Hence, educators and parents have to pay attention to all child development aspects.

Table 6. Connection between family, children, and school characteritics with multiple intelligences
Variable 	Gross Motoric	Fine Motoric	Langu-age	Mathematic	Interper-sonal skill	Intraper-sonal skill	Music skill	Visual skill	Total MI	
Children
Characteristics										
The age of children	-0,025	-0,054	0,074	-0,120	-0,052	-0,013	-0,117	0,079	-0,085	
Birth order	-0,018	-0,059	0,139	0,061	0,103	0,012	0,001	-0,029	0,059	
Family
Characteristics										
The age of father	-0,053	0,123	0,153	0,140	-0,037	0,086	0,019	-0,021	0,074	
The age of morher	0,044	0,069	0,038	-0,049	0,047	0,165	0,029	0,092	0,151	
Father’s educational background	0,151	0,109	0,023	0,083	-0,021	-0,115	0,000	0,131	0,120	
Mother’s educational background	0,075	-0,045	0,071	-0,039	0,016	0,070	0,057	0,152	0,141	
Father’s income	-0,092	0,179	-0,031	0,133	0,206*	-0,047	-0,051	-0,116	0,002	
Mother’s income	-0,081	0,025	0,125	-0,009	0,255**	-0,058	0,105	0,039	0,084	
Family’s income	-0,059	0,121	0,014	0,058	0,299**	-0,012	0,021	-0,034	0,083	
 
Connection between psychosoail simulation and multiple intelligences
	The result of correlation test shows that generally psychosocial stimulation has nothing to do with multiple intelligences. However, if psychosocial stimulation as well as multiple intelligences are observed from their aspects, therefore we’ll find significantly positive connection between language stimulation and fine motor intelligence with correlation coeffisien 0,226. It is so with physical environment and fine motor intelligence with correlation coeffisien 0,281. It means that the better parents give language stimulation to their  children, the better fine motor of the children. It is so the better physical environment around the children’s house, the better fine motor of them. The same case also happened to significantly positive connection between warmth and reception and intrapersonal intelligence. The better a mother gives a warmth like a hug or kiss to her children, the better intrapersonal intelligence of the children by which they show responsibility and self descipline skill. Besides, modelling also has to do with inmtrapersonal intelligence of a child with correlation coeffisien 0,214 (at level α=0.10).
 
Table 7 The coefficient of correlation between psychosocial stimulation with multiple intelligences
Variabel 	Motorik Kasar	Motorik Halus	Bahasa	Mate
matika	Ket 
Intra	Ket inter	Ket Musik	Ket
Visual-	MI	
Learning System	0,164	-0,048	-0,061	-0,140	0,094	0,092	-0,068	0,038	0.052	
Language System	0,005	0,226*	0,063	0.025	0,046	0,024	0,069	-0,053	0,116	
Physical Environment	-0,081	0,281**	0.029	0,000	-0,009	0,038	-0,122	0,108	0,052	
Warmth of reception	0,111	-0,216*	0,009	-0,165	0,244**	0,084	-0,076	0,025	0,032	
Academic System	-0,143	-0,059	0,001	0,011	0,084	0,134	0,154	-0,118	0,004	
Modeling	0,066	0,119	0,088	-0,040	0,214*	0,071	0,038	-0,002	0,171	
Stimulus Variation 	0,003	-0,115	-0,116	-0,034	-0,101	0,110	-0,046	-0,151	0,135	
Punishment	0,014	0,107	-0,013	0,059	-0,156	-0,024	0,035	-0,060	-0,013	
Total Home	0,083	0,090	-0,018	-0,086	0,095	0,124	-0,035	-0,036	0,080	

Connection between learning process and multiple intelligence
In learning process and multiple intelligence, the result of the research shows a significantly positive connection between interaction of teacher-students in classroom with multiple intelligent with coefficient of correlation at level 0,292 (α=0.05) 
  This result shows that attention given by the teacher at school, the teacher’s effort to develop children’s self esteem, communication with children effectively and help children to figure out their weakness and strength, will bring a good effect to a child’s multiple intelligences.  Xie and Lin (2009) show that the use of various media in doing assessment from the beginning to the end of the learning process, will prove to further enhance multiple intelligences in the experimental group compared with the control group.

Table. 8  Coefficient of correlation Learning process and multiple intelligences
Variable 	Gross Motoric	Fine Motoric	Langua-ge	Mathema-tic	Inter-personal skill	Intra-personal skill	Music	Visual-spatial	Multiple Intelligences	
Theme	 0,036	 0.065	 0,029	-0,055	 0,082	 0,160	-0,077	 0,168	 0,120	
Lesson Plan	 0,050	 0,084	 0,097	-0,020	 0,071	 0,018	 0,141	 0,065	 0,152	
Teaching-learning Process	-0,013	 0,010	-0,030	-0,106	0,018	 0,132	 0,128	 0,126	 0,003	
Interaction	 0,115	 0,147	 0,170	 0,082	 0,146	 0,019	0,219*	 0,084	0,292**	
Class Mangement	 0,022	 0,028	 0,075	 0,047	 0,000	 0,142	0,221*	 0,097	0,049	
Assessment	 0,111      	 0,141	0,122      	 0,047	0,169	0,164	0,032	0,194*	0,288**	
General Impression	 0,007	 0,040	0,041	-0,074	0,021	0,011	0,074	0,048	0,052	
Total Learning Process	 0,052	 0,088	0,098	-0,019	0,075	0,015	0,141	0,068	0,156	

	The result of this research also shows that assessment process has a significantly positive connection with visual-spatial intelligence with coefficient of correlation 0,194 (at level  α=0.10). It means the better assessment process the better visual-spatial intelligence of a child. Amstrong (2003) explained that the visual-spatial intelligence or intelligence point of view is the ability to perceive visual-spatial space of world accurately and transform the visual-spatial perception in various forms. A research in Turkey shows that early childhood aged 4-6 years both boys and girls will firstly highlight the visual-spatial intelligence than other aspects of multiple intelligences (Beceren, 2010). This suggests that in early childhood, the use of visual media will be more effective in a learning process. 

Some Factors that Influence Multiple Intelligences
Some factors that influence multiple intelligences of kindergarten age children are child characteristics (age, sex, birth order), family characteristics (father’s age, mother’s age, father’s educational background, mother’s educational background, father’s income, mother’s income), school characteristics (curriculum, students, teachers, infra structure), psychosocial stimulation (learning stimulation, language stimulation, physical environment, warmth and reception, modeling, stimulus variation, punishment), and learning proves (theme/content (learning materials, lesson plan, teaching-learning process, assessment result/evaluation, general impression of learning process)      

Table. 10. Double regression model that influence multiple intelligences to all samples. 	
Model	Unstandardized 
Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	T	Sig.	
	B	Std. Error	Beta			
1	(Constant)	13.117	29.748		.441	.660	
	Father’s age	-.004	.079	-.007	-.054	.957	
	Mother’s age	.093	.093	.135	1.000	.320	
	Father’s educational background	.081	.370	.026	.220	.827	
	Mother’s educational background	.523	.385	.162	1.357	.177	
	Total of psychosocial Stimulation 	.055	.090	.060	.609	.544	
	Total of learning process	.419	.239	.168	1.752	.083	
	Total of family income	-4.149E-8	.000	-.120	-1.254	.213	

While on all samples, the results of double regression test, the factors that have a significant effect (p <0.10) in the multiple intelligences of children at both schools is the value of the learning process (α = 0.083). Adjusted R square value of the analysis is 0.040, which means that 4 percent value of children multiple intelligences are affected by learning process in schools while 96 percent of multiple intelligences children in both public and Islamic schools are influenced by other factors that are not observed in this study.
The learning process in schools both in public and Islamic schools have a significant positive value to the value of the multiple intelligences of children (ρ = 0.083) means the better the learning activities provided by the teacher at the school, the higher the value of children's multiple intelligences.

4.	CONCLUSION

1.	The parents of the samples, both their father and mother, are in the productive age of range 25-54 years with the highest proportion of education is undergraduate.
2.	Based on the type of school, there is no a significant difference in psychosocial stimulation unless the dimensions of exemplary where faith-based school indicates a better score.
3.	Based on the type of school, there is a significant difference in the learning process especially in the development of the theme, lesson plan, assessment results and the general impression. The public schools have high scores but religious schools have a higher value than the public schools on aspects of teaching and classroom management
4.	Based on the type of school, there is no a significant difference in multiple intelligences
5.	There is a positive correlation between the family’s characteristic (father's education background, mother's education background, father's income, mother's income and family income) and psychosocial stimulation.
6.	There is no a significant relationship between psychosocial stimulation with multiple intelligences.
7.	There is no real relationship between the process of learning and total multiple intelligences, but there are relationships in the aspects of interaction and assessment conducted with multiple intelligences
8.	Factors that affect multiple intelligences are determined by the learning process receives by a child in school, the better teachers create a learning process at school, the higher level of children's multiple intelligences.

5.	SUGGESTION
For parents, they need to provide psychosocial stimulation such as by providing care, guidance and more maximum support to make the intelligences of children can better thrive.
For teacher, they have to be more proactive developing professional ability, especially in developing children's multiple intelligences for the reason that the learning process has a significant effect on multiple intelligences of children. It can be done through seminars and training or through appropriate literature that is expected to optimize the multiple intelligences of their students through their lessons in class
For schools, they need to provide facilities and opportunities and financial support for teachers to improve their ability to develop the learning process so as to improve children's multiple intelligences. 
For the government and relevant agencies, they should provide support for improving the quality of teachers and schools that are expected to optimize the ability of teachers in developing professional skills through training development of preschoolers’ multiple intelligences.

6.	REFFERENCES
Amstrong T. 2003. Sekolah Para Juara. Translation. Yudhi Martanto. Bandung: Kaifa
___________. 1996. Mulitiple Intelligences in the Classroom. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Beceren, BO.  2010.  Determining multiple intelligences pre-school children (4-6 age) in learning process.  Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 2473-2480
Giyarti. 2008. Pengaruh Stimulasi Psikososial, Perkembangan Kognitif, dan Perkembangan Sosial Emosi terhadap Perkembangan Bahasa Anak Usia Prasekolah di Kabupaten Bogor. [Skripsi]. Bogor. Fakultas Pertanian. Institut Pertanian Bogor
Hastuti D. 2006. Analisis Pengaruh Model Pendidikan Prasekolah pada Pembentukkan Anak Sehat, Cerdas, dan Berkarakter [Disertasi]. Bogor. Fakultas Pascasarjana. Institut Pertanian Bogor
Masitoh. Dkk. 2003. Pendekatan Belajar Aktif di Taman Kanak-Kanak. Jakarta: Depdiknas. Dirjen Dikti. Bagian Proyek Peningkatan Pendidikan Tenaga Kependidikan
Moleong J. 2004. Teori Aplikasi Kecerdasan Jamak pada PAUD, seminar and nasional workshop “pendidikan anak usia dini” in Jakarta
Rahmaulina N. 2007. Hubungan Pengetahuan Ibu tentang Gizi dan Tumbuh Kembang Anak serta Stimulasi Psikososial dengan Perkembangan Kognitif Anak Usia 2.5-5 Tahun [Skripsi]. Bogor. Fakultas Pertanian. Institut Pertanian Bogor
Solehuddin M. 1997. Konsep Dasar Pendidikan Prasekolah. Bandung: FIP UPI.
Turner JS & Helms BD. 1991. Lifespan Development. 4th Edition. United State of
America. Saunders College Publishing
Xie JC & Lin R.  2009.  Research On Multiple Intelligences Teaching and Assessment.  Asian Journal of management and humanity sciences vol 4 no. 2-3 pp. 106-124