Since the publication of Daniel Goleman’s seminal work in 1995 (Goleman, 1995), emotional intelligence (EI or EI) has emerged as a pivotal area of study across diverse academic disciplines worldwide. Emotional intelligence, as defined by Salovey and Mayer (1990), constitutes a facet of social intelligence, encapsulating the ability to monitor one’s own emotions as well as those of others. This involves discriminating among various feelings and utilizing this information to guide thought processes and actions. In essence, EI is the capacity to perceive, assimilate, comprehend, and regulate emotions both intra- and inter-personally (Mayer and Salovey, 1997; Matjie, 2025).

Individuals with high emotional intelligence are often able to self-motivate to engage in a range of tasks, including those that are particularly challenging, provided they possess the necessary cognitive intelligence (CI). However, it is important to recognize that emotional intelligence is not solely determined by cognitive intelligence. Bar-On’s (1997) theoretical framework emphasizes this distinction by framing EI as a collection of non-cognitive competencies and skills that significantly impact one’s ability to navigate environmental demands and pressures. Consequently, in educational contexts, both EI and CI are essential for achieving academic success. While a learner’s EI equips them to effectively manage contextual challenges, CI provides the cognitive foundation required for excelling in intellectual tasks.

In advance of delving into the intricate complexities of emotional intelligence, it is imperative to consider the broader concept of “intelligence” and its implications within the educational paradigm. Intelligence, in its multifaceted nature, encompasses an array of dimensions intricately connected to cognitive functions such as memory, analytical reasoning, and problem-solving skills. A nuanced exploration of these diverse intelligences enriches our comprehension of human cognition and highlights the critical role of emotional intelligence as an integral aspect of comprehensive intellectual functioning.

Intelligence is delineated as a general mental capacity encompassing reasoning, problem-solving, and learning (Colom et al., 2010). It represents a multifaceted construct that can be articulated both as a characteristic of human behavior and as an aggregation of cognitive abilities (Goldman and Pellegrino, 2013; Howard, 1993). Intelligence is frequently evaluated through standardized measures, most notably the intelligence quotient (CI) test, which functions as a quantifiable index of cognitive performance (Brody, 1999; Demetriou and Spanoudis, 2017). These assessments are expressly designed to gauge individuals’ capacities to acquire, comprehend, and apply knowledge, thereby offering a systematic approach to understanding intellectual capabilities (Brody, 1999).

A salient feature of intelligence is its temporal dynamism; it is subject to variation throughout an individual’s lifespan, with empirical evidence indicating a gradual decline in cognitive abilities as one ages (Alipour et al., 2024; Colom et al., 2010; Deary et al., 2007). This highlights the imperative of continual intellectual engagement and lifelong learning, suggesting that the maintenance of cognitive acuity is closely intertwined with sustained exposure to educational experiences (Zhi et al., 2024).

The relationship between intelligence and educational performance is well documented, with intelligence significantly influencing learners’ ability to perform academically (Brody, 1999; Deary et al., 2007; Lozano-Blasco et al., 2022; Sánchez-Álvarez et al., 2020). Given this interconnection, educators must acquire a nuanced understanding of the various dimensions of intelligence (Ayeni et al., 2024; Nachiappan et al., 2014; Zhi et al., 2024). By doing so, they can develop pedagogical strategies that are not only informed by theoretical knowledge but also tailored to the diverse cognitive profiles of their learners. This understanding can empower educators to create inclusive learning environments that effectively harness the diverse forms of intelligence, ultimately enhancing both teaching methodologies and learning outcomes (Calik and Birgili, 2013; Felder and Brent, 2005).

There are different types of intelligence in education that educators should understand if they are to ensure the transfer of knowledge to learners effectively, namely, physical intelligence (PI), cognitive intelligence (CI), emotional intelligence (EI), and spiritual intelligence (SI) (Nachiappan et al., 2014), as defined and described in Table 1.

It is thus crucial to remember that EI alone cannot enhance academic achievement, hence the introduction of other intelligences in this conceptual review, despite the title being about EI alone. As shown in Table 1, physical intelligence (PI) refers to the ability to effectively manage and tune in to the body’s signals and needs (Neal and Harpham, 2012). This multifaceted construct encompasses several key components, including: body awareness the ability to recognize and interpret bodily sensations and movements, which facilitates better physical responses and enhances overall well-being; energy management the skill to regulate one’s energy levels throughout the day, ensuring optimal performance and preventing fatigue; health habits the adoption and maintenance of behaviors that promote physical well-being, including nutrition, exercise, and rest; and coordination the capacity to harmonize muscle movements for efficient and purposeful action, thereby improving physical skills and reducing the risk of injury (Nachiappan et al., 2014). PI is the foundation for all other intelligences (Wigglesworth, 2012).

Cognitive intelligence, commonly referred to as rational or intelligence quotient (CI), encompasses the ability to engage in complex thought processes such as reasoning, learning, problem-solving, and analytical thinking (Ronthy, 2014). It involves various cognitive functions, including logical reasoning, memory retention, analytical skills, and the acquisition of knowledge (Nachiappan et al., 2014; Zohar and Marshall, 2004; Wigglesworth, 2012).

Emotional intelligence represents a critical competency involving the ability to recognize, comprehend, and regulate emotions, both within oneself and in interpersonal contexts (Salovey and Mayer, 1990). It encompasses several key components, including empathy, emotional regulation, and social skills, which collectively facilitate effective communication, conflict resolution, and nurturing of relationships (Nachiappan et al., 2014). Research studies have demonstrated how EI and CI differ. While EI can be learned and acquired as a skill, CI is largely predetermined (Bar-On, 1997; Goleman, 1996; Goleman et al., 2013; Zohar and Marshall, 2004).

Spiritual intelligence (SI) can be defined as the capacity to derive meaning, uphold values, and cultivate a sense of purpose within both personal and professional realms (Covey, 2005; Däderman et al., 2013). It encompasses several key dimensions, including meaning-making, purpose-driven behavior, integrity, and compassion (Däderman et al., 2013; Nachiappan et al., 2014). SI is considered the ultimate intelligence (Churchill, Gandhi, and Mandela) (Zohar, 2005) and the foundation of both CI and EI. SI is characterized by wisdom and peace in the face of chaos (Wigglesworth, 2013). Spiritual intelligence leads to more emotional intelligence; that is, emotional intelligence strengthens spiritual intelligence (Pinto et al., 2024). In addition to strong CI and EI, she argues, a strong foundation in Physical Intelligence (PI) and a willingness to develop Spiritual Intelligence (SI) are needed. When these four come together, she writes, the result is Deep Intelligence (Wigglesworth, 2014).

The investigation into the various types of intelligence is critical for understanding their relationship with academic performance. As outlined in the previous discussion, it is essential to identify the specific type of intelligence that correlates most strongly with academic success. This identification can inform the training of educators, equipping them with strategies to effectively engage and nurture that intelligence in learners. According to Zhao (2017), academic achievement is defined as the measurable performance of learners in mastering academic knowledge and skills, assessed through examinations following a systematic process of learning. This performance not only reflects a student’s understanding but also signifies the extent to which they have internalized the requisite knowledge and competencies (Liang et al., 2020). Therefore, understanding the interplay between different intelligences and academic achievement is pivotal in developing effective educational practices (Grass et al., 2017; Shi and Qu, 2022).

Physical intelligence encompasses health, stamina, and presence, underscoring the importance of a holistic approach to physical wellness and body awareness in various aspects of life (Ronthy, 2014; Wigglesworth, 2012). Physical fitness can be considered a good measure of the body’s capacity for exercise and also provides an important indicator of health (Real-Pérez et al., 2022). Some studies concluded that physical intelligence does not have positive effects on learners’ academic performance (Bakir, 2024; Gil-Espinosa et al., 2020; Strong et al., 2005). Contrarily, some studies found that being physically healthy, fit, or strong does relate to academic performance (Du Toit et al., 2011; Gil-Espinosa et al., 2020; Hillman et al., 2009; Li and Zhang, 2022; Real-Pérez et al., 2022), thus making PI crucial for learners if they are to perform academically. CI is a key factor that can be consistently used to predict academic achievement (Grass et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2021; Merriam, 2004; Miriam et al., 2011; Stadler et al., 2016; Shi and Qu, 2021, 2022). When it comes to EI, studies found that EI plays a vital role in personal development and social interactions, influencing overall well-being and professional success (MacCann et al., 2020). MacCann et al. (2020) further propose that EI should be incorporated into the academic curriculum and that learners should be encouraged to build social relationships at school to unlock aspects of their EI that may enhance their success in the social sciences. These findings are corroborated by Quílez-Robres et al. (2023), who propose that schools should establish programs to stimulate emotional intelligence at the school level to improve learners’ personal development and academic performance (Perera and DiGiacomo, 2013; Petrides et al., 2004). Moreover, educators’ training should include modules on EI to enable them to nurture emotional competencies in learners (Amponsah et al., 2024). Specific EI domains such as self-perception, empathy, impulse control, and stress tolerance are particularly associated with academic performance (Farah-Franco et al., 2025). This suggests that EI is a vital component of academic performance and should be integrated into the curriculum while teachers are trained to be emotionally competent (Zhou et al., 2024). Despite that, EI alone seems not viable to ensure ultimate academic performance; hence, further studies revealed that SI plays a crucial role in individual well-being and development (Däderman et al., 2013; Nachiappan et al., 2014). According to Midi et al. (2019), Rahimi (2017), and Zhou et al. (2024), spiritual intelligence predicts educational achievement in both university and school contexts, making it imperative for schools to implement programs that foster students’ spiritual intelligence.

In conclusion, different intelligences are strong predictors of academic performance; however, results vary depending on the type of intelligence measured, the theoretical model used, and the cultural context (Lozano-Blasco et al., 2022). Based on the above discussion, the question arises: What training programs should be developed for educators to integrate all forms of intelligence (not EI only) into teaching methods and learning styles? Before addressing this, the theoretical framework that underpins this study must be examined.

To comprehend the role of intelligences on academic performance, more specifically, the role of EI to align with the title of the paper, we identified the following theories, namely, knowledge processing theory, classical conditioning theory and Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences to evaluate if cognitive abilities resulting from high EI can alone lead to academic success, or students can be primed to become academically successful without any intelligences or lastly to ascertain if other intelligences should be applied to bolster EI leading to academic success.

Based on the aforementioned information and the theories discussed, we have developed a set of theoretical models for educators to implement in their classrooms aimed at fostering emotional intelligence (EI) about learners’ achievements. These tools are designed to enhance student engagement, promote self-awareness, and cultivate interpersonal skills, thereby supporting the holistic development of each learner. Throughout this initiative, we emphasize the importance of integrating EI practices into the educational framework to ultimately improve academic outcomes and personal growth.

To facilitate learning, we combined multiple intelligences with learning styles as well as methods of teaching to enable teaching as on Table 2.

MIT presents a thought-provoking perspective on intelligence, suggesting that individuals do not possess a fixed amount of intelligence from birth. Building on this premise, Gardner (1999) expanded the concept by developing various learning styles designed to enhance the multiple intelligences that learners exhibit. He defined learning styles as the unique ways in which learners perceive and process information during their educational experiences. Extensive research, as highlighted by Jena (2018), supports the idea that a diverse range of learning styles exists among individuals. This variety in learning preferences emphasizes the importance of teaching methods that educators can utilize to cater to different styles, enabling them to equip learners with essential skills applicable across all types of learning, regardless of their inclinations (Felder and Brent, 2005).

As learners gain insights into their learning styles, their capacity to absorb and retain information improves significantly. Additionally, the effectiveness of learning experiences can be enhanced when teaching methods align with learners’ preferred ways of learning. However, the overarching goal is not merely to customize educational experiences for each student individually, but rather to foster the development of versatile learning skills that are beneficial across all learning modalities (Felder and Brent, 2005). Educators should consider implementing practical applications of the integrated academic success model alongside the VARK model to stimulate learning in relation to MIT’s theoretical framework.

Nonetheless, caution is warranted when applying the Multiple Intelligences theory and the VARK models, as they have notable limitations. These limitations primarily revolve around a lack of strong empirical evidence and a tendency to oversimplify complex learning processes, which can lead to mislabeling students and neglecting a comprehensive, flexible approach to learning. Critics argue that neither framework has substantial scientific backing, and the idea of matching instruction to a single “intelligence” or “style” does not necessarily improve learning outcomes (Biscardi et al., 2019; Sood and Sarin, 2021).

The main limitations of Multiple Intelligences (MI) theory include a lack of empirical evidence and reliable assessment tools, confusion with learning styles, challenges in practical application—especially in large classrooms—and a potentially restrictive view of identity. Critics contend that the theory’s “intelligences” are often merely talents or skills rather than distinct cognitive systems, arguing that the brain functions more as interconnected networks than isolated modules (Calik and Birgili, 2013; Klein, 1997). As a result, caution should be taken when implementing this approach, and the usage of multiple approaches is encouraged.

This conceptual review aimed to explore ways in which educators worldwide can be trained to be emotionally competent enough to harness learners’ different intelligences for enhanced academic performance and achievement. Multiple intelligences, such as SI, EI, CI, and PI, were identified through the Integrated Human Intelligence Model for Educators, the first theoretical model specifically designed for educators. Various scholars and researchers concluded that a combination of these intelligences, PI, CI, EI, and SI (see Figure 1), leads to well-equipped and developed educators, which ultimately leads to improved academic performance (Grass et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2020; Shi and Qu, 2022). Thus, these core components must be taken into consideration by education and training systems for educators to produce an ideal teacher (Bakir, 2024; Däderman et al., 2013; Farah-Franco et al., 2025; Liu et al., 2021; Lozano-Blasco et al., 2022; Nachiappan et al., 2014; Real-Pérez et al., 2022; Zhou et al., 2024). This implies that this theoretical model or approach to teaching can and will be useful for educators.

Secondly, the Integrated Academic Success Model and VARK Model were identified as other potentially useful theoretical models for educators. This model combines two sensory intelligences, EI and CI, with the Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, and Kinesthetic (VARK) learning styles to predict academic success for learners. Emotional intelligence (EI) plays a pivotal role in navigating life’s challenges and has significant implications for academic performance (El-Saftawy et al., 2024). Early development of EI is crucial, and educators are responsible for fostering it through meaningful classroom interactions (Leasa et al., 2017; Hegarty and Angelidis, 2015). Salovey and Mayer (1990) define emotional intelligence as the capacity to understand and regulate emotions, positing that individuals with strong EI are better positioned to learn effectively, irrespective of their learning style (Singh et al., 2008). Notably, the VARK model highlights the importance of sensory modalities in learning, suggesting that learners are likely to process information through emotion, thereby enhancing academic performance (Leasa et al., 2017). Additionally, cognitive intelligence (CI) should be considered alongside EI to bolster understanding of learning styles and their impact on academic success. A high CI indicates an individual’s problem-solving abilities and critical thinking skills (Liu et al., 2021; Stadler et al., 2016; Shi and Qu, 2021, 2022). Both learning styles and CI significantly contribute to intrinsic motivation, facilitating academic success (Kolb, 2005; Li and Bates, 2020). CI serves as a foundational element for effective cognitive learning, equipping learners with essential skills to assimilate and recall information (Demetriou and Spanoudis, 2017; Ronthy, 2014; Zohar and Marshall, 2004).

The third identified theoretical model for educators is a thorough understanding and application of Gardner’s (1983) multiple intelligences theory (MIT). Gardner’s theory proposes that intelligence is not a single ability but a collection of distinct types. Understanding diverse learning styles and intelligences is essential for effective teaching. Felder and Brent (2005) emphasize that recognizing these differences helps educators engage a wider array of learners. By categorizing learners according to various intelligences, educational teams can implement strategies that benefit all learners, not just those strong in math and language (Sener and Cokcaliskan, 2018). Learning styles, encompassing experiential, behavioral, and cognitive traits, reflect how individuals interact with learning environments. Some learners excel with theories, while others prefer active learning or visual aids (Felder and Brent, 2005). An effective approach balances these styles, promoting adaptability in learners. Gardner’s theory highlights the need for learners to understand both their learning style and dominant intelligence for optimal learning (Sener and Cokcaliskan, 2018). Educators should also attempt to understand learners’ most dominant learning styles for specific subjects so they can apply the appropriate learning style(s). Applying this theory can significantly enhance student engagement and foster critical thinking (Calik and Birgili, 2013). Ultimately, it encourages educators to diversify teaching strategies and move beyond traditional methods (Stanford et al., 2003).

The last theoretical model for educators identified in this study was the adoption of classical conditioning learning theory in the classroom. Pavlov (1902) and Watson (1913) examined critical aspects of classical conditioning and concluded that human behavior and attitudes are significantly shaped by environmental stimuli. Notably, they found that the effectiveness of learning acquisition during initial stages is influenced by the visibility of the external stimulus and the timing of the neutral stimulus relative to the unconditioned stimulus (Pavlov, 1902; Rehman et al., 2025). These insights emphasize the importance of educators to create engaging and rewarding learning experiences. Within the educational context, while the implications of classical conditioning may not be as pronounced as those of operant conditioning, it remains essential for educators to cultivate positive emotional associations with learning experiences (Amd et al., 2019; Totani et al., 2019; Watson and Rayner, 1920). An adverse emotional association, such as fear stemming from bullying, can lead to detrimental outcomes, including the development of school phobia. For example, a student who is victimized at school may come to perceive the environment as threatening, thereby fostering aversion to the learning space.

In conclusion, the development of flexible teaching approaches that cater to a diverse range of learning preferences is crucial in the contemporary educational landscape. By integrating a variety of instructional methods and resources, educators can cultivate a dynamic and inclusive environment that empowers all learners. The emphasis on specialized training for educators significantly enhances their ability to implement effective emotional and intellectual strategies, thereby contributing to improved academic performance and increased student engagement. Additionally, adopting a student-centred approach fosters learner autonomy and facilitates self-directed exploration, both of which are essential for success in the modern classroom. It is imperative that educational institutions and curriculum developers prioritize these methodologies to ensure that every learner is afforded the opportunity to thrive.