This week in CALL, we took a look at learning styles, or individualization. What this basically means is that students learn in many different ways. It is our job as teachers to help them discover the most effective ways for them to learn. Also, we need to develop lessons that fit these different kinds of styles.
I have never studied this topic before, so I really learned a lot from the article and our classroom discussions. The article, by Karen Ngeow, was called "Classroom Practice: Enhancing and Extending Learning Styles Through Computers." The article showed examples of how we can use technology in our classrooms to meet and enhance the various learning styles of our students. I have always tried to use a good amount of technology in my classes. This article gave me several new ideas that I might try. Most importantly, it got me thinking about using a combination of software on one task. By doing this, the students can each contribute and use their individual talents for the success of the group. I think I will incorporate this into many of the activities that I plan in the future.
The classroom discussion focused mainly on MIs, or multiple intelligences. I sat back and listened to the discussion for a while, as more experienced teachers in the class, like Victoria and Stefanie, gave me my first lesson on this. After I looked at their input and tried to digest it, I was able to contribute a bit to the discussion. I discovered that I am mostly a Linguistic, Musical, and Logical learner. I guess that's no real surprise to people who know me. My lowest learning styles came in Interpersonal and Naturalistic, which again is no surprise.
If anyone is interested in finding out more about your learning styles, go to this website, which Victoria found. It's very interesting and you might find out something about yourself.
Well, that's all for me this week. See you next time!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The only two I scored highly on where linguistic and interpersonal. However, I take these with a grain of salt as I do with most of these types of surveys.
As I mentioned in our Skypecast, I have some reservations regarding this types of distinctions. I don't believe that MI is really beneficial for instructional design. Of course, we should vary our instruction to incorporate various activities. However, I see this as creating different connections in all students’ brains and not simply addressing one student's type of intelligence.
I also know very little about MI, so I too will sit back a little and take it in :)
Dan
It is beneficial as instructors to know what learning styles our students have or what intelligences are their strengths. However, I think the real value is for the learner to know her/his strengths. If a student understands how she/he learns best, she/he will be equipped to get more from any class.
The author of this week's article also mentioned practicing methods in teh areas that you know are your weaknesses. If we don't know our strengths and weaknesses, we can't do that.
Eric brings up a great point ... students must be aware of how they learn. To know something, you must be able to understand and experience it (in some form). Ironically, I don't think I've ever learned about how I learn. John-you may be interested in looking into Language Learning Strategies. I recommend Rebecca Oxford's model because I feel it is user friendly for a teacher. She developed an inventory as well to ID which strategies students tend to use. Right now I'm researching the effects of metacognitive strategies instruction for foreign language learners. Pretty interesting (in my opinion).
One thing to remember too about MI or styles is that they are subject to change!
Stefanie
Post a Comment