STARTBODY

Teach English in Hongguang Zhen - Bazhong Shi

Do you want to be TEFL or TESOL-certified and teach in Hongguang Zhen? Are you interested in teaching English in Bazhong Shi? Check out ITTT’s online and in-class courses, Become certified to Teach English as a Foreign Language and start teaching English ONLINE or abroad! ITTT offers a wide variety of Online TEFL Courses and a great number of opportunities for English Teachers and for Teachers of English as a Second Language.

How does a teacher even begin to meet the needs of every child in their classroom? In the past several years education has taken an old concept but thanks to technology can implement it. The idea of personalized learning has become a new frontier. The beauty of this concept is that students are able to utilize their own strengths to demonstrate their learning. The US Department of Education describes personalized learning as “instruction that is paced to learning needs, tailored to learning preferences, and specific interests of different learners” (Sangillo, 2014). As educators we are familiar with two styles of learning: learning styles and multiple intelligences. Learning styles is an older methodology that is similar to a lecture style where the teacher or professor speaks for the entire class. Students are responsible for understanding where their strengths in learning are and usually rely on the strongest mode of learning. Multiple intelligences on the other hand, is a method that develops multiple learning pathways, which ultimately creates individualized toolkits for each learner to use (Gardner, n.d.). This toolkit is heavily influenced by the experiences of the learner. So if we had to visualize what learning styles looked like, an image of scales comes to mind. The scales are broken into four categories: active or reflective, sensing or intuitive, visual or verbal, and sequential or global. According to the work of Felder and Soloman as a reflective, intuitive, verbal, global learner, I exhibit specific characteristics in learning information. I would like to say that this was taught to me by my teachers, however, it was mostly trial and error until my grades matched my work output. Some characteristics they listed included summarizing new material in my own words, creating connections to theories, group work or talking the material out, and creating a big picture framework (Felder and Soloman, n.d.). Looking at multiple intelligences, learners have the ability to demonstrate their thinking skills through both formal and abstract means. As an interpersonal learner, I characteristically am attuned to the feelings of others. This also contributes to my sphere of linguistics, music, and body movement. The focus is on the use of multiple pathways to increase learning, rather than focusing on one pattern to achieve mastery of content (Gardner, n.d.) While these theories are similar, they are not the same. In fact both learning styles and multiple intelligences are used seamlessly in many classrooms. There are several key distinctions between the two though. MI is a new idea that does not focus on formal disciplines, but rather strengths in development of a mental toolkit (Gardner, “Intellectual Myths”, n.d.) Use of these tools is measured by how well individuals use their “tools” to complete tasks on a broad content spectrum. Learning style instead focusing on students using one method or strategy to make students fit in one spot versus the other (Felder and Soloman, 2014). It is also important to remember these distinctions in Gardner’s work. Gardner’s work emphasizes that intelligence is not a trait but rather a reflection of a toolbox that each person possesses. Specifically, this though is summed up in the following quote, “A style is an approach that individuals use for a range of activities. Individuals can have styles that are planful, playful, obsessive, etc. As noted with respect to Reality #2, an intelligence is NOT a style. An intelligence is a computer with a certain amount of strength, a certain amount of computational power.” (Gardner, n.d.) As educators a powerful tool in our planning process is understanding how we ourselves learn. In understanding our own strengths and weaknesses we become stronger teachers. These difficulties not only help teachers create strong relationships with students, but also help teachers shape content and guided practice. One of the best ways to implement this is to provide many options in creating assignments. For example allow students to create games, write plays or songs and then perform them. To wrap up, here are some examples where we can implement both MI and LS in a personalized learning environment. Personally, I believe that both methodologies while different can be utilized in all classrooms. If educators are going to catch up with the method of personalized learning, we must be prepared to offer more than cookie cutter curriculum. References Felder, R., & Soloman, B. (n.d.). Felder & Soloman: Learning Styles and Strategies. Retrieved January 21, 2017, from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/styles.htm Gardner, H. (n.d.). The Components of MI. Retrieved January 21, 2017, from http://multipleintelligencesoasis.org/about/the-components-of-mi/ Gardner, H. (n.d.). Intellectual Myths. Retrieved January 21, 2017, from http://multipleintelligencesoasis.org/malpractices/intellectual-myths/ MI Oasis: About. (n.d.) Retrieved January 21, 2017, from http://multipleintelligencesoasis.org/about/ Sangillo, J. (2014, October 21). Personalized Learning in Social Studies-Moving Away From Ferris Bueller Teaching. Retrieved January 23, 2017, from http://blog.discoveryeducation.com/blog/2014/10/21/personalized-learning-in-social-studies-moving-away-from-ferris-bueller-teaching/


ENDBODY