Most educators are familiar with at least some learning styles. Even if he is not aware of each of the intelligences, he likely already knows about visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners. However, what many may not be aware of is that individuals have dominant learning styles, but also non-dominant styles (secondary, tertiary...) (Denig, 2004). Furthermore, the learner may exhibit or be in need of a variety of approaches during any given part of the learning process (Narli, Ozgen & Alkan, 2011). Clearly, it's nearly impossible to hypothesize which students need which approach when during the course of learning. Therefore, the best use of this information is not for instructors to be familiar with the styles and occasionally mix it up, but to constantly be incorporating myriad instructional methods.

This attachment was created in CI 6320: Curriculum Development. The goal of the assignment below was to evaluate two lessons on the same topic. Using a rubric I created in another class (see principle nine, artifact one), I was able to compare two lessons on teaching the slope of a line. Criteria focused not only on content and procedure, but also the use of technology, collaboration, voice, and learning styles incorporated. Instructors are constantly collaborating with one another, facilitated more than ever before by the Internet. because it is so easy to pull teaching ideas and lesson plans from online, it behooves an instructor to set up a rubric or set of guidelines against which one may judge the value of such resources. By developing such standards, an instructor must synthesize knowledge of various learning styles and delivery methods to create a high quality of instruction for students. By using these methods, it becomes easier to see and improve weaknesses in lessons that otherwise might not reach learners and revive the interest of those who might benefit simply from variety (Naime, Siraj, Abuzaid & Shagholi, 2010).

References

Denig, S. (2004). Multiple intelligences and learning styles: Two complementary dimensions. Teacher College, 106(1), 96-111.

Naimie, Z., Siraj, S., Abuzaid, R. & Shagholi, R. (October 2010). Hypothesized learners' technology preferences based on learning style dimensions. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), pp. 83-93. Retrieved from ERIC database. (EJ908074)

Narli, S., Ozgen, K., Alkan, H. (October 2011). In the context of multiple intelligences theory, intelligent data analysis of learning styles was based on rough set theory. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(5), pp. 613-618. Retrieved from ERIC database. (EJ938543)

It is important to remember that students learn in different ways and need a variety of activities and teaching styles to maintain their interest and enthusiasm. They need to be stimulated by being able to listen, see, take notes, imagine, discuss and visualize (Naime, Siraj, Abuzaid & Shagholi, 2010). The best practice is to plan on keeping a variety of approaches and activities on hand year-round, particularly since class dynamics will likely vary from year to year (Costley, 2012). By using a variety of approaches with any given topic, an instructor is more likely to reach a variety of students and leave a more permanent understanding of whatever is being taught.

As the summation of the course CI 6320: Curriculum Development, a yearly and weekly curriculum map was created. The attached is the weekly curriculum map. Not only was this an excellent way to organize and plan lessons, it also served as a means to evaluate them. This assignment required that certain types of lessons be marked, such as those using technology or possessing a multicultural theme. Additionally, I chose to mark kinesthetic activities. Other professions and current technological trends were brought in as well as group activities and music to stimulate other intelligences. This assignment was particularly effective for me because I had to look at what I was planning and it became much easier to see which students would or would not be stimulated.

References

Costley, K. (2012). Who are today's students in a diverse society? Online Submission, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED528453)

Naimie, Z., Siraj, S., Abuzaid, R. & Shagholi, R. (October 2010). Hypothesized learners' technology preferences based on learning style dimensions. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), pp. 83-93. Retrieved from ERIC database. (EJ908074)