Multiple Intelligences

Today in my high school class, we took the Multiple Intelligences for Adult Literacy and Education assessment.

My results, out of five, were as follows:

4.29 spatial

4.29 social

4.00 self

3.29 logic/math

3.14 musical

3.14 body movement (kinesthetic)

2.86 language (linguistic)

2.86 nature (naturalist)

A few worthwhile questions to answer:

Do you think the results were accurate? Why or why not?

For the most part, yes. I'm quite spatial and introverted. I dislike English class. The two that throw me off are "social" and "nature." Not only do I not see myself as a social person, but I'm certainly more introverted than extroverted. I see reason behind scoring low in nature, but I don't think it should be as low as it is. I love being outside. However, I don't like sciences (biology, chemistry, etc) which it seems to base that category off of.

How do you think your strengths will help you in your future career choice?

I'm very interested in social sciences, so whether or not I end up studying special education or international relations, I'll be studying the process of thinking. If that's trying to put myself in the shoes of another kid to see why they think how they think or putting myself in the shoes of Hungary or the Philippines, both require the social and logic/math intelligences.

Explain how you will build on your strengths when working with students at your placement. Does knowing your strengths help you work with students at your placement?

As I'm working with students at the Early Childhood Center, I'm learning how to relate to other age groups, improving my social intelligence and although I scored lower in kinesthetics, I feel that I'm improving in that area as well because four year olds are more physically involved in their academics.

If you click here you can access a study of the intelligences applied to my classroom.

Learning Theorists, Praise, and PIES

In class—my high school class—we are learning about learning theorists and key concepts developed by them. Instead of retyping all of the information I have listed in a google document, you can click here to see a summation of noteworthy theorists. 

Enjoy.

H.R.

Additionally, here is a document explaining the physical, intellectual, emotional, and social development of a preschooler and here is a document analyzing praise in the classroom.

Love and Logic Triangle

Learning: Preschool vs. High School

It has begun.

Class has started. I don't know exactly what I expected, but I am quickly learning to drop those unsaid expectations.

My class has five students, one teacher, a paraprofessional, and me. What proportionality. 5:3. Where is that in high school? More importantly, why is it so different from high school. Yes, it's preschool. That's why.

High school is so much more difficult than being four, but four is so much more vital to development (according to some psychologists). I don't remember much from AP Psychology my sophomore year, but I do remember the importance of development.

Today I eavesdropped on a conversation between Naomi (for privacy, I'll give students different names) and Ms. Fuller (teachers as well, I guess). It went a like this:

Ms. Fuller: "Naomi, what makes you sad?"

Naomi: "Me."

Ms. Fuller: "Oh, well what makes you happy?"

Naomi: "Me."

What a life that must be like. But more importantly one-on-one conversation with a teacher. Wow. When did that escape us? The closest I get to discussion with my teachers is shooting and email or a quick question between classes. I get that everything starts to move at a faster pace as we mature, but what a curse that is.

There is no longer room for connections or reading leisurely.

Instead it has been reduced to: have a socratic seminar, open up, what language in the piece made you come to that conclusion, read this by next Tuesday, you have two quizzes for my class this week.

In my AP Literature class we're talking a lot about philosophy. I find it most interesting. Today, as I was in my preschool class I got the overwhelming urge to bring up philosophy with them. That obviously wouldn't go over very well. But, why? Who came to the conclusion that four year olds shouldn't be exposed to what we are as high schoolers?

History is my favorite course. The earliest memory I have of learning history in an educational environment was the third grade when I learned about Martin Luther King Jr. I don't think I learned anything of significance. Why didn't I learn about the amendments to the constitution until Junior year?

Awhile ago I briefly studied the "best way to learn a language." Turns out a lot of European countries are teaching new languages by incorporating it into their everyday teaching. What that means is in your kindergarten class you would learn how to tie your shoes, but in Spanish. What a concept! It's working. Why are we waiting to do that in the United States? Why limit it to just language?

The education system is obscure and has lots of room for improvement. I just want to teach my four year olds about the Jamestown settlement of 1606—maybe I would start somewhere that doesn't end so abruptly, but you get my point.

Okay, I'm done with my tangent on that. On a much more positive (or less protrusively inquisitive) note, my preschool class is very focused on independence (too bad not the 1776 kind of independence). I'm happy to be in an environment that encourages individual responsibility and accountability. These are the kind of life lessons that it's okay to learn at four.

Observation Exercise

Over the course of this week, in preparation to meet our classrooms, we've been watching videos of educator professionals observing students. Of course this means that we had to observe the students as well; not just the students, but the teachers too. Instead of uploading a picture of my notes, I'll be typing it out so you can't see my disorganization or doodles.

TAKING NOTES ON WHAT WE HEAR

What do you hear the students saying?

- "It gave me an idea!"
- "I just guessed."
- "I think it was really amazing."
- "It was a miracle!"
- "All I know is that..."

What do you hear the teacher saying?

- "Is there any evidence?"
- "Working hard, right?"
- "I don't know. How can we find that?:
- "Based on what you just found..."
- "How do we know that...?"
- "Did that surprise you?"
- "You don't need me."
- "...a way to learn, not just right and wrong answers."
- "What did you think was interesting?"


 NOTES ON WHAT WE SEE

What do you see the students doing?

- searching through the textbook
- staring into the camera
- fidgeting/nail-biting
- arms crossed
- answers questions independently on hands
- follow-the-leader hand motions to silence the room (raising your hand)
- sitting in a circle

How does this give insight to how the students learn?

- hands-on learning is encouraged
- physical involvement seems more engaging to the students
- you can tell how comfortable a student is through their body language
- sitting in a circle made it a level playing ground

How has the teacher created opportunities for learning?

- hand signals can be used to learn how a student wants to speak
- "the people doing the talking are the people doing the learning"
- turn-and-talk teaching
- more socratic in nature, talking to each other instead of talking (answering to) the teacher

It was interesting to hear what the professionals had to say about it. What interested me most is how transparent children are. You can see their personalities developing and so much of what has already developed. I don't know how this makes me feel exactly. It's amazing that there is already so much personality behind each face, but that just about worries me. If a child is already on a wrong path, intervention is needed soon, but I feel it's often just deemed a "behavior issue" and filed away instead of something that could severely alter this child's adult life.

Pensively,
Hanna E. Reynolds

All About Me