In-Class Teaching Reflection

The class presentation was a lot of fun to do. There were many things that Nichole and I did well, and there were many things that we could improve as well. We really tried to incorporate different strategies throughout the lesson to reach to our classmates learn and remember the content.

To help our classmates remember the material, we came up with some pictures representing the different theories of intelligence. These pictures acted like pneumonic devices to help them recall the theories. Secondly, we really tried to create some meaningful and authentic tasks. With the scenarios, we tried to help them think how knowing Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences will impact their instruction in the classroom. Then, we had them share their teaching ideas and strategies with one another. This allows those ideas to cement into their memory better as they are telling someone and hearing their own strategy. Also, it is a great way for others in the class to receive ideas that they may not have thought about. Having the content be meaningful is a very important part of effective teaching and learning. Multiple perspectives are critical to learning and coming up with your own viewpoint. We tried to clearly teach all of the theories towards intelligence, so our classmates could decide how they choose to view intelligence.

There were many strengths and weaknesses in our presentation. One of the strengths in our presentation was that there was balance in the presentation. Balance in the sense that both of us talked and shared the stage. It wasn’t as if I gave the whole presentation verbally or Nichole did. Another strength was class involvement. We really tried to give students opportunities to participate and learn from one another. I feel that tying the subject into a scripture was also a strength, allowing classmates to really see the eternal value of the content we were teaching.

One of the weaknesses was that we taught our bias. Both of us are partial to Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences Theory. There were three main theories discussed in the book, but we spent most of our time on Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences Theory. Thus, Spearman’s and Sternberg’s theories didn’t get covered as well as Gardner’s theory. We should have been more balanced in our approach to all of the theories of intelligence. Another weakness involved one of the activities we did. I wasn’t clear with explaining the inventory of Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences. If I could do it over, I would have looked at the inventory before handing it out. Also, I would have been clearer with the directions. During the explanation of the activity, I told them to mark if they felt the statement applied to them and to put post-it notes on the wall under the different intelligences written on the board of their highest and second highest scores. All of these directions were explained at once, which caused confusion. Halfway into the activity, I ended up having to re-explain directions several times as a result of the confusion. When giving directions, it is important that they are clear, concise, and not packed with too much information. I definitely gave too many directions at once. I would have let them work on the checklist, monitor their progress, and then told them what to do with the post-it notes when most were finishing up. Also, I could have written an example or directions on the board to help them understand and remember how the post-it notes were to be used.

Overall, I felt very good about the presentation. However, there are always ways to improve. I’m glad that I had the opportunity to present and analyze some of my teaching tendencies to know what I need to improve.