In the Differentiated Dinner students behaved much like the personality types found in the classrooms. Some were quite organized and self- directed, knowing the expectation from the get-go while others waited for the leaders to jump in and initate. Some were reluctant to comrehend what was expected or to grasp the assignment rather bewildered. They were learners from the ones who modeled pro-activeness. Some ’students’ loved the craft /creative element to the assignment and were focused intently to this facet whikle others wanted to research the book for phrasing and wording to make the presentation intelligent. Still some others were eager to be the oral presenters and make the leson relevant to the ’class’. Yes, all of these learner types are in my classroom and it is plain to see that some element of ones preference should be available to them in every lesson plan presentation! The tables were labeled with one of six groups and with headings so that we were grouped with ’like- minded’ perhaps similar-ability ’students’. We were presented an assignment but allowed to discuss and choose the method of presentation and sources of content.The self-assessment was self imposed as we compared presentation by table and learned even more ways to make a great presentation. The Interest Questionaire would be a way of understanding the likes of your students and choosing lessons that incorporate ’where they are’ in their learning . Our tables were sufficient for the number of students and we were told to do the assignment - within the time range of the class session. The whole group became the ’beneficiaries’ of everyone elses work rather than each person doing all six heading themselves, which economized time, and was so much more enjoyable than isolated learning. I belive that all of Gardners Intelligences were illustrated remakably with the DI instruction we received in this lesson.I personally feel challenged to styretch my lesson plans to meet the needs of each student.
In the Differentiated Dinner students behaved much like the personality types found in the classrooms. Some were quite organized and self- directed, knowing the expectation from the get-go while others waited for the leaders to jump in and initate. Some were reluctant to comrehend what was expected or to grasp the assignment rather bewildered. They were learners from the ones who modeled pro-activeness. Some ’students’ loved the craft /creative element to the assignment and were focused intently to this facet whikle others wanted to research the book for phrasing and wording to make the presentation intelligent. Still some others were eager to be the oral presenters and make the leson relevant to the ’class’. Yes, all of these learner types are in my classroom and it is plain to see that some element of ones preference should be available to them in every lesson plan presentation! The tables were labeled with one of six groups and with headings so that we were grouped with ’like- minded’ perhaps similar-ability ’students’. We were presented an assignment but allowed to discuss and choose the method of presentation and sources of content.The self-assessment was self imposed as we compared presentation by table and learned even more ways to make a great presentation. The Interest Questionaire would be a way of understanding the likes of your students and choosing lessons that incorporate ’where they are’ in their learning . Our tables were sufficient for the number of students and we were told to do the assignment - within the time range of the class session. The whole group became the ’beneficiaries’ of everyone elses work rather than each person doing all six heading themselves, which economized time, and was so much more enjoyable than isolated learning. I belive that all of Gardners Intelligences were illustrated remakably with the DI instruction we received in this lesson.I personally feel challenged to styretch my lesson plans to meet the needs of each student.
ReplyDelete