• Kidzmet’s Teacher Student Fit Evaluations

    Just as a seed needs to first grow roots, then develop a shoot, then a bud before becoming a flower, introductions to new pursuits for children…

    0

    Kidzmet’s Teacher Student Fit Evaluations

    teacher student fit evaluationsJust as a seed needs to first grow roots, then develop a shoot, then a bud before becoming a flower, introductions to new pursuits for children need to be approached in a similar way. Kidzmet members use our teacher student fit evaluations in three key ways:

    • Parents often put their child as the main profile in their member dashboard and use the student profiles to evaluate the fit of potential tutors, enrichment teachers, or coaches.
    • Teachers and/or tutors put themselves as the main profile in their member dashboard and profile all of their students to identify where they may need to modify their teaching approach.
    • Homeschoolers put themselves as the main profile on the account and profile their children as students so that they can easily see with which kids they need to modify their curriculum selections.

    Here’s how you’ll see the “fit types” defined on Kidzmet…

    Natural fit :: a compatible personality type, matching cognitive style and many parallel interests and strengths make this a comfortable teacher-student relationship from the outset where the teacher and student intuitively connect.

    Complement fit :: this teacher is compatible with the student on many levels, but different enough to be able to stretch the student’s understanding of the world and what makes other individuals tick. A good way to discover new passions and ways to learn.

    Growth fit :: while not an intuitive fit, when both students and teachers are aware of each other’s “ingredients” (e.g. personality, interests and learning style), they can learn to adapt to create a relationship built on mutual understanding. An incredibly valuable match because the student has the opportunity to learn how to interact in a positive way with colleagues and family members that share this personality type.

  • Effective Breakout Groups for Practice Lessons

    Effective Breakout Groups for Practice Lessons

    "Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it…

    0

    Effective Breakout Groups for Practice Lessons

    "Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid."

    Albert Einstein

    MBTI Manual, p32

    Break by Multiple Intelligence FIRST

    Place at least one child with a parallel preference in the Intel 1, Intel 2 and Intel 3 columns of the Strengths Grid with each of your breakout groups.

    E.g., for a history lesson, place a child with and intra- or interpersonal preference in each breakout group; for a geography lesson, place a child with visual-spatial preference in each breakout group; for a life science lesson, place a child with naturalist preference in each breakout group.

    Cog Style SECOND

    For maximally effective breakout groups for practice lessons, try to place kids together who prefer to learn visually, auditorially or kinesthetically together so that they can learn techniques from each other to cement the concept

    Judging vs. Perceiving THIRD
    (the last character in the Myers-Briggs column)

    If you're planning more than 3 breakout segments, do your next cut by breaking apart judgers and perceivers as much as possible.

    Because perceivers are focused on "what's the end goal?" versus a judger's focus on "what's the next step?", these approaches can be annoying to each other during a practice session. Your judging groups will try to come to a conclusion as quickly as possible and move on to next steps. "We already know enough to make this decision," is what you might hear from these groups. Perceiving kids, on the other hand, like to drink in as much as possible of the situation before "time is up" to come to a conclusion. "I don't know enough yet to make a decision," is a more typical response from these groups…but they may have explored more of the peripheral concepts of the topic when you come back into a group wrap-up. Another way to look at it is that the judgers will be more interested in concept DEPTH, while perceivers are more interested in concept BREADTH.

    Dominant Personality Type FOURTH
    (the middle character in the Myers-Briggs column)

    Again, depending on how small your segments are for your lesson, your next break will be to create blended groups with complementary dominant types – e.g. NT / NF / ST / SF.

    Dominant type preference blending during practice lesson breakouts will help kids gain a broader view of the concept being taught without adding in the layer of inferior preference that the students may find jarring during this stage of learning.

    Other Breakout Group Types

    Intro Lessons
    Long-Term Projects

  • Effective Breakout Groups for Intro Lessons

    Effective Breakout Groups for Intro Lessons

    “In dealing with people, when we keep their type in mind, we are respecting not only their abstract right to develop along lines of their own…

    0

    Effective Breakout Groups for Intro Lessons

    “In dealing with people, when we keep their type in mind, we are respecting not only their abstract right to develop along lines of their own choosing, but also the importance of qualities they have developed by making that choice.

    MBTI Manual, p32

    Break by Multiple Intelligence FIRST

    Place at least one child with a parallel preference in the Intel 1, Intel 2 or Intel 3 columns of the Strengths Grid with each of your breakout groups.

    E.g., for a history lesson, place a child with and intra- or interpersonal preference in each breakout group; for a geography lesson, place a child with visual-spatial preference in each breakout group; for a life science lesson, place a child with naturalist preference in each breakout group.

    Extraversion/Introversion SECOND
    (the first character in the Myers-Briggs column of your member dashboard)

    For maximally effective breakout groups for intro lessons, do your best to make the groups exclusively extraverted or introverted.

    This is especially important during an introductory lesson because while extraverts like conversation “layering” through interruptions, introverts’ require concentration and a well-meaning extraverts interruption may set them back to square one. If this is impossible, try to balance the groups so that introverted students don’t get drowned out by their fellow students and extraverts have a way to “talk through” the new information.

    Dominant Personality Type THIRD
    (the middle character in the Myers-Briggs column)

    If you’re planning more than 2-3 segments, break your I and E segments up into straight T/F/S/N, but if that’s impossible, go for these blends: NT / NF / ST / SF.

    Because using our inferior preference FEELS uncomfortable, we don’t practice it or naturally use it well and putting it to use can be stressful…ESPECIALLY if we’re in a group with others who are adept at the opposing type preference or just can’t understand our point of view. Because of these factors, placing a student in a group with an opposite dominant type preference means that the new understanding won’t be contextualized for a way for the students in a way that they will both absorb and retain the information.

    Judging/Perceiving FOURTH
    (the last character in the Myers-Briggs column)

    At this stage of the game, it’s not as important to break apart judgers and perceivers as it is during practice lessons.

    Understand that your perceiving groups will try to make the learning PROCESS fun, while your judging groups will want to bring closure to tasks BEFORE they feel comfortable goofing around or playing.

    Other Breakout Group Types

    Practice Lessons
    Long-Term Projects

  • Effective Breakout Groups for Long-Term Projects

    Effective Breakout Groups for Long-Term Projects

    Break Apart by Multiple Intelligence FIRST Place at least one child with a parallel preference in each of your breakout groups. E.g., for a history lesson,…

    0

    Effective Breakout Groups for Long-Term Projects

    Break Apart by Multiple Intelligence FIRST

    Place at least one child with a parallel preference in each of your breakout groups. E.g., for a history lesson, place a child with and intra- or interpersonal preference in each breakout group; for a geography lesson, place a child with visual-spatial preference in each breakout group; for a life science lesson, place a child with naturalist preference in each breakout group.

    Break Dominant Personality Type SECOND
    (the middle character in the Myers-Briggs column)

    Be sure to balance dominant types in a group, rather than weighting too heavily with Thinkers, Feelers, Sensors or iNtuitives. During a long-term project, it’s valuable to have the group see “all sides of the elephant”. By balancing the different dominant types in a group, you can ensure that the group won’t feel that one view is “right” while another is “wrong”, but that they all weave together to form a more complete picture of the assignment.

    Break Judging/Perceiving & Extraversion/Introversion THIRD
    (the first and last characters in the Myers-Briggs Column in your member dashboard)

    Go for the balance of both of these type preferences in long-term project work. Use techniques as discussed in our Project Lesson page to manage conversation flow. At this stage, mixing Js and Ps can be incredibly beneficial. Balancing the group will make sure that the project scope is not too broad or narrow as a result of too much layering by the perceivers or not enough breadth from the judgers.

    The beginnings of type management at this level needs to be facilitated by the teacher. Before breaking into the large groups, provide a deadline for the project, then look to the perceivers in your class to help shape the interim steps that need to be executed in order to achieve the long-term project goal.

    Then, look to the judgers in your class to help develop the timeline for completion of each of the individual steps in order to hit the deadline you defined at the beginning. Now that you’ve got a framework, break the class up into judgers and perceivers. Take each of the specific tasks and ask the groups to define responsibilities for each group member and where, how, and with whom each group member will need to collaborate.

    If there are certain sub tasks that need to be repeated several times during the project, suggest that the perceivers experiment their way through the 1st iteration, while the judgers document the steps and estimate timelines, then create interim deadlines for each iteration. In this way, both judgers and perceivers can complete their responsibilities without jeopardizing the final project submission because they’ve left too much until the last minute.

    During each class time regroup, allow time for the breakout groups to focus on the scope of work for the next interim deadline. The perceivers will be able to take the knowledge they’ve gleaned from the previous deadline and recommend adjustments or expansions to the project. The judgers will be able to look at the timeline and help the perceivers understand what’s possible, given the timeline.

    Break Cognitive Style FOURTH

    Go for diversity at this stage of the game and try to vary the cognitive styles in each group, so that they will naturally employ a variety of techniques in group and homework and more fully absorb the material through the use of all modalities.

    Other Breakout Group Types

    Intro Lessons
    Practice Lessons

  • References We Used As We Developed Kidzmet

    References We Used As We Developed Kidzmet

    Genesis of Kidzmet While we started building the current version of Kidzmet in late 2010, the inspiration for the idea actually came from Jen Lilienstein’s undergraduate…

    0

    References We Used As We Developed Kidzmet

    Genesis of Kidzmet

    While we started building the current version of Kidzmet in late 2010, the inspiration for the idea actually came from Jen Lilienstein’s undergraduate senior thesis in 1994. Under the direction of Dr. Francesca Cancian at UCI, Jen studied the effect of the implementation of Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory (or lack thereof) in varying types of schools (public, parochial, Waldorf and Montessori) and the corresponding effect on absenteeism, self-esteem/self-worth, love of learning and students’ openness to future career directions.

    A large number of reference sources were used in the development of Kidzmet’s preference profiles and matching algorithms…and are used in the ongoing development of Kidzmet’s newsletters and course materials. The following books are referred to and cross-referenced continually to make sure we are providing our members with thoroughly researched and cross-checked content.

    Personality Type

    Meisgeier, C. H., & Murphy, E. (1987). MMTIC Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Hirsh, S., & Kise, J.. (2006). Work It Out: Using Personality Type to Improve Team Performance. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing.

    Briggs Myers, Isabel, McCaulley, Mary H., Quenk, Naomi L., & Hammer, Allen L. (1998). MBTI Manual (A guide to the development and use of the Myers Briggs type indicator) (3rd ed #6111). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Lawrence, Gordon D. (2010). Finding the Zone: A Whole New Way to Maximize Mental Potential. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Dunning, Donna (2008). Introduction to Type and Learning. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Hirsh, E., Hirsh, K., & Hirsh, S. (2003). Introduction to Type and Teams. Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Keirsey, David, & Bates, Marilyn. (1984). Please Understand Me: Character and Temperament Types. Del Mar, CA: Gnosology Books Ltd.

    Tieger, Paul D., & Barron-Tieger, Barbara. (1997). Nurture by Nature: Understand Your Child’s Personality Type – And Become a Better Parent. Canada: Little, Brown & Company Ltd.

    Haas, Leona, & Hunziker, Mark (2011). Building Blocks of Personality Type: A Guide to Discovering the Hidden Secrets of the Personality Type Code. Temecula, CA: TypeLabs.

    Tieger, Paul D., & Barron, Barbara. (2007). Do What You Are: Discover the Perfect Career for You Through the Secrets of Personality Type. Canada: Little, Brown & Company Ltd.

    Briggs Myers, Isabel, & Myers, Peter B. (1995). Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: CPP.

    Kroeger, Otto, & Thuesen, Janet M. (1998). Type Talk: The 16 Personality Types That Determine How We Live, Love, and Work. New York, NY: Dell Publishing.

    Lawrence, Gordon (1996). People Types and Tiger Stripes: Using Psychological Type to Help Students Discover Their Unique Potential. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc.

    Kemp, Anthony E. (1996). The Musical Temperament: Psychology and Personality of Musicians. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Zichy, Shoya, & Bidou, Ann (2007). Career Match: Connecting Who You Are with What You’ll Love to Do. New York, NY: AMACOM.

    Multiple Intelligence Theory

    Gardner, Howard (2006). Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Gardner, Howard (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Silver, H., Strong, R., Perini, M. (2000). So Each May Learn: Integrating Learning Styles and Multiple Intelligences. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Gardner, Howard (2006). Five Minds for the Future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

    Armstrong, Thomas (1999). 7 (Seven) Kinds of Smart: Identifying and Developing Your Multiple Intelligences. New York, NY: Penguin Group.

    Armstrong, Thomas (2000). In Their Own Way: Discovering and Encouraging Your Child’s Multiple Intelligences. New York, NY: Penguin Putnam.

    Armstrong, Thomas (2003). You’re Smarter Than You Think: A Kid’s Guide to Multiple Intelligences. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.

    Brualdi, Amy C. (1996). Multiple Intelligences: Gardner’s Theory. Washington, DC: ERIC Digests.

    Schmidt, Laurel (2001). Seven Times Smarter: 50 Activities, Games, and Projects to Develop the Seven Intelligences of Your Child. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.

    Grosswirth, Marvin, Salny, Abbie F., Stillson, Alan (1999). Match Wits With Mensa: The Complete Quiz Book (Mensa Genius Quiz). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

    Bellanca, James A. (2009). 200+ Active Learning Strategies and Projects for Engaging Students’ Multiple Intelligences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Koch, Kathy (2007). How am I Smart?: A Parent’s Guide to Multiple Intelligences. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers.

    Cognitive Style

    Fuller, Cheri (2004). Talkers, Watchers, and Doers: Unlocking Your Child’s Unique Learning Style (School Savvy Kids). Colorado Springs, CO: Pinon Press.

    Tobias, Cynthia Ulrich (1994). The Way They Learn. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.

    Willis, Mariaemma & Hodson, Victoria Kindle (1999). Discover Your Child’s Learning Style: Children Learn in Unique Ways – Here’s the Key to Every Child’s Learning Success. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.

    Walsh, Brian E. (2011). VAK Self-Audit: Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Communication And Learning Styles: Exploring Patterns of How You Interact And Learn. Victoria, BC: Walsh Seminars Publishing House.

    Sousa, David, et. Al. (2010). Mind, Brain, and Education: Neuroscience Implications for the Classroom (Leading Edge (Solution Tree)). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

    Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2011). Mind, Brain, and Education Science: A Comprehensive Guide to the New Brain-Based Teaching. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

    Oczkus, Lori D. (2003). Reciprocal Teaching at Work: Strategies for Improving Reading Comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Hoyt, Linda (2002). Make It Real: Strategies for Success with Informational Texts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.