While this paper did present many innovative teaching methods, I don't think it was geared towards the correct age group. Regardless of their effectiveness, I don't think college students would appreciate many of these teaching styles. Being told to "sing the polymorphism song" would probably anger many of the introductory CS students, they would most likely consider it very demeaning.

Although most of the ideas presented were geared towards younger students, I think some of them could be adapted to college level courses. For instance, the paper suggests that the teaching style should very from lecture to lecture. This would help a lot in an intro class because it would make class more interesting. Occasionally replacing lecture with smaller group meetings could provide a better way to review difficult concepts and give students more of an interactive learning experience. The paper does sight that for many students, cooperative learning is the best way to get them to perform their best.

Perhaps one of the paper's most interesting points was that it stated "...MI theory suggests that no one set of teaching strategies will work best for all students at all times." This means that regardless of how we try to change the teaching format, there will still be some people who aren't helped by it. This leads me to believe that a better way to go about solving the problem would be to offer several different ways to learn the material. For people who learn by seeing, there is lecture. For people who needed to ask one on one questions, there are TA hours. For people who like a cooperative learning environment, there is section. I think rather than searching for the be all and end all of teaching methods, we should work to improve the different areas that we already have covered. Perhaps we should see what could be done to make section a better learning tool for students like a group setting, while lecture could still cater to the masses. And as I said before, perhaps lecture could occasionally be replaced with labs, so that difficult concepts could be discussed more openly, and so that students could have "hands on" experience dealing with what they are being taught.