Introduction
Teachers often discuss the “lightbulb” moments in their students and the warmth and giddiness it brings to our teacher hearts. However, when we really delve into these moments and reflect, it’s safe to say the student had the “light bulb” moment when he or she navigated to the conclusion on their own with the teacher as the facilitator. In reality, the “lightbulb” moments we love and live for are only possible when learners demonstrate independence and their capacity to make connections on their own. To offer such experiences to our students, we must enhance our comprehension and take into account the philosophies of both the learner and the teacher. This enables educators to identify and emphasize the correlations between the roles of the learner and the teacher, ultimately bringing forth more of these “lightbulb” moments.
The relationship between teaching and learning: The carpenter vs. the gardener
The definition of learning has changed almost every decade since the 1960s. In the 60s and 70s, learning was defined as a change in behavior, while in the 1990s, “learning was often described as the relatively permanent change in a person’s knowledge or behavior due to experience” (Smith, 2020, para 13). Additionally, learning has been approached as both a product and a process. Mark Smith (2020) alludes to the fact that there is a major attraction when we approach learning as a product as it provides teachers with material that is measurable and clear. Nevertheless, he also argues that there is danger in discrete learning objectives because it loses focus on the actual purpose and processes of learning. Allison Gopnik (2016) argues that this turns educators into ‘woodworkers’ rather than ‘gardeners’:
“As carpenters. . .essentially your job is to shape that material into a final product that will fit the scheme you had in mind to begin with. And you can assess how good a job you’ve done by looking at the finished product. Are the doors true? Are the chairs steady? Messiness and variability are a carpenter’s enemies; precision and control are her allies. Measure twice, cut once….
When we garden, on the other hand, we create a protected and nurturing space for plants to flourish. It takes hard labor and the sweat of our brows, with a lot of exhausted digging and wallowing in manure. And as any gardener knows, our specific plans are always thwarted…. And yet the compensation is that our greatest horticultural triumphs and joys also come when the garden escapes our control” (pg 18).
I couldn’t help but quote both of these descriptions. I believe it changes the way we view teaching and learning in general and who we are and want to be as educators. If we are truly gardeners, then that means we are creating significant learning environments that consist of continuous change accompanied by hard work, where our students, like plants, can grow beyond what we can provide them. . . which is the complete opposite of a measurable, structured, finished product. While there is safety and security in the carpenter mindset, it does not value the process in which learning truly occurs.
The difference between a learning philosophy & a teaching philosophy
The beliefs we have about teaching and learning influence many of the decisions we make as educators. A learning philosophy and teaching philosophy are greatly connected, but each one focuses on a different aspect of education.
Learning Philosophy:
Learning philosophy pertains to the learner’s beliefs, values, and attitudes about the process of learning.
It involves the learner's perspective on how they acquire knowledge, skills, and understanding, as well as their preferences, motivations, and strategies for learning.
Teaching Philosophy:
Teaching philosophy relates to an educator's beliefs, values, and approaches to teaching and guiding the learning process of students.
It encompasses the teacher's ideas of how to be the facilitator of learning, the goals of education, and the methods they utilize to help students achieve those goals.
Beliefs about learning & myself as a learner
Having a true understanding of our preferred strategies and ideas as educators has a profound impact on how we approach our classrooms and our students’ learning (Bates, 2014).
Not only should we have a true understanding of who we are and what we prefer as educators, but we should also have a deep understanding of who are as learners.
When I reflect on my own learning, I have come to realize that I love connecting the dots. I enjoy analyzing information and making connections to my personal experiences. I enjoy going down all the rabbit holes which may include reading blogs and journals, watching YouTube videos, and finding Instagram accounts that align with my interests, profession, and beliefs. I strive to make sense and order in a world of chaos with the information I learn from multiple sources. Learning as an adult is exciting and forever changing. And this was true for me as a child as well; I have always loved learning and making connections.
Unfortunately, many of the educators in my life perceived learning as a Behaviorist, and, as a result, viewed learning as a product with an attached grade rather than a process. Therefore, in order to receive the grade, my focus became more on the product than the process. The quicker, and more efficiently I could produce the product, the better. In doing this, my love for connecting the dots fell by the wayside. This way of “learning” also served as the beginning of my “fixed mindset” (Dweck, 2006). Growing up, learning did not include failure or unfinished products. As a result, learning came with many personal challenges and deep, internal conflicts. Thankfully, as an adult, I’ve realized that learning is truly a process that comes with many challenges and opportunities for improvement. I now understand that I have to shift from a fixed mindset to a growth mindset in order to fully embrace my learning journey.
Connecting and Implementing Learning Theories: Cognitivism, Constructivism, & Connectivist
Understanding learning theories is highly important when we are deciding who we want to be as educators. Having the knowledge of multiple learning theories gives teachers the advantage in making choices about their own approach to learning (Bates, 2014). After reviewing the learning theories from “What teacher should know about learning theories” (2018) along with other resources, I naturally connected with the learning theories of Cognitivism, Constructivism, and Connectivism.
What makes me a Cognitivist?
After experiencing learning from a behaviorist viewpoint for most of my life, it was not shocking to me that I related to the Cognitivist Learning Theory. While this theory does not have a single, specific creator, it can be attributed to the work of Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, and Jerome Bruner (Bates, 2014). Unlike the black box Behaviorist theory where what comes out of the black box is known and measurable and what goes inside the black box is ignored or not considered of interest, the Cognitivism theory focuses on identifying mental processes such as conscious thought, decision-making, emotions, and the ability to express ideas through social interaction (Bates, 2014). This is exactly how my brain functions. I value making deeper connections and developing new ways to view learning in the future. To truly learn, I believe that we must focus on the human process. We are all unique individuals with unique experiences. Adopting the Cognitivist Learning Theory, we take the focus from the product and place it on the human process.
This way of learning will be crucial when I implement my Innovation Plan (Empower: Blended Learning Leadership Program). Tony Bates (2014) states that “cognitivists have increased our understanding of how humans process and make sense of new information, how we access, interpret, integrate, process, organize and manage knowledge, and have given us a better understanding of the conditions that affect learners’ mental states” (Cognitivism, para 7). With my Innovation Plan, I will be exploring a world of blended learning that teachers may be hesitant to based on its polarity with the traditional classroom. I will be sharing new, innovative opinions, and in order to implement this plan successfully, I must take a cognitivist approach to ensure I understand teachers’ thought processes in how they are receiving, processing, and organizing this information.
What makes me a Constructivist?
Moving beyond the Cognitivist Theory, I connect even deeper with Constructivism where learners actively and consciously build their own understanding and knowledge through experiences, interaction, and reflection (Bates, 2014). As I stated before, I love connecting the dots and taking what I learn in one situation and applying it to another. My English teacher-loving, analyzing brain enjoys the creativity this brings. I find it interesting that the Constructivist approach is more commonly found in less quantitive subject areas –maybe this is why I love English (ELAR) so much!
Furthermore, constructivism values the social context of learning. Bates (2014) explains that ideas are discussed beyond the teacher with friends and colleagues, and learning is a social process. In relation to my innovation plan, the social aspect of sharing and processing information is vital. As teachers implement blended learning in their classrooms, I have to ensure that there is time for teachers to share their experiences, failures, successes, etc, so that they may learn and grow from each other and continue to build a growth mindset and, eventually, a learner’s mindset. This social aspect is a driving force in the Empower Program.
What makes me a Connectivist?
Connectivism is a fairly new theory of learning that continues to be refined and developed. In my opinion, Connectivism takes all of the wonderful components of Cognitivism and Constructivism and creates a theory that helps learners of the 21st century. Tony Bates (2014) explores Stephen Downes’ design principles of Connectivism:
learner autonomy, in terms of choice of content and how they choose to learn
openness, in terms of access to the course, content, activities and methods of assessment
diversity: varied content, individual perspectives and multiple tools, especially for networking learners and creating opportunities for dialogue and discussion
interactivity: ‘massive’ communication between learners and cooperative learning, resulting in emergent knowledge (Connectivism, para 1).
In my role as an Instructional Technology Specialist, I relate to the Connectivist more than I ever. My role in Empower (blended learning leadership program), is just as Bates (2014) describes: “To provide the initial learning environment and context that brings learners together, and to help learners construct their own personal learning environments to enable them to connect to ‘successful’ networks, with the assumption that learning will automatically occur as a result, through exposure to the flow of information and the individual’s autonomous reflection on its meaning” (Connectvism, para 2). The blended learning leadership program will revolve around a significant learning environment that allows teachers the opportunity to come together and share personal ideas and experiences so they may learn from one another. From conversations, social networking, and content of Blended Learning PD, teachers will be able to go out and build their own significant learning environment in their classrooms in whatever way they wish. This experience allows for autonomy and makes learning meaningful and authentic to the teachers and their students.
Conclusion:
Altogether, researching and reflecting on my own learning philosophy has given me much confidence when approaching my innovation plan and future studies. Gaining insight into my identity as a learner enables me to grasp how I process information, which, in return, equips me to be a more effective educator and learning facilitator.
Annotated Bibliography
Bates, T. (2014, July 29). Learning theories and online learning. Tony Bates. https://www.tonybates.ca/2014/07/29/learning-theories-and-online-learning/
This online resource by Tony Bates explores the relationship between learning theories and online education. It provides insights into how various learning theories can be applied to online learning environments, making it a valuable reference for me as an educator and Instructional Technology Specialist.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books.
Carol Dweck's book "Mindset" delves into the concept of mindset and how one's beliefs about abilities and intelligence impact their success. Dweck's research on fixed and growth mindset impacts education and learning as a whole.
Gopnip, A. (2016). The Carpenter and the Gardener. What the New Science of Child Development Tells Us about the Relationship Between Parents and Children. London: Boadley Head.
Alison Gopnik's book explores child development and the relationship between parents and children. While this book discusses the metaphor of "carpenter parenting" and "gardener parenting," it offers insight into the educational roles of teaching and learning.
Learning Project Team of HKU. (2018). History of Learning Theories. What teachers should know about learning theories. https://kb.edu.hku.hk/learning_theory_history/ This resource from the Learning Project Team of the University of Hong Kong provides a history of learning theories and highlights each major factor. This is a helpful resource when learning to understand the basics of each learning theory.
Smith, M. K. (2020). What is learning? A definition and discussion. Infed. https://infed.org/mobi/learning-theory-models-product-and-process/
This entry by Mark K. Smith provides an overview of learning theories and definitions. It offers a valuable resource for understanding the foundations of learning definitions, theories, and their application in education for learners and teachers. It also references many other helpful outside sources.
Comments