teaching theory
As a professional engaged with a vocation that impacts people, I believe my view of people is paramount. It transcends my work regardless of role or venue (counselor, educator, supervisor). My view of humanity sees people as exceedingly deep. I believe that we are complex creatures that are not easily reduced. Further, we are inherently relational creatures. We live and breathe in the context of relationships. This anthropological perspective forms the foundation of my philosophy of teaching. The teacher and learner form a collaborative relationship in which both contribute to an engaging and reflexive process.
The student
It is rare to find venues in which our humanity is deeply honored. In a learning environment this can show up by reducing students to receptacles that must accommodate information. In doing so, the humanity of the student is sacrificed. Rather, the student as person must be honored and attended to throughout the process of learning. Parker Palmer describes real learning as something that, “does not happen until students are brought into relationship with the teacher, with each other, and with the subject. We cannot learn deeply and well until a community of learning is created in the classroom (Palmer, 1993).”
the teacher
I believe that the teacher is responsible for facilitating this “community of learning.” This means acknowledging the power differential in the classroom and to utilize their position to empower. Parker Palmer describes this role in saying that, “the teacher is a mediator between the knower and the known, between the learner and the subject to be learned. A teacher, not some theory, is the living link in the epistemological chain. The way a teacher plays the mediator role conveys both an epistemology and an ethic to the student, both an approach to knowing and an approach to living (1993, p. 29).”
As a teacher, I recognize that there are many places in life which will dehumanize my students and rob them of hope. Hope about life, about learning and about themselves. Because of this, I believe a teacher acts as someone who is holding onto hope. Bell hooks writes that, “educating is always a vocation rooted in hopefulness. As teachers we believe that learning is possible, that nothing can keep an open mind from seeking after knowledge and finding a way to know (2003).”
THE INTERACTION
Finally, the student and teacher interact with one another as well as with the content. It is in this process of interaction that learners are shaped. This interational view is captured through the dialectical constructivist lens. Within this approach to the learning environment, “the source of all knowledge lies in the continuing interactions between organism and environment, neither of which can simply impose itself on the other (Moshman, 1982, p. 375).” Further, these interactions are not mechanical in nature. Rather, they are relational. And their relational quality means that, “the classroom is above all a social environment and teaching is a form of social interaction (Bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1999, p. 194).”
HINDRANCES
Out of my perspective on humanity and the learning interaction, there are factors which are particularly hindering to student learning. I believe that shame, fear, and anxiety are not conducive to an effective learning environment. While these emotional states cannot be entirely accounted for, they should be addressed whenever they are present. Furthermore, they should never be intentionally introduced into the environment as a means of motivation. These emotional states are far more paralyzing than they are motivating.
Relational disconnection also acts as an inhibitor to learning. Because learning is a human process, relating is an inherent part of education. A student feeling disconnected from their teacher, their class or their content does not invite the type of interaction necessary to shape learners. Differences in content lead to differences in the amount of attention paid to relational connection. However, a parallel process occurs in our learning. We are both learning content and learning how to learn content. In other words, we are taking in information and we are being shaped by information. It is the shaping that occurs in the process of learning that requires relational connection.
DESIRED RESULT
The application of these theoretical ideas would result in creating a classroom environment that is conducive to learning. I believe a conducive learning environment is one that fosters collaborative engagement. The communication and expectations are both clear and supportive. Student autonomy is fostered whenever possible. Because of these factors, I desire to be open and flexible as a teacher. I believe learning happens in interactions that maintain a continued balance between challenge and support. Fear, anxiety and shame rise in the absence of support and learning is restricted. Without challenge, the learning environment will not engage deeper levels of understanding.
The concept of scaffolding deeply resonates for me as a teacher and a learner. This scaffolding becomes a place, “where the teacher enables students to do things they cannot do on their own by helping them articulate what they are thinking, reminding them of assumptions they are making, drawing their attention to information, and providing new perspectives (Bruning et al., 1999, p. 207).” This scaffolding is honoring to where the individual learner is in their process. Further, it is a metaphor that accommodates the interaction between teacher, student, and content. Both teacher and student interact on the scaffolding of the content.
Ultimately, teaching is about creating space to shape learners. What we learn shapes us as learners. As a teacher, I want to create an environment which invites the depth of human experience to interact with the depth of life and result in deeper understanding. And in the vein of dialectical constructivism, it is the interaction between the person and the environment that is of greatest importance. It is through this process of interacting and reflecting that learners engage deeper levels of understanding. In this view, the process is of equal or greater importance than the content. Acknowledging the significance of learner process is acknowledging the main force at play in learner development. In other words, learners find a new road to Rome that makes for an entirely new experience of traveling there. Despite arriving at a potentially familiar destination, something altogether different emerges in the process of getting there. When describing deeper levels of thinking, Vygotsky has described this phenomenon like this, “although the results are identical, the process by which they are reached is not at all the same (2012, p. 127).”
Finally, all the theory in the world cannot replace presence. The consistent, compassionate and interactive presence of the teacher is vital to the learning environment. Because learning environments are made up of individual learners, they are radically unique. As such, I agree with Parker Palmer when he says that, “good teaching cannot be reduced to technique,- good teaching comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher (2010).”