Personal Teaching and Learning Philosophy
There has been much theorizing on the subjects of learning and instruction. I do not profess to know everything about, or completely agree with any one theory: behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, narrative, or situated learning theories. However, I have gained much insight from the study of these prominent paradigms and the theoretical ideas which flow therefrom. Understanding learning theories is like placing tools in a tool belt for anyone involved in teaching and learning. The ideas and principles found in learning theories may be employed to help develop creative, engaging, and effective training and learning environments. As stated by Ertmer and Newby (2013), “Designers must have an adequate repertoire of strategies available, and possess the knowledge of when and why to employ each” (p. 44). My personal teaching and learning philosophy has been influenced by many of these learning theories as well as by my own personal experiences in the field.
Effective Design Models
I believe creating successful formal training and learning environments involves deliberate planning and organization. Many instructional design models and theories have been created to help facilitate better learning environments. Reiser and Dempsey (2012) listed several characteristics that should be present in all instructional design efforts. A few of these include: a student centered focus, performance focus, being goal oriented, and in most circumstances, a team effort. According to Merrill (2002), all these theories are very similar in nature. He proposed that he has summarized the main principles from all major instructional design models and theories in his first principles of instruction. His first principles are problem centered, activation, demonstration, application, and integration. After a survey of many instructional theories and models, Merrill advanced “these theories do include first principles of instruction that are similar, regardless of theory or philosophical orientation” (Merrill, 2002, p. 58). I agree that the organization and principles found in instructional design models are very similar at their base. However, I do believe that there are advantages to an in-depth study of individual theories and models. Studying many models at a deep level can bring a teacher or learner greater insights and perspectives for teaching and learning than can be found by studying only one model.
Participatory Learning
I also believe that learning is a participatory process of becoming a part of a community, rather than the mere accumulation of knowledge concepts. Sfard (1998) talked about this participation metaphor for learning in this way: “learning should be viewed as a process of becoming a part of a greater whole” (p. 6). I believe that people learn best through participation as an apprentice, with someone who can assist them in their journey. Along this same line, in most cases, the closer the learning environment is to the real world situation the better. As Dale (1946) said about direct experiences, “It is the rich, full-bodied experience that is the bed-rock of all education” (p. 170). As Dale described through his Cone of Experience, there are times for greater levels of abstractness in learning environments. However, it has been my personal experience that traditional education generally errors on the side of too much abstractness and not enough direct experiences.
Narrative Preference
I further lean towards narrative instructional design methods due to their participatory focus and conduciveness to personal agency. Parrish (2009) advanced that instructional designs which follow a narrative format have a better chance of creating aesthetic learning experiences. He explained how this can be accomplished: “beginnings call for creating tension or mystery and developing trust that the tension can be resolved, middles often call for continued renewal of the initial engagement and reinforcement of the potential for consummation, and endings call for both an emotional intensity that heightens the experience and a chance for reflection that connects everything that has come before into logical and organic unity” (Parrish, 2009, p. 515).
Parish also advocated that learners should always be considered the protagonist in the learning environment. He explained that in many training situations, we see the subject matter or the instructor as the lead character, however, this should not be the case. He stated that learning is never vicarious: “Even though learners might be motivated by the desire to understand the struggles and achievements of others, a learner’s primary experience is his or her own struggles and achievements in learning” (Parrish, 2009, p. 515).
Application
In my own personal experience with training and teaching, I have recognized these principles first hand. I have had the opportunity to manage several Simply Mac retail stores in Idaho and Utah. I found my success as a manager was directly tied to my ability to create a positive learning environment for all employees. The rapidly changing Apple sales and service environment, coupled with employee turnover, made this a constant challenge. I found organization was critical. We were able to keep track of everything through utilizing a learning management system and implementing many principles from instructional design models which I learned in my master’s program.
We found the principles of participatory learning and direct experience were the best way for employees to learn many of the new systems and procedures that changed almost on a monthly basis. In our team meetings, rather than just telling or teaching employees about changes, if possible, we would go to the point of sale computers and show them the changes. We would let them try things themselves and answer their questions.
Some of our most successful and fun moments as a team were when we employed a narrative design in our training. We utilized themes and story lines such as climbing Mount Everest or becoming the Avengers to engage employees in a narrative adventure.
In conclusion, my research and personal experiences have led to my teaching and learning philosophy that the best formal teaching and learning environments are created through using design models effectively, understanding and employing the principles found in the participatory learning theory, and utilizing narrative instructional design methods.
References
Dale, E. (1946). Audio-visual methods in teaching (1 ed.). New York: Dryden Press.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6, 50-72.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(3), 43-59.
Parrish, P. E. (2009). Aesthetic principles for instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 511-528.
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Sfard, A. (1998, March). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.