Philosophies of teaching

Following on from my last post, in addition to offering philosophies of technology in this article, Kanuka also describes the philosophies of teaching.  Kanuka explains that both philosophies reflect our underlying view of the world and need to inform the decisions we make (as teachers) about what and how to teach, and how to use technology.  This can help us understand our actions or preferences, explain these to colleagues and learners, and understand the different choices or preferences of others.  It can also help teachers to avoid “mindless activism” (p.111) where teachers get enthused by the latest technology or trend and attempt to use it alongside existing teaching practices which can “lead to incongruence and inconsistency in action between and among instructors...and incongruence between beliefs and actions” (p.111).

Kanuka describes six philosophies of teaching and the role of technology (including the philosophy of technology) for each teaching philosophy:

1.       Liberal /Perennial: instruction in the classics with rigorous debate to bring about an informed, thinking society; promotes strong teacher direction; generally a poor fit for e-learning as the instructor loses some control of the learning environment; aligned with technological determinism.

2.       Progressive: promoting personal growth and a better society; learning through a student/teacher partnership; well aligned with using learner-centred e-learning to encourage learner participation and sharing reflecting uses determinism.

3.       Behaviourist: designed to bring about observable changes in behaviour which will eventually help society improve and survive; uses a subject-centred approach where teachers design an environment which encourages desired behaviours; believe that transformations can occur though using technology reflecting technological determinism.

4.       Humanist: supporting personal growth and self-actualisation; encourages self-directed learning in a safe and cooperative environment; group learning and self reflection/evaluation methods are core activities to help focus on a learner’s experience of learning (rather than subject content); technology offers flexible, convenient and access to meet the needs of each individual learner and support the role of the teacher as a facilitator or guide (at most) reflecting uses determinism.

5.       Radical: supports education for economic, political or social change; promotes instruction through dialogic encounters which lead to changes in belief and practice and avoid traditional lecturing/top-down education as this is oppressive and value-laden; the teacher is seen as an equal (with expertise) who creates the curriculum with students and enables students to reflect on themselves, their reality and beliefs/assumptions; use technology to suit their own purposes reflecting social determinism but avoid technology which is aligned with ‘the establishment’ paradigm.

6.       Analytical: concerned with the development of rationality and transmitting worthwhile knowledge; teachers guide and direct classroom discussion of worthy topics, concepts and arguments; teachers scaffold learning and introduce new knowledge as appropriate; use e-learning to serve the learning process reflecting uses determinism.

 

In different contexts, my philosophy of teaching varies.  As an educator in a health literacy context, I tend towards the progressive philosophy, with elements of an analytical philosophy when the audience is interested in gaining health knowledge or facts from an expert (although the expert may not be the teacher).  In workplace or industry education the behaviourist philosophy is more frequently used due to the opportunity to practice (behaviours) in a real context, which provides activity and safe experimentation.  Once again, expert input is frequently used to scaffold learning either prior to a learner attempting an activity or when reflecting on an activity, showing an analytical philosophy to teaching.

In literacy and numeracy teaching, I have found that it is very important to build learner’s familiarity with any learning technology or this mode of delivery forms yet another barrier to participation in learning.  While this is possible in a face to face teaching situation, such as a workplace, it is much more difficult in distance learning.  This makes it essential to use technology that is as familiar, easy, intuitive, and logical (from a learner’s perspective) as possible.  I find the technology that fits my purpose and use it as needed.  

With the increase in online resources that learners must use, for instance the Literacy and Numeracy for Adults Assessment Tool (https://assess.literacyandnumeracyforadults.com/Login.aspx ), there is an increasing degree of social control through technology (technological determinism) in the NZ tertiary sector.  The Tool is a predetermined and compulsory part of the literacy and numeracy landscape and educators and learners need to make the most out of it.  Widespread behaviour change, in terms of the number of learners being assesses, has already happened.   It is also assumed that formative assessment results will influence teaching practice and content, as well as provider behaviour.  The Tool is based on many assumptions which may not be reflected in an educators beliefs, such as: national testing is appropriate for adult literacy and numeracy learners, the equal relevance all of the learning progressions  in a strand  to every adult and learning programme, that the context for learning does not need to be reflected in assessment, that assessment does not require a trained educator,and that online results provide sufficient immediate feedback for a learner.