Teaching Philosophy
I have chosen to teach at the post-secondary level to make a difference to future educators, current educators working with these pre-service teachers, students in these classes, and in each of the PSTs’ future classrooms. The students I teach will have a great impact on their students, each in their own way. This ripple effect can be far reaching. I want it to be a positive one. Having seen how teachers can struggle in their profession and thus negatively affect hundreds or even thousands of students, I want to go back to the source and make a difference proactively with pre-service teachers. Svinicki & McKeachie (2014) stress that learning is more important than teaching. I wholeheartedly agree. In planning and implementing instruction, the question I always refer back to is “Will this benefit my students?” If the answer is no, then I don’t do it. The authors also stress the importance of active versus passive learning. I also uphold this as a pillar of my educational philosophy. I believe we learn best by doing, by teaching others, by actively participating in the evolution of our own education. We are not empty vessels to be filled with knowledge by all powerful instructors, but instead authors of our own experience. As an instructor and a critically conscious person, my role is to question the status quo, to realize that there is not a single correct right way to approach education, but the task is constantly evolving and reflecting the individuals we teach. “Critical theorists deny that there is only one credible version of reality. Instead, they insist that to deepen our understanding of the world, we must learn to perceive from as many perspectives as possible.” (Hinchey, 2010). This knowledge has changed the way I think about education, teaching, learning, and life. My mind is open to other points of view and new ideas. This means my work as an educator will never be done. I will never achieve perfection or arrive at the right way to teach, but will eternally strive to do just that. My discipline should be taught in a manner that emphasizes equity, respect, connections among learners and teachers, and active learning. Reflection and inquiry are also critical pieces. Each of these is equally important, and contributes to effective teaching. Inquiry is an integral part of my professional growth as an educator and teacher educator. John Loughran, in his book "Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education" cites Korthagen, 2001, saying “A teacher’s professional learning will be more effective when the learner reflects in details on his or her own experiences” (pg. 136). I continually reflect on my teaching and learning, study my own practice, consider interventions and enhancements, put these ideas into action, and analyze results. This is inquiry. Dana & Yendol-Hoppey (2014) refer to inquiry as a “powerful vehicle for learning and reform” (pg. 12). I find this to be a permanent part of my educational philosophy and practical implementation. I feel it’s important to constantly analyze and reflect on your own work to continue to grow and evolve. “Through the inquiry process, teachers can support with evidence the decisions they make as educators and, subsequently, advocate for particular children, changes in curriculum, and/or changes in pedagogy. Inquiry ultimately emerges as action and results in change.” (pg. 27) By reflecting on my experiences, developing wonderings on how to enhance my practice, putting ideas into practice, evaluating and revising my strategies, and continuing this cycle, I can and do improve my skills in an ongoing manner. An examples of this is my previous study into best practices for pre-service teachers in a post-conference setting using cognitive coaching tools (based on the work of Costa & Garmston, 2002), which I presented at the MOSI inquiry conference in April of 2014. After conducting this research, I was able to collect evidence which demonstrated the effectiveness of the cognitive coaching strategies in this setting, and adjust my post-conferencing strategies to align with what I learned. This has now become a permanent part of my teaching platform, which in turn benefits my pre-service teachers. One of the most important shifts to come in my professional development recently is the emphasis on equity in education and the preparation of teacher educators. Friere, in his well-known book Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1971), discusses at length the need for a more equitable system of education. He references groups of people that are oppressed and those who are the oppressors, and ways to overcome this unjust system. He refers to the traditional method of “banking”, in which students are empty vessels and teachers are the knowledge bringers who fill these vessels with their expertise. This is where I started 23 years ago as a teacher. However, through growth and education, I’ve aligned myself more with Friere’s methods which allow students to have a voice, to share a balance of power with the educator, have a say in what and how they learn, and to engage in dialogue which furthers their own development. “Whereas banking education anesthetizes and inhibits creative power, problem-posing education involves a constant unveiling of reality.” (pg. 68) Learning about this critically conscious theory of education has been transformational in my professional and personal growth. I find myself questioning the status quo of our educational system, and empowered to strive towards beneficial changes where necessary. Evaluation of my teaching, my students, and my program should come from those knowledgeable in the field of supervision and teacher education. It should involve reflection, self-evaluation, and uniform standards. It should include dialogue with stakeholders, and opportunities for growth based on feedback and inquiry results. Peer to peer discourse is also an important aspect of evaluation. An example of this type of evaluating can be seen in my teaching. I ask students to reflect and self-evaluate at the close of each lesson. Sample questions include “What was your level of involvement today? How could you maintain or increase your level of involvement? What ideas that we learned about can you apply to your field experience? Describe and give examples.” These types of questions posed to individuals can be used as summative evidence of student progress, but also as formative evidence to plan future instruction. In evaluating myself, I often dialogue with peers to find out how my lesson plans and implemented strategies compare to theirs, while also taking advice and informal feedback to enhance my learning. This occurs in a formal setting, for example at our course instructors meetings, but also informally through conversations and sought out collaborations. USF ranks in the top 100 best public schools in the 2014 Best Colleges edition of U.S. News & World Report. USF graduate level programs, including education, continue to rank among the nation's 50 best in the U.S. News & World Report graduate school rankings. (Points of Pride.usf.edu. University of South Florida). Our program is continually self-evaluating using nationally approved models, earning awards and accreditations. They invite evaluation from outside sources, and seek to constantly improve. Supervision of pre-service teachers is a critical task. A supervisor is the coach, mentor, support system, teacher, counselor, and ultimately gatekeeper for their students. To be the most effective supervisor possible is essential. You are shaping someone’s career, and in this case, not only their future but the future of every student who enters their classroom for 20 years or more. Thus, I take my role as a supervisor seriously. In agreement with Glickman (1985), I feel the goal of supervision is to improve instruction for my students. There are many ideas on how to best implement this concept. Here are my thoughts. Teacher education is turning more towards strong preparation in the classroom through internships, aligned with university coursework. This clinical experience must be coordinated, so that the skills interns acquire in academic settings are transferred to the classroom practice. Yendol-Hoppey and Franco refer to this as linking “theory and research typically taught at the university to the field” (2014). Research shows that when there is a disconnect between what an intern is taught as part of their university coursework and what they are taught by their mentor teacher in the classroom are not paralleled, the intern sides with the mentor’s view. This is powerful, and can turn out teachers whose skills and strategies are not aligned with current best practices. Therefore, there needs to be a rapport and relationship with open communication between the supervisor, mentor, and intern, to address this historical issue. In order to create this type of relationship, time and energy must be devoted. The supervisor needs to work closely with both the intern and the mentor, and get to know them and their students. The triad of adults ideally works together as a team, to the betterment of each, as a collaborative support system. I agree that supervision can be done to teachers, for teachers, or, as Sergiovanni and Starratt propose, with teachers. (2007, p. 5) Previously, I have been on the “done to teachers” side, unknowingly participating in a system which devalued educators and did not foster the professional growth I envisioned. However, it’s my hope that my recent enhanced education regarding best practices in supervision has led to a positive change. My approach to supervision has undergone a dramatic change. Costa and Garmston (2002) propose that an important approach to supervision is cognitive coaching. As mentioned above, I have come to align my practice with this idea. Many interns, particularly those in their senior year, are ready to take charge of their own professional development. This is especially true if they are engaged in self-study and inquiry. If able, a supervisor can recognize the emotional and professional needs of the intern, recognize their level of development and allow their thoughts and ideas to take center stage. This can manifest itself in a formal observation cycle, which consists of a pre-conference, observation, and post conference. For me, this means allowing the intern to identify the area(s) they would like to focus on, and develop a plan for growth. They identify their own critical incidents (Cogan, 1973). My role is a support facilitator. I answer questions when asked, offer ideas if solicited, listen reflectively, ask probing questions, and collect data during the observation. In the post conference, I bring the data and then let the intern share their insights based on this data as well as their own. In accordance with cognitive coaching strategies, I monitor my vocal patterns and body language, referred to as “paralanguage” by Costa and Garmston (2002, pp. 74-78), as well as refrain from offering unsolicited feedback. This non-directive approach allows the student teacher to direct their learning and reflect upon their teaching, while I listen and support non-judgmentally. Although it can be disquieting to a student who is used to taking a backseat and being a passive participant in their own education, then suddenly finding themselves “visible, accountable, and if you will, vulnerable” (Schulman, 2005, p. 9), this active engagement in the coaching cycle is an important one. However, that being said, if an intern is not at a developmentally ready stage for this type of self-directed learning to occur, then a more directive approach is called for. The directive approach indicates I should take a more active role, providing ideas, feedback, directing and informing the intern of my insights into their teaching proficiencies and deficits. This can occur for as long as there is a need. The ultimate goal, however, is to foster their professional growth until they are able to assume the leadership role in their own development. It’s important as a supervisor to assess the needs of the intern, and adjust to the supervisory approach which best fits their current situation. As stated above, the aim is to go from doing “to” and “for” the teacher to doing “with” the teacher (Sergiovanni and Starratt, 2007). Although my evolution began with the Charlotte Danielson based evaluation model, I have walked far down the path. I still hold that many of her ideas about education, evaluation and supervision hold true. Her four domains: planning and preparation, the classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities, are an accurate summary of the most important points in examining teacher effectiveness (Danielson, 2005). My previous approach was one of an evaluator, as the expert in a partnership with novice teachers. I was trained in the “three to glow on, three to grow on” idea of providing feedback. I didn’t know there was another way! But having studied the seminal pieces in the field of supervision, I feel that my repertoire has grown dramatically, and thus so have my skills as an effective supervisor. References: Cogan, M. (1973). Clinical supervision. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Costa, A. & Garmston, R. (2002). The mediator's toolbox. Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools (2nd Ed.). Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon. Dana, N. F. & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2009). The reflective educator's guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press. Danielson, C. (2005). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching (2nd Ed.)Princeton, New Jersey: Danielson Group, Inc. Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder. Hinchey, P.H. (2010). Finding freedom in the classroom: A practical introduction to critical theory (revised edition). New York: Peter Lang. Glickman, C. (1985). Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Approach . Boston: Allyn and Bacon Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education: Understanding Teaching and Learning About Teaching. London: Routledge. Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2007, p. 5). Supervision: A redefinition (8th Ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Shulman, L. (2005). Signature Pedagogies In The Professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52-59. Svinicki, M., & McKeachie, W. J. (2014). McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (14th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Yendol-Hoppey, D. & Franco, Y. (2014). In search of signature pedagogy for PDS teacher education: A review of articles published in school-university partnerships. School-University Partnerships, 7(1), 17-34.
0 Comments
Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education: Understanding Teaching and Learning About Teaching. London: Routledge.
Chapter 5 of John Loughran’s book, Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education, is titled “A shared language: Conceptualizing knowledge for a pedagogy of teacher education. Episteme is defined as “expert knowledge of a particular problem derived from scientific understandings” and “cognitive in nature.” (pg. 63). In contrast, phronesis is “practical wisdom; it is knowledge of the particularities of a situation. It is knowledge of the concrete not the abstract.” (pg. 64). These terms set the stage for further discussion of the exploration of teacher education programs and the problems that plague them. The author points out a theory to practice disconnect, arguing that there needs to be cohesion in the form of common language and knowledge. Specifically, he proposes the use of “principles, paradoxes, tensions, axioms, summary statements, and assertions” (pg. 80). Various assumptions and program principles are outlined, with the theme being a need for a unified front in programs that prepare teachers. The ideas of self-study, reflection, and teacher inquiry are also included. I specifically enjoyed the description of the program principles developed by Northfield and Gunstone (1997). I agreed with their philosophy of education programs which understands that students arrive with prior experiences which should be considered when implementing instruction. This prior knowledge influences how new ideas are absorbed. Additionally, collaborating with peers is an important part of learning. Most importantly, the instruction at the university should model the types of learning experiences being taught. It’s not enough to tell students use active learning and collaborative strategies, you have to show this in your class. I go back to the co-teaching I did with a professor who week after week taught about active learning by displaying a PowerPoint slide and lecturing while her students sat still and silent for an hour. The dichotomy was obvious and students learned more by what she did than what she said. I think of the Emerson quote, “Your actions speak so loudly I cannot hear what you’re saying.” We need to be that exemplary example for our pre-service teachers, or the message is meaningless. Svinicki, M. & and McKeachie, W. J. (2014) McKeachie’s teaching tips: strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (14th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Ch. 18, Teaching Large Classes (You can still get active learning!) Chapter 18 is another well written, practical guide for teacher educators working at the university or college level. This section explains how to handle important considerations such as using blended learning as an alternative strategy, meaning portions of the class can be held face to face, supplemented by online learning. These online experiences can take the form of online discussions, assessments, portfolios, podcasts, and using websites as resources. Facilitating active learning comes next, with ideas on how to manage large groups while still facilitating discussion and dialogue based learning, which is supported by research as resulting in greater learning than the more passive lecture format. Here again, technology is seen as enhancing instruction. Further, writing can also be incorporated, but in a more truncated format, such as the minute paper, quick summaries, social media related sharing (tweets and posts) or half sheet responses. Calibrated peer review is seen as a way to provide feedback and teacher feedback to groups who share the same ideas or questions. Student anonymity is discussed, and ways to enhance the personal connection with students, even in very large classes. The main idea is that every effort on the part of the teacher supports this goal, even if not all students are reached. Methods such as coffee discussions, online office hours, notes to students, feedback on their work, expressions of concern when not doing well, and encouraging students to form study groups have shown some success. Above all, being organized and planning ahead is essential when teaching a large course. Test preparation, having an online communication method and a class website are critical. Training and supervising teaching assistants is considered, with concrete tips about planning together in weekly meetings and observing classes is advised. Designing courses for active learning is still possible with a large group, though it can take more advanced planning and reliance on technology. Not having taught a very large group of students at the university, the connections I made were of being a student myself many years ago. I recall being one anonymous kid in a class of 200, not knowing the professors name and them certainly not knowing mine. As a good student, I was able to still thrive in these industrial type settings, though I can’t say the learning was significant or permanent. I remember being shocked at the size of these classes and that the professors never know if you attended or not. I don’t want my students to ever feel this way. I pride myself on getting to know each and every student in my classes, and developing a personal yet professional relationship with them. Having taken online courses as part of my master’s degree, I see that there can be a more personal connection if the professor makes the effort, but the connection again is largely anonymous and devoid of personal connection which can enhance learning. Svinicki, M., & McKeachie, W.J. (2014). McKechie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (14th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Ch. 17 Technology and Teaching written by Erping Zhu & Matthew Kaplan, University of Michigan Technology can be used to enhance teaching and learning when aligned with course goals and teaching philosophy. Zhu and Kaplan examine the role of technology through three questions: How will technology enhance teaching and learning? What considerations go into teaching with technology? What is the impact of technology on teaching and learning? Under the heading of how technology can enhance teaching and learning, the authors stress the opportunities now available through online resources such as class blogs, wikis, posted study guides, notes, primary sources, art and design, simulations, social networks, PowerPoints, and webinars. Email and real time discussions also offer opportunities for enhanced learning opportunities, when used correctly. Technology is not a guarantee that learning will occur, but do provide resources which can open the door for further opportunities. Within this, “teaching with technology involves four major components: the students, the instructor, course content, and technology tools”. (pg. 235) The students and instructor are obvious pieces, with course content including specific subjects and goals, and technology as it is accessible and relevant to the learning and the learner. A warning is sent to teachers to beware the trap of teacher centered learning when using software such as PowerPoints or clickers, or watching lectures and reading electronically. The authors go into more detail for certain technology tools, such as clickers, blogs, wikis, lecture capture, course management systems, course websites, and student technology projects. The tips are practical and easy to read. I was able to connect to the reading in many ways, including the role of the instructor in using the technology. There are areas I would love to incorporate into my teaching but do not feel skilled enough to do so confidently. For example, I would like to use Smart board or Promethean board technology more often. I attended a training in the iTeach lab about this, which was amazing. But not having actually done it myself, I hesitate. I know most of my students are well versed in this technology, and I don’t want to appear technically illiterate. I know I should seek their help and co-teach with one or two of them, and I do plan to do so. But it’s a leap of faith to trust them and trust myself in making this a permanent part of my repertoire. Would it enhance learning? Yes, I think it would. The interactive and engaging nature of this technology is alluring. I think my students would enjoy it and it could increase engagement and motivation. Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education: Understanding Teaching
and Learning About Teaching. London: Routledge. Chapter 3 Chapter 3 of the book, Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education is “Teaching: a problematic enterprise”. It talks about the complexity of teaching and of teaching about teaching. The author references Schon, 1983, describing teaching as an “indeterminate swampy zone”. The chapter outlines the difficulties teacher educators face when trying to hone their craft and engage in continued reflection and inquiry related to their own practices. Of particular note to me was the author’s reference to noticing, unpacking, examining, analyzing, and understanding teacher’s knowledge. These themes are examined further the work of Dr. R. West Burns, in her pedagogical framework for teacher educators. Loughran aligns with the idea that novice teachers may not have the skills to dissect what is observed, and that a skilled teacher educator may need to point out and discuss the elements that went in to making a lesson look easy. Additionally, all teachers bring their own ideas and experiences with them and this can influence what they notice and what they consider to be problematic and worthy of further investigation. Loughran talks about modeling for pre-service teachers, and that this in itself is not enough. The modelled teaching must be examined and critiqued, with the instructor allowing themselves to be vulnerable and open to this process. “Modeling carries with it the hope that as students of teaching see their teacher educators teach in this way that they will be encouraged to risk doing the same.” (pgs. 39-40). My connection to this is in the two graduate classes I’m taking this semester. Both my professors, Dr. Burns and Dr. Jacobs, don’t just talk the talk, so to speak, they walk the walk. They model the type of teaching they have us read about and discuss, showing us what it looks like in practice. They apply the strategies and concepts, allowing us to experience first-hand how we can implement these ideas in our own classrooms. Conversely, I have seen non-examples of this at the university as well. There are professors who teach inquiry, self-study, collaboration and student based learning, while doing so in a traditional lecture PowerPoint format, what Friere refers to as the “banking method” (Friere, 1968). Loughran quotes Jason and Karl, colleagues of Dinkleman, saying “it drives me crazy when people employ poor educational practices to try to communicate what good educational practices are” (interview 9/9/99, pg. 38). I can relate! It does indeed make me crazy to see this. I want the best for my students, but it’s outside my boundaries to intervene in another teacher’s classroom. I can only hope to make my own modelled practices a better example of what we hope our pre-service teachers will carry out into their classrooms. Another idea that caught my eye was the concept of management versus control. The author talks about the difference between the two, in that one can manage without having to control. Teacher learning is referred to as a complex system. It is “important in thinking about coming to understand the complexity of teaching for it is in managing the many inter-relationships in a pedagogic situation that the skill, knowledge, ability and professional autonomy of teachers comes to the fore” (pg. 35). I think many teachers confuse control with management, and if an educator is on the “edge of chaos”, as Loughran puts it, that they are not employing “good” teaching practices. Principals who would come around and judge the quality of your teaching based on the silence of your students were a particular point of contention to me in the past. As research shows, students who are passive recipients of knowledge are less likely to master the content than those that engage in direct active exploration and dialogue. To be truly effective, we as teachers have to not only analyze our own practices, but be willing to step outside our comfort zone, try something new, develop new practices, and challenge existing routines. Change and evolution are not easy, but are a part of good teaching. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
April 2016
Categories
All
|