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 (PSTs), K-5 students in these classes, and in each of the PSTs’ future classrooms. The PSTs 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 children, I want to go back to the source and make a difference proactively with pre-service teachers.
The importance of learning
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. This has been an area for growth to me as a teacher at the university, as evidenced by the feedback received from my pre-service teachers over the past 3 semesters.
The authors also write about 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, constructing and reconstructing an equitable reality. As Friere writes in his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed (2000), “Implicit in the banking concept is the assumption of a dichotomy between human beings and the world: a person is merely in the world, not with the world or with others; the individual is spectator, not re-creator.” I believe I am passing this on to my pre-service teachers, and thus passing the torch to a new generation of teachers. I see evidence of this in their blogs, their conversations, and their lessons.
Critical pedagogy, reflection and inquiry
My discipline should be taught in a manner that emphasizes equity, respect, connections among learners and teachers, and active learning. 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, p 53). 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.
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 ow 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, p. 12) refer to inquiry is a “powerful vehicle for learning and reform”. 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. Dana & Yendol-Hoppey (2014, p. 57) go on to add, “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.”
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.
Supervision and evaluation as a critical theorist
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 PSTs, 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 PSTs 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 K-5 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.
Supervision of pre-service teachers is a critical task. A supervisor is the coach, mentor, support system, teacher, counselor, and ultimately gatekeeper for their PSTs. 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 PSTs. 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 PST 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.
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 (PSTs), K-5 students in these classes, and in each of the PSTs’ future classrooms. The PSTs 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 children, I want to go back to the source and make a difference proactively with pre-service teachers.
The importance of learning
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. This has been an area for growth to me as a teacher at the university, as evidenced by the feedback received from my pre-service teachers over the past 3 semesters.
The authors also write about 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, constructing and reconstructing an equitable reality. As Friere writes in his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed (2000), “Implicit in the banking concept is the assumption of a dichotomy between human beings and the world: a person is merely in the world, not with the world or with others; the individual is spectator, not re-creator.” I believe I am passing this on to my pre-service teachers, and thus passing the torch to a new generation of teachers. I see evidence of this in their blogs, their conversations, and their lessons.
Critical pedagogy, reflection and inquiry
My discipline should be taught in a manner that emphasizes equity, respect, connections among learners and teachers, and active learning. 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, p 53). 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.
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 ow 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, p. 12) refer to inquiry is a “powerful vehicle for learning and reform”. 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. Dana & Yendol-Hoppey (2014, p. 57) go on to add, “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.”
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.
Supervision and evaluation as a critical theorist
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 PSTs, 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 PSTs 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 K-5 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.
Supervision of pre-service teachers is a critical task. A supervisor is the coach, mentor, support system, teacher, counselor, and ultimately gatekeeper for their PSTs. 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 PSTs. 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 PST 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.