My Learning Philosophy
I Identify as None of These
My ideas about how we learn have shifted over time. When I was young, I considered myself a staunch Behaviorist, as I thought desirable behavior is what mattered most. My Constructivist ideology was that students should be allowed to explore their learning and teachers should not act like the proverbial “sage on the stage.” Most recently, I became fascinated with Cognitivism or teaching students how to think. I finally realized that trying to accommodate one, or all of these into my style of teaching is wrong. Invariably, concerning myself with how I impart information is wrong; the true point of consideration is how I cease to be a purveyor of knowledge and be a facilitator of acquiring knowledge.
The skills necessary to be an outstanding facilitator includes flexibility, and a spirit of community. Flexibility refers to the ability to be open to change and admit when a strategy is not working for the students best interest. The facilitator is always looking for something new, rather than endlessly recycling one mediocre strategy. Flexibility is also a key requirement in being a good facilitator of learning since no one stratagem can satisfy all the learning needs of scholars. A facilitators flexibility will allow for adapting to change while maintaining teacher dignity and control. This creates a growth mindset in scholars to help them be a success. Teachers are then facilitating learning, and teaching behavior, with the use of non-verbal instruction to achieve authentic learning by the scholars.
To the experienced educational leader, it may seem counterintuitive to identify with all three main theories; however, Aristotle would disagree. If Aristotle can effectively argue that combining ethos, pathos, and logos is a stronger argument; the principle of combination can certainly be applied in this case. Each theory has its strengths and weakness. The strengths of each theory are complimented when played out in the classroom. Behaviorism is criticized for teaching routine and processes of the Industrial Revolution; conversely Behaviorism could also be used to teach the process of thinking about a content. Likewise, Constructivism is often criticized for its low structure atmosphere to encourage creativity. The “Glitter & Glue” practices could very well be effective if behaviors of professionalism are encourage and the academic skill needed are clearly articulated. Cognitivism is the one theory for which ardent adherents to Constructivism express a fair amount of revulsion, because it calls for a memorization and storage processes of content. This is often criticized for simply calling for the storage of facts without any higher level application of said knowledge; however this could simply be rectified by implementing some Constructivists practices. Ultimately, the strength of one theory is demonstrated in how well it is integrated with others.
A Learning Philosophy is fundamentally different from a teaching philosophy in that a teaching philosophy assumes only one fixed point of view. My learning philosophy is predicated on the principle belief that not one of these teaching strategies in and of itself are the best, but collaboratively all of them are in the best interest of the scholar. The only absolute truth is that stubbornly clinging to one method, idea, or philosophy is a road to insufficient education for the scholar. Learners are complete in their incompleteness. It’s the paradox that makes the least likely candidate the most successful. Consider the story of Erin Gruwell as a successful heterodox. She refused to be a mere behaviorist by just rote teaching, or pointless projects. Erin did whatever it took to save one student. That is what a true learning philosophy looks like.
Annotated Bibliography
Dweck, C. S. (2017). Mindset: Changing the way you think to fulfill your potential. Robinson.
Noted educational theorist, Carol Dweck, explains why mindset determines success. When applying the principles of growth mindset to learning, it becomes clear that learning is a lifetime rather than one class.
Fosnot, C. T. (2005). Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice. Teachers College Press.
This is a survey text book over the tenets and practical applications of Constructivism. A facilitator looking to increase the level of engagement in their instructional setting should look for a copy of this book.
Gruwell, E. (1999). The Freedom Writers Diary. Broadway Books/New york.
This converts the autobiographical story of Erin Gruwell and her work at an incredibly low-performing inner city school. Her logic-defying combinations of the three major learning theories is quite literally legendary. This is the primary influence on my learning and teaching style.
Lemov, D., Hernandez, J., & Kim, J. (2016). Teach like a Champion. Jossey-Bass.
Teach Like a Champion contains a variety of Cognitive, Constructivist, and Behaviorists ideas.. This is a tremendous resource of new teachers.
Piaget, J. (1969). The Psychology of a Child. Basic Books.
Piaget outlines his ideas on learning and development. It influences both Cognitive and Constructivist ideas. It is actually required reading ti be a teacher in some districts.
Skinner, burrhus rederic. (1974). About behaviorism. Random house.
This source from Skinner explains the core tenants of this idea. It shows the future evolution of the style.
Sprick, R. S. (2021). Discipline in the secondary classroom: A positive approach to behavior management. Jossey-Bass.
This contains a variety of Cognitive, Constructivist, and Behaviorists ideas.. This is a tremendous resource of new teachers.