Philosophy of Teaching
-
Upload
jeff-thomas -
Category
Documents
-
view
29 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Philosophy of Teaching
Running Head: PHILOSOPHY OF TRAINING 1
EDAE 620
Philosophy of Training
Jeff Thomas
Colorado State University - Fort Collins
PHILOSPHY OF TRAINING 2
Introduction
I had a moment of clarity a few months into my first job as an instructor when I was
training Microsoft Word. There was a lot of material to cover with the new users, so I wrote all
the topics on a chalkboard and mentioned that we would cover them through the next two
days. I made a point of marking each topic with a checkmark as we finished each one. I
successfully got through all the material.
That should not have been my definition of success.
I received my student evaluations once the course concluded. While the scores
indicated that the training went well, the comments belied otherwise. There were people who
were frustrated at the speed with which we moved through the material (some blamed
themselves). Others felt the speed was fine, but felt the exercises weren’t appropriate for their
position. Some users who felt that other material should have been included. The evaluations
effectively forced me to re-evaluate myself.
Philosophy of Training
There are three primary take-aways from that experience that are core to my philosophy today:
1) Training sessions are a safe space for discovery and discussion. With some relief, my
PALS score was high in the area of climate building; it is something I’ve long considered
an important component of successful training. Brockett (2015) mentions the
importance of a “safe space where learners can explore and try on different
perspectives” (p. 38). Maintaining such an open, friendly environment is deeply
important to me. Even with topics as straightforward as software functionalities, there is
PHILOSPHY OF TRAINING 3
still trepidation and even resistance. Performing mail merges, formatting nested tables,
building tables of contents – these are complex, multi-step intimidating word functions.
Providing the time and room to allow students to be active learners that access the
software with mock documents frees them to click around, make mistakes, and
generate errors without fear of transgression. Providing demonstration serves as a
model that they can follow and allows for questions as we go through the material.
Dewey (1938) discussed the concept of freedom and by extension, the inhibiting nature
of rote, controlled learning. Of all the comments I received in those evaluations, the
ones where students blamed themselves for their inability to keep up with the class
were probably the most disheartening. Not only did their comments indicate that they
did not learn, they were possibly disincentivized to try another course. Further, it added
unnecessary anxiety to the classroom atmosphere. It was a critical learning experience
for me. Discussion became a crucial component to make sure everyone was clear about
the functionality of the software.
2) Let the students dictate the material. Students in that initial course indicated that they
had left the session learning things they might not find applicable to their job. I
redoubled my efforts to support a generative strategy as to how and why my students
would use certain features within the software. I realized my courses should be more
job-focused than just merely point-and-click classes. Building on that, in this past year,
I’ve been most informed by Dewey’s (1938) thoughts on the criteria of experience – that
experiences serve to build on one another - a building block provided today becomes a
PHILOSPHY OF TRAINING 4
recollection for the next building block of tomorrow. This idea does not mean the
training sessions become a free-for-all completely directed by the learner, but that their
shared experiences inform me as to what tools in the software will be most salient to
them. In practice, I engage students by asking them what their job functions require,
what their own objectives are, and what their familiarity with the software is. Rather
than use the preset lesson plan from which I had previously steadfastly refused to
deviate, my classes evolved to include more collaboration. If attendees mentioned that
they needed more help with creating large queries, we refocused the course to attend
to that functionality. If there wasn’t a strong need for a topic, I disregarded it.
3) I am a learner within my own session. Brockett discusses how the experience that a
learner is willing to share can be a valuable resource (2015). Not only does it slant the
training a specific direction, but it can provoke ideas that may not have been discussed
otherwise. Students may provide information about the software I hadn’t previously
known or considered. For example, a student might discuss an error they received in
the system, and provide a new workaround. Davis (2012) talks about the important of
respecting the learners and encouraging their feedback simply because of the breadth
of information they can bring into the session. I see respect not just as a matter of
professionalism, but of basic human interaction and my training sessions are the better
for it.
PHILOSPHY OF TRAINING 5
References
Brockett, R. G. (2015), Teaching Adults: A Practical Guide for NEW TEACHERS. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, B. G. (2012), Encouraging Student Participation Retrieved from http://teaching.berkeley.edu/encouraging-student-participation.
Dewey, J. (1938), Experience and Education. New York, NY: Touchstone.
Lieb, S. (1991). Principles of adult learning, Phoenix, AZ: Vision – South Mountain Community College, Retrieved from http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/adults-2.htm
Tate, M. L. (2012), Sit and Get Won’t Get Dendrites: 20 Professional Learning Strategies That Engage the Adult Brain: Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Publishers, Inc.