Masters Unit: Learners and Learning.
Ros Hurford January 2007
How has my own development as
a learner influenced the changes I have made in the way I teach, and how has
this affected the learning of my pupils?
Introduction
In this assignment I want to outline
briefly the course that my
personal development as a learner has taken, how my understanding of learners
and learning has been influenced and formed, and how this ongoing personal and
professional development drives
the changes I make in my teaching methods with the aim of enhancing the
learning of my pupils.
I intend to examine my own learning
experiences and look critically at the theories that have fascinated and
intrigued me since I became curious about how we learn and how learning can be
promoted in others.
Finally I want to look at the way in
which my embodied knowledge about learning and learners directly influences the
way I teach, and whether that in turn genuinely impacts on the children's
learning. The issue that concerns me is whether I actually teach in a way that
is in harmony with my learning theory or whether my teaching approach satisfies
other exterior pressures, but actually fails to maximise the children's
learning and develop their view of themselves as learners.
What is Learning? Where did my
own Living Theory of Learning Originate?
Everything was new and everything was exciting.
Very different from school. She wanted ,suddenly and quite desperately, to
learn. Cheek, M. (2006)
Look at any dictionary definition of
learning and it will focus on the development of skills, ability or knowledge,
gaining information, being able to do something that previously you could not
do. As Marianne, a young disillusioned wife with no qualifications discovers in
Mavis Cheek's book, learning is not just something that happens within the
confines of a statutory education. Her experience is sadly not unusual, as
conversation with too many adults has confirmed. This is typical of the
'shallow' learning described by John Burnham-West (2006) as 'adequate for a
world, which operated on high levels of compliance and dependence in the work
place and society.' (p6) Our world is no longer such a place, and will be even
less so in the future.
This is where my own learning theory began. From personal
experience, from reading and discussing the personal experiences of others, it
appears that often the learning we remember best, or are most enthusiastic
about, is not that which occurs during the time of statutory education. My
concern is not that we learn beyond school; indeed, I am a firm advocate of
lifelong learning, rather that school learning seems to lack the close links to
'real' life or a sense of purposefulness. If we are not engaged in learning
anything of value to us in school, then what are we achieving, and why is the
end result often a lack of enthusiasm for learning?
I agree with Csikszentmihalyi (2002) when he states that:
'Ideally, the end of an
extrinsically applied education should be the start of an education that is
motivated intrinsically.'
(p141)
This is echoed again in the analysis of learning by
John Burnham-West (2006) and I feel there is much to be gained from his ideas
of deeper and profound learning levels, the former being concerned with the 'creation of
knowledge, which the learner is able to relate to their own experience and use
to understand new experiences and contexts' (p8) and the latter with being 'an
authentic human being who is able to accept responsibility for our own
destinies'.(P9)
It
frequently appears that much of what happens within the school day is not
beyond the shallow level of learning, influenced by the demands of curriculum.
My own wish is to make a desire to learn intrinsic in my pupils.
Influences in the formulation of my own theory.
My own theory of learning comes from
a variety of sources. Some I remember with clarity and the impact they made on
me, others are vaguer. Indeed this is one of the difficulties in defining your
own learning theory. Because learning implies an element of growth and change,
a theory of learning must therefore be a living and growing theory; a complex
and intricately vibrant jigsaw where the picture is likely to undergo constant
change as new knowledge or understanding is added.
The only thing of which I am sadly
certain, is, that on leaving teacher training college in 1975, I knew in
outline the theories of Piaget, Skinner and others, popular at that time, but I
hadn't learned how to apply or make use of these theories in my own practice.
They rather resembled the braking distances 'learned' for your driving test;
accurate recall of information but only of academic interest until the day when
you have to avoid an accident.
Occasionally I would catch glimpses of Piaget's stages of development,
see the conditioned reaction to the school dinner bell, but it didn't appear to
connect to the learning that went on in the classroom; largely the transferring
of my knowledge to the minds of the children – or not..
This was probably typical for the
time. Interest in learning theories and what happens in the classroom have only
recently received more central attention.
Since then my awareness of how
learning takes place has gone through many developmental phases. Initially the
range of different theories was interesting but without a common thread between
them.
As part of my professional
development in 1996 I took a course in mental maths strategies. Here I met
Vygotsky'ls zone of proximal development and the work of Bruner, involving
scaffolding, and began to realise that I was developing my own ways of learning
and an understanding of how children learn. I was already using a form of
scaffolding, and this continues today in that I dislike limiting children by
predetermining by worksheet the level they may achieve.
By extending my own knowledge I was
increasing my own awareness of myself as a learner. This was the start of
realising that learning could be tailored to suit the individual much more than
I had been aware of, and that learners have different preferred styles of
learning such as promoted by the work of Howard Gardner. That gave rise to a
much heightened awareness of using visual and kinaesthetic teaching strategies
to a greater degree than I had previously. The focus of Gardener's learning
styles has recently returned as an issue with personalised education and the
introduction of the SEAL programme at school. I feel, however, that this is an
area to develop further in the future in collaboration with the children,
leading to a greater involvement by them in the planning of their own learning
activities.
Also in harmony with what I was
already trying to develop was Bloom's taxonomy of questioning, which found in
me a fertile ground in which to grow, with the realisation that I was already
tending to ask higher order questions of my pupils, if only because the lower
ones appeared to be unstimulating, and the more interesting responses required
a development in my questioning.
I could list countless more theories
and theorists whose writings have influenced me. Edward De Bono with his
lateral thinking, Richard Dunne with the 'Big Idea', Tony Buzan and his work on
mind mapping and memory – ideal for a newly aware visual, adult learner
– Guy Claxton with his ideas about lifelong learning and working in D
mode when trying to solve a problem, Robert Fisher with thinking skills and the
work on teaching philosophy by Matthew Lippmann.
In Building Learning Power (2002)
Claxton explains that::
'Being a good learner is not just a
matter of learning a few techniques...It is about the whole person: their
attitudes, values, self-image and relationships, as well as their skills and strategies.'
(p15)
The various theories appear at first
to have no common link and I am only too aware that in describing my work as an
educator, I have largely focused on myself as a learner.
The significance has only recently begun to 'come together'
– the link between all these different theories is myself
– my own development as an adult learner, my awareness of how I learned
as a child, or how I was expected to learn, my constantly ongoing learning, the
sense of understanding myself as a learner , sometimes with great clarity and
at other times with a bewilderment about the whole process, and how, with all
this hotchpotch of theories and intuitions ( I call them that because sometimes
I can find no 'authority' to validate my theory and am grateful for the
continuous validation from my peers at the Tuesday evening Bath University
sessions and colleagues who point
me in the direction of research that is already one step ahead of me) I can
help the next generations become good learners – how I can enthuse them
for learning in it's widest concept, make them efficient and robust learners
and travel with them as a co-learner in their life learning journey. Each new
theory, as I come across it, is tested out against my own internal learning
awareness and embodied theories. It is in this that I agree with Dweck (2006)
when she writes about developing a growth mindset:
How can growth-minded teachers be so
selfless?...the answer is.. they love to learn. And teaching is a wonderful way
to learn. About people and how they tick. About what you teach. About yourself.
And about life.... (p195)
So how do I understand
learning and learners?
Learning, in my experience, has an
emotional base. To learn requires some type of motivation, positive or
negative. We learn for pleasure, because our curiosity is aroused, because we
want to achieve a specific goal or because we want to avoid something
unpleasant or painful.
We learn skills and we learn facts.
In life situations the skills outlast the memory of facts, unless these are
rehearsed at intervals. And yet the curriculum is still largely content and
'memory' based.
'Our
capacity to learn is the result of an incredibly complex equation of which
neural processing is only a part. It would be difficult to produce a list of
all the factors influencing learning without listing everything informing who
we are as people.' (Burnham-West,
2006, p14)
There is no simple definition of what I understand as
learning or being a learner. It involves too many factors, as John Burnham-West
indicates. For me today the children do not arrive in my class as empty
containers waiting for me to fill them with information. Their 'learning' is
not limited to what I can teach them.
Although the curriculum is largely content based, and
I wish them to succeed in the system, even if I would wish the system changed,
what I see as successful 'learning' is not restricted to the memorization of
facts. The aspects of my job that I see as most vital, and most rewarding, are
those that enable the children to develop the skills and attitudes of good
learners, such as those outlined by Costa (2006), echoed by many other learning
theorists, and in my experience of great importance.
Many of these skills are proposed by
the 2020 Review Group, an example of which can be found on p10 of the report,
which is an encouraging development in education.
What is the issue or area of
conflict?
Much of what I teach is content
driven and chosen for me by government, local authority or school management.
Whilst I accept that I have to conform to these requirements, and would do the
children a disservice within a framework of testing, standards and results, I
also feel it is important to teach how to learn, how to love learning and what
makes a good learner. The research project carried out by Hart et al (2004) in
Learning without Limits identified the same type of conflict. Part of their
research focused on how:
'Teachers reconciled their own values
and beliefs about ability and learning...the compromises they had to make and the
ways they found of creatively mediating external expectations and
requirements.' (p47)
I am keen to avoid labelling or
limiting the children by ability. The current, to my mind, obsession with
differentiated planning causes me endless difficulties. The problem is not so
much the concept of suitable, differentiated work, but rather the constraints
involved in having to prove it. By
grouping children according to a previous test result you deny them the chance
to succeed or grow at their own rate. Maybe we cannot excel at everything, but
how will we know if we don't try, and sometimes all that is needed is an expert
to assist, a 'master' to work with or slightly longer in which to reach that
point. As Hart (2004) states:
The new emphasis on target setting
and value added measures of achievement have made it increasingly difficult for
teachers who reject the fixed view of measurable
ability to hold on to their principles, since they are continually being
required to act as if they subscribe to it' (p9)
What is it that I want to
achieve, why and how am I going about it
In Building Learning Power (2002)
Guy Claxton states that:
'Teachers can promote learning power
through a) what they explicitly value and discuss with the whole class; b) how
they talk to groups and individuals about their learning and achievement; c)
the activities they select; and d) what they themselves model about learning.'
(p69)
This was very much a starting place
for me. I decided that if I wanted the children to be good learners, with my
understanding of what that required in Claxton's identification of resilience,
resourcefulness, reflectiveness and reciprocity, then I was going to have to
teach this alongside the current 'official' curriculum. These were the core
features of the Building Learning Power, to which soon were added, following an
increase in my own learning, the necessity of being physically 'ready' and able
to learn, the Crucial C's of Lew & Bettner (1998), and the emotional and
social aspects of the SEAL programme. None of these are in opposition to
another, although there are many areas where they overlap. It may well be that
in the future my area of conflict
will be eased as the curriculum becomes more skills based and the recent focus
on learning becomes the main purpose, not an added extra. The future, in this
aspect, is promising to address crucial learning issues which have been
sidelined for a long time since the initial introduction of a National
Curriculum, and particularly Key Stage testing.
My initial approach to this was to
create informative displays of learning styles and what makes a good learner,
which I then discussed with the children during circle times and they use daily
to identify their own feelings. This is still ongoing as unpicking the complex
ideas have worked best by a gradual drip feed into discussions. Using P4C and circle times to develop
social skills and emotional literacy has greatly helped with this. The link
between successful learning and emotional intelligence is well documented,
particularly by Goleman (2005), Claxton (2002) and Dweck (2006).
As Sharp (2003) states:
We need to understand our emotions
to be effective learners' (p3)
I also felt it was important to make
learning skills explicit as well as the content learning objective for lessons,
so the children were aware that I was looking for skills such as co-operation
or perseverance, depending on the task. This is still very much in the planning
stage, as I share my ideas with colleagues and the children I teach. For me,
involving the pupils in a decision about how I marked their work was an
important step for me, and marked a definite move away from seeing myself as
the source of all they needed to know, to a co-learner with more developed
skills.
As a result of reading Dweck (2006)
and her ideas about growth mindset, my teaching methods have taken on yet
another new angle in that I am now praising and rewarding the processes and
attitudes, rather than academic achievement, for as she states:
'The belief that cherished qualities
can be developed creates a passion for learning....The passion for stretching
yourself and sticking to it, even (or especially) when it's not going well, is
the hallmark of the growth mindset.' (p7)
The pupils are responding well to
this, less confident children appear to me to be showing greater confidence in
trying difficult tasks, and 'able' confident children who find 'failure'
difficult are taking more risks.
Involving the Children in
their own Learning: examples of what I have tried and the responses.
1.Writing Plays
My current class is a lively, vocal
group of Year 4s. They are mostly able to work co-operatively in groups and
have good social skills. For literacy they are set with the partner class by
ability. This year I have been teaching the upper ability set for the first
time. My initial response was delight in having children who could write and
spell, thus opening up a greater opportunity for independent work than I had
experienced previously with the lower ability children.
In the last couple of weeks of term
before Christmas 2006 we had to cover play script writing on our curriculum
plan. I knew from experience that this was a unit the children enjoyed,
particularly when it involved an opportunity to perform.
Their motivation was likely to be
naturally good and I didn't want to plan anything that would curb their
enthusiasm. Torn between what I
felt would be a good learning opportunity for the children and the pressures of
literacy target and planning sheets, which frequently stunt my own creativity
as a teacher, I opted for the former.
The first couple of days were given
over to reading, analysing structure and performing plays that I had written for
them. In this way I was able to present myself as a model writer involved in
the unit beyond teaching, thus enforcing the idea of adult as co-learner. The
planning sheet looked rather bare for the week as the work was going to be
largely skill orientated; dictated by the children, rather than content led by
the teacher, and this doesn't fit neatly into the planning format boxes. For me
this was unnerving but exciting. Without the list of learning objectives and
details could I prove that the children had been learning, even if my embodied
intuition told me they were?
Having set the task of writing a
play scripts I then found I was virtually redundant as a 'teacher'. Instead I
became a convenient dictionary, audience and co-performer – the children
were inviting me to become part of their creativity. There was a very real
sense of being a fellow learner, albeit one with greater experience. When I
shared this feeling with colleagues they were confirmed my sense of having
handed the responsibility for learning to the children as being a mark of
success in teaching. For when the children no longer need to be told every step
to take, they are on the road to autonomy as learners.
Usually fidgets in lessons these two were
enthusiastically on task the whole time.
Looking later at the photographs I
had taken, and in discussing them with the Tuesday group, I was struck by the
looks of concentration and motivation on the children's faces. If the session
had been videoed then you would also have had the animated body language and
buzz of enthusiastic activity. Their response was exactly what I wanted to see
– and would love to see in every lesson - a love for what they were
doing.
At the end of this I congratulated
them on how they had worked; their co-operation, enthusiasm and creativity and
asked them why they thought they had responded like this. Their response was
that it had been better than 'normal' lessons because they could choose what to
do and the work came from them, rather than being imposed by me. We then
discussed how to keep that learning spirit alive, with the result that they
chose to use ICT Literacy time to work in detail on improving and editing a
piece of work per term, starting with their plays.
Because it had been such a motivated
learning experience I shared the photographs with the children and asked them
to identify why I might think they were behaving like 'good learners'. They too
identified the same qualities of concentration, happy enthusiasm, co-operation
and not even noticing the pictures being taken. They were very much in
Csikszentmihalyi's sense of flow.
The most overwhelming response was how involved they were in
what they were doing – the emotional engagement with the task, the sense
of ownership they had. They were demonstrating many of the qualities of good
learners outlined by Claxton (2002) in Building Learning Power. They were
demonstrating to me that they did not constantly need to have their learning
provided by me, but that given the skills input could then turn to their own
creativity and control their own learning.
Claxton (1998) puts this so
powerfully when he states that:
'Within the learning curriculum what
matters most is not (reinventing) the wheel but the inventing – and the
strengthening of the powers of invention which occurs through being allowed and
encouraged to invent.' (p220)
The issue with this is that in many
ways teachers are encouraged to stick to official guidelines and 'play safe' in
what they try to achieve in the classroom. There has been immense pressure to
teach 'content' to the exclusion of skills and attitudes because of the
dominance of national testing and the power of statistics. Yet, the focus on
content ignores an important area of creativity and the emotional, personal
link between the learner, what they are learning and the quality of their
learning.
2. Philosophy and P4C
Robert Fisher and Matthew Lipmann
are strong advocates of teaching philosophy to children, highlighting the
valuable skills the children develop as a result, and how this impacts on other
areas of the curriculum by developing the children as learners. Having
developed my own ability to facilitate philosophy sessions I have begun to use
them more in other areas of the curriculum in an attempt to blend my own learning
theories with necessary curriculum restraints.
One development from this which has
just been given 'official' management blessing to be tested, is the use of
philosophy sessions once a week during the designated literacy lesson to
enhance the speaking and listening capability of the children and increase
their ability to investigate, question, analyse and look for hidden layers of
understanding.
The long term results have yet to
happen but the attitude and response of the children has been very enthusiastic
and encouraging. The TA supporting an EBD child was amazed at the sophisticated
level of questioning, and the involvement and enthusiasm of particular children
who in 'routine' lessons showed minimum engagement. For some it appeared to
open a pathway to their opinions and thoughts which the content driven
curriculum does not encourage.
3. My Learners opinion of me
as a Learning Asset or Hindrance
Following several sessions on
learning styles and habits I asked my class to draw or write how I, as a
teacher, help or hinder their learning. Initially they found the concept of me
'hindering' quite difficult and some were reluctant to put 'criticism' on
paper, until I reassured them that this was to help me help them learn. Their
responses made interesting reading. Several complained that I talked too much
while they were trying to concentrate, I nagged or dealt with behaviour issues
during a lesson, or that I gave them extra work when they had enough to
complete already. On the positive side I appear to be good at explaining using
a variety of ways to demonstrate something, listen to them and make lessons
interesting. One child felt I helped his learning by shouting at him when he
wasn't concentrating! Perhaps the most rewarding response was from the child
who said I gave him the courage to try. I cannot deny that I was profoundly
touched by this as this aspect of teaching is of great value to me.
The Learner's view of
themselves as a Learner
The learner's own view of themselves
as a learner is of equal importance to me as my own theories of how we learn.
As a teacher I know the type of emotionally safe and encouraging environment I
want to create in my classroom -the type of environment where children are not
afraid to encounter 'failure', mistakes or take risks, where Dweck's growth
mindset can develop. However, the views of the learners are important in being
able to create that environment, because their learning is the reason that I am
there. It is from them that I can learn what helps and motivates them and how
they learn best.
As an educator I try to see them as
individuals with different talents, strengths and abilities, respond to them as
individual learners, but at the same time draw them in to the idea of learning
being a social and collaborative activity; the deeper sort of learning outlined
by Burnham-West and reflected in the theories of Claxton and Dweck.
Future developments
Taking into account the views of my
learners is gaining more prominence in my theory of learners and learning. When
I began my teaching career it never occurred to me to consult my pupils about
my performance, only to grade theirs as a result of my input, or sigh over the
external factors I appeared to have no control over.
Experience and learning has taken me
to new areas, and it is with confidence that I now feel my way forward is to
tap into the views of those I actually teach. For if I want my learning
styles and ways of understanding accepted when I embark on learning as an
adult, shouldn't I also take seriously the views and feelings of my pupils,
even if they are not able to explain their own theories with sophistication?
Even in that, I feel I may well be underestimating how much they understand
about their own learning.
My next stage will be to involve the
children in the creation of a marking system that reflects the amount of effort
or perseverance they have put into their learning, as opposed to only
acknowledging the curriculum learning objective. We have already discussed
ideas for this. Then I want to begin involving them in planning their own
learning experiences and needs. With personalised learning already waiting to
be developed, this is indeed an exciting prospect.
References
Burnham-West,
J. (2006) Understanding Learning.
Retrieved 2/1/07 from http://edlinked.soe.waikato.ac.nz/users/jan/EL/learningpdf
Cheek,
M. (2006) Yesterday's Houses
London; Faber
Claxton, G. (1998)
Hare Brain Tortoise Mind London; Fourth
Estate Ltd
Claxton, G. (2002)
Building Learning Power Bristol; TLO
Claxton, G.& Lucas, B. (2004) Be Creative. London; BBC Books o:p>
Costa, A. (2006)
Habits of Mind. Retrieved 2/1/07 from www.artcostacentre.com
Csikszentmihalyi,
M. (2002) Flow London; Random House
Dweck, C. (1999)
Caution – Praise can be Dangerous. American Educator, Vol.23, No.1,
pp. 4-9. Retrieved 29/12/06
Dweck, C. (2006)
Mindset New York; Random House
Fisher, R. (2005)
Teaching Children To Think. Cheltenham; Nelson
Thomas
Goleman, D. (2005)
Emotional Intelligence. New York; Bantam
Hart, S, Dixon, A,
Drummond M & McIntyre, D.
(2004) Learning Without Limits. Maidenhead; OUP
Lew, A &
Bettner, L. (1998) Responsibility in the Classroom Connexions Press Newton Centre MA
Sharp, P. (2003)
Nurturing Emotional Literacy London; David Fulton
2020 Vision
– Report of the Teaching and Learning in 2020 Review Group Retrieved 29/1/07 from www.teachernet.gov.uk/doc/10783/6856/DfESTeachingandLearningpdf