Falestiny Teaching Philosophy And Methodology

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 1

Falestiny Philosophy: Pedagogical Theories of Teaching and Learning

Jennifer Falestiny, M.Ed. PhD. Candidate - Instructional Design and Technology Keiser University EDU 740 Dr. Sue Adragna March 10, 2019

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 2

For centuries, educators have been sharing best practices, techniques, philosophies and theories when it comes to the pedagogy of teaching and learning. Countless studies have been conducted on various related topics, such as how the brain works and perceives information, the effectiveness of varied teaching techniques, and teaching strategies and content retention (Goodwin, 2018), (Hughes, Hughes, & Hodgkinson, 2017). The debate continues as to which philosophies produce the best student outcomes as new theories and teaching methodologies continue to develop. One can argue that there is no stand-alone, better than the rest philosophy or teaching methodology (Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, & Boschee, 2016). The focus of this debate should shift to the idea of individual educators discovering which philosophies/methods work best providing the best possible learning opportunities for his/her specific students population. Over the years, my pedagogical approach to teaching methodology and theory has changed as I continue to develop into a seasoned educator and as my student population changes. Although my philosophy of education has evolved, the fundamentals of what I believe in remain constant. My humanitarian philosophy on education is that all children deserve a high-quality, culturally-rich, diverse education regardless of the environmental circumstances. In addition, I believe that all children, regardless of any learning disability, have the same opportunity for growth and are able to produce outcomes displaying evidence of growth. In addition to my personal humanitarian philosophy on education, the following paper will discuss the foundations of my personal teaching methodology consisting of: the foundational understanding of the progressivism philosophy, the theory of multiple-intelligences and learning modalities, the

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 3 constructivism approach to teaching and learning, the experiential learning theory, and my approaches to curriculum development in applying my practice of philosophy and theory. Progressivism, Human Needs, Multiple Intelligences, and Learning Modalities The core of my educational philosophy is student-centered, falling under the philosophical approach of progressivism. Progressivism is a holistic philosophy that begins with keeping the student as the center focus of the education (Terzi & Uyangor, 2017). The cornerstone of my philosophy starts by understanding that before any education takes place, if a child’s basic human needs are insufficient, the child does not have the ability to fully learn. I strongly believe in Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs as an essential foundational applied theory before anything else (Cohen & Dennick, 2009). The hierarchy of human needs is a psychological understanding that a human cannot fully function in the proceeding level unless the previous needs are met (Cohen & Dennick, 2009). For a student, being able to fully focus on learning, they must first have the deficiency needs met, which include: the basic needs of food, shelter, and family, the feeling of safety, the feeling of belonging and a sense of self-esteem (Cohen & Dennick, 2009). As an educator, I find it paramount to ensure that my students deficit needs are being met before moving on to actual learning. Multiple Intelligence After the basic human needs are met, the progressive approach is to further understand each student’s likes and interests, and is able to deliver and differentiate instruction to accommodate the learning styles and modalities of the individual learners in the classroom environment (Kaygin, Yilmaz, & Semerci, 2017). Howard Gardner’s theory of the Multiple Intelligences (MI Theory), aligns with progressivism by understanding that all students learn

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 4 differently and have specific ways in which he/she excels in the reception and production of knowledge. I begin every class I teach no matter the age or subject by explaining the MI theory and allowing for my students to discover their strengths, and understand the eclectic student population around them. VARK Learning Modalities In addition to understanding the seven original multiple intelligences theorized by Gardner (Gardner, 1983), I also follow the research based idea that students learn and receive information differently by means of visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic (VARK model) modalities (Fleming, 1995). All learners can benefit from multi-modal instruction (Fleming, 1995), so regardless of the make-up of my students’ learning modalities, I make a point to teach to all modalities in my daily lessons. For example, if I were to teach a lesson on electrical circuits, I would make sure to include visual diagrams, and visually model how to complete a circuit, I would play a short animation on how electricity works (audio), and have students re-teach their neighbor the parts of a circuit, I would have students complete guided notes throughout the lesson (reading/writing), and then I would have students physically complete a working circuit using materials provided (kinesthetic). From a scientific approach, in support of the MI theory and VARK models, I also use the research of Herrmann when creating curriculum content. Herrmann developed the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI) model in 1989 after discovering that a persons learning style is determined by dominant quadrant of the brain over the other quadrants (Bawaneh, Zain, Saleh, 2011). The four quadrants (QA, QB, QC, & QD), are: QA- logical, critical, quantitative and verbal, QB- sequential, structured and organized, QC-interactive and kinesthetic, and QD- creative, imaginative and conceptual (Bawaneh, Zain,

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 5 Saleh, 2011). Research shows that effective learning happens when learning experiences, and learning environments align with a balance of the four core skills (or quadrants) that the brain can process information (Huges, Huges, & Hodgkinson, 2016). Although students learn by means of different learning styles and modalities, learning from a holistic method by means of all learning modalities while implementing a whole-brain teaching approach, will allow students to receive “well-rounded and challenging learning experiences that draw on the present and latent cognitive skills” (Huges, Huges, & Hodgkinson, 2016, p.3). Constructivism and Experiential Learning Theory In my teaching philosophy, progressivism is like a human heart and constructivism is like the human lungs; each serves a specific function, both are vital to the human existence, and one cannot survive without the other. In my teaching I marry the philosophy of progressivism and the theory of constructivism to create the ideal learning experience and environment for my students. While still implementing the contents of a progressive approach, constructivist learning theory is used to allow for students to learn through memorable experiences and build on existing background knowledge (Cohen & Dennick, 2009). Constructivists also understand that learning should be active and not passive, and that students should be the primary focus of the learning environment (Matter, 2018). The more modern take on constructivism is considered as experiential learning (Matter, 2018). Experiential learning theory is student-based not teacher-based, similarly to the theory of constructivism and the philosophy of progressivism (Seaman, Brown & Quay, 2017). Understanding how the brain works, supports the ideas of constructivism and experiential learning (Kuk & Holst, 2018). Research shows that in order for information to become internalized into our long-term memory a systematic approach must be taken in order to do so

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 6 (Goodwin, 2018). By teaching through experiential learning by means of understanding the student’s likes and interests, and learning modalities, by following the HBDI theory of teaching to the whole brain, and presenting information in a way that intrigues the student, the student will be able to retain content information in their long-term memory by the ability to create a relatable and memorable connection to their learning (Goodwin, 2018). Curriculum Design Approaches In my undergraduate studies, I began exploring what my own pedagogical philosophy of teaching and learning was. Because of this, I began exploring my beliefs in education and a preservice educator and have been conscious of my philosophy ever since. Because my personal philosophy stems from a variety of theories and approaches, I have to be systematic in the way I have designed curriculum in order to maintain a holistic approach. The way I design curriculum in correlation to my philosophy of progressivism, is the “content-oriented theory of child-centered curricula” (Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, & Boschee, 2016, p.106). Before, during and after the creation of curriculum, I remain conscious of keeping my lessons multi-modal, and to attract the interest of my students. In designing content, I use a combination of product-based curriculum design and process-based curriculum design (Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, & Boschee, 2016). Specifically, product-based curriculum focuses on the application of experiential learning, relating to real world problems, dealing with real audiences, real deadlines, transformation of the information, and self-reflection on student produced outcomes (Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, & Boschee, 2016). Process-based curriculum design takes into consideration the actual instructional design process in a systematic way. “Critical thinking, listening, and communication are important components of process curriculum” (Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, & Boschee, 2019, p.118) as well as intentional

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 7 planning (materials, activities, methodology), “justification of procedures” and interventions and feedback throughout the lesson (Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, & Boschee, 2019, p.118). Using both product and process methods in curriculum design allows for a thorough, holistic and systematic approach to differentiation of instruction, and instructional methods. Conclusion The core of my educational philosophy is student-centered. I believe strongly in the theory of Maslow that if a student does not have the basic human needs, and does not feel a sense of community and belonging, he/she will not be able to focus on learning. Once I understand my students and their likes and dislikes and we form a working relationship of trust, I find the next important aspect in designing their education, is to understand their intelligence strengths and learning modalities. In my experience I have found that student hugely benefit from knowing the strengths and learning styles of their peers, and research shows that students learn from each other this way (Helding, 2009). Understanding and applying practices that follow the theories of Gardner (1983), Maslow (1943), and Fleming (1995) is the foundation of my humanistic progressive teaching philosophy. My delivery of instruction and curriculum design is also student-centered, and follows the ideals of curriculum design as a process and with an end product in mind. I model my curriculum design around constructivism philosophy, experiential learning, and whole brain teaching. In addition to my teaching methodology, I design curriculum by means of product and process design. I have found that applying these philosophies, theories and method in the way I structure my curriculum design and the way I approach teaching and learning, I am able to create a student-centered, differentiated, holistic learning experience for my students.

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 8 References Bawaneh, A., Zain, A., & Saleh, S. (2011).The effect of Herrmann whole brain teaching method on students’ understanding of simple electric circuits. European Journal Of Physics Education. 2011;2(2):1-23. http://prxkeiser.lirn.net/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect% 3dtrue%26db%3deric%26AN%3dEJ1053785%26site%3dehost-live. Accessed March 6, 2019. Cohen, S., & Dennick, R. (2009). Applying learning theory in the consultation. Clinical Teacher, 6(2), 117–121. https://doi-org.prx-keiser.lirn.net/10.1111/j.1743-498X.2009.00283.x Fleming, N. (1995). I'm different; not dumb. Modes of presentation (VARK) in the tertiary classroom, in Zelmer, A., (ed.). Research and Development in Higher Education, Proceedings of the 1995 Annual Conference of the Higher Education and Research Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA),HERDSA, Volume 18, pp. 308 – 313. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books. Print. Glatthorn, A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B., & Boschee, B. (2019). Curriculum leadership: strategies for development and implementation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Print. Goodwin, B., & McREL International. (2018). Student learning that works: how brain science informs a student learning model. McREL International. Retrieved from http://prxkeiser.lirn.net/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect% 3dtrue%26db%3deric%26AN%3dED587406%26site%3dehost-live Helding, L. (2009). Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences. Journal of Singing, 66(2), 193–199. Retrieved from http://prx-

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 9 keiser.lirn.net/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect% 3dtrue%26db%3dehh%26AN%3d45032733%26site%3dehost-live Hughes, M., Hughes, P., & Hodgkinson, I. R. (2017). In pursuit of a “whole-brain” approach to undergraduate teaching: implications of the Herrmann brain dominance model. Studies in Higher Education, 42(12), 2389–2405. Retrieved from http://prxkeiser.lirn.net/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect% 3dtrue%26db%3deric%26AN%3dEJ1160281%26site%3dehost-live Kaygin, H., Yilmaz, E., & Semerci, Ç. (2017). The relation between lifelong learning tendency and educational philosophies. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(12), 121– 125. Retrieved from http://prxkeiser.lirn.net/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect %3dtrue%26db%3deric%26AN%3dEJ1165453%26site%3dehost-live Kuk, H.-S., & Holst, J. D. (2018). A dissection of experiential learning theory: alternative approaches to reflection. Adult Learning, 29(4), 150–157. https://doi-org.prxkeiser.lirn.net/10.1177/1045159518779138

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review. July, 1943. Mattar, J. (2018). Constructivism and connectivism in education technology: active, situated, authentic, experiential, and anchored learning. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 21(2), 201–217. https://doi-org.prxkeiser.lirn.net/10.5944/ried.21.2.20055

FALESTINY PHILOSOPHY 10 Seaman, J., Brown, M., & Quay, J. (2017). The evolution of experiential learning theory: tracing lines of research in the JEE. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(4), NP1-NP21. https://doi-org.prx-keiser.lirn.net/10.1177/1053825916689268 Terzi, A. R., & Uyangör, N. (2017). An analysis of the relationship between scientific epistemological beliefs and educational philosophies: a research on formation teacher candidates. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(12), 2171–2177. Retrieved from http://prxkeiser.lirn.net/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect% 3dtrue%26db%3deric%26AN%3dEJ1161586%26site%3dehost-live