top of page

Learning Philosophy

Marriage is a terrifying thing. However, learning how to love your significant other is a wonderful thing. When my wife of 12 years, and I got engaged in the summer of 2007, we decided to investigate a trending relationship tool known as “The 5 Love Languages.” The basic idea is that every person receives love in one of five primary ways: words of affirmation, physical touch, acts of service, gifts, and quality time. Well, we quickly discovered that there was a sixth love language, surprised not backed by any research, in which I primarily receive love - trivia. 

 

If anyone wants to make me feel cared for, simply take out a handful of Trivial Pursuit cards and quiz me. From the earliest age, I can remember thoroughly enjoying the absorption and retention of factual knowledge. Coincidentally, this was the learning environment in which I received my education. I was raised in a fact-memorization learning culture. Although many would say that I am a gifted creator at heart, knowing what, who, where, when, why and how about a topic makes me feel accomplished. In elementary school, I can remember challenging myself over and over to master the multiplication tables. Fast was not fast enough. When it came to history and geography, I poured over the state capitals, their locations and even memorized the US presidents in order, just for the fun of knowing. As my wife will attest, 12 years later, I still enjoy this type of learning.​

This includes:

But is this really learning?

 

The information and knowledge I intake in this way are static, unchanging. As we know, in the 21st century, the amount of information is unlimited and learning is constantly changing (Thomas & Brown, 2011). As a teenage student, I recognize that I was treated as a vessel into which teachers would impart knowledge. Then I needed to prove that I had retained that information. The retention of information was easy when the topics were interesting to me. However, when there was no innate curiosity for the subject matter, there were major challenges. I struggled off and on in classes like English and Science where the vocabulary and concepts did not naturally connect to my passions. I now see that this type of instruction failed to produce a learner out of me.

 

My views of learning began to morph once I became an educator in 2010. I had a lot of fun challenging students by incorporating memorization activities from time to time. For example, we challenged each other on the location of countries on the map and naming the Top 10 most populated countries in the world. However, I really came alive as a teacher when students would design and create. There were times when they would use the knowledge acquired in my class and combine it with their own conceptions and experiences to make something new. And when I say those classes were fun, I mean class got REAL fun.

 

As a first-year teacher (and in subsequent years), I found myself needing to extend my learning. This included learning more about the subjects I was teaching, but more so, I needed to learn more about education. I dedicated nights and weekends to researching, planning, seeking peer feedback, and reflecting. This was all in an effort to learn how to best facilitate student learning in middle school social studies. It was an absolute joy to witness students making connections rather than memorizing information. These connections helped them internalize knowledge through analysis and stir enough curiosity for them to begin to ask their own questions that would extend and deepen those connections.

 

It was this experience that caused an internal paradigm shift.  When I had earned my alternative teaching certification, I was trained to build a teaching philosophy. But as I pondered the notion of “learning,” I realized that teaching philosophies are not enough, I needed to consider the learning process and understand my personal learning philosophy.

 

Learning Theories

 

Here is a brief overview of three learning theories that have shaped my journey as a learner:

Behaviorism (Skinner, Thorndike, Pavlov)

This theory focuses on changing external behavior through the repetition of desired actions (“History of Learning Theories,” n.d.). Instructional practices linked to behaviorism are positive reinforcement and “drill and kill” activities.

 

Cognitivism (Piaget, Bloom)

The process of learning and internalizing information becomes the key focus, as cognitivism can be seen as a reaction against behaviorism. No longer are learners passive students, but active participants in learning as they develop stronger mental processes for future learning (Bates, 2014).

 

Constructivism (Bruner, Dewey, Piaget)

Learners are treated as constructors, building new ideas or concepts as they connect the information to their prior experiences. This process treats knowledge as relative since each learner has different preconceptions and prior knowledge. Therefore, it is important to recognize that learning is a social process that relies on teachers, peers, and the community to achieve outcomes and build new knowledge (Tan & Hung, 2003).

A Tale of Two Sons

​

What began as a transitional philosophical shift, became more solidified when I became a father. I have learned even more about myself watching my kids interact with the unknown world around them. Currently, I am proud to have two sons, ages four and two. While they are similar in mighty ways, their differences are equally apparent. This could not be more true when investigating how their young minds seem to learn.

Weston

Male

Age 4

Loves giraffes, drums, reading, and dance parties

 

Wes is a fascinating kid; he truly is an inquisitive soul. In fact, he oftentimes forces me to reflect on my own beliefs and ethics by the deep questions he, himself, ponders. It is obvious, even at this early age, that there is an internal process at work through the discovery of new information and concepts. I am then barraged with question after question as he reflects on his learning experiences. Bates (2014) would define Weston’s approach to learning as a cognitive one, for he does not just want to learn things. Wes wants to know how to learn something, oftentimes pushing himself for a deeper understanding of the world around him. Weston Woods shows evidence of Cognitivism.

Tyler

Male

Age 2

Loves food, marbles, things that spin, and

always wants to “GOOOOO”

 

Ty is a doer; I would say he is equally as inquisitive, but he leads with his hands rather than his thoughts. Ty is experimental and learns by creating experiences for himself. Learning is a social event. Oftentimes, he will want help in creating these experiences by showing that he would like either his big brother or myself to try something first so he can see what happens. There is also a need for validation and clarification as he learns new things. Tyler Woods operates best in an environment of Constructivism.

My Learning Philosophy

​

I see myself in both of my boys’ learning styles. I know that I retain knowledge when I can properly analyze information and make connections. The reflective process is an important piece that allows me to grow as a learner as I seek to understand how and why I think. I also have a strong need to experience learning opportunities that rely on social interactions to build new knowledge. All three of us Woods boys need an environment that creates a culture of active, reflective learning. I believe that these specific concepts are necessary, not just for us, but for all learners as they grow and develop. They are the same ones I witnessed in my early teaching career and now I have the vocabulary to articulate them. This is why I have crafted my Innovation Plan to focus on teacher development. I want to help teachers transition their roles from knowledge imparters to learning facilitators and their classrooms to learning environments.

Through this process, I have decided that my current learning philosophy is a healthy blend of cognitivism and constructivism.

< Significant Learning Environments
Aligning Outcomes, Assessments & Activities >
bottom of page