Pedagogical Philosophy Preference

Based on your teaching/learning experiences and pedagogical philosophy, do you consider yourself to be a linear thinker, holistic teacher, Laissez-Faire advocate, critical theorist, traditionalist, empiricist, or reconceptualist? Why?

    All of these pedagogical philosophies have aspects that are appealing and unappealing to me as an educator. For example, vertical alignment, an aspect of linear thinking, is very important for a school. A teacher would need to know the prior knowledge and learning experiences of their students so that they can deliver new and appropriate units of study. However, focusing on linear thinking above all else, including equitable practices, would be problematic in ensuring quality education for all students. 

    There is also a time when traditionalist education may be useful. As an English Language and Literature teacher, I have read Shakespeare's sonnets with my students before. Students may notice a rhythm and meter in Shakespeare's writing themselves, but, without traditional instruction, students would not know that this type of meter is called iambic pentameter. Definitions and terms like this are important in analyzing and describing different kinds of poetry. Traditionalist learning's biggest downside is that it does not allow for much meaning-making done by the students themselves. Rather, they are expected to adopt the teacher's view on the topics. 

    While I do use aspects from several philosophies, I believe my teaching style fits more into the holistic philosophy than anything else. Furthermore, within a holistic view, I believe that I can touch on other philosophies, such as critical theory and Laissez-Faire. One part of the holistic approach that I most agree with is the idea that boundaries are often crossed between teacher and student. I believe in giving students as much agency in their learning as possible. In my middle years classes, I find that giving students a choice of product and audience to be the best way to do this. As long as the students are showing a transfer of their learning, it should not matter how or to whom the product is shared. If the teacher forces a student to produce something that is not interesting for that student, it can lead to disengagement. This partly coincides with a Laissez-Faire view, as students are given freedom that matches their maturity level. 

    I am also a believer in interdisciplinary learning, which is an aspect of a holistic education. To study a topic in isolation in terms of a specific school subject does not give a student the full picture of that topic. For example, if my students read George Orwell's Animal Farm in isolation, they would probably enjoy the story for the plot and characters, but they would be missing the larger picture of the story. If I were to combine this story with social studies themes of government, propaganda, and economic systems, the students would gain a more rounded view of the story. Studying the book as an interdisciplinary unit would allow students to better understand what the author is trying to say about society and human nature. 

    The assessments I create for my students also have aspects of holistic education in them, especially the idea that students should showcase their learning in a real-world and authentic way. I do this by combining the two subjects that I teach, English and social studies, into one interdisciplinary summative assessment. I then try to get community involvement somehow. To foster a critical view of society, I encourage students to work with members of the community who may be different from them. By doing this, students can understand the situation and difficulties that are being experienced by others. This can open their eyes to a reality that they may have been previously unaware of. 

    In my current unit, I am teaching about globalization and narrative writing. Their final assessment is to interview a member of the community about their life and career before and after modern globalization in Thailand, where we live. They will then think about the pros and cons of globalization on this individual, and write a narrative story about that person's experience. We will then share these stories with school community members. This assignment includes several holistic properties, including student agency, interdisciplinary learning, and community engagement. 

    While holistic learning is beneficial, it does have its difficulties. Miller (2011) has a sound argument when saying that such an approach can be demanding for teachers. By giving students agency and choice in their education, it forces the teacher to become familiar with areas which they may have little experience with. For example, if a student decides to make an abstract art piece to express their views on a topic, the teacher would need to assess that art piece, even if they are not very familiar with that mode of expression. To remedy this, teachers could come together and assess more difficult submissions as a group. This strategy has its problems, however, in that it would take a lot of time and organization. 

    Another issue with holistic learning is in encouraging community involvement. Doing community projects frequently could be quite a strain on school resources. Especially in bigger or underfunded schools, organizing a trip so that each student can experience the outside community would be costly and time-consuming. There are certainly other ways to interact with the community, such as social media, that would be cheaper and easier, but this sort of interaction may not be as authentic or interesting for students. 

    Overall, though it is not perfect, I consider myself a holistic teacher. Giving student choice, creating interdisciplinary units and assignments, and encouraging community involvement are things I try to do as much as possible. 

Miller, D. L. (2011). Curriculum theory and practice: What’s your style? Phi Delta Kappan, 92(7), 34–35.