Now that it is the end of the term, what have I learned? How has my philosophy on learning changed? The short answer is: it hasn’t. But like any wine connoisseur will tell you, it only gets better with age.

 

 

Learning is that “a-ha” moment. It’s the point at which the learner completely understands, constructing and reconstructing their schema in refinement. Learning goes beyond mere memorization or rote memory, it requires the learner to understand the subject on a deeper level, developing a complete understanding of its application and context. While there are some who believe in the Behavioral Learning Theory, I always felt like it can’t be a true testament to learning because it seems superficial. Pattern recognition and task sequencing works for computers, animals, and some lesser tasks which don’t require higher reasoning skills, thereby “learning” a sequence of actions doesn’t represent learning to me. If I had to select a learning theory or two to subscribe, it would be somewhere between Cognitivism and Constructivism. The fact that they both center on the importance of schema development resonates so much with me as this has been a long held opinion of mine. In contrast to cognitivism, however, I also believe that we are not a “tabula rasa”—we are the product of our thoughts, emotions, and experiences—and, therefore, we have the beginnings of various schemas, giving more credence to constructivism. It is through education (both formal and informal) and experience that we continue to expand and refine our understanding. My perspective on learning likely stems from my understanding of how I learn—after all, that’s how I train others. I use my experience to help others to learn at the conceptual level, which, in my experience, has measurably closed the gap between the knowledgeable and the novice. 

Teaching is using all resources, formats, and tools to convey concepts and ideas, then bringing everything together to help learners connect the dots. Teaching should be focused on the learner and their needs, not a display of intellectual prowess from the instructor where they fancy themselves ‘all-knowing’. Sometimes the best way to teach is to say “I don’t know, let’s find out” and walk through the investigative experience together. I see teaching as more focused on facilitation than a direct transfer of knowledge. Think about it like this—when information gets passed from one person to another, it presents an opportunity for that information to get filtered. Either through omission of details deemed “unnecessary” or expressed from the intellectual bias of the instructor, what we communicate will be the product of our thoughts, emotions, experiences, and so on. The beauty to using all available resources, leveraging a compilation of content, resources, and perspectives, is that an educator is able to dilute out their specific voice, and let the myriad of other voices help shape the mind of the learner. 

I think my philosophy on learning has remained relatively steadfast, although a bit more refined. Learning requires cooperation and a sense of diligence to aid in the process. While I still believe that both the instructor and the learner have a responsibility, one cannot succeed without the other; a teacher cannot ‘want it’ for the student, and the student may not always be able to overcome the teacher’s shortcomings. They have to meet in the middle. On a different note, as I reflected back over some of my earlier blog posts, I realized my perspective highlights a fundamental difference between my learning philosophy and some aspects of established learning theories—mine doesn’t account for simply gaining bits of knowledge! Upon further contemplation, I realized that simply gaining insights and information, even from statistical analysis as suggested by the theory of Connectivism, doesn’t translate to ‘learning’ in my mind. To me, that falls under simple communication or, even, memorization. That’s not to say that it’s not a valid means of learning; I just believe that there’s a difference between knowing and understanding. It is my opinion that true learning lives in the realm of understanding—it is through context, application, and implication that we can move beyond simple knowledge acquisition to complete comprehension.

Learning is a process that evolves and grows over time. One can dive deep in a subject matter—learning the history, facts, and implications—but still not really understand the subject matter. Experience is by far the best teacher, and yet without formal education, we’d be reinventing the wheel every time. I believe learning most optimally occurs when formal education and experience converge. I’m a firm believer that you can learn from formal education and experience by themselves, but it won’t be as comprehensive as it should be. 

The role of the instructor is to be the facilitator and the role of the student is to be the owner. The concept here is that the student takes responsibility for their knowledge, active participation, and their learning. When a student takes ownership of their learning, they become invested in the process, putting them in the driver’s seat and making them an integral factor in their successes and failures. The instructor as the facilitator has the responsibility to guide the students through all resources presented; however, it is through active participation on the part of the learner, that the student can achieve the deepest understanding of a subject matter. Through this active participation, the learner not only consumes content but they are able to produce their own, demonstrating what they’ve learned in addition to highlighting their own talents. 

Evidence of learning takes many forms, therefore it’s imperative to know your audience. In my experience, it’s apparent a trainee actually learned when they can take the material a step further than it was initially presented. Asking questions to form connections and drawing parallels are dead giveaways that something resonated. That isn’t to say one always has to be so engaged—it isn’t uncommon for learners to keep their thoughts to themselves. Sometimes you only know they’ve learned when they demonstrate the skills in a performance environment—this is the main reason why I am so adamant about making my training assessments be simulations of some sort. While they are demonstrating the desired performance, I can assess the depth of their knowledge, level of situational comfort, and identify areas of weakness. If a trainee can take a subject, put it in their own words and elaborate on it with ease when prompted, I generally feel they have, in fact, learned what they needed to.

Technology provides a conduit to aid the instructor in immersing the student. Looking back to how I conducted training when I first started, I realize now how out of touch I was. I elected to hold in-person classes complete with a PowerPoint deck on the large, wall-mounted conference room monitor. While effective in most settings, it was downright inefficient as a whole. Technology can help lessen the load on the instructor, allowing them to focus on key learner weaknesses. The added benefit for the learner is they can get more focused mentoring time with the instructor because they already completed the lesson. A lot like a flipped classroom, the learner can have dedicated time to focus on what they need, which only improves their overall retention and satisfaction. After all of the tools I’ve been introduced to this term, I have already decided to implement podcasting in the future. This is a complete 180-degree turn from my initial stance. I initially couldn’t see the value in it, thinking it was just a waste of time. However, through research and actually walking through the process, I can see that it is the perfect compliment to my core training program! After walking through the logistics and uncovering training needs that have been plaguing me for a while, I love the idea of exploring how to best leverage technology to help me and my trainees work smarter, not harder.