Teaching philosophy
and technology
When asked to identify my philosophy for teaching, I look
back to my own education and recognise that I have had the influences of many
philosophies. As a receiver of
education, my early education began with a cognitive approach. In the 1970s when teachers began
experimenting with new philosophies such as constructivism/humanism, strategies
such as “group interaction” started to be enacted.
As I have gone on and continued my learning as an adult through
various courses, I have experienced many approaches and teaching
strategies. Some have been
spectacularly successful and others have left me questioning what, if anything,
I had learned?
Now, I am on my second fully online learning course of study
delivered through tertiary institutes.
I have the opportunity to view both organisations and their differing
approaches. I analyse them to guess at the possible philosophies each teacher
brings to the learning. Naturally,
I have my own learning preference, so I can feel challenged by some strategies and
not by others.
What I do find, as a receiver of education, is that I have
an opportunity to really question my own teaching delivery philosophy,
especially in relation to the online learning environment. Kanuka (2008) maintains that we need to
consider “our interrelationship of philosophy and the choices we make about
e-learning technologies” (p.93). I
try to match myself to the different philosophies: Liberal/Perennial,
Progressive, Behaviourist, Humanist, Radical, and Analytical, however, I find
fragments of myself in all of them.
To assist me in my search for clarity of philosophy, I
consider the philosophies of technology and how I resonate with each one. Kanuka (2008), gives example of three technology
philosophies:
Uses Determinism
The idea that technology is a neutral tool to “serve the
aims and objectives of agents (e.g., educators) employing them”(p.96) is an
attractive idea. However, I believe the assertion that “as individuals, we
have control and autonomy of the technology” is questionable and a narrow focus
on technology “neglects the social embeddedness of these systems and their
uses” (p.97).
Social Determinism
Integrating technology with social and cultural contexts
resonates with my social constructivist and critical leanings. However, I also agree with the view
that social contexts do not “manipulate education systems” as there is a
“dynamic mutual shaping between the social, technology and the users’
environment” (p.98).
Technological Determinism
Technology is viewed negatively as a “distracting and
potentially even harmful component of education systems” (p.98); a view I
disagree with. The growing use of
e-learning by educational organisations and industries has had positive
effects, however, I do share the concerns of others that “modern technologies
and growing neo-liberalism are creating a rising capitalistic climate that
includes political-economic interests such as comodification, commercialisation
and corporatisation of education” (p.99).
As time goes on, I become more politically aware as I see
the social inequalities in our capitalist society. Increasingly, my guiding philosophy is critical/radical: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory.
I strive to allow my learners’ to create their own learning
and question their place in society. However, I also recognise that “the
methods used to achieve perspective transformation are not doable in most
educational environments” (p.109).
Along with a radical/critical perspective, I also have a
humanist/constructivist approach to teaching. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_education,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(learning_theory)
My teaching supports “individual growth and
self-actualisation” (p.106) and my teaching strategies include group work, experimentation
and self-direction. When viewing on-line
learning though, taking this approach is more difficult, particularly when trying to instigate group
work.
When I view my teaching practitioner history, I find that in
many instances, I have been ‘channelled’ in my teaching approach to suit my
employer organisation and the often time-pressured demands of the curriculum I
am required to fulfil. However, as
my teaching experience has increased, I find that I now seek employers that
support my own philosophies and shun those that do not. I also find ways to work my own
teaching philosophies into the often limiting curriculum and assessment regimes
necessary for government funders ongoing support.
Self knowledge underpins all my education philosophies, and
I agree with Kunuka (2008) that “reflecting on and becoming aware of our
philosophical orientations is important” (p.111) for choosing how and what we
use in e-learning technologies. I
hope these insights gained can guide me through all the changes technology has
still to deliver.
Reference
Kunuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning
technologies–in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson
(Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118). Edmonton, Canada:
AU Press
