My experience in "Instructional Methods for Adult Learners" has been important to me in three ways. First, it helped me build my confidence in returning to formal learning. Second, it helped me examine and more clearly articulate my learning philosophy. Finally, the way we approached the study of instructional methods and assessment provided important practical context to my views on teaching and learning.
I am a non-traditional student. I've tried to be a curious and self-directed learner throughout my adult life, but I was still anxious about participating in a formal, face-to-face class for the first time in 15 years. There were definitely some struggles for me, but ultimately I grew more comfortable, gained confidence and even made meaningful connections with some of my fellow learners. As Dr. Claudette Peterson pointed out many times in class, the diversity of backgrounds and experiences of the students in the class was a great benefit. I believe social learning depends on exploring our differences, and I appreciate the space our instructors provided to do that.
I found particular value in my conversations with Brooke Thiel. Together we explored the space between Brooke's experience in the K-12 classroom and my much less formal experiences as a trainer and facilitator. From that exploration, I learned that, even in an extremely student-centered philosophy, there are some contexts in which an instructor's direct leadership is necessary to create the conditions for students to find their voice and grow.
In addition to those conversations, the work in the course also helped define my view of education, which is a critical part of my view of the world. It started with the self-assessments we were asked to complete. The Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory mostly confirmed my intuition about my philosophy, although I had never thought about it as a coherent philosophy. The Principles of Adult Learning Scale, however, really challenged me. I found I was not "walking my talk." I was not reflecting my philosophy in my actual teaching. As I thought more about it, I realized that the gap between my philosophy and my actions was explained, in part, by the contexts in which I was being required to teach, but it was also explained by my lack of courage. I have had opportunities to choose more open, more social methods in my teaching. I have even planned a more open and social learning experience, but too often, I have lost my nerve. I have held back because I did not want to be vulnerable. I was afraid to fail.
I did not expect the study of instructional methods, many of which are standard in formal learning to help me close the gap between my philosophy and action. That was until I read Stephen Brookfield's piece on discussion (Brookfield, 2004, pp. 209-226) . Brookfield's description of discussion as method associated with democracy, as a method representing the best of the humanistic and radical traditions, and a s model emphasizing the natural, participatory, informal aspects of learning, all inspired me.
Brookfield’s “theory-in-use” for facilitating discussions hit home with me. I found that the five components of the theory: be wary of standardized approaches, use a diversity of approaches, welcome the unanticipated, attend to the emotional dimension, and be authentic in the group, were much more closely aligned with my work facilitating small groups than with what I considered to be my "teaching." I think that, despite my tendencies toward disruption and innovation, I believed "teaching" was only what I had experienced to be, something formal, structured, planned and controlled. I did not consider the free and unpredictable space for facilitation, conversation and community to be part of teaching. Brookfield's words helped me realize that my work "educating" and my work with human networks were not separate at all.
With that revelation, I began to close the gap between my philosophy and my actions. When demonstrating cooperative learning for class, I tried to focus less on making sure I was exactly representing cooperative learning and more on creating the conditions for authentic human connection and conversation. I tried to use some of the instructional methods we had learned not because they would lead to a particular outcome, but because they would provide a framework in which learners could engage with each other in a meaningful way. I tried to focus less on reducing the margin for error, and more on being bold and feeling free to fail.
The taxonomy assignment really helped me further define my views on learning. When thinking about the taxonomy, I bounced around many ideas related to social learning, but when I was able to connect it to the idea of "creating space" and the metaphor of teacher as gardener, everything clicked. Having to deal with methods and assessments that don't easily fit my context or viewpoint sharpened my focus. It made my own view of learning more luminous in my mind. It also helped me see the purposes of those methods to the learning journey.
Learning is transcontextual. Over the last four months, I have had the opportunity to synthesize my individual and collective experiences in this class with what I have learned through practice, research, reflection and conversation. My work on the "Building Networks for Resilience" learning experience has given me space to practice some of the instructional methods I have learned and to practice closing the gap between my philosophy and actions. My research for the demonstration and taxonomy assignments has led me to important philosophical touchstones like Worker, Oullette and Maille's definition of learning in the context of Extension. The opportunity to reflect for this assignment and in the other spaces has led to connections between what I've learned in this class and other domains like network theory, emergent strategy and collective action. Finally, and most importantly, the conversations in class and online, with colleagues and new acquaintances, professional, academic and personal have helped my learn more about who I am, what I believe, and why I am here.
References
Brookfield, Stephen D. (2004). Discussion. In Michael W. Galbraith (Eds.), Adult Learning Methods: A Guide for Effective Instruction (3rd Ed.) (209-226). Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.
Worker, Steven M., Oullette, Kristy L., Maille, Alexa (2017). Redefining the Concept of Learning in Cooperative Extension. Journal of Extension, Vol. 55, No. 3, Article 3FEA3.