Some years ago I took the course in pedagogy that is needed to work as a university teacher in Sweden. My biggest learning outcome from it was without doubt the content and discussion that regarded different learning styles. It can be said at this stage the I very much see myself as a traditional teacher; learnings come from lectures and maybe a seminar or two. And, of course, that the students read the mandatory literature ahead of the written examination at the end of the course. Period! From my early experiences I can recall especially two students who differed so much, but I still wonder who was ”the better”? A male student was talking much in the classrooom and put forth really good thoughts and questions, but his written exam was on the edge of being lousy. I still remember that I ”saved him” just because he was so clever, verbal and entertaining in the classroom. But his writing was terrible. The other student, a female, I sort of first noticed when I read her written exam, that was tremendously well written. What a pleasure for a techer to read her so brilliantly elaborated answers. Having students like that also makes you proud! But at the same time; why didn’t she speak up in class as I would have loved to hear her wit during the seminars. With this old-fashioned way to look at learning you also end up in a question about what your are examining – the content/answers in the written exam or the student? I thing that can be added here is also that from not liking it at all, I nowadays very much like anonymous examinations.
As you might have guessed I experienced a paradigm shift as a teacher when I realized that there are several ways to learn and with digital tools you can make use of and develop so many new ways. But this does not necessary mean that you have surrender all the traditional teaching. Start blending, not just for your own variation. It’s often a way to motivate new students, and of course retain them. The key to keep them staying in the course starts with how you as the teacher or facilitator constructs a context where motivation is sustained. And this often commences wih making the course relevant and understandable for the students or participants. van Ameijde et al (2018) have created the acronym ICEBERG that made much sense to me, and they emphasize words like coherent and engaging. To look a little in the rear-view mirror I see that this goes back to Biggs (2011) classic concept of constructive alignment. After having designed courses I can definitely underline how important it is that a course makes sense and its content is aiming at foreseeable goals. I can also add that constructive alignment very much helps me, too. I guess that I’m not the only one who throughout the years have experienced that the ongoing teaching to some extent lacks a compass(?).
In the process of designing a course it is vital to think in ways that encourages different learning styles, recalling my old students from above. Both van Ameijde et al (2018) and Salmon (2017) see how important it is to be aware of that teaching and learning is a development process, that at its best ends with the sudents needing the teacher to a lesser extent. The scaffolding starts with a good group climate that enhances the different forms of learning and where the students or participants feel comfortable. Some students prefer meeting IRL, others are more apt to use a digital tool. And with blended learning both can be pleased. But, even if you just use a digital tool, in a 100 per cent online course design, there is a possibility to make use of different learning modes. And as a teacher – or facilitator – a course becomes more rewarding than if just one way of learning is used. Especially if you as the teacher also learn from the students or participants. And this includes the learnings as well as the subject knowledge. Of crucial importance is that you really can see the group process as well, beacuse being a successful teacher is often spelled timing.
References
van Ameijde, J., Weller, M. and Cross, S. (2018). Learning Design for Student Retention. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp.41-50.
Biggs, J. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university, Buckingham: Open University Press/McGrawHill
Salmon, G. (2013). The Five Stage Model. http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html