Week 5: On Andragogy

What is andragogy, and how might the approach help in teaching FYC?
Following last week's megapost, I'm going to skirt this week with a less intense discussion. Andragogy, the teaching of adults, requires understanding that the needs of adult learners not only differ from those of younger learners, but perhaps are more diverse among the demographic labelled "adult."

Objectives of K-12 educational institutions differ from objectives of adult education centers. Adult education may range from developmental instruction to advanced or specialized context instruction (such as for a given field, workplace, or merely a project).

Most of my undergraduate (minor and certificate) coursework in TESOL focused on educating children in mainstream classrooms. My graduate studies, practicum, and teaching experiences in TESOL have been teaching adults. When I first began teaching at the university, I was surprised to learn that many of my ESL students had come to the U.S. with advanced degrees in their first (or often second, third, or fourth) languages. Like me, many already had education and professional experience -- They were learning new language skills to increase their chances of promotion and/or international employment.

In non-ESL classrooms, K-12 classes provide a great deal of course scaffolding including management of the students' time and resources; however, in FYC classrooms, scaffolding lessons is important, but less strictly guided time management necessitates. While providing comprehensible, not simplified input (Krashen), an FYC instructor has the responsibility deliver content, but not to closely monitor students' reading and study habits. Providing a clear syllabus and weekly schedule is one way to provide a structured scaffold for the FYC student to begin taking adult responsibility for his/her coursework. It is important to note that not all FYC students are native English speakers or between the ages of 18-24. Many non-traditional students attend college and university courses. An instructor's awareness of individual needs can help provide well-scaffolded need-based instruction on a case-by-case basis. The temptation to provide normative instruction may leave advanced learners bored and disengaged or allow students in need to fall through the cracks. Learning is personal, so teaching must be provided as such to the extent the environment will allow.

Andragogy, not to be confused with... "androidgogy" -- Can we call it that?: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342152/Robot-teachers-human-faces-roll-classroom-run-English-lessons.html

Week3-4: Teaching Philosophies

Based on your teaching philosophy (which may change over time), what are types of assignments which you would include in a FYC syllabus?

I am sorry to assault my dear readers with a teaching philosophy badly in need of editing to a single page. I wrote the following teaching philosophy when I earned my TESOL certification. Though I have many changes to make, my foundational values remain the same. My methods include individuation, collaboration, communication, social constructivism, and balance.

As we worked through Berlin and Fulkerson this week, I was struck by the balance in each of their value structure models. I have taken several courses in the teaching of composition and TESOL, so these methods are review -- I'm looking for new layers of meaning as I enrich my foundational experience and refresh my professional development.

Berlin's model presents balance with two sets of opposing value structures. Within each set resides balance, and between the two sets resides balance:

Neo-Aristotilian values of deductive logic, sterile, fact-based Truth
versus Neo-Platonist Expressivist values of subject viewpoints and voice, create truth in individual validation.

Positivist (previously known as Current Traditional) values of arrangement, style, and grammar, implications of perfection and Truth
versus New Rhetoric or Epistemic values of truth residing in society as the collective says

Fulkerson presents a well-balanced triad:

Cognitive-psychological values mental processes, planning, translating, revising, problem-solving, and assimilation

Expressionism values activists' voice, agency, and motivation

Socio-Epistemic values truth as relative (e.g. political spin)

As we discussed which values we hold most dear, I was reminded of the beauty of the Gestalt -- Neither carries more weight in a well-rounded education. Anthropology taught me to value people in both individual and collective forms that we can observe and study with numbers, yet we avoid interfering or affecting transformation. Marketing taught me to value the bottom line and connecting with the audience. Technical communication has taught me the value of mediation, translation, problem-solving, and relativity. Is it not true then, as an instructor I might accept both Berlin's and Fulkerson's models in their Gestalt form of a single functioning philosophy individual in model and complete in concept? This philosophy is demonstrated in my daily lesson plans in FYC.

I:

• open my instruction with a friendly greeting followed by a personal anecdote. I'm working the crowd, gaining followers, marketing my persona
• relate the anecdote to the previous or upcoming lesson to create relativity.
• ask directed questions about the homework and students' understanding of materials to problem-solve. In this process, I also mediate, clarify, and translate the university's expectations.
• use my own writing to model "good" writing I expect my students to strive for.
• ask students to journal, to express their individual voices in a sheltered and guided context.
• engage students in small group, large group, pair, and individual activities.
• provide multi-modal forms of communication on each activity -- reading, writing, listening, and speaking.
• provide +1 information to keep my swiftest students from fading into the crowd.
• provide multiple copies of the information to engage my least interested students.
• laugh at myself and encourage my students to laugh at themselves and at me in a respectful way.
• encourage the inclusion of visuals to support written essays.
• allow room for improvement by allowing students to rewrite assignments after receiving my feedback.
• provide feedback in a timely fashion to accomplish the previous.
• provide a balance of love and tough love for assignments late and assignments too late
• explain the purpose and interconnectedness of every activity
• accept various opinions
• encourage risk-taking
• lead by example
• provide concrete examples
• admit my own failings
• seek to empower every student because she will take every skill in this class beyond these walls to build her own Truth or truths within the context of her very complicated life.

Teaching Philosophy: Inspiring with compassion

"In my experience, every individual is a student. We all ask questions to learn about our environment. When something interests us, we seek further information by observing through the senses and by asking questions. In the same vein, we are all teachers. We are always offering answers and advice; sharing information. Those of us who wish to teach professionally are those who recognize their own desire to be a part of something bigger, to share their knowledge professionally, and to motivate others to seek knowledge as we have done ourselves. Effective instructors learn from their students then refine their teaching approaches to the needs of the students.

Is it possible to teach to each student’s individual needs? Yes. Psychologist Lev Vygotsky and Linguist Stephen Krashen understood that in language acquisition, a student’s cognitive and linguistic competence is based on the amount of information to which he/she is exposed. Beginning with students’ background knowledge, an effective instructor evaluates the present student expectations and then helps to reshape those expectations to merge with those of the administrative body of the educational institution and those of the instructor so that the three meet inside the nexus of learning. Teaching language with passion requires passion for language and a deep desire to share that passion with others. Excellent language instruction embodies the intuitive understanding of the student, recognizing the spark within the student and the natural human desire to learn, embracing these aspects, and igniting those sparks. Excellent instruction engages those who might appear unreachable. Teaching with passion is providing not only answers but posing further questions for thought which increase the students’ desire to learn and to seek further learning. Teaching with passion is transferring knowledge, sharing knowledge, and employing a variety of methods: lecture, collaborative reasoning, media, and simple-to advanced technology. These methods merge the objectives of the learning institution with the objectives and motivations of the students. Teaching with passion is dynamic and pragmatic teaching to a variety of learning styles. Some styles may be familiar, while others are new and innovative, but all of them present repeated information for retention and new information for further exploration.

My experience in visual communication, marketing, technical communication, and anthropology has taught me that people seek information through various means. Visual students look for imagery, including the imagery of textual and graphic communications. Auditory students learn through direct lecture and subconscious auditory observation. Kinesthetic students learn through touch and motion. Social students learn through collaborative reasoning, peer dialogues and discussion groups. To teach to only one learning style is to perform a disservice to the institution and every student. Scaffolding for all learning styles through lecture, repetition, drill, collaboration, seriousness, humor, hypotheses, and using visual, auditory, and tactile lessons provides opportunity for every student to learn within his/her comfort zone as well as to expand his/her knowledge including the knowledge of possible learning approaches. Students don’t always know what their primary learning styles are. Students who have been exposed to only one learning style might find themselves intrigued and engaged by familiar techniques enriched through nuance. Successful teaching is opening already open doors wider by building upon students’ background knowledge with new information in order to foster communicative competence. Very young children and adults of all literacy levels have experiences in life from which a good teacher can build, and then open, doors to exploration of new knowledge.

Effective teaching builds a solid foundation that supports a variety of scaffolds. When we look at Edgar Rubin’s optical illusions, do we see faces or the vase? There is no “right” or “wrong” answer because the image depicts both. Untrained minds may not have learned to look for both. A new world opens when students who only see faces learn to see the vase. My passion for teaching is seeking that moment when the student’s mind opens to allow him/her to see what was previously obscured. My experience in business and marketing has taught me that people must be sold on the idea that they can learn difficult materials. The first step in marketing is establishing confidence in the individual, recognizing and increasing student motivation. After a student is exposed to a variety of learning styles and becomes comfortable with him/herself as a capable learner and communicator, discourse competence emerges naturally as the student’s knowledge carries over into a variety of genres and circumstances. Well-scaffolded teaching based on planned, structured, and organized approaches sets an example for student organization. Concrete teaching leads to concrete learning.

Though learning is never a completed process, effective assessment can be used to determine whether the student has achieved course objectives and is prepared to advance to the next level. What about the student who isn’t prepared to advance? Learning from the successes and failures of ourselves and others provides us with the opportunity to improve our teaching. I believe I will never be a perfect teacher -- I will always be learning from my students, myself, and others. Continually drawing inspiration from others makes me a humble and eager student. Drawing from the experiences of author-instructors such as Danling Fu, Robert Hayes, Guadalupe Valdés, and others -- teachers who have experienced successes and embraced failures with inspirational positive attitudes to make changes in the educational system and in the way we teach and learn -- leads me to believe that I am a great teacher who knows she will always make a difference no matter how challenging the circumstances.

My strength, like those who inspire me, is my ability to see the principles of gestalt required for effective instruction. Macro objectives are composed of a complex network of micro factors, interwoven and interdependent. The minutiae of complexity create an organic and tangible beauty of something greater -- education and knowledge. This is the legacy with which I wish to inspire, to breathe into students the passion for learning."

Week2: Difficulties of teaching writing

What is the most difficult thing to teach in the teaching of writing, and how do you go about teaching that?

As I read through Lisa Ede's and Andrea Lunsford's "Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked: The Role of Audience in Composition Theory and Pedagogy" I conjured a mental image of the writer as a sorcerer magically invoking an audience. Though quite fantastical and over-dramatized, this is what I try to teach my students to do with their writing -- create magic. We discuss critical thinking and critical engagement in composition and ESL theory courses. We debate how or whether we can teach critical thinking. In leadership training courses, we are likely to be asked to recall an "aha moment", that moment when we reached a realization or a moment of enlightenment. My job as an instructor is to critically engage my students. Instructor reviews are one way I measure how I'm doing in my teaching and whether I've found ways of engaging my students in didactic learning rather than merely speaking at them for several hours per week. My students are my audience for whom I prepare weekly presentations where I aim to critically engage them in discussion and thought. Statistically speaking, no one enrolls in intro-level composition because he/she wants to. I poll my students at the start of the term -- Who is really excited about this course? Who just loves English classes? Who is taking this class because they want to? Who is taking this class because it's required? One or two students in each section tell me they love English classes, though all admit they're taking the course because it's required. We all have a good laugh realizing student motivation is similar for all in introductory composition as it's extrinsically rather than intrinsically produced.

I don't love English myself. It's difficult to learn -- especially for native speakers who must deconstruct all their knowledge of a language they own, then reconstruct it within rule-sets and value-sets they've not been taught the past 18+ years. ESL learners have the advantage of learning the language within the higher academic context where the rules confine how we compose. One of the most difficult things to teach my ESL students is to immerse themselves with native speakers so they learn the language in its context. I wonder whether this gives them real language skills needed to compose, as we still hold a great distinction between the aural and visual audience as Walter Ong implied. The language of academic composition exists somewhat in a vacuum -- It's neither completely real, nor completely fake, as is the audience Ong says really does not exist.

Social media presents opportunities to observe instances of audience addressed versus audience invoked, real audiences confused with fake. In a few social media platforms (where I consider myself highly engaged) I pass reading titles that don't invoke me:

"Things you've been doing wrong...," are value judgments written by authors who don't know me.

"This girl writes a letter to the President. You won't believe what happens next," overlooks the likelihood the reader can predict the outcome.

These headlines don't seek to invoke the audience, but rather they talk at the audience, attribute values to assumed audience, and in my case, alienate the audience. Sometimes these headlines infuriate me because the author seems oblivious of his audience and gives me no reason to care as a reader, thus no reason to critically engage. Thomas Kuhn observed language as paradigmatic, non-static. My job as a teacher is to appreciate and understand real world changes and to make the work we do in composition courses relevant, meaningful, and engaging beyond the classroom -- whether in other courses or outside the institution. There are two aspects to making this teaching successful: My ability to critically engage my student audience, and to foster or coach them to care about reaching out to engage an audience real or perceived. In order for these things to happen, I must care about my students' success and create an environment in which they learn to care about their writing. I must present them with a real audience, an understanding and appreciation of their responsibility to invoke, engage, and manipulate said audience. I must also understand that they are my audience to whom I have a responsibility of engaging. In short, the most difficult thing to teach students is why they should care about their writing. The most difficult thing to teach myself is remaining in touch with what is important to them so that I might make content relevant and interesting, providing content meaningful and an environment safe for developing voices.