T2P Week THREE!

So Far:
  
     As it appears to me, through the all the complexity, the jargon, the homework and the mix of class, things seem to be getting easier. Not only am I developing my personal philosophies and creating curriculum assessments, but I am learning how students learn through theory before I put myself into practice.
      Mark Twain once said, "how empty is theory in the presence of fact."What is beautiful about this quote is that when applied to leaning, there are no facts, so theory can always be reflected upon and applied to practice. What may be true for one student's learning habits is not always true for another. How else could so many theorists develop such a quantity of different, applicable learning theories, if there were always solid, concrete facts relating to how students learn.

Today:

     An issue that arrises, especially after today's class is how to incorporate all of these theories and techniques and ideals into my own philosophy, especially when they all contain at least some merit. Skinner's theories touch upon the innate learning behaviors of humans, while Erikson focuses on the scaffolding of life and the effects of decision making throughout developmental stages; both contain incredibly valuable stances on human learning theories, and must both be considered when developing personal philosophies and curriculum. What I hypothesize is that if teachers envelop as many credible teaching theories as possible into their philosophy and curriculum, then they will be able to become more rounded learners themselves, because they will be better able to look at their students and cater their teaching styles to fit their needs. Essentially, the more the teacher knows about different learning theories, the more the teacher can relate and try to fit those theories to specific students. Once the theory that fits the student can be recognized, than the teacher can then adapt their teaching methods to help out the student. As Skinner and Erikson both pointed to, the teacher's main job is to remain a facilitator of knowledge, one who can guide students through a lesson, as opposed to a drone who recites information.
    Furthermore, I also believe an issue will be teachers or pre-teachers who will too eagerly try to categorize themselves into a theorist's group. For example, one might say they are a piagetian or Vygotskian follower. I believe this will hinder the teachers' ability to incorporate multiple theories into their classroom, and will essentially block students from getting quality education.
     Learning theories, as we learned, can be broken into art and science. It is an art because it takes skill to incorporate the multiple theories, but also a science, because the teacher needs to observe and react to the students' needs and desires for education. I have hypothesized in conjunction with my first hypothesis, that if teachers are fully committed to their students through means of reflection and observation, then the students are receiving optimal education, because the teacher is recognizing how students learn and are applying multiple learning theories to the class lessons. This will cater to more students' needs, and create a better learning environment for the entire class.

Tomorrow: 

    In future days, months and years, I hope to increase my knowledge of learning theories and develop a strong balance of applying my knowledge of other's theories to my own philosophies. As apparent in Jerrid Kruse's article on teaching theories, it is best to scaffold many different theories, such as behavior learning theory, developmental learning theory, cognitive learning theory, etc. with the lesson being taught. This way, students can develop comfortability with different teaching facets, and can hopefully grow personally from the experience.
    It appears as though my journey to becoming an expert learner has a long way to go!