Curt Bonk, Indiana University
The Evolution of Teaching Philosophies
Self-Analysis Statement for Teaching and Learning
Technology
In the early to mid-1980s, I was
stuck in the cube farms of various companies in the Milwaukee area as a bored
corporate controller and CPA. The last firm that I worked for designed and
fabricated highly dense circuit boards. That experience got me excited about
technology in education. At the time, I became interested in the intersection
of technology, education, business, and psychology. My life changed by taking
correspondence, face-to-face, and television courses to qualify for graduate
school in educational psychology (while minoring in educational technology) at
the University of Wisconsin. When I arrived in Madison, I was hired to help
design a national syndicated telecourse called “Teachers Tackle Thinking:
Critical Thinking in the Classroom.” The person who hired me had been my
instructor for two of the correspondence courses that I had previously taken. Suddenly,
I was hooked on nontraditional forms of learning; especially distance learning.
In a way, every pedagogical
experiment with technology and every technology research project I have
conducted since that time is my way of paying the world back. I am currently in
my 33rd year as a college faculty member; 30th year at IU after three initial years
at West Virginia University. I feel fortunate to have arrived at IU in late
August 1992 just as workers were taking the tape off the elevator doors of the fancy,
new, federally-funded IU School of Education. With advanced writing and
infrastructure from AT&T, the Wright Education building was designed to be
a demonstration site for technology in education. My father worked for AT&T
his entire life, so when he heard that I was interviewing at IU, he was elated.
Needless to say, I accepted the position. Thanks dad.
The Evolving Teaching Philosophy
In the mid to late 1990s, I drafted a
teaching philosophy which I posted to my homepage (see http://curtbonk.com/teaching.html). It is still there. In it, I say, “As
a learning environment theorist, I believe that experts, technology tools,
peers, teachers, curriculum, self-reflection, and assessment all impact
learning. Effective use of these resources can result in active student
learning. In using my student-centered teaching philosophy, I try to include
some active learning and student choice within every lecture or lab activity. A
visitor to any of my classes would note that I use various combinations of
tasks such as concept mapping, timelines, taxonomies, summary writing, jeopardy
quizzes, fireside chats, Web searching, scavenger hunts, group activities,
portfolios, conference-style presentations, scholarly journal creations, etc…”
I further stated, “Across my
teaching, research, and service activities, I have attempted to inspire
students, college instructors, practicing teachers, trainers, and
administrators by promoting innovative practices with emerging educational
technologies. I am deeply committed to expanding access to education through
nontraditional means such as Web-based instruction, computer conferencing,
videoconferencing, and courses and workshops taught directly in schools and
workplaces. I feel fortunate that some of my pedagogical experimentations with
technology now serve as models for teachers both in Indiana and around the
globe. I often advise my graduate students to try to "make a dent"
when they leave IU. I have tried to do the same back here at IU and beyond.”
Remember that statement involving Web-based learning was circa 1998 and I remain
committed to it today.
That philosophy still holds today. In
fact, it is at IU that I have continued to refine my instructional philosophy
and approach into a highly learner-centered one where the instructor is part
concierge, part coach, part counselor, part curator, part consultant, and, part
15 other “C” words which I hope to document in my next book, Education 20/20.
The role of instructor is surely undergoing massive transformation today. In
fact, the term “assister of learning” is likely a better way to describe the instructor
now. Basically, what we do is challenge students and then provide the support
structures to help the learner meet or exceed such challenges. As someone who
teaches a course on theories of learning, I believe that there is no one best
theoretical perspective or approach to teaching and learning. The most
effective instructors today attempt to design or engineer learning environments
using the wealth of learning resources at one’s fingertips. These truly are exciting
times to be in education!
In addition to the 20 new instructor roles,
in my “Education 20/20” book project, I also detail 20 principles of
learning using my “Learning Activation System Template”
or LAST principles of instruction (Note: Dr. David Merrill already coined the “First
Principles of Instruction”). These “LAST” principles include the principles of:
(1)
Flexibility; (2) Convenience; (3) Cheerfulness
and Optimism; (4) Empowerment and Autonomy; (5) Passion and Inspiration; (6) Relevance
and Meaningfulness; (7) High Expectations; (8) Collegiality; (9) Organization; (10)
Sharing; (11) Support and Feedback; (12) Spontaneity; (13) Choice and Options; (14)
Trial and Error; (15) Nontraditional Learning; (16) Expanded Resources; (17) Purpose and Vision (18) Human Connectedness; (19) Cognitive Apprenticeship; and (20) Openness (see 2011 blog post)
Each of these principles coalesce to create a psychologically
safe environment for knowledge exploration, construction, negotiation, connection,
and evaluation.
From a learning theory standpoint, a
learning environment based on Education 20/20 ideas is effectively an eclectic
mix of them all—behavioral, social learning, cognitive, constructivist,
connectivist, etc. As such, it recognizes that no one theory or perspective is
omnipotent. Each has a role depending on the situation and prevailing cultural
tools, norms, and needs. When properly understood and employed, each of these
distinct views of the learner and the learning process can play a vital role in
transforming educational settings.
The idea of “Education 20/20” entails
notions of learner empowerment, autonomy, choice, and self-direction as well as
opportunities to take risks and fail and iteratively learn from those mistakes
and try again. Learners will be more motivated to make a series of attempts
when the task or situation is personally relevant and meaningful. Above all,
there is a spirit of exploration and discovery that leans toward the self-initiation
of learning; a “freedom to learn” as the famed psychologist Carl Rogers widely advocated.
As with the recent movement toward participatory forms of learning with social
media, Education 20/20 also attempts to make the generation and sharing of
products and ideas as essential as the consumption of them and accountability
for them.
In this era of learner
production and participation in the learning process, there is a struggle to
not overteach and overreach. I am reminded of a quote in Parker Palmer’s (2007)
book, The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s
Life. As Palmer states, “Like most professionals, I was taught
to occupy space, not open it: after all, we are the ones who know, so we have
an obligation to tell others about it! Even though I have rejected that
nonsensical norm, I still feel guilty when I defy it. A not-so-small voice
within me insists that if I am not filling all the available space with my own
knowledge, I am not earning my keep.” Such views on teaching and learning
ownership are also salient in Stephen Brookfield’s various thought-provoking
books, The Skillful Teacher (1990), Teaching for Critical
Thinking: Tools and Techniques to Help Students Question Their Assumptions
(2012), and Powerful Techniques for Teaching Adults (2013). I
particularly resonate with Brookfield’s work on learner empowerment and fostering
self-directed learning among adult learners.
At times, I, too, suffer from an
overriding abidance to these norms of teaching as occupying space instead of
opening it up. I sometimes catch myself standing and lecturing, and, in the
process, overteaching and overreaching. At the same time, I authored a book, “The
World is Open: How Web Technology is Revolutionizing Education” in which I
promoted expanding or opening up spaces to learn. Whether it is P540, R546,
R511, or R678, students find my courses rich, resourceful, meaningful, engaging,
challenging, comprehensive, and offering them freedom to learn as I attempt to
be inclusive and open up all the relevant resources that I find and are
potentially useful. Suffice to say, there is a continual struggle between
opening spaces and personal trails for learning through providing sufficient freedom
to learn and stepping in to lend your advice and expertise in the form of unique
personal insights, stories, and experiences.
R678 (and P540) Course Reflections: Products
and Paths
Let’s look at Education 20/20
principles and how they have found their way into student learning, creativity,
motivation, and assessment. In terms of access and opening student spaces to
learn as Parker Palmer and Stephen Brookfield recommend, R678 Emerging Learning
Technologies allows for numerous alternative pathways to learn the content. As
a prime example, students can select three or four online open access articles
each week from a list of many articles found in the 80-page “monster” syllabus.
This pedagogical idea coincides with my Principle of Sharing as well as my
Principle of Choice and Options, mentioned earlier. Students appreciate the
free nature of the open educational resources (OER) and the degree of latitude
they have in selecting articles and topics that fit their needs and interests. To
integrate their learning, I have them write reflection papers on what they
choose to read at midterm as well as write “super summaries” of their readings
and explorations at the end of the semester.
Another example of using technology
to open up spaces to learn in R678 (and also P540 Learning and Cognition in
Education) is through the use of massive open online courses (MOOCs). I
encourage students to enroll in a MOOC on a similar topic to the class during
the semester. If they complete it and earn a certificate, they can eliminate
one of the assignments provided they write a short reflection paper on the MOOC
experience and their personal growth within it. Importantly, given the recent
popularity of this assignment, I have designed a rubric for assessing their MOOC
reflections. Students gain valuable self-directed learning skills from
experiencing a MOOC plus the MOOC hopefully reinforced their learning in R678. Most
notably, this activity relates to the Principle of Nontraditional Learning, the
Principle of Expanded Resources, and the Principle of Choice and Options.
Another highly popular option in R678
(and P540) is to have students design a YouTube video summarizing their
experience. I have used this option for nearly a decade. Many students spend
extensive time producing highly creative videos summarizing key concepts in the
course including four students that sang songs, played music, or read poetry.
Some produce documentaries or podcast shows on key issues or trends. Students
have such a high standard for these videos or podcasts that we often have a
final class movie night. And these videos are reused as task examples for
students in the following semesters. This option relates to the Principle of Relevance and
Meaningfulness. Of course, it also relates to the Principle of High
Expectations.
There are many other types of final
products in R678. Some students have designed Prezi presentations or Jing
tutorials. In addition, several students have created Pinterest websites for
the tidbits (i.e., news stories) as well as Facebook fan pages. And, for many
years, I required that all R678 students blog on their readings. Doing more
than the requirements, a couple of them have produced rich and impressive multimedia
glossaries with links to videos and pictures for terms that they have defined. Also
going well beyond the assignment, two teams last year created mobile learning
training for teachers in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria closed schools for
weeks and limited their Internet access (News #1, News #2). Similarly, I have had a student
create a mobile app of the history of mobile learning and another build an elegant
timeline of the field the of distance learning using Timeglider, both of which
I often show at my conference keynotes and workshops. Such task options relate
to the Principle of
Empowerment and Autonomy, the Principle of Relevance and Meaningfulness, the Principle
of Trial and Error, and the Principle of Expanded Resources, among others. Many
of these ideas are documented in my two books with 100+ activities for engaging
learners online, “Empowering Online Learning” (2008) and “Adding Some
TEC-VARIETY” (2014); the latter of which is free to download (see http://tec-variety.com/). The over 200,000 downloads to date
of all, or at least part, of this book, indicates significant impact of its
ideas.
In addition to videos and timelines, I
am also utilizing the Principle
of Empowerment and Autonomy as well as the Principle of Relevance and
Meaningfulness with student production of digital books. For example, I started
experimenting with Pressbooks in the spring of 2019. Similarly, from 2006 to
2008, I pilot tested the use of wikibooks as a tool for learning. In the fall
of 2007, my classes
created extensive wikibooks in P540: (1) The Practice of Learning Theories
(The POLT), and (2) in R678: The Web 2.0 and Emerging Learning Technologies
(The WELT) with students from Dr. Mimi Miyoung Lee’s classes at the University
of Houston, an alum of my program. In addition, the WELT project included
graduate students from Beijing Normal University in China, a university in
Taiwan, and Indiana State University. Since that time, students in P540 and
R678 have continued to expand these two digital wikibooks. A resulting publication
in the Internet and Higher Education from these experiments with
wikibooks received a first-place award from the AECT division of distance
education.
A key goal of mine since I entered
academia has been finding ways to increase social cognition and perspective
taking using collaborative technologies. The cross-institutional nature of the
wikibooks opened students to diverse points of view. As our research showed, some
were ready for this learner-centered approach where no one’s name is on the
product and some certainly were not. Similarly, another top 10 teaching moment occurred in this class
nearly a quarter century ago in 1995 when I experimented with combining two videoconferencing
systems--PictureTel and CU-SeeMe technology--to bring in synchronous guest
experts whose articles my students were reading and discussing. The students first
debated their articles in VAX Notes and then met the authors for question and answer
sessions. Importantly, an article describing that unique form of apprenticing
students into a discipline was soon published in Educational Technology
magazine. The goal was to enhance learner perspective taking and social
cognition by combining synchronous and asynchronous events. Through such
videoconferencing, my students began to realize that one idea or article does
not represent a person and that key ideas and statements of scholars change
over time. As might be expected, there are many Education 20/20 principles
embedded in that one class activity including the Principle of Trial and Error, the
Principle of Nontraditional Learning, the Principle of Expanded Resources, the
Principle of Human Connectedness, the Principle of Cognitive Apprenticeship, and the Principle of Relevance and
Meaningfulness.
Fast forward more than two decades,
and it was time to once again experiment with combining two videoconferencing
systems. Starting in 2018, I have used Crestron technology and Zoom in R678 and
R546 to virtually bring in researchers, authors, and other scholars sometimes with
just an hour or two notice. In the process, students are exposed to many unique
ideas and perspectives. Interestingly, two former students from the 1995
experiment with PictureTel and CU-SeeMe came back in the spring of 2019 when I combined
systems to bring in guests from Stanford, Seoul, and the UK via Zoom. It was
magical! (See review letter from Dr. Sonny Kirkley,
IU.)
R546 Course Reflections: Embracing Diversity and Course
Inclusiveness
Another course in which I have relied
on synchronous technologies is R546 on instructional strategies. For almost 25
years, I have used videoconferencing to bring together graduate students from
various IU campuses and Indiana schools (i.e., IU-NW, IUPUI, IU-SE, IU-B, Lebanon and Turkey Run
School Districts, etc.). This inclusive approach fosters an appreciation of
different points of views. It also facilitates the sharing of instructional
strategies between K-12 teachers who might be in urban schools and those in extremely
rural ones. I find that the more locations, the higher quality the examples. I
must point out that it requires extensive planning and organization; such as
getting the resources to students at the remote site and simply getting a classroom,
which is increasingly difficult; especially after the IUB and IUPUI Schools of
Education became separate schools rather than a core campus school. I have
learned to start with views or questions from the remote site first and to
sometimes travel to the remote location to engage my students. Here, the Education
20/20 principles include the Principle of Support and Feedback, the Principle
of Organization, the Principle of Sharing, and the Principle of Nontraditional
Learning.
In recent years, the student base in R546
has become highly diverse; in fact, the course has felt like a mini-United
Nations event with students from 10-15 different countries in the room. During
the past five years, about 40 award winning Fulbright teachers from 10
different countries (i.e., India, Taiwan, Singapore, New Zealand, Botswana,
Morocco, Mexico, Palestine, Israel, and Finland) audited it. They must audit
two IU classes during their four-month stay and the majority have selected the R546
class from all available classes at IU due to its practicality, timing, learning
outcomes, and reputation (see the support letter
from Fulbright teachers). In addition, I had perhaps 75 visiting
scholars from China (mostly English professors), Korea, and Taiwan sitting in R546 during
that time; 30 Chinese scholars in one semester alone. Basically, they are there
to learn the latest in technology, pedagogy, and learning. In fact, when teaching R546 in the fall of
2015, 2016, and 2017, I approached fire code safety regulations despite it
being an elective class offered on Saturday mornings at 8 am. Clearly, R546 has
a solid reputation.
R511 Course Reflections: Experts from Anywhere
R511 on the foundations of educational and
instructional technology, is an introductory course which I have been teaching
for a few years. I have built numerous options for students to learn the
content (Principle of Choice and Options). Students can read the articles
assigned online, they can engage in discussions in Canvas, or they can watch or
listen to narrated PowerPoint presentations from two retired professors who
created the course nearly four decades ago. They can also attend my lectures in
Zoom. Many, instead, decide to download the PowerPoint sides. They can learn
through my interviews with experts in Zoom. In addition, expert interviews in Kaltura
are available whenever that want. And many of the most prominent people in the
field can be found in the AECT Legends and Legacy interviews in YouTube. Last
year, I published an article in TechTrends that on the cognitive
apprenticeship benefits from such synchronous conferencing chats in Zoom as
well as using shared online videos interviews of experts in AECT Legends and
Legacy website. Using such technologies, students learn from both past and
present leaders. In this way, I have enhanced and extended the way that R511 has
been taught.
Recapping
As detailed above, I have used multiple videoconferencing
technologies to bring in
synchronous guest experts and book authors from around the world into my R511,
P540, R678, and R546 courses. I have experimented with many midterm and final
projects involving technology where students design podcast shows, online
concept maps and timelines, mobile apps, videos of final projects, website
designs, documentaries, and multimedia glossaries. Last year, two teams in my
R678 class designed mobile app training projects for teachers in Puerto Rico who
lost electricity in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria. Additionally, I have experimented
with webstreaming of my course lectures so that students can participate in my
classes from a distance; this includes people just wanting to sit in when
and where possible. Importantly, I attempt to make all my course resources free
and open. As an example, I have an 80-page “monster” syllabus for R678 wherein all
course content is free.
There is often much interaction,
energy, and creativity in my classes. We use active and engaging learning techniques
like online and FTF role play activities, mock trials, the six hats technique,
reciprocal teaching, flipping the classroom, short video concept anchors, cross-institutional
debates, top ten competitions, reverse brainstorming, poster sessions, nominal
group process, metaphorical thinking, freewriting, and SWOT. Technology support
tools might include concept mapping and mindmapping, online chats, blogs and
wikis, online discussion forums, Kahoot!, Sli.do, Google Docs, Course
Networking, Flipgrid, and Piazza. The fact that students include their final class
products in their e-portfolios and dossiers from which they apply for jobs indicate
that this approach is personally impactful. Few students drop out and many visitors
drop in. Student learning is so rich that I use their projects as task examples
and I have prior students showcase their projects in ensuing semesters. Suffice
to say, in a multitude of ways, learning technology has thoughtfully and
successfully been deployed across all my courses.
Proof of Learning Impact. How do I know that such technology
integration and use has resulted in elevating student learning? Class projects
have equipped students with skills to: 1. Receive job interviews from their podcasts;
2. Become G (Google) Suite certified; 3. Get their book reviews published; 4.
Learn how to design educational videos; 5. Design websites and digital
marketing materials for their employer; 6. Collect research data that has been
presented at conferences and later published; 7. Design functional mobile apps
for a client; 8. Get funding for small technology grant; 9. Create a mobile
book; and 10. Become school and statewide leaders in technology integration (e.g.,
N = 125 teachers from 25 rural Indiana schools in the TICKIT project).
My teaching
philosophy continues to evolve. Clearly, the 20 principles and 20 instructor
roles in Education 20/20 require a new type of instructional approach. Learning
technology is increasingly pivotal in that approach. I have used technology to
enhance student learning with podcasts, online videos, and digital books. Pushing further still, I have employed
technology to extend learning by having students collaborate as well as debate
with peers in similar course at other institutions. And, I have transformed the
curriculum with learning technology such as having students design
cross-institutional wikibooks and mobile apps for clients. The means to
enhance, extend, and transform the curriculum with technology tools and
resources will continue to grow during the coming decade at breathtaking speed.
(Note: support letters available from: Professor Minkyoung Kim, Univ.
of West Florida, and Professor Meina Zhu, Wayne State Univ.; and online course
review letter from Dr. Gamze Ozogul, IU).