Learning outcomes:
- LO5: Discuss the value of disciplinary approaches to teaching and learning.
- LO6: Demonstrate an understanding of two key theories of learning: behaviorism and constructivism.
1. Introduction
As a teacher, the methods and techniques that you have at your disposal have stemmed from two main sources of insight into how students might best learn your subject. One of these is the research into the art of teaching and learning conducted over the past century both in academia and in the private sector. Education researchers, social and cognitive scientists, nonprofit organizations, policy groups, and practitioners (across various fields) alike have dedicated a great deal of time and resources to defining what effective teaching approaches look like, as well as the theories upon which they are based or supported. To date, multiple theories around teaching and learning have been published, and subsequently scrutinized by individuals within the broader educational landscape. The scope of these notes, and by extension the entire course, does not allow for an in-depth discussion of every learning theory in existence. That said, the intention of the final section of this set of notes will be to highlight a few learning theories (behaviorism and constructivism) which have gained the greatest traction in scientific research in the field of teaching and learning.
The other—and perhaps the larger—source of the practices which may already be present in your classroom is the history or tradition of your academic discipline itself. Academic fields or disciplines exist, and can be distinguished from each other, precisely because they have different answers to questions like “what counts as knowledge?”, “how is it best discovered and organized?”, and “how is it best transmitted to future generations of practitioners?” The answers to all of these questions (and particularly the last one) bear directly on the kinds of assignments and classroom experiences that teachers working within various disciplines are likely to prefer and/or to judge successful. Fields which regard writing as a crucial tool for thinking, for example, will be much more likely to devote a significant amount of instructional time and focus to writing assessments than will fields which regard writing as a mere afterthought to whatever they consider the main process of discovery. While we at the Bok Center are enthusiastic proponents of teaching practices based in the latest educational research, we also recognize that expert practitioners of academic disciplines have access to deep wells of sedimented wisdom about their fields’ goals and about how one moves from novice to expert—wisdom accumulated over centuries, in most cases—which are no less worthy of respect for being less “scientific.”
In fact, because most university teachers come to the classroom through their disciplinary formation, we will begin these notes with a discussion of the ways in which good teaching should try to make the conventions of its academic field visible and intelligible to students.