On track to develop mastery of one self, what is your approach to education and learning? (contd)

Layer 9: My approach in the learning experience

Continuing on from my previous blogs in this series: it is my desired goal to develop a collaborative, collegial, safe learning environment. Trust and respect are core to this process.

As mentioned in the previous Layer, prior to the learning practice session I need to be in a position to pre-assess the learning group. In instances where I do not have the required background information – which I admit to being the majority of cases – I would need to structure my initial class room activities to include activities which enable me to educe the range of background information and understanding I consider relevant and useful. To facilitate the needed getting to know my learners phase, I find being open with my learners along similar levels of information and behaviour that I expect of them. I consciously invest time in the initial stages of the learning experience with a new group of learners to develop an appropriate learning session culture, which includes confirming the agreed learning outcomes. This step is necessary to ensure the learner’s expectation and the learner facilitator’s expectations are aligned; and if not, to take the opportunity to discuss and address any misaligned of expectations at the earliest opportunity. The ultimate goal of a learning experience is to optimise the effective student learning experience of the particular learners. In clarifying both the learner’s and my learning facilitation expectations, I am in my experience removing possible issues or objections that may arise later. Even if issues or objections regarding levels of expectations do arise later in the learning experience, at least there has been prior dialogue – a conscious reference point from the outset – to return to and continue discussion. This process is all part of developing trust and respect for a collaborative, collegial, safe learning environment.

Learner assessment – during session delivery

Throughout the learning experience I will be informally assessing the progress of the learner group, and as much as humanly possible, the progress – in real time assessment –  of each of the individual learners. My goal at any point in time thought the learning experience is to confirm all of the learners are engaged and are being presented with a learning experience that is compatible with their personality type, their thinking approach, their intelligences, and their learning styles (Light et al 2009, 77). I need to confirm the learner’s understanding independently throughout the learning experience by a range of means. Two such means are via questioning techniques; and observing students in action. Concept checking questioning techniques (CCQ) and instruction checking questions (ICQ) enable me to effectively and efficiently achieve this, ensuring that I systematically include all participants within the particular learning experience – as appropriate (Fisher and Frey 2007; Angelo and Cross 1993). Observing of students carrying out a task can also confirm to you as the learning environment facilitator that your instructions were clear. But such observation allows you to also confirm the student’s approach to a particular function; the degree of competence that may or may not have with that particular function; any gaps in knowledge they may or may not have; and the opportunity for you as their learning facilitator to further assist them in order to optimise their effective learning experience. This later observation in the environment of audio training used to be conducted in workplace training contexts (the apprenticeship model), but in the contemporary environment, much of this type of training is now conducted in formal education programs (Billett 2001): formal education programs such as SAE Institute’s Creative Media degree, Bachelor of Audio Production program (SAE Institute, 2015).

As a learning experience facilitator, my desired goal is to develop a collaborative, collegial, safe learning environment. Trust and respect are core to this process. As part of this process, my aim is to reveal my self as candidly as is appropriate – socially and culturally. In my experience, the more I know my self as a practitioner, the more congruent I can be with others – including my students; and the more potential I have to be able to optimise the effective student learning experience of those particular learners.

Layer 10: Evaluation of the learning practice

The evaluation of the learning practice session is what I consider to be one of the most important stages of the education & learning process. The purpose of this stage is to have the learners evaluate the learning session in terms of the content and/or processes.

I have observed many novice education and learning practitioners in many different scenarios overlook this stage, unaware of the importance of this stage. I have laid this evaluation section out in the following five (5) parts.

Layer 10a: Evaluation of the learning practice Pt1

This process commences at the conclusion of the central learning practice session. Often, I will have a break at the end of the central learning practice session, before I commence the evaluation stage.

In preparing for this stage prior to the commencement of the learning session, I need to consider how I am planning to have the learning session evaluated in terms of the content and/or processes. I consider how I will effectively and efficiently draw the education & learning practice session to a logical conclusion so that the learners can effectively and efficiently evaluate what they have learnt.

The evaluation process can be either a formal or informal process. However for best practice, I would advocate to include both a formal or informal process in the evaluation stage.

• An example of an informal process could include a cohort-wide round table debrief of “what I learnt today?” I have be known in this stage to make notes down as they share; or if i feel this to be intrusive, then I may make mental notes that I will jot down immediately after the learning session has ended.

• An example of a formal process could include a pre-arranged summative evaluation tool such as a feedback form that the learners respond to questions regarding the various aspects of the learning session.  The primary benefit of this confidential response of each individual if that one may elicit some responses that a informal round table debrief may not.

Once I have completed this evaluation process, I end the learning session officially – restating any expected action or practice required prior to a further learning session. I then dismiss the learners.

Layer 10b: Evaluation of the learning practice Pt2

Once the learning session has concluded, I then need to consider the evaluations.  For the formal process, this will include considering the quantifiable or qualitative responses in order to draw conclusions of the learner’s evaluation of the learning session.

For the informal process, this may include revisiting some jotted down points during the actually learning session round table debrief; or if considered an intrusive process, actually noting down learners’ comments that were made during that session.

This evaluation process could also include a third party observer who may have been sitting in on the learning session. Such a third party observer’s observations and input could be very beneficial in the event that there is a difference of opinion as to the usefulness of the learning sessions content and/or processes, between some of the learners; or some of the learns and you as the facilitator of the learning session.

Irrespective of what tool or party provided the evaluation of the learning session, my aim is to gather data regarding the following questions:

Did the learners realise the aims and objectives of the learning session?

How do I know they did?

How did I know they didn’t?

Anecdotally what was the feedback?

In terms of summative feedback, what was the evaluations?

Were there any observers in attendance in the learning session?

Intuitively, how did the learners realise the aims and objectives of the learning session?

Did some learners realise the aims and objectives of the learning session, but others not?

Why do I think this did/did not occur?

Did the learners realise the learning session objectives?

Why/why not?

How do I know this?

Did the learners feel they realised the learning session objectives?

Why/why not?

How do I know this?

Once I have completed the data gathering stage, I need to take time to reflect on the evaluation of the learning session.

Layer 10c: Reflective practice following the learning practice Pt3

There are benefits of reflecting on a learning practice session once it has concluded. The degree to which one can reflect is dependent upon one’s knowledge of the content or the different learning theories and approaches. You can only reflect on what you know. It is very difficult if not impossible to reflect on an aspect of your practice that you are not yet aware of. Whilst i feel this is obvious – common sense – I think the point is lost of some education administrators.

My practice covers the three disciplines of creative (music) practice, education and learning practice, and my most recent engagement, research practice. In Layer 5 I noted that my approach to all of these forms of practice, I “make time to reflect every day at some time upon some aspect of my diverse practice, referenced against other practitioners, whether peers or those who I value their cultural production. My focus is to gain clarity, greater understanding, increased insight, considering possible alternative workflows I could have pursued, and decide what form of practice I will pursue the next opportunity a similar circumstance arises” (Page 2004). I also noted my daily practice is to engage in both reflective practice and reflexive practice.

        Reflective Practice – introduction

Many novice practitioners may consider casual options of reflection; such as on the way home on the bus or in the car whilst listening to music, as being sufficient to develop their practice. Haseman differentiates casual reflections and conscious planned reflective practice as the difference between navel-gazing and what he terms forensic reflective practice (2015). The goal of reflective practice should be to turn experience into learning (Boud et al 2013). Therefore a deliberate activity to consider a past practice event, and then analyse it critically, appears to be the minimal criterion that defines robust reflective practice. A practitioner should consciously make time and space at a specific part of the day when where they can engage undisturbed in reflective practice; considering what they did, or didn’t do in that lesson; or what you did or didn’t do in terms of the agreed aims and objectives contained within your learning experience plan.

Specifically, education and learning practice needs to be considered in terms of the respective andragogies or pedagogies of the learning group.  In order to avoid the ill-disciplined habit of informal reflection, it should be the aim of the practitioner to have clear and transparent processes so that they can be examined closely as to their value, limitations and assumptions (McKee, 2003). The result could be a practitioner’s reflective practice toolbox, offering a range of strategies for: reflection-in-action (Schön 1983), reflection-on-action (Schön 1983) and reflection-for-action (Pascal & Thompson 2012): demonstrated by real world examples across any of the common aspects of teaching, such as: curriculum design; learning experience planning; delivery; and post-delivery evaluation.

Figure II – Reflective Practices Summary (Anderson et al 2015)

There are a number of possibilities of focus to reflect on following the learning practice. One can reflect on the experience of the learner; your experience as the practitioner; or your experience as a participant observer (Griffiths 2010). Brookfield’s theoretical framework for reflective practice is provided to examine these pedagogical practices through four different lenses – through our own eyes; through your student’s eyes; through our fellow professionals’ eyes; and through established theoretical views (Brookfield, 1995). This reflective practice process should at best inform and and enrich ones’ education and learning practice, allowing the discovery of innovative or creative practices, while also acknowledging contemporary literature on the subject.

Roth’s model could also be used for unpacking the reflective process, encouraging greater depth of analysis and further investigation as required (Roth, 1989). Together, these conceptual frameworks provide several perspectives and facilitate ways in which to think critically about teaching, and uncover effective practice. This framework could provide a platform for revealing a desired result of reflective andragogical or pedagogical practices in line with industry standards.

• Questioning what, why, and how one does things and asking what, why, and how others do things 

• Seeking alternatives 

• Keeping an open mind 

• Comparing and contrasting 

• Seeking the framework, theoretical basis, and/or underlying rationale 

• Viewing from various perspectives 

• Asking “what if…?” 

• Asking for others’ ideas and viewpoints 

• Using prescriptive models only when adapted to the situation 

• Considering consequences 

• Hypothesising 

• Synthesising and testing 

• Seeking, identifying, and resolving problems

 Reflective Practice – specific to an education & learning practice session plan

The process I follow at the end of a education & learning practice session includes the following areas, with accompanying questions:

REFLECTION ON LEARNER’S LEARNING PT1

I do this process in two stages. The first stage is on-site, immediate post-practice. The benefit of this process is that the practice events are still fresh in my mind. I can scribe the physical, visual, auditory or emotional events of the day with a high degree of detailed recollection due to the currency of the events that have just been experienced or observed. In many ways, it is very much an stream of consciousness process – scribing without considering too much or judging my responses.  In terms of a detail of recollection I find this on-site, immediate post-practice reflective practice session is very beneficial as an initial data collection exercise. This process commits to my sub-conscious content for consideration, and until the point that I make time to return to the second stage of the deliberate reflective process, my mind will be turning over that data, and distilling the less significant events from the more prominent and significant events.

The range of questions I ask of myself to scribe my immediate first responses are:

• Did the learner realise the aims and objectives of the learning session?

• How do I know they did?

• How did I know they didn’t?

• Anecdotally what was the feedback?

• Intuitively what was the feedback?

• Did some learners realise the aims and objectives of the learning session, but others not?

• Why do I think this did/did not occur?

• Did the learners realise the learning session objectives?

• Why/why not?

• How do I know this?

• Did the learners feel they realised the learning session objectives?

• Why/why not?

• How do I know this?

REFLECTION ON LEARNER’S LEARNING PT2

The second stage is away from site, and after some time has lapsed post-practice. I find it is crucial to conduct this second stage reflective practice in a different site to that of the practice session, as it allows a separation of any possible automated response that may be activated by the actual practice site that I am reflecting about. Additionally, the amount of time expired between the actual practice session and this reflective practice session may vary in each circumstance: I have found over doing this process over many decades that it has to be an appropriate amount of time to allow my mind to turn over that data, and distil out the less significant events from the more prominent and significant events. Sometimes this takes a few days, and at others times, it has taken several weeks. I am experienced enough in this process now to trust my inner time clock to know which particular practice session I will choose to reflect upon in any of the regular scheduled evening reflective practice sessions I hold.

As inferred, the benefit of this process is that the practice events become distilled in my mind, with the more prominent or significant events rising to prominence in my mind. This stage of reflective practice also allows for any emotion around that particular practice session to recede to a level where perhaps a greater degree of perspective can be applied to the event. With distance and time away from the practice, I find I scribe the prominent or significant physical, visual, auditory or emotional events of the last practice session with a greater degree of critical thinking due to the distance – time and place – from the events that had previously been experienced or observed. I generally do this process once I have concluded my responsibilities of the day – when the house is quiet, when my mind is free of other responsibilities. I may or may not have a hot beverage, and I sometimes conduct this exercise against a backdrop of soothing music which I find allows my mind to delve into depths of thought and analysis. In contrast to the stage of on-site, immediate post-practice stream of consciousness process gathering of recollection data, I scribe very consciously, analysing what and how I respond. I certainly consider why I have acted in practice – and also responded – in the ways I do, dissecting each and every prominent or significant event within my practice session. It is a rigorous process that I find is both mentally exhausting, but also satisfying due to the crystallisation of thoughts and ideas that I find usually occurs.

In this Part 2 stage, the range of questions I ask of myself to scribe my second round of very considered responses are very similar – if not the same – set of questions as outlined above. However, I definitely drill down within each question to a far greater level of depth, looking for insightful distinctions about my practice. The question words of what, how and why are instrumental in this process. In doing this second round of reflective practice, I find is that I am far more detailed in the scribing process, critically analysing to a depth that is absent from my on-site, immediate post-practice initial data collection reflection process. It is within this reflective practice session that I crystallise my thoughts and understandings, and gain fresh levels of clarity about my practice.

REFLECTION ON FACILITATOR’S PRACTICE DELIVERY

Given the above reflection on student learning, I ask myself the following questions:

• Were the learning session outcomes realised?

• How satisfied am I with the learning outcomes?

• If not completely satisfied: why/why not?

• Do I consider any changes need to be made in the next education & learning session of the similar aims and objectives? 

• What were the strengths and weaknesses of the learning sessions?

• How was the timing or the flow of the education & learning practice session? 

• What worked?

• What and why?

• What didn’t work?

• What and why?

• Had I planned for this event/factor to happen?

• Was it conceivable that it could occur?

• What was the percentage of time between facilitator-talk (Ft) and learner-talk (Lt)?

• Was this as planned and described in the education & learning practice session plan?

• Why?

• Why not?

• How useful was the education & learning practice session plan?

• What was?

• What wasn’t?

• How closely did I stick to the education & learning practice session plan?

• What happened that forced the change?

• Why hadn’t I planned for this change to happen?

• Was it conceivable that it could occur/arise?

In terms of the education & learning approach:

• How effective was the particular pedagogical/andragogical approach?

• What worked?

• What and why?

• What didn’t work?

• What and why?

• In terms of the methods/tasks/processes:

• How effective was the particular methods/tasks/processes implemented?

• What worked?

• What and why?

• What didn’t work?

• What and why?

• What changes will I make for the next education & learning session of the similar aims and objectives? 

• Are their any techniques or skills in terms of teaching practice I need to develop to better faclitate the education & learning session?

• How could I further develop Ir learning session plan to accommodate unexpected events when they arise?

• If I were working within a team, are there any issues related to the teaching team that I need to follow up on?

REFLECTION ON THE LEARNING SESSION’S ASSESSMENT STRATEGY

• Did the learner meet the assessment requirements of the learning session?

• How do I know they did?

• How did I know they didn’t?

• What assessment strategy did I use?

• How effective was tthat approach in Ir opinion?

• What worked?

• How do I know it worked?

• What didn’t work?

• How do I know it didn’t work?

• What changes will I make for the next education & learning session of the similar aims and objectives? 

• Are their any techniques or skills in terms of assessment planning I need to develop to better faclitate the education & learning session requirement realisation?

REFLECTION ON THE LEARNING SESSION’S CONTENT

• Did the learners absorb the required learning session content?

• How do I know they did?

• How did I know they didn’t?

• Based on the pedadgogical/andragogical approach:

• How effective was tthat approach in Ir opinion for this particular content?

• What worked?

• How do I know it worked?

• What didn’t work?

• How do I know it didn’t work?

• What changes will I make for the next education & learning session of the similar aims and objectives? 

• Are their any techniques or skills in terms of content I need to develop to better faclitate the education & learning session?

• Are there any content questions I need to follow up with the learners? 

REFLECTION ON THE LEARNING SESSION’S LOGISTICS

• Were there any factors outside of the educational and learning facilitator’s control that impacted the session in any way?

• Negative? 

• What?

• Positive?

• What?

REFLECTION ON TECHNOLOGY USED

• What technology or tools will I need to have prepared prior to class (physical, IT)?

• What digital tools and/or resources will I use in this education & learning practice session?

• Will I need any technical support? If so state when, where and when.

• Do I need to contact IT support prior to my education & learning practice session?

• Do I need to schedule time to load computer programs or learning technologies prior to class? 

REFLECTION ON RESOURCES USED

• What resources or materials will I need to have prepared prior to class (human, physical)?

• What tools and/or resources will I use in this education & learning practice session? 

• If so what, where and when. 

REFLECTION OF SELF

• What did I learn or observe about Ir self during this education & learning practice session now that I have considered all aspects of the practice session in detail?

REFLECTION FOLLOWING ENGAGEMENT WITH CRITICAL FRIEND

• Do I still hold the same opinions regarding the education & learning practice session now that I have discussed the practice session with my critical friend?

REFLECTION OF SELF

• What did I learn or observe about my self during this education & learning practice session now that I have discussed the practice session with my critical friend?

REFLECTION FOLLOWING ENGAGEMENT WITH LITERATURE

• Do I still hold the same opinions regarding the education & learning practice session now that I have engaged education & learning literature in terms of my specfiic education & learning practice session?

REFLECTION OF SELF

• What did I learn or observe about my self during this education & learning practice session now that I have engaged education & learning literature in terms of my specific education & learning practice session?

Layer 10d: Reflexive practice following the learning practice Pt4

Returning to Brookfield’s approach as outlined above, once a practitioner has engaged in reflective practice, irrespective of whether that evaluative data has been internally generated, from the learner group within or post the central or evaluatiion session, observed and feedback from either a supervised observer, a peer observer, a critical friend, derived from reading literature, or from engaging in either informal or formal forms of professional development programs; unless something is decided upon to be trailed into one’s practice, in order to develop that practice, then I would question the usefulness or the validity of that reflective practice. As introduced in my Music Practitioner – Part 3 blog, Haseman outlines that for practice to be forensic reflective practice, the reflective practice must progress to and include the extra step of developing one’s practice to include aspects that have been reflected on, and decided that are in need of improvement. Aspects that are thought will enrich ones’ education and learning practice, and developing one’s experience in different learning theories and approaches.

Figure III – Forensic reflective practice chart (Haseman 2015)

Therefore I would ask my self the following questions to complete this process of reflective practice, preparing for reflexive practice – actually applying development and change to my practice.

REFLECTION FOR PRACTICE/DEVELOPMENT FOR FUTURE EDUCATION & LEARNING PRACTICE SESSION DIRECTIONS

• What are there areas of my education & learning practice that I need to develop prior to my next education & learning practice session? 

  List these areas in detail:

• Of these, what will I select to focus on?

• What do I need training and development in, in order to realise these developments in practice?

• How will I know when I have successfully achieved this desired development?

Layer 11a: Reflective professional practice in contemporary higher education

Finally, I want to conclude with Light et al’s proposition of three (3) paradigms of academic development of educators and learning practitioners in a contemporary Higher Education environment (Light et al 2009, 12). Light et al describes a practitioner in terms of: their relative lack of engagement in their education and learning practice on a professional level; their relative lack of reflection and level of engagement with the context of the education and learning field and discipline; and finally, their engagement as a professional practitioner who also considers wider social and cultural issues and realities. As you read these, I request that you consider which one best describes your approach or situation to your learning experience practice:

1. ad hoc paradigm: “is located primarily within the individual teacher, and essentially asserts that a good teacher is born, not made”. “Teaching is something one picks up and grasps informally and individually. It is non-reflective in the broader sense. The teacher is left to her own devices and draws upon past experience of being taught, trial and error, help from sympathetic colleagues when available, and her own natural affinities for teaching”(Light et al 2009, 12). Note: the self is at the centre of this paradigm;

2. skills paradigm: “the development of teaching is an add-on process and rests in the accumulation and reproduction of performance and communication skills, competencies and tips. These skills are generic and provided by trainers and consultants who often have no formal experience of the discipline in which the trainers are working or even of higher education training”(Light et al 2009, 12). Note: both the self and the institution are at the centre of this paradigm;

3. professional paradigm: “the location of the professional paradigm goes beyond the practitioner’s self and institution to embrace wider issues raised by society”: “professional status derives from the value that society places on higher education, the inclusion of specialised knowledge and the reliance on higher-order abilities critically to acquire, apply, reflect on and elaborate that knowledge. As such, it is essentially a reflective paradigm” (Light et al 2009, 13). Note: the self, the institution and society are at the centre of this paradigm.

   Which one best describes your approach or situation to your learning experience practice?

   Given this, in what ways can you develop as a professional practitioner?

Layer 11b: Reflective professional practice values statements

As developed across the 11 Layers of my approach to education and learning, I believe a contemporary practitioner needs to develop an understanding of their self – as a person, and as a practitioner. I believe the more self knowing a practitioner has of who they are in terms of their personality; their various thinking, learning orientations and intelligences; their values, beliefs and biases, the more congruent a practitioner can be with others. Ultimately, the more potential the practitioner is able to assist their learners in the learning experience – to develop their content, information knowledge base and skills level – the more opportunity the practitioner can guide the learner to maximise their development, their personal empowerment, in order for those learners to ultimately realise their full life potential. I consider this approach integral to becoming a professional practitioner.

The following statements are what I consider to be central to my reflective professional practice; values that I apply across all forms of my practice, whether it be education and learning, music practice, research practice, or life practice.

‘Know one self, develop mastery of one self

Take a proactive approach with your education and learning, investing in developing and advancing your content, information knowledge base and skill level 

A professional practitioner: 10,000 hours of practice, reflect, develop, practice, reflect, develop, practice, reflect, develop,practice, reflect, develop, practice..

As a reflective professional practitioner, embrace the wider social and cultural context rather than just the institution’s desired outcomes’ (© Page 2015)

References

Anderson, C, Carolyn Carattini, Heather Clarke, Gail Hewton, David Page 2015 QUT KKP623 Reflective Practice in Action Group Presentation submission Accessed October 24, 2015.

Angelo, Thomas A and K Patricia Cross. 1993. “Classroom assessment techniques: A handbookfor college teachers.” San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Billett, Stephen. 2001. Learning in the workplace: strategies for effective practice. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Boud, David, Rosemary Keogh and David Walker. 2013. Reflection: turning experience into learning. New York: Routledge.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 1995. Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Esposito, Emily 2015 The Essential Guide to Writing S.M.A.R.T Goals  Accessed 20th November 2015

Fisher, Douglas and Nancy Frey. 2007. Checking for understanding: formative assessment techniques for your classroom. New York: ASCD.

Griffiths, Morweena. 2010. “Research and the self.” In The Routledge companion to research in the arts, edited by M Biggs and H Karlsson, 167-185. London: Routledge.

Haseman, B 2015. “Forensic reflective practice: effecting personal and systemic change.” Accessed May 24, 2015. https://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_118711_1&content_id=_5744651_1.

Light, Greg, Susanna Calkins and Roy Cox. 2009. Learning and teaching in higher education: the reflective professional. London: Sage.

McKee, Alan. 2003. Textual analysis: a beginner’s guide. London: Sage

Onion image courtesy of: Onion Layers Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2015a. Music Practitioner Part 3 Accessed 28th March 2015

Pascal, J., & Thompson, N. 2012. Developing critically reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 13(2), 311. doi: 10.1080/14623943.2012.657795

Roth, Robert. 1989. “Preparing the reflective practitioner: transforming the apprentice through the dialectic“. Journal of Teacher Education 40 (2): 31-35

SAE Institute, 2015 SAE Institute Accessed 28th March 2015

Schön, Donald A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Aldershot, England: Arena.

Springer, Sally P and Georg Deutsch. 1993. Left brain, right brain. 4 ed. New York: WH Freeman & Company.

Bibliography

Armstrong, Thomas. 1999. 7 Kinds of Smart: Identifying and Developing Your Multiple Intelligences. New York: Plume Books.

Ashwin, Paul. 2006. Changing higher education: the development of learning and teaching. New York: Routledge.

Bradbury, Helen, Nick Frost, Sue Kilminster and Miriam Zukus. 2010. Beyond reflective practice: new approaches to professional lifelong learning. New York: Routledge.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 2006. The skillful teacher: on technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom. 2 ed. San Francisco: The Jossey Bass.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 2002. “Using the lenses of critically reflective teaching in the community college classroom.” New Directions for Community Colleges 2002 (118): 31-38.

Brookfield, Stephen. 1986. Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Chopra, Deepak. 1996. The seven spiritual laws of success: a practical guide to the fulfilment of your dreams. New York: Random House.

Covey, Stephen R. 2013. The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Covey, Stephen R. 1991. Principle centered leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Covey, Stephen R. 1989. The 7 habits of highly effective people. Melbourne: The Business Library.

Dyer, Wayne W. 1992. Real magic: creating miracles in everyday life. Sydney: Harper Collins.

Ericsson, K Anders. 2008. “Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview.” Academic emergency medicine 15 (11): 988-994.

Entwistle, Noel and Paul Ramsden. 1983. Understanding Student Learning. New York: Routledge Revivals.

Gardner, Howard and Thomas Hatch. 1989. “Multiple Intelligences go to school: educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences.” Educational researcher 18 (8): 4-10.

Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences image courtesy of:  Gardners’ MI   Accessed 28th March 2015

Gawith, Gwen. 1991. Power learning: a student’s guide to success. Melbourne: Longman Chesire.

Gerber, Michael E. 2005. E Myth Mastery. New York: Harper Audio.

Gerber, Michael E. 1999. The e-myth manager: why management doesn’t work – and what to do about it. New York: Harper Business.

Gerber, Michael E. 1988. The E Myth. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Grace, S and R Ajjawi. 2010. Phenomenological research: Understanding human phenomena. Researcing practice: A discussion on qualitative methodologies. Rotterdam: Sense.

Knowles, Malcolm S, Elwood F Holton III and Richard A Swanson. 2012. The adult learner: the definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. 7 ed. New York: Routledge.

Lawrence-Wilkes, L. & Chapman, A. 2015. Reflective Practice. Accessed March 28th, 2015 http://www.businessballs.com/reflective-practice.htm

Littauer, Florence. 1986. Your personality tree. Dallas: Word Publishing.

Markova, Dawna and Anne R Powell. 1996. How your child is smart: a life-changing approach to learning. Los Angeles: Conari Press.

Merriam, Sharan B. 2001. “Andragogy and self‐directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory.” New directions for adult and continuing education 2001 (89): 3-14.

Millwood, Richard. 2013. Learning Theory v6_Millwood.D2.2.1.20130430  Accessed 20th July 2015

Page, David L. 2004. Educational Philosophy Part 1 Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2015a. Educational Philosophy Part 2 Accessed 28th March 2015

Parker, A and J Cutler-Stuart. 1986. Switch on your brain: a guide to better reading, concentration and coordination. Sydney: Hale and Iremonger.

Pedagogy versus Andragogy chart courtesy of: Pedagogy vs Andragogy chart Accessed 28th March 2015

Peters, Thomas J. 2003. Re-imagine! London: Dorling Kindersley.

Peters, Thomas J and Nancy Austin. 1985. A passion for excellence. The leadership difference. London: Dorling Kindersley.

Peters, Thomas J, Robert H Waterman and Ian Jones. 1982. In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. London: Dorling Kindersley.

Pieper, Martha Heineman and William Joseph Pieper. 1999. Smart love: the compassionate alternative to discipline that will make you a better parent and your child a better person. Boston: Harvard Common Press

Robbins, Tony. 1991. Awaken the giant within: how to take immediate control of your mental, emotional, physical and financial. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Ryan, Mary Elizabeth. 2014. Reflective practice in the arts. In Literacy in the Arts, edited by G Barton, 77-90. London: Springer.

Schön, Donald A. 1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 355 + xvii pages.

Sperry, Roger W. 1975. Left-brain, right-brain. Saturday Review 2 (23): 30-32.

– ©David L Page 21/07/2015

– updated ©David L Page 20/11/2015

– updated ©David L Page 12/04/2020

Copyright: No aspect of the content of this blog or blog site is to be reprinted or used within any practice without strict permission directly from David L Page.

On track to develop mastery of one self, what is your approach to education and learning?

Layer 8: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session

Continuing on from my previous blogs in this series: as I have indicated in my first blog, I have laid this section out in the following nine (9) parts.

Layer 8a: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 1

In preparing for an education & learning practice session, I develop a plan. In doing so, I commence five (5) tasks.

My first task in developing an education & learning practice session plan is to develop a succinct phrase of the title of the session:

• The title of the session: What is the discipline topic of this education and learning practice session?

My second task in developing an education & learning practice session plan is to develop a succinct sentence stating the rationale of the session:

• The rationale of the session:  What is the purpose of this education & learning practice session? What do I hope to achieve by the end of the education & learning session?

   TIP: Use future tense active words – such as will increase, will gain, will encounter – in developing the rationale of the session. These are to guide your development of practice during the preparation development stage of the session plan.

Examples of Rationale statements: 

1. This education & learning practice session will increase understanding  …..

2. Learners will gain a perspective on……….

3. Learners will encounter these concepts………..

          My third task in developing an education & learning practice session plan is to develop the aims of the session:

• The aims of the session need to be holistic: What is the end goal of your education & learning practice session? What do you plan to do and achieve with the learners by the end of the education & learning practice session? It is very important when developing your aims to remain focussed on the primary aim of the education & learning practice session: to ensure the learners realise the agreed learning outcomes of this session. In order to assist in this process, it is suggested to use a goal-orientated guide such as SMART in developing your session plan: be specific; include measurable statements; ensure the final aim/goal is achievable; and relevant to the learner and the agreed session learning outcomes; and bound in time (Esposito 2015).

  TIP: Use active verbs words –such as practice, trial, discuss, search , research, gather, analyse, articulate, propose, develop, design, record, mix, produce or present – in developing your objectives to guide the learners during the education & learning practice session. The primary objective  of the education & learning practice session is to ensure the learners are engaged in learning as per the agreed learning outcomes of this session.

Examples of Aim statements: 

1. To offer experiential insights into ………

2. To expose the learners to the ……….

3. To have the learners engage in a………..

My fourth task in developing an education & learning practice session plan is to develop the objectives of the session:

•  The objectives of the session need to be more specific than the aims, but still succinct sentences of intent: What are your smaller steps that will help you achieve the main aim of the session? These smaller steps should lead the learners to realise the agreed learning outcomes of this education & learning practice session. Each objective may have a number of learning outcomes. In order to assist in this process, it is suggested to use a goal-orientated guide such as SMART in developing your session plan (Esposito 2015).

TIP: Use active verbs words –such as practice, trial, discuss, search , research, gather, analyse, articulate, propose, develop, design, record, mix, produce or present – in developing your objectives to guide the learners during the education & learning practice session. The primary objective  of the education & learning practice session is to ensure the learners are engaged in learning as per the agreed learning outcomes of this session.

Examples of Objective statements: 

1. The learners identify ……….

2. The learners analyse  …………

3. The learners develop………..

4. The learners produce………..

5. The learners present ……..

My fifth task in developing an education & learning practice session plan is to develop the learning outcomes of the session:

•  The learning outcomes of the session need to be more specific than the aims and objectives, but still succinct sentences of outcome: What are the learning outcomes for each specified objective of the session? These statements state the agreed learning outcomes of this education & learning practice session for both the learning facilitator and the learners. Each objective may have a number of learning outcomes. The learning outcomes must differentiate from each other in terms of an outcome, but may also overlap. In order to assist in this process, it is suggested to use a goal-orientated guide such as SMART in developing your session plan (Esposito 2015).

TIP: Use active verbs words – such as apply, identify, evaluate, formulate, implement, construct, critically analyse, articulate, communicate, develop, work with, create, maintain, plan, employ, demonstrate, develop, design, record, mix, research, propose and publish – in developing your learning outcomes to inform the learners’ from commencement of the education & learning practice session. The primary objective of the education & learning practice session is to ensure the learners are engaged in learning as per these agreed learning outcomes of this session.

Examples of Learning Outcome statements: 

1. The learners apply knowledge of ………

2. The learners evaluate the impact of ……..

3. The learners formulate and implement …….

4. The learners evaluate and maintain………

5. The learners plan…….

6. The learners employ (specific) concepts ……..

7. The learners demonstrate………..

8. The learners employ (specific) skills ………

Layer 8b: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 2

My primary goal for the learning practice session is to align the learning objectives, the learning activities, and the learning assessment tasks (Light et al 2009, 82). The goal in developing a learning practice plan is to focus, with the goal of optimising the effective student learning experience of the particular learners during a learning practice session. For me to develop learning practice plans for a specific environment and learning group, I must understand the parameters of both of these variables as a starting point.

•         What will the learning environment be?

•         And perhaps most importantly, who are my learners?

Learning Space

How I conduct myself in the learning environment will in many ways be dictated by the actual space. Questions regarding the learning space to be considered prior to developing a learning practice plan include:

• Is the learning space part of an organisation with other inhabitants?

• Is there natural light?

• Is it ventilated suitably, or air-conditioned or heated in certain climates?

• Is it free from disturbance from other activities in the shared building?

• How large or small is the space?

• Is it an open space?

• Is it a space with other resources such as tables, chairs, computers within it?

• Is there a degree of portability or movability with those resourses, or are they fixed?

• Is the space naturally conducive to active learning, or passive lecturing?

• Is there an appropriate space for the learning facilitator to manage the learning experience?

Knowing the space allows me to consider what learning activities may be appropriate. Or may prompt me to source alternative learning space options. For example, I may be able to use alternative space within the same building, outside, or even at the local studio or park. Once I have confirmed the learning space options available to me, I am then free to consider the learners.

Layer 8c: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 3

The Learners/Learner pre-assessment/pre-delivery session

The word assessment is an interesting term in education and learning. Mention of the word quite often leads people to recall past experiences of being formally assessed in schools, quite often tarred with negative memories or emotions. In extreme cases I have observed people experience a complete shut down of their senses due to the extremity of their previous formal assessment experiences.

The other use of the term in education and learning is that of informal assessment of a learner: an assessment of the learner from your professional practice perspective – a needs analysis as such of who the learner is. An informal assessment of what the learner needs to ensure they are developing their content, information knowledge base and skills level, in order to maximise their development, their personal empowerment, in order for them to ultimately realise their full life potential.

Step 1: In the development of initial drafts of a generic learning practice plan, I specify the learning aims and objectives. These aims and objectives need succinctly describe the education and learning practitioner’s educational approach, the outcomes of the session, and holistically establish the expected interaction between the learner and the practitioner, predict the likely learning activities, and infer the likely learning assessment tasks. The learning aims and objectives should be the mission statement for the particular learning practice session. It is essential therefore, that the aims and objectives remain the highest priority, as these become the ground that the learning practitioner can bring the learners back to during moments of uncertainty. With so many variables which can potentially change during a learning practice session, it is imperative that the learning practitioner does not waiver from, or neglect the aims and objectives of the learning session.

Step 2: Prior to the learning practice session I want to be in a position to pre-assess the learning group. The extent of the information I ideally need to know prior to developing my learning practice plans is about the background of each of the learners. Having taught across many nations and cultures, the following represents a typical list of information I would be seeking prior to a learning experience session:

• Nationality – what is there nationality, and can any introductory stereo types be gleaned from this about this learner?

• Culture – what is their culture, their values and beliefs? Are there any learners from a particular culture that may require consideration in the planning of this particular education & learning session?

• Native Language – what is the 1st language of this nationality, and can any introductory assumptions be made about this learner?

• Age – what is their approximate age, their life experience, and their generation?

• Life experience – based on their age, can we make any assumptions about this learner?

• Gender – what is their gender and can any national, cultural or age assumptions be made about this learner?

• Education – where are they educated? and to what level of reading, writing and mathematics?

• Work Experience – are they currently skilled in terms of an industry role/occupation, and if so, what type of skill is it (white collar, blue collar, other)?

• Previous experiences in learning – what have their previous learning experiences been? And are these predominantly positive or negative experiences?

• Learner personality. To what degree will the learners be able to engage in any and all types of planned learning tasks, without concern for their lack of engagement due to fears or discomfort with risk-taking, being shy, or introverted?

• Learner aptitude – what are the learner’s aptitude to learning? To what degree have the learners previously demonstrated that they are able to learn in a learning session situation similar to what they are about to engage in?

• Learner strategies – are the learner’s likely to have developed strategies to apply in this learning session situation to successfully realise the learning outcomes?

• Learning styles – what range of learning styles are they likely to have; both in terms of VAKD modalities, and also according to Gardner’s multiple intelligences? How differentiated will the learners’ styles be within this group?

• Learners motivation for engaging in this learning experience. What is their motivation for learning in this instance of learning?

• Content experience – What experience do they have in the planned education and learning context? What do they already know of the planned content? What have they studied or learnt before? How will the planned content of this education and learning session potentially build upon their existing knowledge? To what degree can this learner already demonstrate understanding of content knowledge, or competency of the applied content?

• Declared learning, medical, mental health, intellectual or physical impairment conditions. Do any of the learners have any declared learning, medical, mental health, intellectual or physical impairment that need to be planned for? Do any of learner’s suffer from hearing or sight issues? Anxiety issues that could be prevent them from undertaking a particular type of task? Are there likely to be environmental concerns such as access? How will you plan to support learners with declared learning, medical, mental health, intellectual or physical impairment conditions?

• Undeclared or unaware disabilities that could affect the learners’ ability to successfully realise the planned sessions’ learning outcomes? How will you plan to support learners whose undeclared learning, medical, mental health, intellectual or physical impairment conditions may arise during your education & learning session?

Some important clarifying questions for this final point could be: Is there a required prerequisite to this learning session content?; and if so, what level has the learner likely to have achieved in that content – theoretically and practically? Has the learner also likely to have since that pre-requisite learning event, been able to gain experience applying it in a real world context? In terms of the cohort of learners for this learning experience: can it be assumed that all of the learners will be on the same level of this assumed pre-requisite content? If not, I would need to plan for a mixed-levels education and learning session, being prepared for disparate levels across the cohort, and have pre-thought of a range of multi-level tasks with varying degrees of expectations of activities and tasks, to accommodate the potential range of learner levels, depending on the learners actual level – theoretical or practical – at this time.

Layer 8d: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 4

 If the information highlighted in any of these points is not accessible prior to developing my learning practice plans, then I need to develop what I classify as a generic education & learning practice session plan – an education & learning practice plan which allows me to ascertain such information from within the classroom environment when I first meet with the learners, and then as I grow to know over the ensuing sessions that follow.

Step 3: In the development of initial drafts of a generic education & learning practice plan, I take into consideration the learning session aims and objectives, and plan for a number of education & learning experience scenarios. In order to address the likely event of having a greatly differentiated learner group – a learner group with a wide range of learner types with various thinking orientations or intelligence – I am likely to be in a position where I need to make assumptions, and plan for a range of different scenarios.

Stages of Practice

In every education & learning practice session, there are specific stages of practice. The stages of practice aid the flow of the practice session overall, by dividing the education & learning practice session into logical divisions of introduction, development, conclusion, and closure.

However, these stages of the practice session are dependent upon the approach – theory and method – of the education & learning practice. Therefore I need to answer the following question:

• What is the approach that I will adopt for the education & learning practice that will inform my practice?

I consider a range of learning theories and methods that could be appropriate for this particular education & learning session. As an integral part of this process, I consider the basis of the learning outcomes. Are the required learning outcomes – in nature – technical? functional? interactive? or situational? I make a decision as to what approach I will adopt for this particular education & learning practice, and am now in the position to plan the stages of practice in greater detail. The four (4) stages are:

• Stage 1: the introduction stage to the learners and the learning session  – sets out how I am planning to situate this particular  learning session for this particular group of learners?; how I am planning to illuminate to this particular group of learners, the planned learning outcomes of this session?

• Stage 2: the central stage of the learning session (also referred to as the core stage of learning session) – describes how the purpose of the learning session – content and/or process – will be delivered across a series of tasks and activities. Describes how the learning session is going to be developed so that the desired content and/or process will align with the pre-agreed learning practice aims and objectives;

• Stage 3: the evaluation stage – describes how I am planning to have the learning session evaluated in terms of the content and/or processes. How will I draw the education & learning practice session to a logical conclusion so that the learners can effectively and efficiently evaluate what they have learnt?  What evaluation tools will I use – informal and/or formal?

• Stage 4: the closure stage – describes how the session will be closed.

Sub-stages of Practice

Stage 2 the main stage then needs to be further detailed into a number of discrete education & learning sub-stages. Depending upon the chosen theory or approach, the sub-stages of the Stage 2 learning practice can include:

• • Stage 2a: establishing the context for the learning content and/or process in a situational example;

  • Stage 2b; presentation/instruction stage, teaching of new content and/or process;

  • Stage 2c: a heavily guided scaffolded learning practice stage;

  • Stage 2d: a moderately guided scaffolded learning practice stage

  • Stage 2e: a lightly guided scaffolded learning practice stage, and ;

  • Stage 2f: a performance practice stage.

  • Stage 2g: a debriefing stage, reflecting on, and evaluating the experience of the practice stage

    For greater description of these sub-stages, I refer you to my blog.

Layer 8e: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 5

Step 4: The next step in developing the draft education & learning practice plan is to consider what learning activities and tasks I intend to draw upon to support the learning objectives.These education & learning activities and tasks need to be congruent with the learners background and their expectations, as discussed above. These activities can be intellectual, physical or multi-modal activities. Each of these stages of education & learning practice should allow the education & learning facilitator to facilitate activities and tasks that engage and mobilise the learners, providing effective and efficient opportunities for the learner.

All activities need to be carefully planned and described in detail, predicted times for each activity to be allocated, and clear instructions for those activities and tasks written. These activities and tasks may encompass one or more of the communication modalities: speaking and listening; writing and reading. For example, an education & learning activity and task could be:

• a lecture,

• a workshop  – the workshop is likely to include (in no particular order):

  • an individual work component;

  • a pairwork component;

  • a group work component – perhaps small group, or perhaps whole group.

• or an external task-based project.

The learning session facilitator needs to consider the core learner modalities engaged in during a learning task. Is it predominantly verbal, visual (image, graphic or data-based such as text), or kinaesthetic? Will the planned task fully engage a differentiated learner group? If not, how can the task to be modified?

The learning session facilitator needs to consider the planned interaction that may occur during these activities and tasks, between the facilitator and learner. Facilitator talk is not problematic, providing the time spent is actually realising a very specific objective of the education and learning session.

I consider the likely flow of communication will be at each and every stage of the education & learning practice session. Ultimately: how much time will the facilitator be talking (Ft); and how much time will the learner be engaged in either speaking and listening, or writing and reading (Lt). On every education and learning plan, I provide a narrow column down the right-hand side, where I note the focus of the learning task – either Ft or Lt – and how much time it involves. I am then in a position to add these figures up, informing me of how much facilitator talk (Ft) time there is planned; and how much learner talk (Lt) time there is planned. This is a very quick way to ascertain the probable balance of the proposed education and learning session, with the opportunity for change prior to the session if a likely imbalance is predicted.

Lastly, I need to consider what activity is planned to occur during this time.

•  What will learner be doing? 

I need to detail how the learners are expected to work during each specified task.

Similarly, I also need to detail what I as the facilitator will be doing

• What will I do during this time?

• • classroom management?

  • managing education & learning practice session flow?

  • learning checks?

  • how will my voice likely be? animated? calm?

  • my positioning to the learners?

  • my engagement with the learners?

  • to what degree or distance will I be facilitating the process?

FINAL NOTE: Session activities and tasks need to be aligned with the chosen education and learning theory or approach, and ultimately the aims and the objectives of the particular practice session.

Layer 8f: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 6

Step 5: The next step in developing the draft learning practice plan is to consider what learning assessment tasks are going to be introduced throughout the learning practice, in order to evaluate the learners’ learning. These can be either:

• Informal ‘on the fly’ formative assessment tasks by the learning practitioner;

• More structured formative assessment tasks, or possibly even;

• Formal summative assessment tasks as required for a formal accredited course.

The challenge of formatively assessing the learners can be outlined by the following questions:

• How will I monitor learner progress and needs across the education and learning practice session?

• How will I record the data or evidence of learner’s realised learning?

• At any point in time, how will I best assess the learners are learning?

• What prompting questions could I use to assist the formative assessment process?

• What clarifying questions could I use to assist the formative assessment process?

• What probing questions could I use to assist the formative assessment process?

• What concept checking questions could I use to assist the formative assessment process?

• Essentially, how will I identify if the learners have actually learnt the objective of the task?

 Irrespective of the type of learning session, it is usual for the first type of learning assessment to make up the majority of in-class assessment. It is not unusual for a proactive education and learning practitioner to be assessing the learners – individually, in small groups, in larger groups, or as a whole group – constantly throughout the learning session. Such attention to the learners at any point in time is I believe a significant aspect of the role of a contemporary education and learning practitioner. With large classes, such attention can become quite consuming; and therefore a more structured assessment task may be considered timely to relieve the education and learning practitioner for a period of time, effectively affording them a break from their practice oversight. Such a more structured assessment task can also afford the learner an alternative modality of engagement to the activities they have been engaged in. These learning assessments can be intellectual, physical or multi-modal activities. Irrespective, all learning assessment activities need to be carefully planned, times to be allocated carefully considered, and clear instructions planned. Lastly, it needs to be noted that these learning assessment activities need to be congruent with the proceeding activities, as well as the learners background and their expectations, as discussed above.

Layer 8g: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 7

Step 6: As indicated earlier, with my primary goal for the education & learning practice session to align the learning objectives, learning activities and tasks, and the learning assessment tasks, as I develop the draft learning practice plan, I take the predicted learner experience into consideration. I need to consider how the members of this particular learning experience are likely to approach the pending learning session. Entwistle and Ramsden outline a deep and a surface level of approach “used by students in a wide variety of tasks in different disciplines and departments” (1983, 136).

Deep levels of approach are listed as:

• Personal experience – “integrating the task with one self”

• Relationships – “integrating the parts into a whole”, and

• Meaning – “integrating the whole with its purpose”.

Surface levels of approach are listed as:

• Unrelatedness – “defining the task as separate or its parts as discrete

• Memorisation – “defining the task as a memory task”, and

• Unreflectiveness – “defining the task in an external way” (Entwistle and Ramsden 1983, 137)

Depending on the agreed outcome of this particular education & learning experience, the learners need to be prepared for the style of learning experience they are about to engage in. If the content is required for a competency assessment at a vocational level, one may find a surface level expectation is inherent within the learner. This may be appropriate to the way you as the learning facilitator may intend to engage in, and deliver the content. However, if a surface level expectation is inherent within the learner, and the agreed outcome of this particular learning experience is that of an undergraduate degree module, perhaps the expectation of the education & learning facilitator and the learner will be misaligned – at odds with each other. This misalignment of learning expectations could be problematic within the learning experience, causing a range of possible outcomes such as: learner resistance; learner unwillingness to be involved, engage, or share in the learning experience; further learner attitudinal issues such as becoming introverted, or in contrast, being disruptive or aggressive; or either learner of learner facilitator frustration. It is therefore necessary to ensure that the learner expectation and the learner facilitator expectations are aligned; and if not, addressed at the earliest opportunity.

Layer 8h: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 8

Step 7: The last step in developing the draft education & learning practice session plan is to consider what resources, tools and technology I may need to organise in order to support the specified learning objectives, learning activities & tasks, and the assessment tasks of that practice session.

Some focus questions could include:

• What needs to be considered and completed before the education & learning practice session commences?

• What materials and resources will I need to have prepared prior to class (human, physical, IT)?

• What digital tools and/or resources will I want to use in this practice session?

• Will I need any technical support? If so state what, where and when.

• Do I need to contact IT support prior to my education & learning practice session?

• Do I need to schedule time to load computer programs or learning technologies prior to class? 

Layer 8i: My approach in preparing for a learning practice session Pt 9

The final stage in this process – once the education & learning practice session plan has been developed – is to consider the various forms such a plan may be required to be presented in. Whilst I have outlined each of these forms via a specific applied example of education & learning practice in another blog series series (Page 1990), an overview of these are:

1. Synopsis Education & Learning Practice Session plan: this summary paragraph will be used by the marketing department to actually advertise the education & learning practice session – to attract learners of the potential fit of this program for their specific needs

2. Summary Education & Learning Practice Session plan: this brief summary document may include only a section of either the aims, objectives or learning outcomes; and probably the task headings of what is to be on the agenda of the education & learning practice session. It could be used to present to the learners at the start of the session to outline the skeletal program of the education & learning session. Good practice would be also to use at the close of the session to recap what has been covered over the course of the learning session;

3. The Interpretive Education & Learning Practice Session plan: this document would include the rationale, the aims, the objectives, and the learning outcomes, but may or may not include an education & learning approach to be taken. This level of documentation could be used by facilitators who are going to deliver the program that can be afforded some individual freedom of the approach and the tasks;

4. Prescriptive Education & Learning Practice Session plan: this document would include the rationale, the aims, the objectives, the learning outcomes, and the intended education & learning approach indicating the pedagogy or andragogy. This document can be used for facilitators who are required to deliver a course in a specific way. A tertiary level course with multiple tutorial groups could require this level of documentation. In this scenario there are likely multiple instructors across multiple classes of learners who the administrators believe would benefit from sharing a similar experience;

5. Prescriptive Plus Education & Learning Practice Session plan: similar to the above, this document would also include the rationale, the aims, the objectives, the learning outcomes, and the intended education & learning approach indicating the pedagogy or andragogy. Perhaps a formal industry accreditation course with ongoing multiple tutorial groups could require this level of documentation. The facilitators are delivering a course with important outcomes, demanding a duplicatable session so that irrespective of which session a learner attends, the learners will share a similar learning experience to that of another person in another session;

6. Full/Detailed Education & Learning Session Plan. This is the master, fully-scoped document that I as the practice session developer developed as part of my preparatory practice, detailing every aspect of the education & learning practice session, including the learner group, and contingency strategies to address possible changes in circumstances during the actual practice sessions; or

7. Instructional Education & Learning Session Plan. This is another version of the full/detailed Education & Learning Session Plan, that may include specific criteria terminology outside of what one may expect in a usual Education & Learning Session Plan. The Instructional Education & Learning Session Plan may be provided to a practitioner-in-training in an organisation which requires specifically worded criteria to be met in order for that practitioner-in-training to meet minimum performance standards. Whilst the criteria terminology may be different to usual education & learning practice session, it certainly should only differ to a usual Education & Learning Session Plan in the way the essential elements are divided or described. It should in short, contain all of the usual Education & Learning Session Plan elements (Page 1990).

            This blog series is planned to continue with Educational Philosophy Part 3c .

References

Entwistle, Noel and Paul Ramsden. 1983. Understanding Student Learning. New York: Routledge Revivals.

Esposito, Emily 2015 The Essential Guide to Writing S.M.A.R.T Goals  Accessed 20th November 2015

Light, Greg, Susanna Calkins and Roy Cox. 2009. Learning and teaching in higher education: the reflective professional. London: Sage.

Onion image courtesy of: Onion Layers Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2015a. Educational Philosophy Part 2 Accessed 15th June 2015

Page, David L. 2015b. Educational Philosophy Part 3a Accessed 15th June 2015

Page, David L. 2015c. Educational Philosophy Part 3c Accessed 15th June 2015

Page, David L. 2004. Educational Philosophy Part 1 Accessed 15th June 2015

Page, David L. 1990. E+L Session Plans Part 1 Accessed 15th June 2015

Bibliography

Anderson, C, Carolyn Carattini, Heather Clarke, Gail Hewton, David Page 2015 QUT KKP623 Reflective Practice in Action Group Presentation submission Accessed October 24, 2015.

Angelo, Thomas A and K Patricia Cross. 1993. “Classroom assessment techniques: A handbookfor college teachers.” San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Armstrong, Thomas. 1999. 7 Kinds of Smart: Identifying and Developing Your Multiple Intelligences. New York: Plume Books.

Ashwin, Paul. 2006. Changing higher education: the development of learning and teaching. New York: Routledge.

Bradbury, Helen, Nick Frost, Sue Kilminster and Miriam Zukus. 2010. Beyond reflective practice: new approaches to professional lifelong learning. New York: Routledge.

Billett, Stephen. 2001. Learning in the workplace: strategies for effective practice. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Boud, David, Rosemary Keogh and David Walker. 2013. Reflection: turning experience into learning. New York: Routledge.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 2006. The skillful teacher: on technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom. 2 ed. San Francisco: The Jossey Bass.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 2002. “Using the lenses of critically reflective teaching in the community college classroom.” New Directions for Community Colleges 2002 (118): 31-38.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 1995. Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Brookfield, Stephen. 1986. Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Chopra, Deepak. 1996. The seven spiritual laws of success: a practical guide to the fulfilment of your dreams. New York: Random House.

Covey, Stephen R. 2013. The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Covey, Stephen R. 1991. Principle centered leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Covey, Stephen R. 1989. The 7 habits of highly effective people. Melbourne: The Business Library.

Dyer, Wayne W. 1992. Real magic: creating miracles in everyday life. Sydney: Harper Collins.

Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T. and Tesch-Römer, C., 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review, 100(3), p.363.

Fisher, Douglas and Nancy Frey. 2007. Checking for understanding: formative assessment techniques for your classroom. New York: ASCD.

Gardner, Howard and Thomas Hatch. 1989. “Multiple Intelligences go to school: educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences.” Educational researcher 18 (8): 4-10.

Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences image courtesy of:  Gardners’ MI   Accessed 28th March 2015

Gawith, Gwen. 1991. Power learning: a student’s guide to success. Melbourne: Longman Chesire.

Gerber, Michael E. 2005. E Myth Mastery. New York: Harper Audio.

Gerber, Michael E. 1999. The e-myth manager: why management doesn’t work – and what to do about it. New York: Harper Business.

Gerber, Michael E. 1988. The E Myth. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Grace, S and R Ajjawi. 2010. Phenomenological research: Understanding human phenomena. Researcing practice: A discussion on qualitative methodologies. Rotterdam: Sense.

Griffiths, Morweena. 2010. “Research and the self.” In The Routledge companion to research in the arts, edited by M Biggs and H Karlsson, 167-185. London: Routledge.

Haseman, B 2015. “Forensic reflective practice: effecting personal and systemic change.” Accessed May 24, 2015. https://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_118711_1&content_id=_5744651_1.

Kemp, Anthony E. 1996. The musical temperament. New York: Oxford University Press.

Knowles, Malcolm S, Elwood F Holton III and Richard A Swanson. 2012. The adult learner: the definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. 7 ed. New York: Routledge.

Lawrence-Wilkes, L. & Chapman, A. 2015. Reflective Practice. Accessed March 28th, 2015 http://www.businessballs.com/reflective-practice.htm

Littauer, Florence. 1986. Your personality tree. Dallas: Word Publishing.

Markova, Dawna and Anne R Powell. 1996. How your child is smart: a life-changing approach to learning. Los Angeles: Conari Press.

McKee, Alan. 2003. Textual analysis: a beginner’s guide. London: Sage

Merriam, Sharan B. 2001. “Andragogy and self‐directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory.” New directions for adult and continuing education 2001 (89): 3-14.

Millwood, Richard. 2013. Learning Theory v6_Millwood.D2.2.1.20130430  Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2015d. Music Practitioner Part 3 Accessed 28th March 2015

Parker, A and J Cutler-Stuart. 1986. Switch on your brain: a guide to better reading, concentration and coordination. Sydney: Hale and Iremonger.

Pascal, J., & Thompson, N. 2012. Developing critically reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 13(2), 311. doi: 10.1080/14623943.2012.657795

Pedagogy versus Andragogy chart courtesy of: Pedagogy vs Andragogy chart Accessed 28th March 2015

Peters, Thomas J. 2003. Re-imagine! London: Dorling Kindersley.

Peters, Thomas J and Nancy Austin. 1985. A passion for excellence. The leadership difference. London: Dorling Kindersley.

Peters, Thomas J, Robert H Waterman and Ian Jones. 1982. In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. London: Dorling Kindersley.

Pieper, Martha Heineman and William Joseph Pieper. 1999. Smart love: the compassionate alternative to discipline that will make you a better parent and your child a better person. Boston: Harvard Common Press

Robbins, Tony. 1991. Awaken the giant within: how to take immediate control of your mental, emotional, physical and financial. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Roth, Robert. 1989. “Preparing the reflective practitioner: transforming the apprentice through the dialectic“. Journal of Teacher Education 40 (2): 31-35

Ryan, Mary Elizabeth. 2014. Reflective practice in the arts. In Literacy in the Arts, edited by G Barton, 77-90. London: Springer.

SAE Institute, 2015 SAE Institute Accessed 28th March 2015

Schön, Donald A. 1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 355 + xvii pages.

Schön, Donald A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Aldershot, England: Arena.

Sperry, Roger W. 1975. Left-brain, right-brain. Saturday Review 2 (23): 30-32.

Springer, Sally P and Georg Deutsch. 1993. Left brain, right brain. 4 ed. New York: WH Freeman & Company.

– ©David L Page 17/06/2015

– updated ©David L Page 20/11/2015

– updated ©David L Page 12/04/2020

Copyright: No aspect of the content of this blog or blog site is to be reprinted or used within any practice without strict permission directly from David L Page.

On track to develop mastery of one self, what is your approach to education and learning?

Layer 7: My approach to educational practice

Continuing on from my previous blogs in this series: as I have indicated in prior blogs “I have been fortunate in my educational practice career to have taught across different eras, across a diverse number of fields and disciplines, across different environments and situations, for different desired outcomes, and to vastly different sets of learners. I therefore, have had the privilege to develop a diverse range of educational practice, across many different learning theories” (Page 2004). Millwood’s (2013) project Holistic Approach to Technology Enhanced Learning  (HoTEL) visually highlights the many different approaches an educator or facilitator may approach a specific learning environment and group of learners. All are potentially useful depending upon the context, the desired outcomes, and the learners. As I stated previously, it “would be foolish, and I believe the voice of inexperience for anyone to suggest one discipline and learning paradigm as being superior to another. They are different, and have developed as a result of different needs in different situations with different practitioners for different learners” (Page 2004). Though with time and conscious development, I have developed my personal philosophical approach to not only life, but also to my educational practice.  Fundamentally,

“my educational practice, how I engage within the site, and with my learners, and in fact how I approach all aspects of my life – my practice, and my self – is within a Learning Organisation paradigm” (Page 2004).

Pedagogy vs Andragogy

A Learning Organisation paradigm fits appropriately along side of the andragogical movement of adult educational practice (Knowles et al 2012). The andragogical movement differentiates itself from a pedagogical perspective of practice primarily around the age and dependence of the learner. Pedagogy, based on the greek word for child assumes the learner is a dependent, reliant upon the educator in the learning environment. In contrast, the andragogical movement defined as “the art and science of helping adults learn”, assumes the learner is self-directed, and responsible for their own learning (Knowles in Merriam 2001, 5).

Figure I – Pedagogy vs Andragogy Chart (2015)

There is some debate as to the validity of the andragogical approach being used in the same breath as a pedagogical method. However, my view is both approaches have their place in contemporary adult and education and learning practice. Whilst fundamentally I am predisposed to a andragogical approach to my education and learning practice, it does not exclude instances where I consider a pedagogical approach may be more appropriate in order to optimise the effective student learning experience of a particular learner or learners at that time (Boud in Ashwin 2006,19). I rely on sound sustainable and replicatable methodological approaches within my education and learning practice. As mentioned, I am in a position to draw on developed content, information knowledge and skill gained across a wide range of experience in different learning theories and approaches. I have yet to experience one theory or approach that is optimal in every contemporary adult education and learning practice context.

Multiple-facetted approach

I also rely on my life experience to assist in the learning process as I see appropriate.  I regularly draw on a broad range of roles and faces to assist me in my educational practice. Assuming that within a learning practice session of say twenty-four (24) learners, there is expected to be a wide range of backgrounds, personalities, thinking and learning orientations. I as the learning facilitator approach the learning experience knowing I need to be flexible and adaptable to cater to, or relate to, the individual learner. Some of the roles or faces I see my self as having include that of: an educator, a teacher, a facilitator, an authority, a coach, a motivator, a guide, a mentor, a consultant, a manager, a delegator, a performer, an adviser, a supervisor, a curator, a learner, a peer, a team member, an empathiser, a friend, a parent, a disciplinarian, a court jester, a cajoler, a philosophiser, an administrator, a carer, or a (small c) counsellor, to name a few (Light et all, 2009, 122). I find having such a multiple facetted role and face approach in the practice of education and learning is particularly necessary when approaching students who have varying degrees of learner experience and development. For instance, as Knowles et al summary of four (4) stages in Adult Learner Learning Autonomy highlights, for each stage of a student’s development, the learner facilitator will require a different role or face.

• Stage 1 learner development: student dependence, in which the teacher may need to be one of an authoritative figure or a coach;

• Stage 2 learner development: student interested, in which the teacher may need to be one of a motivator or guide;

• Stage 3 learner development: student involved, in which the teacher may need to be one of a facilitator;

• Stage 4 learner development: student self-directed, in which the teacher may need to be one of a consultant or delegator (Knowles et al 2012, 185).

Further to this, I have regularly found that even within the one learner, they may be at different stages of their learner development depending upon what the task at hand is. For example, if a learner is expected to engage in four (4) tasks during a 180 minutes learning session – for example researching, analysing, discussing and writing – a learner may have differing levels of aptitude, competence and development across these four (4) functions. Therefore, as a professional learning practitioner, I am likely to draw on a range of my multiple facetted practice roles and faces within the learning environment context in order to optimise my interaction with the learners.

My sole purpose of engaging in these multiple practice faces is to assist the learner in gaining an understanding or insight of their learning challenge at that particular point in time. My goal is always first and foremost to assist the learner, and optimise the effective student learning experience at that moment in time. I would also like to state: I would be incongruent if I was to claim that I always get the correct balance when approaching a particular learner or group of learners. I don’t. However, as a practitioner and social being I need to take ownership of what choices and decisions I have made at any point in time, and at a later time, make the time to reflect on my decisions, actions and  outcomes that presented themselves within the learning environment I was responsible for.

Replication and Duplication of Practitioner Practice

Some observers could consider such a multi facetted practice approach as being problematic in terms of institutional management, given that such an individual practitioner approach may not be a replicatable or duplicatable methodological approach across faculty.  As most are aware, the landscape of higher education has rapidly changed over the past decade, and is continuing to evolve. Business measures of success have increasing become measures of higher education institutions – economic effectiveness and efficiency.  Accepted business processes are being developed in order to attempt to control the three (3) pillars of higher education activity: teaching, research, administration & service (Light et al 2009, 3-8).  I believe the parameters surrounding these three pillars can be and should be defined to benchmarked best practice in order to maintain levels of service delivery to all learners irrespective of the institution they attend. But I do not agree that learning practitioners could ever, or should ever have their unique practitioner approaches restricted – as long as these practices are aligned with optimising the effective student learning experience of those particular learners. I rely on sound sustainable and replicatable methodological approaches within my educational practice. However, as developed across the preceding Layers, my view is that each practitioner is a unique self, with potentially differing culture, education, age (generational experience), work experience, previous experiences in learning, learning styles, motivation to learn, and prior experience in the pending agreed learning experience discipline or subject area. Each practitioner should also have a uniquely personalised and developed content, information knowledge base and skill level. Each practitioner will therefore bring to a learning experience a unique approach to practice, in order to optimise the effective student learning experience of those particular learners. I consider the uniqueness of the professional practitioner to being a valid and exciting aspect of the contemporary education and learning field.

Practitioner Congruence

It is important to note: in order for me to practice to a level of personal integrity – being professionally congruent with my practice – irrespective of who my learners are. I must ensure that my educational philosophy is aligned to the executive leadership of the education institution where I am conducting my practice. As a professional education and learning practitioner, I accept one of my core values is to assist people with their learning. Having experienced issues with learning at certain stages of my development, I consider my self to have an empathy and a holistic care for people, wanting to assist them in any way that they need, to ensure they are developing their content, information knowledge base and skills level, maximising their development, their personal empowerment, in order for them to ultimately realise their full life potential.

It would be problematic for me to engage in educational practice within an organisation or institution where their educational philosophy was not aligned to my philosophy and approach. In approaching an educational or learning program, I either commence by creating a curriculum from this philosophical stance. However, if I am in a learning institution where I have not been part of the curriculum development process, I need to ascertain and absorb the specifics of the content; determine how best this content can be delivered to address the learning outcomes in way that is aligned to my philosophy; develop a teaching program across the full duration of the course; and then at that point I can begin to draft the individual learning experience plans.

       Professional Practice

As mentioned in Layer 2 of my previous blog, my over riding philosophical stance embraces the 10,000 hours trades philosophy of skilled craftworkers (Ericsson et al 1993). I value and believe in the merit of developing of a skill, a trade, a craft, or art – for that practitioner developing specialist knowledge and tools over many thousand’s of hours of practice, to ultimately express one self through uniquely personalised and developed content, information knowledge base and skill level. I consider this approach integral to becoming a professional practitioner.

            This blog series is planned to continue with Educational Philosophy Part 3b.

References

Ashwin, Paul. 2006. Changing higher education: the development of learning and teaching. New York: Routledge.

Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T. and Tesch-Römer, C., 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review, 100(3), p.363.

Knowles, Malcolm S, Elwood F Holton III and Richard A Swanson. 2012. The adult learner: the definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. 7 ed. New York: Routledge.

Light, Greg, Susanna Calkins and Roy Cox. 2009. Learning and teaching in higher education: the reflective professional. London: Sage.

Merriam, Sharan B. 2001. “Andragogy and self‐directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory.” New directions for adult and continuing education 2001 (89): 3-14.

Millwood, Richard. 2013. Learning Theory v6_Millwood.D2.2.1.20130430  Accessed 28th March 2015

Onion image courtesy of: Onion Layers Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2015a. Educational Philosophy Part 2 Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2015b. Educational Philosophy Part 3b Accessed 28th March 2015

Page, David L. 2004. Educational Philosophy Part 1 Accessed 28th March 2015

Pedagogy versus Andragogy chart courtesy of: Pedagogy vs Andragogy chart Accessed 28th March 2015

Bibliography

Anderson, C, Carolyn Carattini, Heather Clarke, Gail Hewton, David Page 2015 QUT KKP623 Reflective Practice in Action Group Presentation submission Accessed October 24, 2015.

Angelo, Thomas A and K Patricia Cross. 1993. “Classroom assessment techniques: A handbookfor college teachers.” San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Armstrong, Thomas. 1999. 7 Kinds of Smart: Identifying and Developing Your Multiple Intelligences. New York: Plume Books.

Bradbury, Helen, Nick Frost, Sue Kilminster and Miriam Zukus. 2010. Beyond reflective practice: new approaches to professional lifelong learning. New York: Routledge.

Billett, Stephen. 2001. Learning in the workplace: strategies for effective practice. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Boud, David, Rosemary Keogh and David Walker. 2013. Reflection: turning experience into learning. New York: Routledge.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 2006. The skillful teacher: on technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom. 2 ed. San Francisco: The Jossey Bass.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 2002. “Using the lenses of critically reflective teaching in the community college classroom.” New Directions for Community Colleges 2002 (118): 31-38.

Brookfield, Stephen D. 1995. Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Brookfield, Stephen. 1986. Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Chopra, Deepak. 1996. The seven spiritual laws of success: a practical guide to the fulfilment of your dreams. New York: Random House.

Covey, Stephen R. 2013. The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Covey, Stephen R. 1991. Principle centered leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Covey, Stephen R. 1989. The 7 habits of highly effective people. Melbourne: The Business Library.

Dyer, Wayne W. 1992. Real magic: creating miracles in everyday life. Sydney: Harper Collins.

Entwistle, Noel and Paul Ramsden. 1983. Understanding Student Learning. New York: Routledge Revivals.

Esposito, Emily 2015 The Essential Guide to Writing S.M.A.R.T Goals  Accessed 20th November 2015

Fisher, Douglas and Nancy Frey. 2007. Checking for understanding: formative assessment techniques for your classroom. New York: ASCD.

Gardner, Howard and Thomas Hatch. 1989. “Multiple Intelligences go to school: educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences.” Educational researcher 18 (8): 4-10.

Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences image courtesy of:  Gardners’ MI   Accessed 28th March 2015

Gawith, Gwen. 1991. Power learning: a student’s guide to success. Melbourne: Longman Chesire.

Gerber, Michael E. 2005. E Myth Mastery. New York: Harper Audio.

Gerber, Michael E. 1999. The e-myth manager: why management doesn’t work – and what to do about it. New York: Harper Business.

Gerber, Michael E. 1988. The E Myth. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Grace, S and R Ajjawi. 2010. Phenomenological research: Understanding human phenomena. Researcing practice: A discussion on qualitative methodologies. Rotterdam: Sense.

Griffiths, Morweena. 2010. “Research and the self.” In The Routledge companion to research in the arts, edited by M Biggs and H Karlsson, 167-185. London: Routledge.

Haseman, B 2015. “Forensic reflective practice: effecting personal and systemic change.” Accessed May 24, 2015. https://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_118711_1&content_id=_5744651_1.

 Lawrence-Wilkes, L. & Chapman, A. 2015. Reflective Practice. Accessed March 28th, 2015 http://www.businessballs.com/reflective-practice.htm

Littauer, Florence. 1986. Your personality tree. Dallas: Word Publishing.

Markova, Dawna and Anne R Powell. 1996. How your child is smart: a life-changing approach to learning. Los Angeles: Conari Press.

McKee, Alan. 2003. Textual analysis: a beginner’s guide. London: Sage

Page, David L. 2015c. Music Practitioner Part 3 Accessed 28th March 2015

Parker, A and J Cutler-Stuart. 1986. Switch on your brain: a guide to better reading, concentration and coordination. Sydney: Hale and Iremonger.

Pascal, J., & Thompson, N. 2012. Developing critically reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 13(2), 311. doi: 10.1080/14623943.2012.657795

Peters, Thomas J. 2003. Re-imagine! London: Dorling Kindersley.

Peters, Thomas J and Nancy Austin. 1985. A passion for excellence. The leadership difference. London: Dorling Kindersley.

Peters, Thomas J, Robert H Waterman and Ian Jones. 1982. In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. London: Dorling Kindersley.

Pieper, Martha Heineman and William Joseph Pieper. 1999. Smart love: the compassionate alternative to discipline that will make you a better parent and your child a better person. Boston: Harvard Common Press

Robbins, Tony. 1991. Awaken the giant within: how to take immediate control of your mental, emotional, physical and financial. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Roth, Robert. 1989. “Preparing the reflective practitioner: transforming the apprentice through the dialectic“. Journal of Teacher Education 40 (2): 31-35

Ryan, Mary Elizabeth. 2014. Reflective practice in the arts. In Literacy in the Arts, edited by G Barton, 77-90. London: Springer.

SAE Institute, 2015 SAE Institute Accessed 28th March 2015

Schön, Donald A. 1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 355 + xvii pages.

Schön, Donald A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Aldershot, England: Arena.

Sperry, Roger W. 1975. Left-brain, right-brain. Saturday Review 2 (23): 30-32.

Springer, Sally P and Georg Deutsch. 1993. Left brain, right brain. 4 ed. New York: WH Freeman & Company.

– ©David L Page 25/05/2015

– updated ©David L Page 20/11/2015

Copyright: No aspect of the content of this blog or blog site is to be reprinted or used within any practice without strict permission directly from David L Page.