My Teaching Philosophy:

My teaching philosophy is informed by a lifelong interest in intercultural communication and scholarly-based, student-centered curriculum design. It is also inspired by my interest in popular culture and new technologies. My approach to learning is informed by humanist, social learning and constructivist principles. I invite students to express themselves as individuals and I am sensitive to the emotional, as well as cognitive, dimensions of the learning process. My philosophy prioritizes personal and cultural reflexivity, student feedback and innovation.

Personal and cultural reflexivity:

Effective teaching and learning (whether online or offline) is co-created and co-constructed in a reciprocal and evolving interaction between student, teacher and subject. Students are not ‘empty vessels’ waiting to be ‘filled-up’ with knowledge; they bring unique insights and understandings to the teaching and learning process. I endeavor to understand and appreciate the diversity of student experience by not making assumptions based on a student’s demographic information or cultural and linguistic background; rather, I provide the scope and opportunity for students to reflect upon and articulate their unique relationship with the knowledge and skills they bring to their studies – and to the broader university culture.

Personal reflexivity

My reflective practice in light of student and peer feedback ensures that I do not deliver exactly the same content in repeat iterations of a course. I solicit ongoing feedback throughout my courses, by inviting students to comment on the activities and assessments in reflexive discussions. I also carefully monitor formal university surveys and anonymous feedback.

I do not shy away from complexity in my course design and delivery; rather, popular media examples are used to encourage students to engage with complexity as it manifests in students’ everyday lives. I aim to create learning situations that are challenging and stimulating, but not so much so that they become a prolonged source of anxiety and frustration for students (see “Zone of Proximal Development” Vygotsky). I take a semi-constructivist approach where I partner complex academic texts with news articles, popular media examples, TED talks and YouTube videos to show that university learning is relevant to students’ everyday lives. I also often solicit student-selected examples and base analytical assessments on topics of their choice.

Cultural reflexivity

A majority of my teaching work involves students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. However, I build a sense of acculturation into my course design – whether or not it caters specifically to culturally and linguistically diverse students. Acculturation is defined as the process of “adapting to or borrowing traits from another culture; also:  a merging of cultures as a result of prolonged contact” (Merriam-Webster)[1]. The process of acculturation is akin to learning new knowledge; it can be de-stabilizing and emotional, as it often challenges preconceived worldviews and requires patience to understand. In courses designed specifically to help international students’ acculturation process, I present key academic skills and concepts as being culturally specific priorities and perspectives. I demystify not only Australian culture, but also the ‘culture’ of the university and offer comprehensive philosophical explanations and justifications for why I structure my courses the way I do. An invitation is extended to students to reflect upon and make sense of new academic cultural practices, in light of their own experiences.

For example, through discussions with students in an acculturation course for international postgraduates, I discovered that the concept of academic integrity, as we understand it in Australia, is not universal. Many postgraduate students had never used referencing before, as it was not a skill that was privileged in previous university and/or workplace experiences in their home countries. I amended the curriculum to include cultural philosophies of knowledge and knowledge production that underpin academic integrity, as it is understood in an Australian context. The rationale for this was to promote a deep understanding of ‘why’ referencing is used, as opposed to addressing how and when to reference. This strategy made a significant difference to the quality of referencing (and subsequently reduced the number of academic misconduct cases).

Innovation:

I am constantly striving to find the ideal ‘blend’ between technology and student engagement. I have found that it is pedagogically risky to approach the design of online and offline activities in the same way (see Jones and Bennett, 2014). For example, learning activities that are extremely effective in face-to-face environments, when teacher and peers are able to model, encourage and drive engagement in real time, such as rigorous debate and discussion, do not translate well into the asynchronous, text-based, online ‘forums’. I avoid text-based conversation formats online, like discussion forums. I believe that online learning activities should supplement reading activity with alternative and interactive ways of approaching the material.

I found I was able to improve online student engagement by uploading a simple ‘selfie’ video to YouTube each week to ‘touch-base’ with online-only students. Students commented that they enjoyed the spontaneous and personal interaction and that they looked forward to it each week.

My aim to design innovative and engaging online learning spaces is a work in progress. While students enjoyed the video ‘selfies’, encouraging participation in online discussions, lectures and collaborative activities still proves challenging for online-only cohorts. I am experimenting with modularization, reflective journals, real-time audio discussions, Skype chats, games, MOOCs and interactive quizzes to find creative and engaging activities for students who are participating online.

 

 

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/acculturation