Reading 2 (Theme 1)

Second reading on Theme One: What's behind my teaching? A personal philosophy

Kelly, Lynda (2000). Understanding conceptions of learnng. Sydney: University of Technology. Downloaded on 6 March 2008 from http://www.austmus.gov.au/amarc/pdf/research/paper2000.pdf

This paper is written from a learner-centred constructivist and experiential perspective. It records qualitative research into museum learning and looks at how an individual’s “learning image” (their personal philosophy of learning) can be uncovered. The research was located within grounded theory drawing on phenomenography as an analysis tool. It was concerned with how adult museum visitors think and talk about learning.

The authorial researchers argue that in order to understand learning we must start with the learner’s experience rather than the content or outcome of the learning.

Their definition: “learning is a dynamic process dependant on both the individual and thieir environment that focuses on some change ( a change in point of view/the way one sees the world/knowledge/skill level/the way a person sees themselves)

The first part of this paper deals with previously researched conceptions of learning. They cite Marton and Svensson’s (1979) 3 aspects of studying conceptions of learning, viz.
How the person relates themselves to the situation
How the learner makes meaning from content
How the learner thinks about their learning as a conscious act
They surmise that thinking about learning as a conscious act enhances the learning

Marton et al(1993) suggest a hierarchy of conceptions of learning ranging from increasing knowledge to “changing as a person”.

Park (1994) found that respondents felt that learning that had been chosen by an individual is associated with higher levels of fulfilment than learning imposed upon him/her ; self-chosen learning associated with fulfilment.

Griffin (1998) found students thought they were not learning unless they were doing something “formal” as at school

Taylor & Spencer (1994) People regarded formal education as associated with school and “ imposed and prescriptive”; learning was informal, positive, personal, ongoing, lifelong

Some of Kelly’s findings:
Early learning experiences recalled are intensely personal and related to things outside of formal “content” of school
Remembered experiences outside of school link with children’s interests
Social learning experiences were significant
Learning as opposed to remembering
Relevant learning is more satisfying
The internet was seen as a valuable learning tool; often the starting point for finding information

Discussion

Researching the type of learning that occurs in a museum was a novel one for me but offered an interesting context for exploring conceptions of learning. It brings to the forefront the ideas of informal learning vs formal learning and it highlighted the differences in perceptions of learning. The student responses that “just looking around” did not count as learning and that learning is something formal that happened in school confirmed for me the need for conscious reflection and application that makes the learning conscious. It also made me re-think my ideas of serendipitous learning. For example, when I have given students a task that has involved online research, I have always believed that the process may lead to “incidental serendipitous” learning via browsing. Should students be encouraged to provide feedback on the search itself as well as the findings in order for such incidental learning to be recognised and valued?

The other interesting aspect of the research referred to the adult responses. They regarded formal education in a negative light and viewed informal education as real learning and a positive developmental process. The idea of experiencing higher levels of fulfilment from learning that had been chosen than by learning that had been imposed upon them draws attention to the idea of motivation for learning and the possible advantages of including some level of choice. I believe this provides a level of learner empowerment or control that supports a more positive level of self-efficacy and makes me consider the question – To what extent should we include the opportunity for choice in lesson design?

References from article:
Griffin, J. (1998). School-museum Integrated Learning Experiences in Science: A Learning
journey. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Sydney: University of Technology
Marton, F. and Svensson, L. (1979). Conceptions of research in student learning. Higher
education, 8(4), 471-486.
Park, A. (1994). Individual commitment to lifelong learning; individuals’ attitudes: report on the
quantitative phase. Research series no. 32. Moorfoot. Sheffield: Employment Department.
Taylor, S. and Spencer, E. (1994). Individual commitment to lifelong learning: individuals’
attitudes: report on the qualitative phase. Research series No. 31. Moorfoot, Sheffield; Employment Department.