Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Alex Collopy
ECE 451
Before starting this course, my teaching philosophy was flimsy at best. While I had some
experience in learning about different teaching styles and theories, I did not yet feel that I had
enough knowledge to apply to my own experiences. When I took EDTHP 15 freshman year, I
took a liking to the teaching philosophies of Romanticism and Progressivism. I would not
necessarily say that was when my teaching philosophy really developed, but at least I had a name
to give to some of the ideas floating around in my head. I also liked the idea of open dialogue
between teachers and students in the classroom and the belief that teachers and students should
be lifelong learners. As I feel my preferred teaching philosophies begin to slowly develop within
me throughout this semester, I am noticing a couple of patterns. As of this point in the semester,
I am beginning to explore the idea that learning is a process rather than a product. I have also
taken a liking to the idea that a teacher should provide unconditional love for their students and
that the process of labelling students can be detrimental to their development and well-being.
I remember that when this semester began, we opened with the idea that learning should
be about growth and improvement, not necessarily about achieving a certain result within a
specific time frame. While I do think that it is possible to set specific goals in the classroom and
work tirelessly to achieve them, I think that doing so sacrifices focus that could be spent
observing milestones in learning. That is why this class focuses on workshopping every
assignment that we do in order to slowly improve our quality of understanding. Getting into the
habit of seeing learning as a process will be helpful when we eventually have classrooms of our
own. In fact, one topic that we have revisited in class that especially resonates with me is the idea
that the teacher should be learning alongside the student. I also now see the importance of
tracking performance through documentation. It can be used to create visual, aural, or written
evidence of progress. This helps the teacher know if they are making significant improvement in
their classes, or if progress seems to stagnate and the teacher should reconsider if certain
practices are actually having a positive effect on their students (Sietz). I think that documentation
is what makes learning alongside students really possible, because without having a specific
method of tracking progress, how could we possibly expect teachers to simultaneously keep
track of both their students’ progress as well as their own? However, I also believe that teachers
should be cautious about how they document their work. If the documents only seem to compare
students’ performance with each other rather than themselves over time, then it can take on a
competitive nature and actually have a negative effect on students (Seitz). I think that a good
way to avoid this would be to make every child’s medium of documentation personalized. Every
child’s record does not necessarily have to include the same type of projects and assignments as
their classmates. Every child learns at a different pace and learns certain subjects more easily
than others, and I believe that their records should support that sense of individualism.
I also feel like I got the chance to explore the world of informal learning. I have never
really considered how tasks as simple as choosing a meal or running around in the dirt could be
valuable to a child’s education. These different experiences can even affect their behavior in the
classroom. For example, in my HDFS 428 lecture we discussed the case of a daycare class of
children who did not know how to use the miniature grocery store that the teachers had set up for
them. This was because their parents never took them out grocery shopping with them, and
therefore had nothing to base their play off of. Initially, I saw choosing food as a simple
necessity, while in reality it could be a great chance for a child to practice their decision-making
skills. Until I started taking this class and CI 295A, I did not necessarily pay much mind to the
importance of tactile learning. Maybe it is because as a child I was taught that there is a clear
divide between “learning” and “playing” or “goofing off.” I am starting to understand that in
reality, all experiences may have educational value if one looks at the situation from a certain
playing with slime or paint can help stimulate a child’s creative and cognitive development. I
learned from my mentor teacher that exploring methods of tactile learning allow children the
opportunity to create and solve their own questions and scenarios, not unlike how a researcher
would test a hypothesis. This style of teaching seems to combine qualities valued in Montessori
and Reggio-Emilia inspired schools. When reading through Edwards’ article, I noticed that
Montessori and Reggio inspired classrooms involved a lot of materials that provided children the
development as well. I remember reading about different experiences that Ayers highlighted in
his book. He emphasized the importance of collaboration and teamwork, especially when he
decided to make a lesson out of creating a ramp for the class turtle (Ayers 2010). These lessons
also remind me of a discussion we had early on in the semester, in which we talked about “going
against the grain” as a teacher. I think that focusing on social and emotional skills could be
considered an example of that as opposed to rote memorization that the administrators in Ayers
supported. I also enjoyed reading Vivian Paley’s work, and especially liked some of her ideas
that came from her book “The Boy who Would be a Helicopter.” I liked her example of learning
to manage a classroom without the use of punishment--in her case a timeout chair--because it
only served to stigmatize children who received punishments frequently, and their behavior
Furthermore, I really liked how Paley made a serious attempt to understand the logic that
her students follow, and came to understand that children and adults follow a different set of
logic. She also determined that as teachers, we should be expected to change our behavior to
serve the students’ individual needs, and not the other way around (PALEY 1999). Therefore,
over time she observed her students and noticed how strongly their logic was intertwined with
fantasy and pretend play. She realized that her best method of connecting with her students was
to follow along with the logic that they provide and encourage them to share their stories and
fantasies as often as they wished. And as she explored how children connect with each other and
the world around them through play, she also explored the idea of how to manage that
punishment-free classroom that I mentioned earlier. She stated that as a younger teacher, she
used it as a crutch, but over time found that it was ultimately ineffective in changing student
behavior that she did not approve of. I really liked that she was able to come to better understand
the logic that children follow as they interact through play, and instead of trying to instill change
in behavior through “adult logic,” she incorporated her reasoning into her students’ stories.
During the time that we read Paley in this class, we also discussed the concept of misbehavior
behaviors based upon our own adult reasoning. When I read about her growth as a teacher
throughout the course of her books, I started to see that she seemed to learn just as much from
the students as they did her. We also discussed that because misbehavior is a construct, the
intervention method that the teacher approaches the behavior with is subjective. Personally, I see
“misbehavior” as action that causes harm to others. This can span anywhere from physical harm
to disruptive or disrespectful behavior toward someone else. However, I believe that instead of
punishing what I deem to be misbehavior, I think that it would be a good opportunity for me to
help teach the concept of empathy to a child, and that their actions affect the people around them.
I found Paley’s approach very interesting when she incorporates play into behavior modification,
and I am curious to see if I would do well to practice a similar method when presented with the
opportunity. Overall, I think that the ideas that Paley outlines in her writings are ones that I
Another topic that I really connected with from the class was the theme of unconditional
love. From the very beginning of the course we focused on the differences between effective and
affective teaching and how they can greatly change the atmosphere of the classroom. Affective
teaching places emphasis on making the child feel that they are in a safe and loving environment.
This helps promote healthy emotional development and motivates them to learn. Effective
teaching, on the other hand, focuses on making sure that the students make the grade and views
teaching from a mechanical perspective. Personally, my favorite teachers throughout the years
were the ones who seemed to care about making a personal connection with each of their
students. These teachers treated my classmates and I as complete people, rather than scores on a
standardized test. The topic of love ended up being the main focus of my letter to my favorite
teacher in my journal. Within this class, I would say that some of my favorite days were the ones
when we listened to speakers such as Rita Pierson in her speech “Every Child Deserves a Hero”
and Andrew Solomon in his speech “Love, No Matter What.” In both of their speeches, they
mention the importance of loving even the most different or challenging children because that
unconditional love is what they need in order to grow (Pierson) (Solomon). This is where I also
consider the difference between “effective” and “affective” teaching. Effective teaching is more
focused on getting the necessary results, while affective teaching takes the individual child into
account during the learning process and shapes the lesson around their needs. I think that
transitioning to an affective teaching style may be difficult, especially according to the RSA
Animate video in class which labels our current education system as archaic. Affective teaching
is also more collaboration-based, which may prove useful as our culture and economy become
more globalized. To me, collaboration-based learning means learning with groups of peers and
combining skill and effort to solve a problem or create a story. Affective teaching also involves
anti-bias education, which teaches children to be aware of and accepting differences among
themselves. I think that a lot of love is necessary to properly convey these new styles of teaching,
and I think that love goes into making the decision to transition to this teaching child for the sake
of the student.
Another important topic that stuck out to me from this class was the controversy
surrounding labelling. After reading the examples from Boldt’s and Ayers’ writings, I can see the
damage that labelling can have on a child and how they are treated by their teachers and peers.
When Nick was labelled as an “at risk” reader in Boldt’s article, he ended up developing a
serious aversion to reading stemming from the anxiety that the label placed upon him (Boldt
2006). When Quinn was labelled as having ADD in Ayers’ book, he grew distressed and
discouraged. In both cases, neither child experienced these emotions before they were labelled as
different. In class, we discussed that placing labels on a child may be helpful when working
behind-the-scenes, but when openly expressed to the child and to their peers, it has a detrimental
effect. This may be because the child may begin to base their identity around the label and their
self-efficacy may become damaged in the process. It can be damaging enough when the label is
properly placed, but often times children may even be labelled frivolously. According to the
RSA Animate video, there is an exaggerated ADHD “epidemic resulting in mass medication of
students who may have trouble focusing on lessons that they do not find stimulating (The RSA
2010). The video argues that this label places a stigma upon children who do not conform and
may stifle their natural creativity. I believe that if labelling children must take place, it should
only be used behind the scenes of the classroom in order to aid the teacher in how to meet the
needs of their students. Labels should not be used to compare children, labelling should not be
used to explain a child’s behavior, and labelling should not be used to define a child’s worth and
identity.
Throughout this semester, I have started to feel my beliefs and philosophies toward
teaching rapidly begin to take hold as I become more educated about the may complex sides of
teaching. I know that I still have a long way to go before I can confidently begin to express and
implement my own judgements about the many complicated issues surrounding teaching, but I
also know that I am steadily making progress. So far, I believe that the process of learning is
more meaningful than pure results, and therefore I believe that affective teaching involves loving
your students unconditionally and avoiding labelling them as an easy way out. I understand that
there are no black-and-white answers when it comes to teaching, but I hope that with a
combination of empirical evidence and my own moral beliefs, over the next few years my
Works Cited
1. Ayers, William, and Ryan Alexander-Tanner. To Teach: The Journey, in Comics. New
www.ted.com/talks/andrew_solomon_love_no_matter_what.
4. Pierson, Rita. “Every Kid Needs a Champion.” TED: Ideas Worth Spreading,
www.ted.com/talks/rita_pierson_every_kid_needs_a_champion.
5. Boldt, Gail. “Resistance, Loss, and Love in Learning to Read: A Psychoanalytic Inquiry”
8. Edwards, C.P. “Three Approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and Reggio
Department of Family and Consumer Sciences. (2002): 1-13. Web. April 21, 2018.
9. The RSA. (2010, October 14). RSA Animate: Changing Education Paradigms. Retrieved
From: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U