I recently completed The Anatomy Foundational Coaching Course through Grayden, which teaches participants how to be more coach-like in the way they speak to others. 

Our course ran over two consecutive weekends, and throughout those two weekends we learned skills, and then built on those skills as we practiced what we were learning. 

What did this course look like?

Starting with an introduction to what coaching is, then recognizing where you are on a spectrum of understanding of what coaching is. We then explored the role of a coach and understanding that a coach’s role is to ask questions, not provide answers or problem solve, and recognizing that the coachee has all the answers, and is capable and whole. We discuss different contexts for using a coaching mindset, which could be a formal coaching relationship, having a coaching conversation, or simply being more coach-like in your everyday life. 

Following the introduction, prior to teaching us any strategies the instructor did a demonstration of a coaching conversation. My role was to be the coachee, and the other students listened to the conversation, and made notes about what they noticed. 

We then had a discussion about what I noticed and felt as a coachee, and what the other students noticed in their observations. 

At this point we started learning the different strategies and types of questions you can use in coaching conversations. As well as, the best ways to navigate having these conversations with a coaching mindset, versus trying to give advice or problem solve for the coachee. Throughout the course we were given opportunities to practice our skills as we learned them, and they continuously build on previous skills to come together as a holistic approach to the conversation.

So why was it memorable?

This course was memorable for a few reasons. 

Firstly, it has made me a better teacher, and a better person in general. When I’m developing lessons I keep this framework in mind, which helps guide students to finding the answers, and also gives me something to lean into when a student just wants me to tell them the answer. 

One of the lessons we learned was that “why” questions inherently are judgmental, even if that is not your intention. Asking a “why” question can lead to the person you are talking to closing themselves off to you because they can feel this judgment. As soon as I flipped my responses to people from being “why” questions, and asking in a more curious way, my difficult conversations became much more meaningful, productive, and I find that people are much more willing to open up and get to the root of the issue. 

Secondly, being coached was something I never would have thought I needed, but going through the process while my fellow participants were practicing helped bring clarity to aspects of my life I didn’t realize I was unsure about. 

Finally, it built really strong relationships with some of my colleagues that I haven’t previously worked closely with because we were doing this process together. Which I recognize isn’t always the case, but I was really lucky that the course was put on by my department head who is a certified trainer for Grayden, which meant the participants were all colleagues within our organization. 

I recommend this program to everyone, especially those in leadership roles, or who work with people on a day to day basis. It truly has changed how I look at conversations and interact with everyone, every single day.

I can’t be the only one who previous to the pandemic had no experience with online learning environments. My first experience with online learning was as a teacher, where I was expected to deliver lessons, in a way that I had never done before, not to mention I was brand new to the profession. 

Now 4 years later, I am a student in an online learning environment, which is very different from any learning environment I have experienced as a student before. Let’s look at these two very different learning experiences.

Similarities 

Both face to face, and online learning can use multimedia activities. Typically I think multimedia is more common in online learning, but it can and should be used in face to face learning as well. I find it more enjoyable, and memorable when multimedia activities are included in lessons because I can associate specific activities with the information I am learning. Having a mix of activities makes it easier for me to remember each different lesson.

You are required to meet the Learning Outcomes of the course. Whether you are in person or online, every course has planned learning outcomes and in order to be successful in the course you will need to meet them.

There is an instructor that is there to help guide you through the learning and provide support and feedback when needed.

Some form of assessment happens in both settings. The types of assessments might look very different but they are present.

There is a diversity of students. In online learning the diversity of students could be much greater because the reach of the course is not limited to the geographical area that face to face is limited by. However, there will always be some diversity even in face to face learning environments. I’ve been really lucky in my learning experiences, both face to face and online, have had quite diverse groups of students. 

Differences:

Feedback:

In face to face learning feedback is done through direct interactions with real time responses to questions. You can seek immediate clarification. Personally I find that these direct interactions for feedback are much more effective for my learning style. When I’m working on a task I’d much prefer to get the feedback and fix something in real time while I’m in the groove, over waiting for feedback and coming back to the task at a different sitting.

In an online learning environment oftentimes there is asynchronous work happening so feedback might come hours or days later from when you ask for it. Unless there is a synchronous meeting time, clarification is not always immediate.

Scheduling and Location:

In face to face learning you are required to be at the designated location, at a specific time for each lesson. A lot of the learning and work often happens during the class time. The pace of learning is set by the instructor with hard deadlines for work. I find that the structure of having multiple classes a week, with regular face time with the teacher helps keep me on track to work through assignments because I have multiple opportunities to check in throughout the week. 

In online learning, it is more flexible and you are able to attend the lesson from anywhere in the world making it more accessible to people who are not geographically close or able to attend in person learning, asynchronous work can be done at any time, and from anywhere. Synchronous time can happen from anywhere in the world, and the work is typically more self-paced. For me, at first glance, the flexibility of online learning seems like it will be better when I am working full time, but in reality the flexibility makes it easier to push things off, and therefore end up with a lot of work to complete within a short period of time, versus doing it slowly throughout the course.

Activities:

Face to face learning allows for more hands-on activities, especially ones that require specific materials such as science experiments, or for students to work together acting something out, or solving physical puzzles. I enjoy these types of hands-on activities because they are so much more memorable than a lecture. If students are leaving the class talking about the activity I know that memorable learning has occurred.

With online learning, activities can be collaborative but often are done asynchronously. I find because of the asynchronous nature of most collaboration with online learning, I don’t get as much out of this type of collaboration because I find it more challenging to build off of others’ ideas when I have to come back to the thinking.

Social Interactions Amongst Students:

In a face to face setting students are actively working on tasks at the same time, and often together in partners or small groups, and you can easily do things such as think, pair, share. As a student there is socialization that occurs at the start of and end of classes. As a fairly shy person, I find in-person classes less intimidating because of socialization that occurs before and after class. Even though I’m not super outgoing, it gives me more opportunities to build meaningful connections with my classmates in a low stakes way. I also find I am more likely to ask my peers questions mid-class to check my understanding because I know we are working on the same thing.

In online learning, these social interactions don’t occur as naturally, especially if students don’t already know each other. Space can be made to have these interactions, but students are much more likely to stick to themselves. Personally, because I am shy I find it really challenging to socialize with new people in an online setting. I am far more likely to sit quietly and not go out of my way to talk to people, because they aren’t right in front of me, and I don’t necessarily enjoy small talk. 

Participation and Distractions:

Face to face settings increase participation from students because of the human element of being physically in a room with someone. It is easier to participate when you can see everyone’s body language, and read the room for the tone of conversations. It also decreases distractions from devices because students don’t need to be on their devices in order to participate in the entirety of the lesson. Students are also less likely to be on their phones, because it becomes quite obvious when they are. Younger students typically aren’t allowed to have their phones in class, and when you get to older students, they are aware that it is rude to be on their phone so typically will keep the distraction away. When I am in a face to face classroom setting, I am more often than not, 100% focused on what I am learning at that moment. My phone is away in my bag not tempting me, and I only have my computer open if it is needed, and I usually (not always, because I’m not claiming to be perfect!), only have the tabs I need open. 

Online classes are easier to opt out of participation because students aren’t always synchronously working with the instructor. When they are synchronous there is an option to have your camera off, or “have technical difficulties” that limit your participation. With an online setting you are forced to be on your device in order to be a part of the lesson which therefore increases the potential for distractions, with having multiple tabs open and other things running in the background or on a second screen. The instructor is also not in the room with students so it is easier to be on a second device like a phone while working on class work or listening to lessons. I am guilty of all of these forms of distraction, and at a much higher rate than I am willing to admit. In theory could I close all of my distracting tabs while on my computer? Yes, of course.

So what is my preference?

If you couldn’t tell based on what I have previously mentioned here, my preference is for face to face learning as a student. I do understand that for some people online might be better, but for my personal learning style, I find it so much easier to connect with my instructors for questions and receive feedback when I’m in a face to face setting. This direct, instant feedback is more beneficial for how I work through learning tasks, and to keep me on track to complete work in an appropriate time frame. 

I think Aaron Barth does a fantastic job, summarizing many of the things that online learning is missing, in order for me to be successful in an online setting.

When thinking about learning theory within my teaching context I think the strongest connections are with cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism. 

Let’s start with the basics of what I mean when referring to these theories

Cognitivism: Is identifying the mental processes that are essential for students to be able to learn, you are teaching students how to learn (Bates, 2019). Often talked about through Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Objectives.

Constructivism: Emphasizes consciousness, free will and social influence on learning, as having a high importance. A student’s understanding of concepts develops over time, and puts value on student reflections for learning. (Bates, 2019).

Principles of Connectivism: 

• Learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions
• Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill 
• Decision making is a learning process – choosing what to learn (Siemens, 2005).

My teaching experience with these theories

When I think about the structures of our school system I think cognitivism, and constructivism fit best. During my Bachelor of Education we learned about Bloom’s Taxonomy and cognitivist thinking. At the time, did I really understand what it meant, or how to apply the theory? Definitely not, but as I have grown as a teacher so has my understanding of the theories. Quite honestly, I haven’t actively thought about the theories when designing learning activities until recently, and even now I don’t actively think about it within the context of the theory, I think about it as what is best practice and go with what I inherently know as being best practice.

Let’s break my practice down into the theories

Cognitivism:

When creating formative and summative tasks for students, I always am asking them to do something within one of the higher levels of analyze, evaluate, or create within Bloom’s Taxonomy. I do this because if they are able to do a task that is at one of these higher levels they should also be able to demonstrate all of the levels below it within that task. 

Constructivism:

When planning units I chose to focus on teaching students concepts and skills. They practice these skills to help them understand concepts throughout the unit, before they are ever summatively assessed on them. Once an assessment happens, we continue to use those skills throughout the year, and revisit them in future units to be assessed again. This second assessment allows students to reflect on what they have learned in previous units, as well as the current unit and use that knowledge to further demonstrate their learning. 

Principles of Connectivism:

I actively work to incorporate a wide range of opinions and perspectives for anything that we do in class. Part of this includes teaching students how to use google effectively to find academic sources on a topic written from non-western perspectives. Actively encouraging students to dig deeper and challenge themselves and their own thinking, and to be open-minded while questioning the opinions of others. We are constantly making connections between current units and past units, and between subjects. 

I truly believe that the best learning takes place when you encompass different aspects of multiple theories.

There is a time and place for each theory.

If I had to choose one theory that best describes my belief about how learning takes place it would be cognitivism. 

The reason for this, is that I think within cognitivism there is flexibility in its ability to encompass the aspects of constructivism and connectivism that I have come to appreciate.   

References

Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy | Center for Teaching | Vanderbilt University. Vanderbilt Center for Teaching. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

Bates, A.W. (2019). Cognitivism. In Teaching in a Digital Age (Second Edition ed.). https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/3-3-cognitivism/

Bates, A.W. (2019). Constructivism. In Teaching in a Digital Age (Second Edition ed.). https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/section-3-4-constructivism/

Siemens, G. (2005, January). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. 9. https://jotamac.typepad.com/jotamacs_weblog/files/Connectivism.pdf

And we’re back! This term is the second semester of our Masters of Education (M.Ed) cohort. It is crazy how fast time flies when you are working full time AND doing school work. Sometimes I wonder how I find the time for everything. 

January marked the start of my 5th year teaching, and I can’t believe it has already been five years since I started in this profession. Reflecting back on my years so far, there have been so many challenges, and uncertainties and it is surreal to think I’m now at a place where what’s to come in the next year isn’t completely unknown. 

I am interested in learning design because I think it is really important to be open minded in how you plan and deliver lessons to students, and continue to consider alternative methods to ensure you are continuously growing in your practice. 

My Learning Design Experiences:

My experiences with learning design like many in the profession have ranged over the years. My first experience was during my Bachelor’s of Education (B.Ed) program. There was a very structured framework we needed to follow when planning lessons and units and we had to explicitly state when, where, and how, we touched on every piece of curriculum we were including in a unit or lesson. When teaching new teachers how to properly plan a lesson I understood the need for structure, but I often found the structure provided just didn’t work for the way my brain planned lessons.

When I graduated, and got my first job, I was so excited for my lesson plans to become less detailed in the justification for why I was doing something, and focus more on actually teaching. Two weeks after starting my first job, I said goodbye to my class for Spring Break and then we never met in person again because of the pandemic.

Nothing could have prepared me for the next two years and my learning design solely focused on helping my students get through what we needed to do, as safely as we could.  

After two years teaching in rural schools in the Interior of British Columbia (BC), I made the move to Victoria and started at my current school. The shift from rural public school to an International Baccalaureate (IB) independent school was quite jarring and my learning design practices needed to shift. After two and a half years and some IB training later, I finally feel like I have honed my learning design skills for my context. 

Similarly to when I was doing my B.Ed, the IB curriculum does have a set framework to work within for learning design, however, for me, the framework is set up in a way that makes sense for my brain so it is a tool I happily use every day! 

My Process:

When thinking about learning design in an IB setting there are a few things I consider.

First, is the Statement of Inquiry (SoI). The SoI is what guides the unit, and is created by selecting from a list of general concepts provided by IB.

After creating a SoI we use the backwards design approach when planning the unit, which focuses on the intended learning outcomes versus covering specific content. I focus on creating the summative task, which I do by following the GRASPS framework.

Once I know what I will be assessing I choose Approaches to Learning (ATL) skills that we will focus on throughout the unit.

The chosen skills are explicitly taught and practiced throughout the unit, so at most I will select 3 skills to work on for any given unit. Formative tasks are then planned to help students practice the skills needed for their summative task, with opportunities for meaningful feedback planned along the way.  

Only after I know what my SoI, ATL skills, formative and summative tasks will be do I start adding in the content. Our school still follows the BC curriculum, so I pull the content for units from this curriculum.

At first it feels like a lot of hoops to jump through but ultimately, planning lessons like this helps ensure that all of the requirements for IB are being met, and it makes picking up a unit plan from a previous teacher much easier to understand as we all follow the same framework!