This is a sample learning philosophy that Craig Shepherd wrote in 2015. I present it here to give you an idea of the philosophy you will need for your own portfolio. Be sure to include in-text citations and references to support your ideas. They can come from various academic sources--including text books, peer reviewed articles, academic literature, and so forth.

I believe that learners enter formal and informal learning environments with a wealth of experiences that shape their identities, world-views, and personal and professional goals. Tapping into this knowledge is critical for educators not only to ascertain prior knowledge and interests to develop and sequence instruction (Smith & Ragan, 2005; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) but also to help learners assume teaching roles as they provide context to abstract principles and theory, assimilate and accommodate ideas into existing worldviews, and take more active roles in knowledge construction. Experience drives education. Although personal experience can be the impetus for goal setting and training, it can also constrain learner perspectives, acting as a blinder that channels knowledge rather than encouraging people to consider alternative perspectives and procedures. Thus, it is important that educators help learners elicit past experiences, world-views, and goals while simultaneously providing opportunities for new experiences and insight.

Like Dale (1969), I believe that direct, firsthand experience provides a foundation from which all other experiences are interpreted. The most powerful learning occurs when teachers help learners to interpret and co-construct learning through past and present experience. Indeed, as individuals age, they desire more immediate application of learning into professional and personal settings (Knowles, Holton, Swanson, 2014). Based on the power of experience to interpret and shape learning, I try to incorporate authentic experiences in undergraduate and graduate instruction that extend beyond classroom boundaries. In the past, my students have participated in technology-rich service learning activities with school librarians and teachers, attended after-school technology clubs, completed client-based projects for advanced design courses, and established Internet security workshops for community members. They have also examined their own civic or professional endeavors to situate learning regarding diffusion and change, instructional design, and project management. Additionally, I have helped other instructors locate course clients for professional internships, graphic design projects, and other activities. These experiences help learners apply principles in authentic practice, consider past experience, and construct new knowledge. Of course, direct experience is not always possible or desirable. I try to use various resources to help students contextualize, consider, and construct learning (Dale, 1969; Smith & Ragan, 2005). The result is often rich dialogue where everyone (including myself) learns and progresses.

However, lived experiences do not always lead to meaningful (or desired) learning, particularly when individual goals do not reflect instructional goals (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2010). Guided reflection on experience is required for learning (Dewey, 1910; Schön, 1983). Yet reflection skillsets may not come naturally to learners and may require formalization during instruction (Hatton & Smith, 1994; Shepherd & Hannafin, 2013). Learners and instructors share responsibility for reflection. Learners should actively pursue their own and instructor-given goals. This may require them to consider, formalize, and share their own goals with others. Instructors should also identify learning goals based on program outcomes, course objectives, and student needs and desires (Smith & Ragan, 2005). Instructors should consider how identified goals transfer to larger, real world contexts and ensure that learners are aware of these goals and their transferability (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Guiding questions, discussions, formative assessments, and other prompts may help learners consider their experiences and facilitate reflection and knowledge acquisition. These prompts occur both during formal instruction and within portfolios, learning management systems, and other distance-delivery tools.

Because goals drive instructional strategies, I take a pragmatic approach to learning theories and their application in instructional settings. I believe our sensory inputs and cognitive processes are limited and that we need to consider content difficulty, presentation procedures and individual learning characteristics when developing and implementing instructional strategies (Pass, Tuovinen, & Tabbers, 2003; Sweller, 2010). However, I also believe that various circumstances dictate when to use generative and supplantive strategies (Smith & Ragan, 2005). Thus, while individuals ultimately construct their own knowledge, they are able to adapt to instructional approaches that best meet the interplay of their needs, course needs, time considerations, and so forth.

References

Dale, E. (1969). Audiovisual methods in teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Dryden Press.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. New York: D. C. Heath & Co.

Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1994). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, 39-49. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(94)00012-U

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2010). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., III, & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (8th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Pass, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63−71. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Shepherd, C. E., & Hannafin, M. J. (2013). Reframing portfolio evidence: Empowering teachers through single-case frameworks. Journal of Thought, 48(1), 33-51.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 123−138. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5

Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.