Teaching Philosophy Statement

Many of our common educational practices (i.e., the traditional lecture-exam paradigm), which can be variously described as “the sage on the stage” or “the banking model” (Freire, 2018), are based on the assumption that it is the teacher’s responsibility to transplant what is in her head into the heads of her students. Given the knowledge race in which we find ourselves and given the vicious competition for knowledge-based jobs (Friedman, 2005), to some it might seem irresponsible for educators not to try to stuff as much knowledge as is humanly possible into young citizens. This approach, however, does our students a disservice as it leaves them ill-equipped to deal with a complex and constantly changing world where it is impossible to know all ‘the facts’ and where the facts constitute only a small component of reasoning and decision making. Rather, the greatest gift that we as teachers can impart is to arm students with the power of their own minds – to teach them how to think, rather than merely what to think.

As the Leader for Veterinary Science and Diagnostics with the British Columbia (BC) Ministry of Agriculture and the Director of the BC Node of the Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative, I have found that there are three key characteristics that make someone a ‘good thinker,’ and that are essential for everything from dealing with clinical cases to making effective decisions in real-life, complex situations. These characteristics include being hungry for a diversity of ideas and points of view (open-minded), being engaged in constant communication with ourselves and the world around us (dialogical) and being driven to ask the best questions and find the best reasons (inquiry). For this reason, fostering the development of open-minded, dialogical, inquiry-based thinking is the overarching goal of my approach to teaching. I fulfill this role by creating an immersive, experiential, student-centered learning environment focused on practical reasoning, real-world meaning, problem solving, communication, transdisciplinarity, and inclusivity.

Practical reasoning: Inquiry, at its core, is “truth seeking”; to be a truth-seeker is to strive to be right, not just appear right (Gardner, 2009). This is a principle that is woven through every aspect of my teaching, as I try to impart to my students the belief that it is their moral obligation to make sure that every stance they take is the “rightest” or “truthiest” of potential alternatives. They can only do this through practical reasoning, which includes clearly articulating their opinions, subjecting those claims to the strongest possible opposition, and thereafter embracing the position that is least vulnerable to falsification by counter example (Gardner, 2009). In other words, they must enter into an open-minded inquiry-based dialogue with the world around them.

Real-world meaning: Eliciting inquiry-based thinking also requires that the focus remains on issues and problems that are pregnant with possibilities, and with potential answers that are firmly rooted in the real world in which students find themselves. Thus, I try to ensure that the issues covered are pragmatic and meaningful for the students so that they feel that they have a “stake” in what they are learning. This, in turn, solidifies student conviction that their learning has real value for them personally, and for their local and global communities; this is not about simply jumping through academic hoops. For example, in my class on science and risk communication, students are asked to bring in news stories that interest them (e.g., parents refusing to have their children vaccinated), so that they can then work with their peers to design risk messages for those stories and consider ethical implications of messaging. For assignments, I require that students come up with their own topics, and I encourage them to select topics that have personal meaning and/or that can be used for their jobs or theses. One such example might be a student working in the field of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, and who thus has the opportunity to try out messaging regarding concussion-prevention in youth sport—a topic that might not be of interest to other students. For the students I individually supervise, I require that they play a major role in the development of their own projects, and I endeavor, wherever possible, to have them work directly with stakeholders on a project that has practical significance (e.g., a student working directly with the City of Vancouver to develop a municipal rodent monitoring and mitigation program).

Problem solving: While stressing to students that they must work within the reality that they find themselves (which can sometimes mute inquiry thinking), I nonetheless push them, referring frequently to Ackoff’s (1978) problem solving theory, to identify pre-conceived ideas that might be creating artificial constraints to action, and then come up with creative ideas to overcome those constraints. This sort of creativity is inherently risky for students, as the outcome is not guaranteed. For this reason, I consistently allow room within the course design for students to be brave and try out new ideas, even if they don’t end up working out as the student intended. In other words, I create a learning situation in which mistakes are considered an important part of process (Newby and Gardner, 2019). For example, I like to employ repeat assignments (i.e., where the students revisit the same type of assignment across several modules) and to give students opportunities for feedback and revision on assignments prior to assessment. I also assist graduate students to develop theses in a ‘pyramid’ style, where the bulk of the work is designed in a manner that ensures student success, but in which there is at least some element that is unpredictable and that requires a creative approach to solve.

Communication: Effective communication, of course, is crucial for inquiry-based thinking. It is for this reason that I believe that communication skills are just as important and difficult to acquire as scientific ones, and that communication skills are essential for students to be in conversation with themselves and the world around them. This is the reason that I developed the School of Population and Public Health’s sole course on science and risk communication. It is also the reason that I devote a considerable amount of time mentoring my graduate students in their written and oral communication skills, including communicating directly with stakeholders and with the media.

Inclusivity: Integrating ideas and perspectives from multiple disciplines (i.e., transdisciplinary) and many people is also critical for nurturing the propensity for open-minded dialogical inquiry. With regard to transdisciplinary thinking, I try always to holistically integrate ideas from diverse disciples and zones of understanding. This philosophy is reflected in the open-source textbook I created on science and risk communication, which incorporates elements from medicine, the physical sciences, philosophy, psychology, crisis management, policy making, creative writing, and others. I attempt to ensure inclusivity across interpersonal difference by encouraging and rewarding students for expressing themselves in the context of the course, and for bringing their own persona into their work. I do this by clearly outlining the core requirements for an exercise or assignment, but then allowing students the latitude to interpret those requirements in any way that they wish. In the classroom, I constantly reinforce the value I place on uniqueness rather than uniformity. For example, I like to make the analogy to fine art and the fact that we appreciate Carr, Picasso, and Van Gough precisely because their individual unique ways of seeing the world enormously enhances our combined well-being.

Ultimately, for me, teaching is about helping students not just to learn, but “to learn to learn.”  My goal in teaching, in other words, is always to meet students “where they are at” (Newby and Gardner, 2019) and to create a situation whereby we can inquire together toward a deeper, more complex understanding of the challenges we all face.

References:

Ackoff, Russel L. (1978) The Art of Problem Solving. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Freire, Paulo (2018) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Friedman, Thomas L. (2005) The World is Flat: A brief History of the Twenty-First Century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 

Gardner, Susan T. (2009) Thinking Your Way to Freedom: A Guide to Owning Your Own Practical Reasoning. Philadelphia: Temple.

Newby, Alex and Susan T. Gardner. (2019) “Meeting Youngsters Where they are at: Demonstrating its Advantages.” Childhood & Philosophy, v. 15, pp. 01 – 26.