Running head: FINAL REFLECTION

Final Reflection: Structures Foster Understanding and Implementation of Significant Learning

Adam T. Patricoski
Loyola University Chicago

FINAL REFLECTION

Final Reflection: Structures Foster Understanding and Implementation of Significant Learning

Introduction
Sixteen weeks is not a significant amount of time. However, in the past sixteen weeks I
have gained a new perspective on what it means to learn, and how learning can be fostered for
others. Strong course design requires activity and interaction between teacher and student (Fink,
2013). This simple phrase required a recalibration of my approach to learning. Guided by
research, theory and my own experience with the material, I can now articulate a more
intentional way to promote learning.
Connections to Course Material and Experiential Learning
Going into the semester, I was curious to see how the content in this class would resonate
with my undergraduate classes in English education and with other professional development
training. The work of Fink (2013) was useful for establishing a framework to understand
learning outcomes and significant learning experiences. I was drawn-in by his view that teachers
seem to get it wrong when it comes to content delivery that promotes significant learning.
Further, there does seem to be a mismatch between instructor expectation of 30 hours or more of
outside study for students enrolled full time (Fink, 2013). Coupling these thoughts with other
readings on the prevalence of technology, increasing cost, and demanding schedules in students
lives, I believe that some things need to change in higher education.
Finks (2013) Taxonomy of Significant Learning seems a useful perspective for
helping students get the most out of their learning. It was helpful to read this work at the
beginning of the semester as it gave me context for the rest of the course readings. The taxonomy
is practical, drawing upon multiple types of learning that prompt students to make connections to
their life file (Fink, 2013). This model aligns with my approach to education, especially my

FINAL REFLECTION

belief that technology has erased the need for rote memorization in the classroom. Also, I have
seen firsthand that students who put forth effort in their learning typically have stronger learning
outcomes. In these regards, the significant learning taxonomy connects with my own life file
as an academic advisor to students.
My experiential learning group incorporated this framework for similar reasons. As we
developed our modules for Adaptability, we implicitly drew connections to Kolb (1984), and
the fact that experiential learning combines elements of perception, cognition, and behavior.
Through a loop of experience and reflection, learning ties the two elements together. It would not
be possible to make that statement were it not for the earlier Lewinian and Dewey models of
experiential education (as cited in Kolb, 1984). Ultimately, it was Kolb (1984) who described
learning as a process of adaptation, thus highlighting a direct connection between our topic and
service-learning. My group also connected to Jacoby and Associates (1996) assertion that
service-learning is both curricular and co-curricular in nature. It is apparent to me that our
practical task of creating curriculum was both strengthened by this research and guided by it.
Essential Themes to Articulate My Learning
One of the primary ideas I take away from this course is that expert content knowledge
does not insure good teaching (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999). Still, there are ways to offer
good teaching experiences; these are rooted in the work of many researchers. The idea that the
classroom should be a learner-centered environment created through backward design is a useful
way to approach learning (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999). Prior to taking this course, I
would have designed a syllabus based around important content knowledge or themes, adding
variety to activities, replicating the kinds of learning I experienced in my past.

FINAL REFLECTION

Nilson (2010) provided another way for me to view learning, focusing completely on
stated outcomes, and allowing those outcomes to guide my choices as I create learning
structures. An important consideration for outcomes is that of high-impact learning practices.
These both increase retention and promote student engagement with learning (Kuh, 2008). I was
aware of high impact practices prior to taking this course, but I most often discussed them as a
component of co-curricular learning. Viewed in conjunction with our other readings, I can also
see them in context with curriculum development.
Reflecting back to an earlier point about technology, I feel affirmed in my belief that
developing a skillset for continuous learning is of utmost importance. The prevalence of
technology was the basis for this belief, but the works of several researchers support this skillset
for significant learning and continued development (Fink 2013; Bransford, Brown & Cocking,
1999). Consequently, there is more credence to my personal belief beyond a reaction to increased
use of technology.
I have never been a philosopher; that method of thought it is too abstract for my liking.
Time and again, the readings brought attention to learning that included realistic and
meaningful tasks (Fink, 2013, p. 213). To put it simply, I appreciated this focus. Fink (2013)
certainly emphasizes this with the four methods of active learning (Getting Information, Doing,
Observing, Reflecting), and others promoted learning through active, ongoing reflection (Ash,
Clayton, & Moses, 2009; Honnet & Poulsen, 1998). I drew upon all of these methods of learning
through the creation of my syllabus, as well as during development of the Adaptability
module. I appreciated the support of meaningful tasks as a way to learn. I think it helps students
see value in the efforts they exert during the learning process.
Personal Philosophy of Curriculum Development

FINAL REFLECTION

My philosophy in developing curriculum is guided by the assertion that clear structures

allow students individual freedom to learn. I believe that we need to help students create mental
models for knowledge retrieval and implementation (Brown, Roediger & McDaniel, 2014).
Reading Make It Stick was a nice supplement to the other material we covered in class. It
connected some of the action-oriented content with the neuroscience behind learning. Factoring
the encoding-consolidation-retrieval process was useful to consider in relation to significant
learning (Brown, Roediger & McDaniel, 2014). In some ways, I see it as the other side of the
learning coin (content/science). The science of learning further supports clear structures that
facilitate knowledge retention and implementation.
The Taxonomy of Significant Learning provides the structure necessary to create a
solid curriculum experience (Fink, 2013). There is no doubt in my mind that other approaches
exist, but much like the foundational knowledge it advocates, I see it as a foundation capable of
additions. In other words, it provides a springboard for other types of learning. Bransford, Brown
and Cocking (1999) contributed that competence is developed when knowledge can be
understood within context, and organized in such a way that it can be applied across multiple
settings. Well-thought structures promote understanding and organization of knowledge. Unless
students can apply what they have learned, the knowledge gained will quickly fade.
Beyond the structure of learning, Wagner & Compton (2012) reminded me of the
importance of play, purpose, and passion. Through the narratives shared, it was clear that these
three traits offer a unique path to knowledge acquisition and meaning-making. My own
inclinations tend to overlook some of the innovative contributions that play, purpose, and passion
can induce. But, I recognize that my own learning traits are not the measure by which I should

FINAL REFLECTION

create curricular experiences intended for a variety of students. To this end, Wagner and
Compton (2012) is an opposing perspective I need to incorporate as I develop curriculum.
Self-Assessment of My Learning
Knowledge of self is important to engage in meaning-making (Baxter-Magolda, as cited
in Fink, 2013). Through the course of the semester, I saw myself progressing through the
Taxonomy of Significant Learning (Fink, 2013). The first few weeks gave me exposure to
foundational knowledge for curriculum development. Through the initial assignments, I began to
apply and integrate that knowledge. The experiential learning project was an opportunity to
continue this integration, while caring about the human experience of future Marquette students.
Lastly, through this final reflection, Im learning how to continue learning through creation of
curriculum in future settings. Overall, one of my strengths was openness to personal growth and
development. Some of this growth was achieved through active participation in small-group and
class discussion.
Admittedly, some of the content was less appealing for two reasons. First, I reached a
saturation point after the first few weeks with frequent, substantial assignments. When I
completed the fourth assignment, I felt I had a solid foundation, and consequently, my
engagement with some of the readings was not as active. Also, I really enjoyed the readings that
covered a range of content on learning, but was less interested in some of the narrow ones. For
example, my work does not take me directly into the realm of internships or ePortfolios; I found
that I covered that material only at the surface level for main points. At no point did I disengage
completely, but I felt the change in interest level.
A large component of this course was our experiential learning project, in partnership
with Marquettes Center for Teaching and Learning. We just completed this assignment, and I

FINAL REFLECTION

am not sure that I yet have the distance from it for true reflection. I appreciated opportunity to
implement our knowledge in a real scenario where my efforts will be put to use. I have become
accustomed to working with my other Ph.D. peers, so I had to open myself up to working with a
new group. The efforts put forth by the group resulted in a decent final product, but I do think we
were hampered by the fact that all three members are in the midst of job searches. Initially, I
tried to lead by example of effort put forth, but I think the group really needed more direct
leadership to help us accomplish needed tasks. In recent weeks I began to work more directly
with our project leader to help bolster her leadership and keep us on track. Overall, the project
was worthwhile, but not without frustration.
Conclusion
Looking back on the totality of my learning experience, I am reminded of Kolbs (1984)
description that experiential learning is a fluid process that is transactional between person and
environment (p. 35). Significant learning design takes both dedicated time and concerted effort
to do it well. This course helped me both find and create structures to understand significant
learning and implement it with students. Through the readings, reflections, and personal
assignments, I was able to make meaning that I could utilize in my experiential group project.
Ultimately, I can speak with greater confidence that I understand the transaction taking place in
the learning process and know how to promote individual development through use of targeted
learning outcomes.

FINAL REFLECTION

8
References

Ash, S.L., Clayton, P.H. & Moses, M.G. (2009). Learning through critical reflection: A tutorial
for service-learning students (Instructors version). Raleigh, NC: PHC Ventures.
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind,
Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make it stick: The science of
successful learning.
Fink, L.D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences, revised and updated. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Honnet, E.P. & Poulsen, S.J. (1998). Principles of Good Practice for Combining Service and
Learning, The Johnson Foundation
Jacoby, B. & Associates. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and
Practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kuh, G.D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them,
and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities
Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wagner, T., & Compton, R. A. (2012). Creating innovators: The making of young people who
will change the world. New York: Scribner.