Liu 1

Assignment 3(a): Personal Philosophy for Training and Development

Aims and Purposes of Professional Development in Context

Overall aims of professional development in my context of faculty development is to

provide resources to ensure continual learning to assist with the faculty in their growth at

multiple levels in the university. Within my department (Economics), our “entry” level faculty

we hire for are those at the Assistant Professor level which is a tenure-track position or the

“junior faculty.” Our department’s culture is to provide as much support and clear guidelines to

promote our faculty to tenured positions. However, aside from navigating our internal

department standards, it is my job as the Academic Personnel Analyst to assist the faculty in

navigating the policies and bureaucratic system that involves multiple stakeholders in having a

say on the ultimate career trajectory for every faculty member at UCSD. I chose to focus on the

junior faculty as the greatest challenge in their career is to achieve tenure which can take

anywhere between 5 or 6 years once starting their initial Assistant Professor appointment. It is

critical that during this time that their portfolio is well rounded in the areas of teaching, research

and service (not only to the department, but also to the economic profession in general). It is up

to the department to foster their development, or risk losing junior faculty with potential to

outside university competitors.

Conceptual and Philosophical Assumptions in Professional Development

In terms of my assumptions about the learner, my guiding educational philosophy is most

aligned with progressivism. As stated in the “Five Key Educational Philosophies'' from WH

Magazine, this educational philosophy grounded in John Dewey’s 1920s Laboratory School
 Liu 2

acknowledges that “not every student could learn by the same approach […] it is this reasoning

that made him incorporate several different methods to educate students at his school” (“The Key

Five Educational Philosophies”, n.d.) The nature of knowledge in my context in the view of the

progressive lens sees that there are multiple ways in obtaining knowledge. As stated in Russell

(2006), when examining the way knowledge could be obtained, it was found that “learning style

is a fundamental step prior to beginning any educational activity” (p. 352). Another concept that

resonated with me was Russell’s description of different learning styles that learners could prefer

to maximize their retention potential. Specifically I agreed with the conclusion that “adults learn

best when teaching strategies combine visual, auditory, and kinesthetic approaches” (Russell,

2006, p. 352). Finally, another consideration to take in mind is the power of informal teaching

means in obtaining knowledge. As stated by Stephen Billett and Jennifer Newton in Beyond

Reflective Practice, “most of learning throughout working life arises through practice”

(Bradbury, Frost, Kilminster, & Zukas, 2010, p. 53). In my context, junior faculty are usually

presented with a lot of duties and responsibilities. They must demonstrate a growing trajectory in

their teaching strength, the quality and progression of their research, and finally that their impact

on the economic profession is significant. Often, while they may accelerate in one or two areas

from their previous experience, it is the interplay and balancing that becomes a challenge and

tends to hinder an area. This difficult balancing act is highlighted as one of the important

contextual concerns on how the specific faculty population learns in the Dirkx and Austin article.

In the discussion on how the history and focus of faculty development has changed over the

years, we are now in a current period of “the Age of the Network, an era of faculty of

development in which the expanding roles that faculty members are asked to assume will need to
 Liu 3

be addressed through the collaboration and efforts of a number of stakeholders” (Dirkx & Austin,

2005, pg. 9). With the junior faculty having many varied responsibilities ranging from

developing their teaching skills to cater to large undergraduate students (150~300 students per

lecture hall), to developing their research to ensure they are publishing in top field journals, a

variety of learning styles are required by the faculty members in not only for their own

knowledge acquisition, but also to impart their expertise to others. Furthermore, it is important

that the junior faculty are actively learning and engaged in order for there to be any value drawn

as adult learners. According to Billet et al, active learning is the “need for learners to be actively

engaged in the process of learning anything of personal worth or requiring effort [...] this

includes how individuals construe, construct and interact with what they experience” (Billet et al,

2008, p. 10). Furthermore, Billet specifically states that active learners position themselves as

“being central mediators of what they experience and how and what they learn” (Billet et al,

2008, p. 9). Additionally, Russel discusses how specifically adult learners enter back into the

realm of learning for a variety of reasons that revolve around their own motivations. In fact, one

of the ways that the adult learning process is facilitated is when the “learner participates

completely in the learning process and has control over the nature and direction” (Russel, 2006,

p. 350). It would seem then active learning must come from personal agency to want to change a

situation that the learner has direct investment in. I believe the way to achieve active learning is

creating professional and training development programs that have clear outcomes in mind with

a curriculum centered around the needs of the junior faculty. The relevancy of the training would

be enough to make these young faculty members understand the relevancy and inspire intrinsic

motivation to take the training seriously.

 Liu 4

Conceptual Framework in TPD Designing and Planning

I would use Silberman’s Active Training Handbook as a framework to guide my work.

Silberman’s introduction into the foundation in which the handbook is built on says that “in order

for people to learn something well, they must hear it, see it, question it, discuss it with their

peers, and do it. They may even teach it to someone else in order to solidify their understanding

of the information or skill” (Silberman, 2015, p. 2). This is in close alignment with what I

perceive to be my conceptual and philosophical assumptions in professional development for my

junior faculty.

Instructional or Training Strategies in Implementing and Delivering Program

In utilizing Silberman’s Active Training handbook, the sense I get from the suggestions

and many tools within each chapter is looking for interesting and insightful ways to engage your

learners. In my context of working at the faculty development level, I believe a lot the ultimate

success in getting through to my faculty will be whether or not I can gain their trust. Amicable

collegiality is, above all, the most important quality that has influence over my faculty’s decision

to engage in departmental affairs. In envisioning a training and professional development

program to best support my junior faculty, I want to engage our senior faculty to take a big role

in these programs to support and mentor our newer faculty members. As there are different

specific studies within Economics, I’d want to match a junior faculty member with the

appropriate senior faculty in not only a personality match, but also one that would further

progress the specific economic field their research lies in. I’d therefore want to assess training
 Liu 5

needs and collect the necessary information on what gaps in information the junior faculty are

experiencing. It is critical to conduct an assessment because it can “help to determine the training

content […] allows you to obtain case material […] [and] gives you an opportunity to develop a

relationship with the participants” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 23). Once training needs are identified,

a match would be made to engage the correct senior faculty members to participate in specific

training topics. In terms of how some of the training would be communicated, I think

presentations are generally widely accepted and the preferred instructional technique in the field

of academia. However, “learning cannot occur simply by listening and seeing. It requires the

person’s own mental processing to take place […] work to involve participants and maximize

understanding and retention through participative techniques” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 75) Some

strategies I’d use throughout the presentation would be having an opening summary where I

would “state the presentation’s major points and conclusions to help participants organize their

listening” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 82) at the beginning. I’d also encourage the use of analogies to

assist with helping the faculty members relate concepts to experiences they have already gone

through. Other tactics I may utilize are “spot challenges” where one would “interrupt the

presentation periodically and challenge participants to give examples of concepts presented”

(Silberman, 2015, pg. 90) to give opportunities for learners to participate. On the other hand,

some non-presentation strategies I could utilize are demonstration because “involving

participants in demonstration […] is important so they can actually hear, see, and touch relevant

learning materials” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 103). For example, if one of the areas that the junior

faculty needs development on is teaching techniques, they could easily sit in on a senior faculty

member’s class as an observer to see how their more experienced colleagues manage a class. I
 Liu 6

believe that while a considerable amount of planning should be integrated prior to the start of a

training program, I must have a degree of flexibility as one that supports emergent education. As

stated in Yek & Penny (2006) in their assessment of how Singapore’s educational changes, “the

learning process and outcomes are continually evaluated based on the dynamic interaction of the

learning group. Hence, the curriculum itself develops with the learning process.”

Evaluating TPD Programs

The approach I would use to evaluate the training and professional development

programs within junior faculty development is using the model advanced by Dr. Donald

Kirkpatrick (2005) that has four levels of evaluation of training program. As stated in Silberman,

the Kirkpatrick model “offers indicators of value through a holistic measurement of both

qualitative and quantitative measures from a program or initiative with formal training typically

being the cornerstone” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 344). For Level 1, or “Reaction”, I believe an easy

way to identify whether the program met the participant’s expectations as a whole is through

administering a form right after the training program. I’d also utilize the “semi-projective

technique” to allow freeform feedback and “obtain a deeper and more personal response than a

questionnaire could elicit” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 348). For Level 2, or “Learning”, I would

utilize my senior faculty to collect evidence on whether the learning has taken place through

interviewing the junior faculty “to see how they would respond to job-related problems”

Silberman, 2015, pg. 349). For Level 3, or “Behavior”, I would survey my junior faculty most

likely in the middle of the next quarter they are teaching to see assess if the training “led to

on-the-job application” with combination of their senior faculty mentors evaluating through
 Liu 7

“observing their actual job performance” and providing feedback. Finally, for Level 4 or

“results”, an easy measurement would be a long term analysis to see the rate in which our junior

faculty do promote in a timely manner. If we see that our junior faculty are choosing to stay

within our department and are promoting at an appropriate timeline, “it’s reasonable to attribute

any improvement over the trend-line prediction to training” (Silberman, 2015, pg. 354).
 Liu 8

References

Billet, S., Harteis, C., & Etelapelto, A. (2008). Emerging Perspectives of Workplace Learning.
Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers

Bradbury, H., Frost, N., Kilminster, S., & Zukas, M. (2010). Beyond Reflective Practice: New
Approaches to Professional Lifelong Learning. Oxon, England: Routledge.

Dirkx, J and Austin, A. (2005). Making sense of continuing professional development: Toward
an integrated vision of lifelong learning in the professions. Paper presented at the AHRD
Preconference on Continuing Professional Education: Exploring a Model of Theoretical
Orientations in Professional Development, Estes Park, CO

Russell, S. (2006). An Overview of Adult-Learning Processes. Society of Urologic Nurses and

Associates, 26(5), pp. 349-352.

Silberman, M. L., Biech, E., & Auerbach, C. (2015). Active training: A handbook of techniques,
designs, case examples and tips. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

The Key Five Educational Philosophies. (n.d.) Retrieved from

http://wh-magazine.com/educational-philosophy/the-five-key-educational-philosophies

Yek, T., Penny, D. (2006). Curriculum as praxis: Ensuring quality technical education in
Singapore for the 21st century. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14 (26), 1-28.