Coming into the MAED program I had some background knowledge in various areas of learning and teaching theory. I envisioned my experience at MSU to be a relatively similar continuation of my undergraduate degree in Educational Studies, which, for the most part, was based on studying educational psychology and adult education within a multidisciplinary liberal arts curriculum. I did not realize I would learn so much about myself as a teacher in this masters program. The classes that helped reshape some of my beliefs in teaching, learning and the educational system where EAD 867: Case Studies in Educational Leadership, TE 831: Teaching School Subject Matter with Technology, EAD 860: Concept of a learning Society and ED 800: Concepts of Educational Inquiry.



As part of the masters requirements, I chose my concentration in P-12 School and Postsecondary Leadership because of the breadth of courses available, which were related to my interest in educational psychology, adult education and social studies. However, I did not truly understand what the term “leadership” meant in the title. I expressed my erroneous view about leadership in a reflective essay. For many years, I thought management and leadership was essentially the same thing. I had a negative view of the term “leadership.” I associated it with corrupt business and political leaders. I also negatively associated it with all those leadership business books about paradigm shift, proactive, outside the box and other business jargon that seemed more like gibberish. I honestly was not comfortable with the title of my concentration; I did not view myself as a leader and I sure was not planning to be a principal or administrator of a school. To compound my discomfort, I felt I had to enroll in a course that had something to do with leadership or at least have the word leadership in the title.



To help justify my choice of concentration, I enrolled in EAD 867: Case Studies in Educational Leadership, instructed by Dr. Marilyn Amey. It so happened, that the class which I thought did not pertain to my goals or interests, has turned out to be one of the most influential. The course was developed to allow us to explore our own leadership philosophies and to understand the dynamics of leadership in educational institutions. We read articles which described different kinds of leadership. We were assigned case studies that allowed us to try to solve leadership issues in educational institutions; we not only focused on the principals and administration, but also looked at the larger organization which includes teachers and their leadership roles. We quickly learned that we all have different leadership styles.



I think the most important assignment I worked on in my masters was the final reflective essay regarding leadership. It helped me become cognitively aware of my leadership skills, which was truly empowering. I came to the realization that my still developing leadership philosophy has to be viewed through the same lens as all my personal philosophies; as a post-modernist thinker I believe in many contrasting truths simultaneously. Therefore, I will most likely never have one particular leadership philosophy. Nonetheless, I am currently building a mental framework of leadership styles and concepts which I can use in different settings and situations. In general, my leadership style has elements of flexibility, motivation and trust. This flexibility would include not having qualms or misgivings about being an authoritarian leader if the context or cultural setting dictates it.



The idea of a teacher leader was new to me. I learned that leadership involves working together, communicating and designing/sustaining a common vision. I understand that I can use my leadership skills to help the educational institution I teach at. Another positive outcome of taking this course is that the title of my concentration now makes perfect sense to me.



One of my biggest transformations was in my view on technology in education. Before my masters, I did not think much about using technology in the classroom. In general, I thought some of the push for technology in education was pointless. My rational was, if some teachers wanted to explain a concept, they could speak and doodle something on the whiteboard. What was the point of spending time developing a pre-planned digital presentation that may negatively affect the open-ended nature of many classes? Even though I did not have an interest in educational technology, I realized I should learn how to use technology in the classroom if I needed to use it at a different school. I enrolled in TE 831: Teaching School Subject Matter with Technology, instructed by Erica Hamilton. I was a bit apprehensive; I had little background in developing or implementing technology in the classroom. Again, I made the correct choice. The course was practical and hands-on. There was no attempt to push any ideology or educational reform; the focus was on finding, testing, and using technology to suit our specific needs and contexts. We found content online, shared resources with classmates and produced our own content. One of the projects I created was a digital story/presentation about giving direction and using preposition. I created a digital story without a pre-recorded script. The idea was that every conversational English class has different English language abilities, and It would be best to customize the delivery of information for each class.



The concept that truly changed my thinking about using technology in the classroom was learning about TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge). TPACK is a framework created by Punya Mishra and Dr. Matthew J. Koehler from Michigan State University; it helps explain the kinds of knowledge teachers need to use to integrate technology into their teaching.  Further information can be found at http://www.tpack.org/. I had previous knowledge about the interplay between pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge in teaching (which was researched by Lee Shulman while he taught at Michigan State University). The addition of technological knowledge as depicted in the TPACK framework was not only succinct but beautiful. It took me one glance at the TPACK graph to understand the role of technology in education; TPACK represents a balanced thoughtful approach for implementing technology in the classroom depending on the context. Because of this course, I now use my laptop to display relevant English content. I am using technology as a pedagogical tool to enhance the lesson which is predominately based on a textbook.



One of the most valuable things I learned in my masters program is to appreciate the different contexts in which learning takes place. The course EAD 860: Concept of a learning Society, instructed by Dr. Steven Weiland taught me to look beyond formal institutions of education, i.e. schools, universities, career development classes. I should also consider non-formal education and other contextual settings of education which are parts of the learning society.  Some examples may include a) learning while working, b) learning online by retrieving content that enhanced knowledge (high-quality primary sources can often be found), c) learning by traveling and observing/engaging with other cultures, d) developing learning projects at home by using anything that will enhance your understanding and knowledge. This could be done by reading relevant books or even playing certain video games.



The broader concept of the learning society does not have a clear definition. I personally like the idea of combining the notion which suggests,” the learning society is one in which all of its members are learning and thus improving their lives and contributing to the collective good” (Wieeland, 2013). With the concept “the learning society is a broadened definition of learning that seeks to harmonize formal and non-formal education” (Weiland, 2013).



One of my favorite topics in the masters program was self-directed learning, it was discussed in half of the courses I took. EAD 860: Concept of a learning Society, had the greatest focus on the topic.  There are two schools of thought in self-directed learning, Dr Weiland states that “the most well known assumption is that learners are autonomous independent and choose to learn for personal growth. The other school of thought is that people seek and learn by social construction of knowledge… the process may involve group learning and communal learning” (Weiland, 2013). In one assignment, we conducted our own inquiry on self-directed learning by reading Noah Adams’s autobiographical book Piano Lessons: Music, Love, and True Adventures. We had to find and analyze the various methods of learning and contextual setting in which he sought to learn how to play the piano. As a casual reader I sure did not relate to the main character; I have no interest in classical music or most of the things he likes. Nevertheless, it was fun conducting an inquiry by looking at Noah’s life and educational history and determining his methods of education, most of which involved independent and social self-directed learning.



The final course I want to discuss is ED 800: Concepts of Educational Inquiry, instructed by Dr. Steven Weiland. There was no triumph over previous biases or a deep personal transformation, rather, the course was just intellectually stimulating. I loved the multidisciplinary/critical-thinking format. This course covered a broad scope of topics in the area of inquiry in education. My favorite lessons include the debates between the traditional and progressive faction of education and teacher research.



My prior understanding about learning and psychological theories, for the most part, came from the perspective of psychologists and philosophers. Coursework and materials I read placed little judgment on the theories, (this one is better than the other). I was a little shocked to learn from this and other courses in the masters program that there was such a rift between philosophies of education, especially in some parts of the formal educational system. The two factions I learned about were the traditionalists and progressives. According to Professor Weiland’s notes “The traditionalist (or back to basics movement), believe learning subject matter is most important and that drill and practice methods set achievable and goals” (Weiland, 2013). The progressive movement is inspired by Jacques Rousseau, Colonel Parker, John Dewey, and Jean Piaget. Some of the common tenets in progressive education include social learning, allowing students to experiment, promoting creativity, using methods of constructivism, and using student-centered-learning in the classroom.  I think the debate is silly, especially since many teachers, educational administrators, and politicians often do not know what psychologists, philosophers and researchers actually say. Nonetheless, I do believe that both factions of education are valid. Diane Ravitch sums up the debate best by saying, “both can be faulted one for demeaning intellectual and academic standards and the other for caring more about the subject matter than children… progressives can be thanked for emphasizing children motivation and making schools responsible for the health and general welfare of children and traditional can be credited for insisting upon the democratic responsibility of schools to promote the intellectual growth of all children” (Diane Rivitch).



Another interesting lesson in the class was the concept of narrative inquiry and the broader concept of teacher researcher. The study of educational research often focuses on (and seems to place more value on) quantitative research over qualitative research. I have been interested in qualitative research but never reviewed a good example. It was interesting to learn about narrative inquiry, which I believe is an example of qualitative teacher research; the lesson included reading Vivian Paley’s The Girl with the Brown Crayon. The story shows how a teacher can conduct research by observing their class and writing about it. The process involves describing subjects, settings, and contexts. The data is enhanced by describing colors, sounds, textures, smells, tastes, expressions, emotions, and behaviors in rich detail. This allows for subjective note taking and analysis, which is usually written in narrative prose. Actually, for the teaching profession this can be inspiring because it showed that we as teachers can contribute to the body of education research and knowledge.  

    

I chose this masters program because I thought it would be a natural continuation of my undergraduate degree in educational studies. This certainly has occurred, but in different ways than I thought. I believed I would attain deeper content knowledge in areas of educational psychology and adult education. Instead, I have also gained broader perspectives of understanding of education and am now able to better determine relationships between students, teachers, educational settings, and educational theories. Furthermore, I unexpectedly gained a deeper understanding of myself as a teacher and leader.