Zull, James E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: enriching teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, Va.: Stylus Pub.

Self-reflection on the Chapter 2 and Chapter 3

In chapter 2 of this book, based on David Kolb’s learning cycle (concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract hypothesis and active testing), Zull argued that the learning cycle involves using different parts of the brain, namely sensory cortex, integrative cortex, frontal integrative cortex and the motor brain. Hence a learning cycle can be reflected by a brain cycle.

Further on, Zull divided the brain structure into back cortex and front cortex. Two parts are connected to be able to communicate with each other; and the connection is crucial to learning which is defined by the author as Transformation Line. Learning is about the balance of using back cortex and front cortex.

This is linked back to my first article on the reading log (and the course discussion in weeek1), personal philosophy of teaching and learning. Teaching and learning can not be separated and a teacher’s teaching philosophy more or less reflects his perspective on learning and teaching. Even though all the teaching and learning philosophies are not equally good, from my point of view, a teacher should have multiple perspectives on teaching and to be open minded.

In this way, Zull’s argument provides a new perspective on learning philosophy from a biological point of view – learning and teaching is about changing the brain. A learning process is to use different parts of the brain to receive and process the information, then create new ideas and apply it. To be an effective learner, one should use his brain in a balanced way and here is where a teacher’s role involves in. We are not doing brain control, but to help learners to exercise his brain in a balanced way.

Zull’s book is written in an easy to read manner and it particular interested me since it opens a new perspective for me to look at how people learn and how we might be able to help people to learn.

Personal Philosophies of Teaching: A False Promise? By: Pratt, Daniel D., Academe, 20050101, Vol. 91, Issue 1

Database: ERIC

In colleges and universities, a teacher will be asked about his teaching philosophy during evaluation process of teaching. More or less, it is related to his reappointment, tenure, or promotion. The author raised four issues behind a personal philosophy of teaching that may affect the reviewer's judgment of "good teaching philosophy".

● Does everyone agreed on the acceptable statement of teaching philosophy?

Is teaching philosophy a description of aims and means or it is a deeper reflection of the values and beliefs. What should be suitable for the substance of teaching philosophy?

● Should acceptable philosophies of teaching only be "learner centered"?

There has been shift from teacher-centered teaching philosophy towards learner-centered philosophy. However, is learner-centered philosophy the only acceptable philosophies of teaching? Author has given an example of teaching philosophy in different culture, China, in this case. The Chinese version of "learner-centered" teaching may seem to be teacher-centered teaching in western view.

● Do Reviewers' own philosophies of teaching have influence on their judgment?

If a reviewer is holding different teaching philosophy, the evaluation may be biased.

● Is students’ evaluation of teaching fair?

In student assessment of teaching, nearly all the questionnaires are similar regardless of teachers' different teaching philosophy.

In conclusion, the author's argument is that the view of effective teaching should not be narrowed. The perspective on good teaching is various and differing views of teaching should be recognized and respected.