former Director of Academic Affairs, MFI Polytechnic Institute Inc.
The case study that will be analysed here is my teaching
experience in the subject called Programmable Logic Controllers
(PLC). The analyses will be based on the day when my
participants were most varied. On that day, my participants were
made up of one maintenance supervisor, two new engineering
graduates, four practicing technicians and two teachers. The first
three hours of the 30-hour PLC course is worth mentioning
because first meeting would usually set the tone for the rest of
the classes.
I started the first meeting by introducing myself, describing the
course objectives and contents, and the classroom policy. I
explained that in order to obtain the ‘course certificate’, each one
should be able to perform three out of four laboratory exercises
within three hours and on the next meeting achieve at least 70%
mark on the written examination conducted within two hours.
These practical and written examinations were done at the end of
the course.
The emphasis of my first presentation was to give them the
picture of what lies ahead. I clearly described that there were
four sets of experiments arranged for the purpose of attaining the
defined outcomes of the course. The sets were motor control,
pneumatic cylinder control, alarm control and sequential control
of lamps. As they could see these four sets were stationed in the
four corners of the 7 by 12 meters classroom. During each three
hour session, the two hour laboratory exercises would commence
every after one hour of lecture. The lecture was normally
conducted using the common visual aids such as white board,
projector, film showing and PowerPoint presentations. The end of
the lecture would be a practical demonstration which served as
the start of the laboratory activities. During the practical
exercises my function as a lecturer would switch to facilitator.
All participants were also given a chance to introduce themselves.
Although their experiences and expectations on the course were varied, their stories were related to a common field of interest –
PLC’s role in Industrial Automation.
As far as I can remember the focus questions of each identified
group of learners were the following:
Supervisor: “What will be the immediate and long term
benefits of implementing PLC in our
organization?
Technicians: “What are the knowledge and skills needed for
me to effectively troubleshoot the faults in a
PLC system?”
Teachers: “How could I transfer the skills and knowledge
about PLC in my own organization’s classroom
setting?”
New Engineers: “How will this training add up to my resume and
career advancement in the future?”
However, regardless of whatever their questions were, the
objectives, contents and assessments were already established
even before they thought of enrolling. Therefore, I believed that
the success of the program depended on whether I delivered the
course according to the curriculum and not on whether I
answered their questions.
It seemed that the first meeting ended (as I directed) with the
unification and transformation of the learners’ diverse and complex expectations from the course into a simple and common goal – pass the practical and written examination to receive the course certificate!
Analyses of the case study
The case study described above will be analysed in three ways.
First is to look at the teacher’s approach to education
(philosophical perspectives in learning). Second is to evaluate the
learners’ response to training (conceptions in adult learning).
Lastly, is to analyze the case study in a more panoramic way
(lifelong education, critical learners, pedagogy and andragogy,
and the facilitation of learning). Moreover, the analyses will also
describe the alternative approach and argue on why other
perspectives might not be appropriate. Unfortunately, the
analyses exclude postmodernism and ethical issues in education.
My aim as a teacher mentioned above was to implement a
competency – based training by means of lecturing and facilitating
roles. As a lecturer during the first hour of the class, I served as
an authority who directed the learning process. This means that in
a certain degree I took a liberal stance as an expert in
transmitting knowledge (Matuszowics, 2000). However, in the
next two-hour, practical exercise was based on behavioural
objectives provided by the curriculum. Also, the environment was
systematically organized by me in order to elicit desired
outcomes. For these reasons, it can be viewed that, as I facilitated the practical exercises, I applied the behavioural learning theory
as suggested by Merrian and Caffarella (1991).
The roles of the students or participants, on the other hand, were
complex. The supervisor’s goal of enrolling in my class was to
know what PLC is and its cost effectiveness in the long run. The
technicians, on the other hand, wanted to upgrade their skills to
efficiently maintain the PLCs installed in their respective
organizations. Similarly, the teachers in my class expected to
have mastery on PLC so that they could also teach PLC in their
institutions. The young engineers, however, were there for
whatever purpose the training would serve them. However, given
the learners’ varied expectations, they responded in a
homogenous way by adhering to the demands of the course.
These demands were based on the assessment of the
competencies the learners should be able to perform. These
competencies in turn were driven by the needs of the industry
and therefore task oriented. Thus, it can be said that “this
industry based training draws upon research on learning from a
neo-behaviourist or cognitive psychology standpoint”- the first
among the conceptions of adult learning called training and
efficiency in learning (Boud, 1987, p.223).
Moreover, PLC course was pedagogically delivered because, as
Knowles stated (1990, p.54), I as the teacher had full
responsibility in making the decisions about what should be learnt,
how it would be learnt, when the learning should take place as
well as finding out if ever the learning took place. Thus, the
learner submitted to my instructions and become dependent on
my directions. However, the learners responded in andragogical
ways because, as Knowles also mentioned (1990, p57), they were
ready to learn and their experience had constructed their
learning. Additionally, I believed that, in one way or another, their
submission to me as their teacher was not motivated by my
approval, as in the case of pedagogy but by their own selfconcept, which is andragogical (Knowles, 1990).
The combination of liberal (intellectual) and behavioural
(experiential) learning perspectives that I used were appropriate
for the technicians and teachers. Liberal approach helped the
technicians and teachers understand the concept of PLC while the
behavioural approach developed in them the skills to program and
troubleshoot a PLC controlled manufacturing system. However,
the new engineers could have been better off if I inculcated in
them the ability to think critically in addition to gaining new
knowledge and skills. Since, more likely that these new engineers
will hold managerial positions or will be involved in decision
making in the future, then it is paramount that they can envision
alternatives and more productive ways of applying PLC in a given
industry. I believe that the ability to decide prudently requires the
skill of critical thinking (Brookfield, 1987). Similarly, the
supervisor should have given a program oriented to social
learning. Since, the supervisor’s goal was focused on the benefits
of applying PLC in his organization then it is significant that he is
aware of the influence of his learning about PLC on his
subordinates (social context). Consequently, the supervisor’s
knowledge about PLC and the support of his people could
convince their superior in acquiring PLC for their production line.
I am convinced that radical philosophy is not appropriate in this
program since PLC would not bring any change in society in
general. Nevertheless, progressive approach might be appropriate
for all the learners, as White and Brockett (1987, p. 13)
describes, “Progressive philosophy emphasizes experience of
learner in determining problem areas and solution to be
considered”. Applying this to the PLC course would mean
consolidating all the experiences of the participants. The focus
question, for instance, would be ‘what are the advantages of
utilizing PLC in the manufacturing?’ Allowing the participants to
derive their own concept of why PLC is invented might result to a
more creative and deeper understanding of PLC. Furthermore,
having the learners thought of the solution to a problem will
empower them to be more responsible, because there would be a
“sense of ownership”. Lastly, is the alternative of using the
humanistic approach, White and Brockett (1987, p.13) also
pointed out that the assumption wherein each learner possesses
an unlimited potential will create a supportive and affirmative
feeling to the individual.
Without doubt, the analyses taught me significant lessons that
would be useful on my professional development. I have learned
that switching to other philosophical perspectives in education
could be more beneficial to the learners. Although following the
old adage, “teach as you have been taught” is a safe way to go, it
might not be that effective in attaining the objectives of the
curriculum and satisfying the expectations of the learners.
I also realized that, although my teaching skills, scholarly
knowledge, curriculum planning, visual aids, equipment and
program instructions counts, there is more to it in learning.
Rogers (1983) discussed that, facilitation of learning depends on
the qualities of personal relationship between the facilitator and
the learners. Some of the attitudes, for instance are, realness,
acceptance and emphatic understanding. Rogers (1983, p.127) also stated, “students who are in real contact with problems that
are relevant to them wish to learn, want to grow, seek to
discover, endeavor to master, desire to create and move toward
self-discipline”. In my case, permitting the participants to learn
dictated by their own interest will serve as a challenge to me.
Indeed, even in technical education, humanistic and progressive
philosophies will surely enhance learning. Learners should have
been more confident and critical if I used a humanistic approach.
The learners’ combined experiences should have been useful in
determining the problem, as well as finding the solution if I
implemented a progressive approach. For me, the appropriate
mixture of four philosophies such as liberal, behavioural, humanist
and progressive in education would be an effective means of
educating a group of learners. These educational approaches in
teaching together with the essential attitudes while facilitating an
experiential learning environment will surely bring the best kind
of learners.
#PLC #louieabuel