Picking up where we left off on the previous post, so how do teachers intentionally teach for transformative learning? And how do they do that, given the fact that a teacher cannot make (as in require or force) students have a learning experience that changes what they believe, how they think, or how they act? Like all learning, it’s about creating conditions that are conducive to transformative learning.

I’m immersed in writing one of 34 chapters commissioned for a handbook on transformative learning. My chapter explores the relationship between learner-centered teaching and transformative learning. I am convinced the two are related, but I’ve never spent time trying to sort out the nature of that relationship. It’s a good project—I’m learning a lot, although I seem to be uncovering more questions than answers.

Ronald J. Markert captures the “more” in a set of principles. The context is medical education, but the principles he proposes are broadly applicable. Here’s a sample.

It’s good to remember how frustrating learning can be. It’s even better when you experience the frustration firsthand.

I was home last week, visiting my 98-year-old father. He was doing well until February of this year. Since then he’s seriously declined physically and mentally. The mental changes are the hardest to take. Things he’s known for years are gone or only there intermittently. The confusion shakes his confidence. He thinks it’s morning but he’s never quite sure, and for some reason looking out the window doesn’t resolve his doubts. Numbers are now mostly a mystery. He called to tell us he’d just received a check for $2,100. He was right about receiving a check, but it was for $72—the $2,100 was the premium amount. I replaced his broken watch band with one just a bit different than his old one. Mastering how it worked took most of one afternoon.

Should students have a role in developing the syllabus for a course? Yes, say 69 percent of a cohort of nursing faculty and 65 percent of a cohort of nursing students. And 92 percent of that faculty group said they did involve students in syllabus development. However, only 12 percent of the students said that they had been given a role in setting up the course syllabus.

I had a great experience last week: I attended the Organizational Behavior Teaching Conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico. This is the annual meeting of an organization that supports college teaching for those within the management field. A number of our professional associations (most often in the large disciplines) have separate organizations or subgroups within the association that are focused on teaching and learning. Does your field have such an organization? If so, I would encourage you to consider attending events hosted by the group. There is such energy generated when folks who care about teaching convene to explore issues and share ideas.

I did a workshop this week on climates for learning. It’s a session I love doing. Nobody argues with the need to have one in the classroom and everywhere else around campus. But most of us haven’t gotten past the metaphor (we aren’t talking about the “weather” in our classroom even though we do regularly refer to the “atmosphere” in class and the “environment” on campus). When we refer to the climate for learning what are we talking about?