Updated Teaching Philosophy Statement
- Year 1

My Beliefs and Values about Teaching, Learning, and Assessment

Teaching, for me, is about creating conditions where learners can step into the spotlight as active participants in their own development. I conceptualise this through the Theatre of Reflective Design, a metaphor I developed at the start of this programme and have since refined through a year of deliberate reflection on my practice.

In this theatre, learning unfolds like a production where students are not passive audience members but performers engaging with knowledge, refining their understanding through rehearsal and iteration, and shaping their perspectives through continuous feedback. My role is that of stage manager rather than lead actor. I set the conditions, provide structure, and ensure the feedback loops are functioning, but the performance belongs to the learners.

This past year has challenged and deepened this belief. I came into the programme confident that my instincts would carry me through. Both my parents were teachers, and I assumed that teaching was simply "in my blood." The MPhil modules revealed how incomplete this assumption was. Enthusiasm and inherited intuition do not substitute for deliberate engagement with educational theory and reflective practice.

Five values guide my approach to teaching and shape the decisions I make in the learning spaces I create.

1. Excellence: Pursuing continuous refinement of practice through iterative reflection; and cultivating this same orientation in learners.

2. Competence: Grounding teaching in deliberate theoretical engagement; and developing learners who can connect practice to underlying principles.

3. Integrity: Being honest about blind spots and assumptions, upholding honesty in academic outputs, and encouraging intellectual humility in learners.

4. Innovation: Embracing creative, design-based, and digital technology approaches to teaching; and valuing learners willing to experiment and take risks.

5. Accountability: Taking responsibility for equitable learning environments and owning one's academic outputs fully; and fostering this same ownership in learners.

Educational Theories that Underpin My Beliefs

My approach draws on cognitive, experiential, and transformative learning theories. Schön's (1983) concept of the reflective practitioner resonates strongly with my understanding of teaching as requiring both preparation and real-time responsiveness to what is happening in the learning space. Boud and colleagues' (2013) work on learning from experience has helped me understand that reflection is not simply thinking about what happened, but actively processing experience to construct new meaning.

I have come to appreciate Mezirow's (1991) transformative learning theory more deeply this year, recognising that meaningful learning often involves challenging existing assumptions rather than simply acquiring new information. This insight emerged through examiner feedback on my research protocol, which revealed that I had been working with concepts at surface level rather than engaging with foundational texts. The experience was itself transformative, prompting me to question how I approach theoretical engagement.

Blended learning provides the stage where these theories come together. Technology-enhanced methods offer dynamic possibilities for interaction, but they require careful attention to equity and accessibility. Not all learners arrive with the same technological fluency or access, a blind spot I had not fully appreciated before this year's reflections revealed it.

How My Attitudes Have Changed Over Time

The most significant shift has been recognising my tendency to assume shared understanding. Across all four Year 1 modules, feedback consistently highlighted that I overestimate the extent to which readers and learners share my frame of reference. I lead with theory before ensuring ideas are accessible. I use terms without checking whether my audience understands them as I do.

This pattern has implications for my teaching. When I design sessions using digital tools or introduce Design Science Research concepts, I now recognise that I must explicitly scaffold understanding rather than assuming learners will follow my reasoning. The stage manager cannot assume the cast knows the script.

A second insight concerns my analytical tendencies. I gravitate toward identifying gaps and weaknesses, sometimes overshadowing recognition of existing strengths. Examiner feedback noted this pattern in my curriculum analysis work. Constructive analysis requires balance. Identifying what needs improvement is valuable, but so is acknowledging what already works and building upon it.

My Teaching Context

I hold a dual appointment that positions me at the intersection of health policy and health professions education. As a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Health Professions Education at Stellenbosch University, I contribute to postgraduate teaching and curriculum development. Concurrently, I serve as a Public Health Medicine Specialist with the Western Cape Government Health and Wellness Directorate.

This positioning shapes my teaching in distinctive ways. My learners are typically mid-career health professionals with diverse clinical and managerial backgrounds. They bring rich experience but varied familiarity with educational theory and digital tools. The policy environment requires pragmatic solutions, while academic work demands methodological rigour. Navigating these different professional cultures has sharpened my awareness of how context shapes communication and the assumptions we make about what others know.

How I Measure My Effectiveness

I measure effectiveness through multiple mirrors of feedback, to use the Theatre of Reflective Design language. Student responses matter, but so does peer feedback and my own systematic reflection on what worked and what did not. The iterative cycle of designing, delivering, reflecting, and refining parallels the rehearsal process in theatre and the prototyping cycles in Design Science Research.

This year has taught me that effectiveness also requires attention to equity. A session that works brilliantly for learners with strong technological access may exclude others entirely. Measuring effectiveness means asking who is learning, not just whether learning is occurring.

Goals for Continued Professional Development

Looking ahead, I have three priorities for Year 2. First, I intend to develop more explicit communication practices, building habits of checking assumptions and scaffolding understanding before introducing complexity. Second, I will engage more deeply with foundational theoretical sources, moving beyond surface-level familiarity toward genuine understanding. Third, I plan to ground my visual and design-based approaches in educational literature, connecting my practical instincts to established scholarship.

The Theatre of Reflective Design metaphor remains central to how I understand my work, but I recognise that it needs stronger theoretical grounding in performance pedagogy if it is to become more than creative flourish. Year 2 offers an opportunity to develop this grounding and potentially position the metaphor as a contribution to HPE scholarship.

FOUNDATIONAL READING

• Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (2013). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. Routledge.

• Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.

• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.