Learning Environments Educators as far back as Aristotle have attempted to determine the most optimal approach to teaching and learning. Any theory of learning must take a constellation of factors into consideration. Evidence-based research on the different components of learning theory, effective instruction, and learning environments abound, yet the one commonality is that individual differences are pivotal to the success of any approach. Additionally, even if perfect learning environments could be created, learning must be applicable to the world outside of the classroom. Indeed, that it its ultimate purpose. In this paper, this author will explore the characteristics of the backwards mapping, or designing for understanding, Common Core State Standards, both of which are integrative frameworks that promote efficient learning and effective teaching.

Learning Theory and Its Importance

A primary consideration of learning theorists is how to effectively address individual differences. Consider that from the 18th century and earlier, learning was often the result of a tutor-tutee relationship that was the province of the wealthy. A tutor often resided in the home of the learner and was paid to individualize instruction to meet the needs of the learner -- while working from what was more or less a curriculum based on classical works of great thinkers. Doubtless, the patrons who commissioned the individual tutoring sessions had some say in the curriculum scope, and different curricula for male students and female students would apply. Despite the formal trappings of such an arrangement, the tutor had a considerable degree of flexibility in instruction, which enabled the idiosyncrasies of the learners to be considered in absolute terms. As education became democratized, learners were gathered into groups to receive their instruction, and the enduring challenge of teaching many students at once provided fodder for endless theorizing and, eventually -- thankfully -- empirical research about how to address the inherent difficulties of institutionalized schools.

Learning theory that maps backward from the critical skills that students are expected to know, to the instruction that provides the learning opportunities from which those skills will be built. The framework that most informs my thinking about teaching and learning was developed by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, educators who developed and popularized backward design of instruction (2005). Standards are integral to effective instruction, as a clear conception of the end results is fundamental to the process of mapping a path to that end vision (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). To map backward, a teacher must be able to clearly state precisely what the learner should know, understand, and be able to perform -- and the elements must demonstrably tie to the specific plan for instruction, lesson plans, and address anticipated constraints or challenges (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).

Although the Common Core State Standards are fairly controversial in some arenas, the overarching plan for using the Common Core falls neatly within the tenets of the backward mapping, understanding through design approach. The Common Core standards and competencies are integrative, fitting well into the demands of new literacy in a digital age. The methods used in the understanding through design approach ensure that the elements of instruction -- the lessons, units, courses, and majors -- are all logically derived from the desired end results. This tack is counterpoint to laissez-faire and commercial approaches to instruction that permit a teacher to follow their own interests or whims that may occur through contact with books, fun activities, traditional methods, or the, say, the PTA. Curriculum must make explicit the best ways to achieve specific desired results. This occurs most precisely when the design for instruction moves backward from the desired learnings -- and is based on data, which is a topic for the next section (Stankov, 2008).

The Effective Teacher and Learning Environment

Effective teaching does not occur through happenstance. An effective teacher must possess the aptitude for teaching, but they must also exhibit several other important characteristics, that are either intrinsic to who they are or that they have learned and developed through a formal program of preparation. Effective teachers must be good decision makers as decisions -- particularly those based on data -- make up the fabric of teaching (Slavin, 2015, p. 6). Moreover, the decisions teachers make must derive from a solid and comprehensive understanding of the findings of evidence-based research (Slavin, 2015, p. 6). Self-knowledge, self-regulation, and the ability to maximally use opportunities for reflection are also elemental to effective teacher behavior (Slavin, 2015, p. 6). A deep grounding in subject matter and knowledge about the location and access requirements of educational resources facilitate the development of effective...

6). But these are insufficient without the teacher's ability to solve problems and instinctively use critical thinking skills (Slavin, 2015, p. 6). Direct instruction is really just a variant of the backward mapping approach, as it used specific learning objectives to develop lessons plans, and then evaluates student performance according to the data about individual students and about the aggregate -- that is, which content needs to be dropped or changed because students are confused. Bandura provides a theory of motivation that I believe is far superior to that of the behaviorists. According to Bandura, the motivation to learn is integral to the human desire for socialization; therefore, motivation is inherent and good teaching and learning environments bring out that natural inclination to work toward social and academic competence. However, when classroom management is challenging, then a behaviorist approach will add the most clarity for the analysis, and help to objectify the problem behavior so that its not seen as endemic to the student, but is seen as a disconnect between the environmental stimuli and the internal rewards derived by the student whose needs are adequately and appropriately met. Further, in an optimal teaching and learning environment, technology is not an afterthought -- not an add-in -- rather it is embedded in and integral to all the educational processes.
Learning Characteristics

A catalyst for the development of cooperative learning was the appreciation by Johnson and Johnson that students come to their learning experiences with widely varying skill sets and aptitudes (2009). Social interdependence theory is the basis for cooperative learning, and it has roots in the research and theories of Bandura and Vygotsky. Indeed, Bandura's and Vygotsky's theories hold equally well for student learners and their teachers (Yasnitsky, 2011). Bandura argues that,

"Human agency is characterized by…the temporal extension of agency through intentionality and forethought, self-regulation by self-reactive influence, and self-reflectiveness about one's capabilities, quality of functioning, and the meaning and purpose of one's life pursuits" (2001, p. 1).

The teacher's role in the use of both formal and informal cooperative learning and cooperative base groups has been operationalized through the theory and research (Brown, 2014). Indeed, the value of group learning has endured many educational reform efforts and is currently seen in the methods used to teach Common Core State Standards, and to foster deeper and more focused learning in students.

Learning Characteristics

The benefits of collaborative teaching and data-driven decision-making are important when designing instruction for students with disabilities. Indeed, for students with Asperger's syndrome, cooperative learning provides opportunities for both academic learning and social learning (Fine & Myers, 2004; Griswold, et al., 2002; Phemister, 2005). Brown (2014) describes the practice of open classrooms in which teachers share their pedagogical responsibility with other teachers. Here, too, it is apparent that the value of collaborative and interactive educational experiences extends from teachers to students. Two commonly used open classroom practices include learning walks and team teaching. Both practices rely on the intentionality of teaching. Learning walks enable administrators and other teachers to chat with students following their learning experiences, a process that can reveal how well students understand their learning objectives and how well they can talk about their learning. Team teaching does much the same for teachers as they discuss their instructional goals and share and analyze student data to better understand how effective their instruction has been, and how they can make it better or different when re-teaching is needed.

Personal Reflection

My personal learning style is definitely not based on auditory input. I am predominately a visual learner and like to be able to refer back to written information in case I may have missed something or misconstrued information. I know from experience that I my reactions are quick and often premature: that is to say that I may respond emotionally to input and later, upon reflection, realize that my perception was not completely on target. I need to guard against an instinctual negativity, particularly when I receive feedback or constructive criticism about my performance. In fact, it is this attribute of my personality that I believe prevents me from enjoying group work in the classroom or study groups outside of class. I have to deliberately and diligently guard against my tendency to focus on the delivery of feedback and the personalities of the people in the groups, rather than on the content of the feedback and the credibility of the input from others. My study skills are average but my effort is above average, so I continually…