Where’s the Line? Putting Democratic Teaching Ideals to the Test
On the one hand, I want students to feel comfortable being active "citizens" in the class and practice their skills of negotiating within a pluralistic sphere. I want them to see that teachers do not always have to be the ultimate dictator in the classroom; that instead they can be open to hearing the voices and concerns of their students. On the other hand, however, I am always wondering if instead of creating an atmosphere of positive freedom -- freedom to -- I am actually creating an environment of negative freedom -- merely a freedom from constraints and challenges. Most of my students have been well-schooled in conventional education; they've learned how to "play the game" of trying to get the most amount of credit/rewards/grades out of the least amount of effort and challenge. I always wonder when students ask for certain changes to the syllabus if they are "gaming" me; what's their true motivation for seeking the change? Am I doing them a disservice, becoming an enabler of low expectations, if I ultimately concede to their requests for changes? Where do I draw the line between asserting something that I think is good for them and listening to their concerns?
Instead of offering students an immediate answer to their requests, I try to open up the discussion to the rest of the class. I inquire if others share the concern and what possible other solutions there might be. At times, this, too, is problematic as students, again schooled in the conventional education culture where there is enmity between teacher and pupil, rarely wish to alienate peers by siding with the teachers' initial decisions and saying, rather Eddie Haskell-like, "I think the requirements and due dates are just fine as they are and don't need to change." Sometimes, though, we DO get a good dialogue going, especially when I can clearly and non-defensively articulate my purposes behind setting up a rubric in a certain way or explain why I set a certain deadline. In the process of such discussions, I am pushed to re-visit my goals, which is a good thing for a teacher to do in general, and a great thing to model for future teachers. For example, with the request to pre-record their Pecha Kucha presentations, I was able to reflect that my main goals were to:
As we discussed the goals, I also stressed to them how people should step outside of their comfort zone and do things that might orginally strike them as scary (e.g. present in front of peers), and that this is a safe environment for them to do so. I did concede, as we discussed, though, that my key goals (a through c above) could still be met by the students doing pre-recordings instead of "live" presentations. Thus, we changed the rubric together to accommodate this new option. When the presentations happened, however, quite a few of the students did end up opting to do a "live" presentation.
But in giving in to allowing the option of pre-recording, was I a push-over? Should I have held firm and pushed them all to go the extra step and present "live"? Or did I instead provide them a positive example of how a teacher tries to live her pedagogical and philosophical ideals? Such questions plague me constantly as I navigate a world between two worlds - conventional education and democratic education. Do others find themselves in this often-uncomfortable space? If so, this blog is where we can share our stories and questions and work through the discomfort together - so welcome!
Posted in DemEd in Real LifePhilosophy of EducationTeaching on Nov 11, 2009 - 11:41 AM
In my efforts to model democratic practices to pre-service teachers, I ask my students at the beginning of each class, "Are there any questions, comments, concerns, suggestions, complaints?" Usually I am met with silence or with just basic housekeeping-type questions (e.g. when do we have to take Praxis II? etc.). Occasionally, though, a student will offer a concern or complaint about the work load or impending due dates, or they'll propose a change to a grading rubric item. For example, in the last month, I had students request to be able to pre-record their Pecha Kucha presentation (a sort of slam poetry form of powerpoint presentation -- 20 slides in 20 seconds each to explore an issue -- see Pecha Kucha for an example) rather than present it "live." And just last week, students requested that we postpone a paper's due date by a week. When students make such requests, my democratic ideals and philosophy are put to the test.On the one hand, I want students to feel comfortable being active "citizens" in the class and practice their skills of negotiating within a pluralistic sphere. I want them to see that teachers do not always have to be the ultimate dictator in the classroom; that instead they can be open to hearing the voices and concerns of their students. On the other hand, however, I am always wondering if instead of creating an atmosphere of positive freedom -- freedom to -- I am actually creating an environment of negative freedom -- merely a freedom from constraints and challenges. Most of my students have been well-schooled in conventional education; they've learned how to "play the game" of trying to get the most amount of credit/rewards/grades out of the least amount of effort and challenge. I always wonder when students ask for certain changes to the syllabus if they are "gaming" me; what's their true motivation for seeking the change? Am I doing them a disservice, becoming an enabler of low expectations, if I ultimately concede to their requests for changes? Where do I draw the line between asserting something that I think is good for them and listening to their concerns?
Instead of offering students an immediate answer to their requests, I try to open up the discussion to the rest of the class. I inquire if others share the concern and what possible other solutions there might be. At times, this, too, is problematic as students, again schooled in the conventional education culture where there is enmity between teacher and pupil, rarely wish to alienate peers by siding with the teachers' initial decisions and saying, rather Eddie Haskell-like, "I think the requirements and due dates are just fine as they are and don't need to change." Sometimes, though, we DO get a good dialogue going, especially when I can clearly and non-defensively articulate my purposes behind setting up a rubric in a certain way or explain why I set a certain deadline. In the process of such discussions, I am pushed to re-visit my goals, which is a good thing for a teacher to do in general, and a great thing to model for future teachers. For example, with the request to pre-record their Pecha Kucha presentations, I was able to reflect that my main goals were to:
a) have the students do some in-depth research,
b) practice, practice, and practice some more to fit their presentation into the Pecha Kucha format, and
c) create entertaining and relevant visuals to accompany the narrative.
As we discussed the goals, I also stressed to them how people should step outside of their comfort zone and do things that might orginally strike them as scary (e.g. present in front of peers), and that this is a safe environment for them to do so. I did concede, as we discussed, though, that my key goals (a through c above) could still be met by the students doing pre-recordings instead of "live" presentations. Thus, we changed the rubric together to accommodate this new option. When the presentations happened, however, quite a few of the students did end up opting to do a "live" presentation.
But in giving in to allowing the option of pre-recording, was I a push-over? Should I have held firm and pushed them all to go the extra step and present "live"? Or did I instead provide them a positive example of how a teacher tries to live her pedagogical and philosophical ideals? Such questions plague me constantly as I navigate a world between two worlds - conventional education and democratic education. Do others find themselves in this often-uncomfortable space? If so, this blog is where we can share our stories and questions and work through the discomfort together - so welcome!
Tags for this entry:
research,
freedom,
higher education,
questioning,
classroom strategies,
discussion,
presentation,
pecha kucha
