F |
I |
N |
D |
I |
N |
G |
|
O |
U |
R |
|
N |
O |
R |
T |
H |
|
|
|
|
My worldview is rooted in the belief that the universe is an integrated system, an interdependent web of life (Deloria p81) emanating from a gender-neutral Creative Force who is the very essence of goodness.(Harper, et al. p107) It follows, that all human nature is intrinsically good. Empirically, I base this belief on my extensive experience working with infants and their parents. Infants are born good with a deep curiosity and drive to learn and to grow. Indeed infants would be the perfect model for self-directed learning – if they didn’t have to learn within a social context.
Infants, are born into a society – a community – which often fails to meet its obligation to these tiny treasures. Hence many of them fail to meet those lofty goals, fail to thrive, fail to learn, fail to grow, fail to blossom. Why?
If individuals are intrinsically good and societies or cultures are composed of individuals why are not all societies perfect, fair, just or just plain good? If these communities are part of a wholistic, interdependent and integrated system of perfection would they not be good? (DeLoria p91)Yes, they would. But in the words of my friend Germán Gutierrez, speaking of his own people, the Colombians, “They have lost their North.” They have become disconnected from Nature or Creation. (ibid)
I cannot with confidence say that any society – present or past – is or was intrinsically good. However, that society must exist for humans to exist is evident. If learning (which I define as making connections or a perceptual reciprocity with that being (Merleau Ponty as found in Abram p56) is part and parcel of humanity’s purpose then it follows that learning must also be conducted within a social context – a community of learners – friends educating friends (Collins Learning for Life p113) through a dialogue of equals (Freire p78).
Society once corrupted or seduced will taint individuals because of the overlap of influences among individuals within the social fabric. Imagine spilling ink on a piece of pristine cotton – that mark will be virtually permanent. Consider individuals as singles or threads within the warp and woof of that fabric – one cannot be stained without someone next to him/her also being affected.
Is there a way we can “Scotchguard™” our social fabric through an educational process? Yes, through a Radical/Progressive approach and within childhood a Progressive Pedagogy (Macedo in Freire, p25) of Engagement (Vella p113). I reiterate that we cannot do so by “stabilizing” individual threads within the social fabric for they never existed outside of that fabric. The only way we can strengthen our social fabric is within a social context – not by creating more resilient individuals. At this point, the whole cloth must be swished in the learning bath of community. But before we get carried away with the laundry, let us first look at the philosophical stances available for us to choose from in the field of Adult Education.
Liberal/Perennial Philosophy, most evident in the theories of Adler and Hutchins, views learning as something people will naturally seek out (Scott Learning for Life p100). This view presupposes that learners have time on their hands and the means to procure opportunities for professors to pour knowledge into their heads for knowledge’s own sake. It is presumed that this activity will not particularly effect any social change. Like Pragmatism it views lives from an Utopian perspective of non-interferrence.
Behaviorists, B. F. Skinner chief among them, believe that our actions must be shaped and directed. Like Pavlov’s famous dogs, we must be trained through a system of rewards and punishments (like marks?) which will assist us to align our actions within the guidelines of our expert trainers. (ibid p 101)
Pragmatism or Analytic approaches to education, perhaps a noble experiment in humanistic self-determination, like Humanism and Liberalism, fails to examine the deterrents to learning for adults. It depends heavily on ambiguous terms like person’s interests and abrogates the educator’s responsibility. (Knowles Foundations… p 35) Very real obstacles like time constraints, poverty and work and family responsibilities pose very real challenges and doom learners to fail. The fault lies not within the learner; the precepts were as faulty as those of Humanism.
Humanism, wherein our ubiquitous Abraham Maslow finds great comfort, claims that we must climb a pyramidal structure from basic needs towards self-actualization (which no one except the gods really attains, but that’s okay because it is as worthy a goal as Heaven). Within Humanism we are encouraged to see ourselves as all-responsible little islands. Learners are viewed as dynamic parts of the learning process placing the teacher as mediator of learning. The danger in this stance is individualism because it allows us to view “different” as “less than” or ”Other”. The Other becomes objectified or distanced (Abram p100 and Freire p74) perhaps even an enemy with little worth or merit.
Workplace training, which is purported to be Humanistic in nature falls under the Freire’s “banking model” (Freire p72) and gives a false sense of security to individuals. Humanism has historically been used to blame the victim such as in the case of well-paid auto line-workers being told, first, that they weren’t as productive as workers in other “under developed” countries and then, that they hadn’t upgraded their skills to be ready for the new technologically superior jobs which were plentiful. This tactic put the responsibility for worker loss of jobs directly in the laps of the workers.
Humanism is concerned with freedom and integrity of individuals who are in control of their own life, but the actuality often falls short of the purported goals and purpose. Though individual trainers may have the best intentions embracing this Philosophy, one can see why this philosophy is espoused by Corporate Americanada when one realizes that Workers’ Trade Unions have certainly made their life uncomfortable with all their Radicalism!
Kolb’s progressivism with its goals of improving society and its means rooted in the experiential model views teacher as partner-helper with learners ultimately responsible for their own learning. Since this learning always takes place within the context of a social dialogue, I can manage to work within an environment that holds this as the sterling standard for all adult education process. Formal Adult Education leans heavily on Progressivism and picks and chooses parts of the Humanist Philosophy, or at least the methods within the theoretical model.
Adult ESL programs usually fall strongly within the schools of Progressivism and/or Humanism, but fall just short of Radicalism. However, they do intend a rather radical social change – a cultural paradigm shift – to occur within the learners. While I have no great argument with Knowles, particularly with his Andragogy, I do take exception to the Humanism inherent in his Philosophy. Both Knowles and Carl Rogers seem to believe that individuals will have a need to steer the learning and are capable of so doing. However, except perhaps in the case of a hermit, learning takes place within a social context giving the learner meaning and purposefully placing the learning objectives within a larger frame. This reality is evident in Knowles’ concern and care not to allow the learner to become too dependent on the teacher. Of course, as teachers we must adhere to respecting the value of each learner, but there is always more than one learner in the context of adult education programs – or we couldn’t run them (bottom line, you know). We must, as instructors, understand the concepts of group dynamics, be cognitive of and sensitive to the diversity of social contexts of our learners.
In this working context, techniques derived from the Andragogical model are useful, with merit placed heavily in the Philosophy and practices of Radicalists like Paulo Freire, Violet McNaughton, Jane Vella, Myles Horton, Zoë Weil and Anne Bishop whose book on community development is aptly titled “Becoming an Ally Breaking the Cycle of Oppression ~ in People ~. This approach realizes the import of connecting to the collectivist reality that is the social fabric which holds us together in communities, webs. This wholistic and accessible approach gets at root causes of social inequity and social injustice rather than applying band-aids.
Raising consciousness through a critical thinking process is the ultimate goal and purpose of education, in my view. It endures; it transforms; it results in social change. However this it not a sail on a tranquil sea. Radical as an adjective means relating to or affecting the fundamental (emphasis mine) nature of something and advocating through political or social reform. (OED ed 2002) Progressive means proceeding gradually or in stages, favoring change, innovation or social reform. (OED ed 2002). Both methodologies by these names lead to social change or reform – never done overnight or without upset.
Learning within a group can be a stormy activity; conflict born out of the divergence of individuals within the group will see to the boat being rocked. But rigorously focused conflict frequently creates a tension that tests us and in testing us requires us to think through and rethink fossilized beliefs. Structural tension, engineers tell us, is what holds up bridges and this same force can propel learning – especially in adults. Conflict does not equate with competition and often produces more robust and cohesive groups with clearer goals.
Once we work out why there is tension we may come to find that there is much common ground on which to build a collective vision. It is my contention that we need a collectivist vision. Individualism, (Scott Learning for Life p104) has run rampant and has divided us into small pockets with no meaning or connection. We have become isolated and vulnerable as learners – not more self-directed or self-actualized but certainly more confused because SDL is inherently contradictory (Chovanec Learning for Life, p319). An individual’s dignity is most evident when community connection is solid and secure. Learners need their dignity and purposefulness; their own focus and goals – but as humans we need humanity, we need to feel a part of something larger.
My analogy or metaphor to my Philosophy of Radical Progressivism is the Medicine Wheel. This Wheel acts as our compass, reminding us that everything we do must be considered, thoughtful and kind. Wheels are circles as is all Nature circular, seasonal.
If we view the Universe as a Circle within which we are contained and view ourselves as the Centre of our own Circle, then we must also realize that we are part of larger, concentric circles that radiate outward. This makes us aware that what we do ripples and radiates outward, affecting all within our larger circle. We also see ourselves Humanistically as free, in control and responsible. (Scott Learning for Life p102) I explain this to my students as circles of concern and influence. We change that centre and through a cultural synthesis (Freire p180) we influence that entire Circle, called Society.
For me teaching is a spiritual calling, a vocation (Collins, M MDDE 611 Readings p107) In my journey with my students the Medicine Wheel acts as my compass and helps me to steer my ship, to find my North.
Bibliography
Abram, , David, The Spell of the Sensuous, 1997, USA, First Vintage Books Edition, 1997
Bishop, Anne, Becoming an Ally Breaking the Cycle of Oppression ~ in People~ second edition, 2002, Canada, Fernwood Publishing Company Limited
DeLoria, Vine, Jr., God is Red A Native View of Religion, 1994, Colorado, USA, Fulcrum Publishing
Freire, Paulo, pedagogy of the oppressed, 30th ed., Translated by Myra Bergman Ramos, 2003, New York, Continuum International Publishing Group, Inc.
Harpur, Tom, Finding The Stillpoint A Spiritual Response to Stress, 2000, Kelowna, BC, Canada, Northstone Publishing, an imprint of Wood Lake Books Publishing, Inc.
Horton, Myles and Freire, Paulo, We Make the Road by Walking, ed Bell, Brenda, Gaventa, John and Peters, John, 1990, USA Temple University Press
Selman, Gordon, Selman, Mark, Cooke, Michael, Dampier, Paul ed. The foundations of Adult Education in Canada 2nd ed., 1998, Toronto, ON, Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc.
Scott, Sue M., Spencer, Bruce and Thomas, Alan M. Thomas, ed. Learning for Life Canadian Readings in Adult Education, 1998, Toronto, ON, Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc.
Spencer, Bruce, The Purposes of Adult Education A Guide for Students, 1998, Toronto Canada, Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc.
Vella, Jane, Taking Learning to Task Creative Strategies for Teaching Adults, 2001, SanFrancisco, CA, USA, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint
|
|
| |