The Road Less Traveled

  * What do you believe?

I believe that teaching and learning are interrelated processes that we all experience in our everyday lives. In other words, one does not stop teaching to learn or stop learning to teach; instead, as education is fundamentally social, there are no clear lines to draw between teaching and learning, and ultimately, such lines are unnecessary. Also, everyone holds the potential to learn as well as to teach. While there are individuals and groups who possess higher levels of knowledge or experience than others – either generally or in specific subject areas – their knowledge is not, in and of itself, more valuable than others. I believe teaching and learning is vital to human existence and carries with it many purposes.

  * What do you value?

I value an intentional approach to teaching and learning that recognizes the extent to which we can educate each other in various environments (i.e. not simply in the traditional classroom), as well as the limitations of our own subjective experience and knowledge (and therefore, the necessity for collaboration in learning). I value teaching and learning that is rooted in the lived experiences of participants and seeks to further principles of peace, justice, sustainability, and coexistence.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which teaching and learning is seen as fundamental to our existence as human beings and intimately related to our personal and collective development. People ought to be motivated to learn and empowered with the resources and guidance necessary to make meaning of their environment and the self, and ultimately, to transform both. Education ought to be recognized as a lifelong process, and communities ought to provide organized educational opportunities for all citizens equally.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

Essential to my philosophy about the purposes of teaching and learning, as well as the need to motivate students to pursue their own learning, is existentialism, which cultivates in students “an awareness that they are free agents, responsible for creating their own selves and purposes” (Gutek, 2004, p. 92). Regardless of the various restrictions an individual faces (e.g. social inequality, poverty, disability, etc.), one still holds the potential to choose how to act and lead one’s life. Teaching and learning is perhaps the most powerful vehicle for confronting this and other existential realities. Secondly, my emphasis on rooting teaching and learning in the lived experiences of participants – and indeed, thinking about “participants,” not separate, unequal roles of “teacher” and “student” – is derived from critical theory and liberation pedagogy.

 

Ethics Education

  * What do you believe?

I believe education plays a vital role in helping people make ethical decisions in their lives. The best “ethics education” is done by teaching students critical thinking skills, various ethical perspectives, engaging in problem-solving that involves ethical decision-making, and reflecting upon the implications of one’s actions. I believe ethics education ought to recognize and clearly articulate the historical and socio-cultural location of individuals, groups, and communities. In other words, there is no Absolute Truth or Ultimate Reality that guides our decision-making.

  * What do you value?

I value an approach to ethics education that incorporates a wide variety of ethical perspectives, especially those that are unfamiliar to learners and require them to try out new perspectives. Also, it is important for learners to take responsibility for their actions, as well as their own ideas about ethics. As a result, ethics education will not be about telling learners how to behave or suggesting that one’s ethics don’t matter – instead, learners will direct their own learning, developing (and constantly re-developing) their own ethical ways of living.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which ethics education is fundamental to the teaching and learning that goes on in school and other educational environments. More generally, our approach to ethics as a society ought to be one that fosters discussion and reflection on ethical issues regularly, giving attention to the complexities of ethical decision-making. For example, if a community faces a breach of ethics (e.g. a school shooting), they openly and carefully assess the ethical implications of such an act and consider a range of questions about how to resolve such an incident and move forward.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

My emphasis on considering a variety of ethical perspectives and not allowing any particular perspectives to “trump” others (i.e. an Absolute Truth or Ultimate Reality) clearly defies Idealism, Realism, and Theistic Realism as these traditional philosophies identify, in various ways, universal and eternal truths and values. Postmodernists, on the other hand, “reject the grand philosophical systems purported to explain reality as an architecture of the universe, and the metaphysical assumption that an ultimate ground of being, a transcendent cosmic reality, exists beyond and above the physical world” (Gutek, 2004, p. 130). Rather than suggesting that there are no standards for ethical conduct, postmodernists claim that there is no single set of ethical standards. They emphasize that “values, like knowledge claims, need to be seen as growing out of the experiences of groups who live in differing situations” (Gutek, 2004, p. 132). Open discourse is vital to revealing the historical and socio-cultural significance of various ethical standards.

 

Teachers’ Roles

  * What do you believe?

I believe a teacher is primarily in a position as a facilitator of learning. While he or she may have expertise in particular areas of thought – due to some combination of significant experience and knowledge – as one individual, he or she is not in an authoritative position to speak to the variety of experiences, backgrounds, cultures, learning styles, and motivations of diverse groups of students. Students may benefit, of course, from a teacher’s expertise, but considering the highly collaborative nature of teaching and learning, a teacher’s expertise in a given subject matter is only one piece of a complicated puzzle. By the same token, a teacher ought to be open about his or her background, teaching and learning styles, and when appropriate to the curriculum, beliefs about various questions about politics and society.

  * What do you value?

I value a teacher who works alongside students, facilitating their learning and providing guidance, rather than telling them what to think or how to think. On the other hand, I also value a teacher who is able to critically assess students’ abilities and performance and pose significant challenges that foster learning. Outside of relationships with students, I value a teacher who recognizes his or her role as a public intellectual, engaging community members in discussion about a variety of issues relevant to the community, as well as society as a whole.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which teachers work closely and collaboratively with students, empowering them to take responsibility for their own learning and pursue their own educational goals. Ideally, teachers will also be critically reflective about their teaching and seek to improve their effectiveness, as well as the role of education more generally. For instance, if teachers are working within a school system that is ignoring the lived experiences of students, or teaching to the test, or merely training students to live functionally in a capitalist society, then he or she ought to mobilize the community against such atrocities.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

Liberation pedagogy influences a lot of my ideas about teachers and their roles, specifically the notion that “genuine learning occurs when teachers and students engage in a shared, ongoing dialogue that creates rather than transmits knowledge” (Gutek, 2004, p. 300). Furthermore, my insistence that teachers are not objective, unbiased observers, as well as my claim that teachers ought to tear down unjust systems, reflects liberation pedagogy. More specifically, with regard to teachers as change agents within school systems, I rely on postmodernism, critical theory, and existentialism (e.g. encouraging students to write their own “scripts”). These philosophies each recognize schools as valuable sites of resistance to traditional power structures (e.g. patriarchy, White supremacy, imperialism, etc.). Critical theory, especially, urges teachers to “take on a deep and far-reaching examination of the conditions in and out of schools that have caused their disempowerment and the miseducation of their students” (Gutek, 2004, p. 318).

Students’ Roles

  * What do you believe?

I believe students are best able to learn and find meaning in their learning when learning is primarily self-directed and rooted in the lived experiences of students. Furthermore, rather than being divided into decontextualized subject areas, I believe education ought to be structured in such a way that recognizes the everyday experiences of knowledge, reasoning, and decision-making facing students. I believe students ought to be actively involved in their learning in such a way that extends beyond the walls of the traditional classroom.

  * What do you value?

In reference to my belief that education ought to relate to the everyday experiences of students, I value experiential and collaborative learning, as well as an emphasis on critical thinking and problem solving. Rather than students learning because they are forced to learn (or at least perceiving it that way), I value learning that motivates students and is perceived as relevant to their lived experiences. Furthermore, I value any practice that clearly articulates educational goals and allows students a voice in not only determining these goals, but engaging in an ongoing dialogue about them and their significance (or perhaps in some cases, insignificance).

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which students are motivated to learn and are directly responsible for their own learning, which would include some role in determining educational goals, pedagogical decisions (e.g. classroom activities), and assessment practices. I also envision an educational system that promotes learning that is directly transferable to students’ lived experiences; in other words, I envision breaking down this dichotomy of school vs. the “real world.”

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

The suggestion that learning ought to be an active, self-directed process rooted in the needs and interests of students, rather than based on pre-determined educational goals and practices that are in fact, or at least perceived as, disconnected from reality, seems highly inconsistent with the American educational system today. This approach bears obvious ties to liberation pedagogy and critical theory, and of course, would be a slap in the face for conservative philosophers. However, elements of my approach coincide with liberalism, which suggests that a teacher “should be a flexible instructor who is ready to diverge from the prepared lesson plan when the occasion presents itself” (Gutek, 2004, p. 189). Also, there are clear ties to pragmatism, which is fundamentally concerned with growth. As proclaimed by Dewey and other pragmatists, “Growth means that the person is learning more effective, meaningful, and satisfying ways to live, in order to deal with a changing reality and direct the course of her or his own life” (Gutek, 2004, p. 76).

 

Learning Styles

  * What do you believe?

I believe each student enters the “classroom” (i.e. approaches learning) with his or her own unique learning style based on a wide range of psycho-social factors, including culture, personality, self-confidence, and philosophies about learning. Learning styles are also dependent on a range of biological factors, including physical and mental ability levels. Educators have a responsibility to accommodate these learning styles and also, whenever possible, help learners develop their orientation to learning (i.e. incorporate new learning styles, advance old ones, etc.).

  * What do you value?

I value an educational environment that is aware and respectful of various learning styles and seeks to accommodate these different styles in ways that help learners’ meet educational goals, in addition to fostering an appreciation among students of different learning styles. For instance, learners may be given the responsibility of leading a class session, which would require them to understand and respond to different learning styles.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which learning is recognized as a complicated, multi-faceted process that occurs differently for each person, and that such recognition is applied pedagogically. In doing so, it seems natural that educators would provide more autonomy to learners, providing them with a variety of paths through which to learn the curriculum, but allowing them to select their own. Also, since learning styles are not merely a concern for formal school settings, I value an educational environment in which learners get to know and appreciate different learning styles.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

Rather than forcing students to learn in a particular way, my approach to learning styles follows pragmatist philosophies, suggesting that learning ought to be rooted in the lived experiences of students. More specifically, pragmatist curriculum “comes from students’ experiences – their interests, needs, and problems” (Gutek, 2004, p. 77). This, of course, would include students’ learning styles. Also, since a failure to accommodate different learning styles carries implications of discriminating against particular groups of students, critical theorists would also raise the concern that a “hidden curriculum” is creating inequality. As Gutek (2004, p. 319) points out, “the ‘hidden’ curriculum refers to those values, behaviors, and attitudes conveyed to and imposed on students through the milieu and practices of the school in a capitalist consumer-oriented society.”

 

Communicating Your Beliefs on Controversial Topics to Students

  * What do you believe?

Essentially, there ought to be no issue too “controversial” for educators to address with students, though there are obvious limitations based on the needs and interests of students. For instance, an advanced discussion about ties between U.S. imperialism and the September 11^th attacks might be appropriate for a high school or college-level audience, but it might leave a group of second graders confused, alienated, and upset. If an issue is considered too controversial, then an educator ought to openly mediate that concern, recognizing that he or she is responsible to provide sound reasoning for devoting class time to the issue. Of great significance here, of course, is understanding and evaluating why an issue is controversial – indeed, this explanation may reveal even more evidence as to why discussing the issue is important.

  * What do you value?

I value an educator who communicates his or her own beliefs about controversial issues in a way that fosters further discussion, rather than halting it or suggesting that the educator’s perspective carries more weight than anyone else’s. I value an educator that encourages students to think for themselves, following a quote from Audre Lorde (1984): “Your silence will not protect you.” In other words, we are all responsible for our own knowledge and ethics, and at some point, our “self” will be called into question. Remaining silent (i.e. not having an opinion or merely deferring to others) invalidates one’s selfhood, in a sense.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which the “classroom” (which to me, ought to encompass any social experience in which learning is taking place) is a space for open and dynamic dialogue that challenges participants to think critically and grow. I envision educators who are not afraid to bring up controversial issues and students who rise to the challenge of engaging in respectful dialogue. Furthermore, I envision communities that value the need for these discussions to take place, embracing the potential challenges they pose to the status quo.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

“Controversy” seems like such a neutral term. While it is a provocative term, it really fails to tell us anything in particular about the issues itself or the perspectives shared in dialogue. My only assumption, based on experience with “controversial issues,” is that these issues are controversial because the status quo (and the power structure in place) is threatened in some way. In my work in sexuality education, for example, talking about sexual pleasure or masturbation is often controversial – really, in some places, it is off-limits to even conceptualize sex as potentially involving pleasure. I gather that this controversy is rooted in a fear of young people engaging in sexual activity earlier than parents intend, even though there is little to no evidence to suggest that simply talking about it leads to sexual activity. Furthermore, ideas about what sexual activity is unhealthy and when “too early” is are rooted in patriarchal and religious ideologies that are not fully understood and certainly not called into question. Silencing honest and open dialogue about sexuality reinforces those ideologies.

In general, then, my openness to discussing controversial issues as an educator is contrary to conservatism, as well as several traditional philosophies, including Idealism, Realism, and Theistic Realism, insofar as these philosophies would seek to halt certain discussions or dismiss them as irrelevant. While my approach shares ties to several philosophies, most notable are existentialism and postmodernism. My emphasis on teachers being careful not to treat their perspectives as more significant than those of students mimics the postmodern emphasis that “the official curriculum – the approved representations – is only one version of reality, usually that of a society’s dominant and controlling group” (Gutek, 2004, p. 136). Rather than assuming there is one single answer, postmodernists explain, “the process of representation (instruction) needs to be used critically and reflectively to present a wider range of human experience” (Gutek, 2004, p. 136).

Relationship Between Schools and Community

  * What do you believe?

I believe schools are centers of learning that ought to shape the communities in which they exist, and in turn, be shaped by their communities. Though schools in American society today are generally catered to the needs of children and young adults, with a few programs directed toward “adult learners,” I believe schools ought to focus on lifelong learning and provide programs that are relevant to the needs and interests of all age groups. In this way, schools would play a much more integral role in community life and provide a public space in which community members of all age could come together and share dialogue and other social activities.

  * What do you value?

I value a school system that is relevant to the lived experiences of human beings. At the bare minimum, this suggests that schools ought to facilitate dialogue and civic engagement, bringing communities together to communicate and resolve concerns, problem-solve, and explore larger questions of the human experience.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which schools are vital to community life, not by simply educating children into dominant ideologies, but fostering lifelong learning for all members of the campus community. More simply, I envision schools as a site of learning, which one might argue is already taking place today, albeit in an extremely limited form.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

Most of my comments here regarding the relationships between schools and communities have centered on the importance of lifelong learning and the potential for schools to play a more active role in community life. Reviewing the major philosophies, ideologies, and theories in our text, I have not found anything directly refuting these notions. In fact, lifelong learning and the school’s role in community life seem implicit with most, if not all, of the perspectives in our text. Marxism, critical theory, and liberation pedagogy are more explicit, however, with regard to the significance of schools shaping the community and larger society. As Gutek (2004, p. 316) explains, “Critical Theorists believe that the aims of education are related to larger social, political, and economic goals of establishing greater equality and equity for people.” Also, in reference to Marxism, Gutek (2004, p. 225) states, “The driving goal of a Marxist-inspired education is to bring about fundamental economic change and restricting so that ownership of the means and modes of production passes to dispossessed groups.”

 

Distance, Online, or Other Alternative Delivery Methods of Education

  * What do you believe?

I believe that distance education has dramatically expanded access to education in the United States and around the world, empowering groups that have been marginalized. While it poses challenges to traditional theories about education, distance learning can promote a similar, if not better, learning experience as a traditional brick-and-mortar education. As many educational institutions, primarily colleges and universities, have jumped on the bandwagon of providing online programs (largely because these programs can be more profitable than traditional approaches), there are legitimate concerns about the quality of these programs. As I mentioned, distance education can be effective, but these recent developments – and the simple fact that the technology is relatively new and under-researched – there are significant questions for educators and learners to consider.

  * What do you value?

I value distance learning that treats learners as human beings and is interested in fostering individual and collective growth among learners. Essentially, I value the same things about a distance “classroom” that I would about a traditional classroom – it’s simply a matter of adapting those expectations to a new model of education.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which some type of organized learning environment – traditional or distance, or some combination of the two – is available to all citizens, helping them meet their educational goals. Furthermore, since distance learning brings people together to learn more easily than physically meeting in a traditional classroom, I envision a society in which learning environments (e.g. blogs and discussion groups) are recognized for their own educational values and utilized as such.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

As much of my passion for distance learning is related to increased access to education for marginalized groups, there are clear ties here to liberation pedagogy. Freire was concerned with the question: “Do existing social, economic, and political conditions retard human liberation and freedom, or do they promote self-fulfillment?” (Gutek, 2004, p. 296). Clearly, if people are unable to pursue an education because they lack the resources to travel (or potentially relocate completely) or cannot accommodate a typical class schedule, distance learning provides a way for them to experience a quality education without undue burden.

 

Home Schooling

  * What do you believe?

I believe students who are home-schooled are in an excellent position to get the individual attention and self-directed study necessary for successful learning. Also, parents are likely to have formed a bond with the student that facilitates learning, both in regard to the subject matter and more generally with regard to educating the whole student. Home-schooled students are relatively isolated since their social experiences with classmates are limited. And while this isolation does not mean that home-schooling cannot be effective, it does raise concerns about the students’ ability to work collaboratively and form meaningful relationships with peers.

  * What do you value?

I value any learning experience that helps students take responsibility for their own learning and feel that their schooling and those involved in it (e.g. teachers, colleagues, administrators, etc.) care about their needs and interests. Also, I value learning that seeks to integrate lessons traditionally learned in the classroom with those outside the classroom, essentially breaking down the school vs. the “real world” dichotomy.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which all students are given the option of being home-schooled or attending school in smaller, private groups (e.g. a few families collaborating to educate their children), in addition to participating in activities offered by public schools in their area. Ideally, there would be close collaboration going on between home-schooling parents and teachers, counselors, administrators, and other officials.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

While there are no explicit statement for or against home-schooling in the major philosophies, ideologies, and theories in our text, existentialists seem to be the most vocal in asserting flexibility in school organization. For instance, existentialism “opposes any organization of the school that restricts the genuine interaction of students with each other as individuals or that categorizes them. It opposes the standardization of education, the rigidity of scheduling, and the tyranny of testing that restricts the impersonal relationship between teacher and student, and among students” (Gutek, 2004, p. 93). While this statement is not made specifically in regard to home-schooling, many of the concerns of existentialists are shared by home-schooling parents and resolved, at least in part, by their practices.

Inclusion, Multicultural Education, and Diversity

  * What do you believe?

I believe education is a site of resistance in which power is constantly being negotiated, specifically with regard to questions of what (and whose) knowledge matters, the fundamental aims of education, how teaching and learning ought to be conducted, and roles of teacher and student. Historically, schools have served as vehicles for dominant groups to enforce their worldviews, and for their role in the process, educators have been responsible for marginalizing groups of students based on race, sex, class, sexual orientation, and other factors.

  * What do you value?

I value an educational system that recognizes and seeks to undermine inequality and injustice, one that sees this goal as fundamental to its mission. I also value an educational system that is open to change since recognizing schools as sites of resistance assumes that such an environment is inevitably unstable and in a state of flux.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which schools are treated as sites of resistance in which marginalized groups are empowered to reshape their environment in such a way that promotes equality and equity among all people. As alluded to above, this demands a change in all areas of education, including what curriculum is offered, how schools are organized, how student performance is assessed, and whose voices are involved in any decision-making process.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

Without a doubt, my approach to inclusion, multicultural education, and diversity draw heavily from liberation pedagogy, critical theory, and Marxism. These perspectives are all concerned with education for social justice and the need for significant reforms in our educational system. While liberal and progressive educators might identify with these concerns, they would be interested in resolving them purely through known and accepted procedures, which happen to be controlled by the dominant groups whose interests have created the problems at the heart of the original concerns. Clearly there is a split here in terms of how to resolve these injustices, and I would lean toward the more radical approaches of liberation pedagogy, critical theory, and Marxism.

 

Student Assessment

  * What do you believe?

As I grew up with standardized testing and was recognized as a successful student within that context, it is difficult to imagine and appreciate an alternative. However, this model of assessment presents a limited representation of students’ knowledge and progress toward educational goals. While I believe there is a place for standardized testing in terms of having some sort of objective measurement to compare student performance around the nation, I believe the bulk of assessment ought to be conducted interpersonally among teachers and students. Assessment ought to be, at least in part, directed by students, allowing them to understand and appreciate the need for self-assessment, and more importantly, to see themselves as an unfinished product that is constantly improving and growing.

  * What do you value?

I value assessment that is meaningful for students and that helps them set (and meet) realistic educational goals that inspire them to grow as individuals. I also value teachers who provide guidance, facilitating dialogue with students that help them evaluate their performance and work habits, empowering them to develop the meta-cognitive skills necessary for success, rather than simply habits that will help them get a good grade. With regard to grades, much like standardized testing, there is a place for them to provide a sort of universal measure. However, as an educator, I value much more the sort of interpersonal and intrapersonal assessment that can take place, but is not so easily quantifiable.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which standardized test assessments and grades may be used, but not in such a way that they take priority over the more meaningful and substantial assessment that takes place among teachers and students. This sort of assessment is inherently more relevant to the individual needs and interests of students, and furthermore, the interaction involved provides much more room for feedback and dialogue that can help a student make meaning of the assessment experience overall and improve.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

Much of what I describe here is consistent with what existentialists call “authentic assessment, in which students maintain portfolios or journals that allow them to set their own goals and determine their own achievement of these goals. Their own papers, drawings, essays, and other items help them track their own educational journey” (Gutek, 2004, p. 96). In general, existentialists share my concerns about teaching to the test and failing to provide meaningful assessment for students. Closely related to this sentiment is Freire’s concept of “banking education,” in which teachers deposit bits of information into a student’s mental bank, “where it is stored and supposedly will resurface, to be cashed in, when needed” (Gutek, 2004, p. 300). The banking model is not only ineffective educationally, but it makes more a miserable and depressing experience in the classroom.

 

Accountability

  * What do you believe?

As an educator, I am accountable, first and foremost, to my students, and secondly to parents, other teachers, administrators, and community members. While teachers and students share in the learning experience, students must recognize that they are accountable for their own learning. I do not “provide” learning as an educator, I facilitate it. That means, if I am not working with active participants, there is not much I can do. On the other hand, I must be open and receptive to students concerns about the learning environment, accommodating their needs and interests. It is a team effort, and ultimately, among teachers and students, we must be open and honest about our mistakes and shortcomings. Maintaining an open line of communication is vital and can prevent falling into the “blame game.”

  * What do you value?

I value a learning environment in which teachers and students are involved in an ongoing dialogue about how class is going. Just as I am assessing students constantly for the sake of their educational goals, I expect students to assess me. In addition to fostering opportunities to speak openly about our learning environment, I value being accountable for our concerns. In other words, if a student is unhappy with the amount of class time devoted to a particular issue or discussion, then he or she is responsible to express that concern, and it would certainly be helpful for all of us if he or she would also introduce some sort of resolution or compromise that would improve the situation. Rather than being an opportunity to complain or blame others, then, class discussion is about problem-solving.

  * What are your ideals?

I envision a society in which teachers and students are actively involved in learning and making the learning environment their own. This process empowers students to learn on their terms, while also helping them become more aware of what pedagogical strategies are most beneficial for them and their peers. Students may also become more aware of the challenges facing teachers to support a safe, productive, and challenging learning environment for all students.

  * Which philosophies align or don’t align with your topic-related beliefs and why?

My emphasis on students taking responsibility for their learning and teachers being accountable, first and foremost, to students is most closely related to existentialist ideas about teaching. Existentialism suggests that

Teaching should be done as much as possible in an I-Thou relationship that does not depersonalize the student or turn the teacher into an educational functionary. An I-Thou relationship is one that begins and remains as an interaction between individuals who value each other as persons for their own identify as a free existent. It means valuing the person for what he or she is and stands for (Gutek, 2004, p. 95).

An I-Thou relationship demands that teachers and students holds themselves accountable for their mistakes and shortcomings, openly and honestly discussing these matters, and working toward resolution.

References

Brookfield, S. (1993). “Self-directed learning, political clarity, and the critical practice of adult education.” Adult Education Quarterly, 43(4), 227-242.

De Beauvoir, S. (1989). The second sex. New York: Vintage Books.

Gutek, G. (2004). Educational philosophy and changes. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.

Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider. Freedom, CA: Freedom Press.

Below is a general explanation of my educational philosophy.

For further discussion on more specific educational issues, see Part II

Personal Philosophy

My understanding of self is not rooted in any belief in God or a fascinating creation story that enriches my life with divine meaning and purpose. Instead, in the absence of what would otherwise be easy answers to many of life’s questions, I am left unsure of what I am, why I am here, and what I ought to do. What I do know, however, is that I am responsible for my actions and that my survival and well-being is intimately tied to the lives of others, as well as to the natural environment. Clearly then, one of my primary goals, simply for the sake of survival, seems to be learning how to coexist with other forms of life in a world that can be very chaotic – physically and socially.

To complicate matters, the self that I refer to as “I” or “me” is constantly changing. I may bear slight physical resemblance to myself as a child, but clearly my physical appearance has changed. Mentally I have much more knowledge about the world and am more capable of critical thinking. And of course, I am growing emotionally and spiritually in ways that I could never have predicted before. In relation to these factors, my identity, or how I might describe my “self,” is different today than it was years ago. In fact, to some extent, it is different than it was yesterday. And it seems inevitable that this change will continue to occur. Ironically, the only thing in my life that seems relatively constant is change.

Finally, just as there was nothing permanent about who I was yesterday, there is nothing permanent about me in general. In a certain amount of time and under certain circumstances, neither of which I can control, I will die. And while memories of me, mediated by conflicting perspectives of different people whose lives I touched, will “live on” for some time, and of course, my actions in life will have had some sort of lasting impact, there is still no permanent or constant “self” to speak of, only an ever-changing experience of a being in its environment.

While I may not explicitly believe in the concept of a fixed, permanent self – and more importantly, find use of the term more cumbersome than it is worth – I do recognize that there is a constructed self in my mind that answers basic existential questions about who I am and why I’m here, providing the framework for more specific ideas about what to think and do in everyday life. This constructed self is shaped by a variety of influences, which generally fall into a single category of culture, including gender, race, class, religion, sexual orientation, and occupation. These influences are experienced at the individual level in the form of beliefs, values, and worldviews. One might argue that there are significant biological factors that shape the self; I exclude them from this explanation not because they do not exist, but because construction of the self is inherently a process of making meaning from one’s circumstances. For instance, one may be born female, but as Simone de Beauvoir (1989) so eloquently put it, one becomes a woman. One’s sex does not, in and of itself, pose considerable meaning for the self, at least until that meaning is socially constructed.

The nature of human society is essentially about surviving and thriving in a society in which no one seems to know the secret of life, all of life’s major questions are up for speculation, and yet we are dependent on ourselves and each other (an unpredictable and unstable bunch) and the natural environment (which is largely out of our control and would frankly be better off without our species having ever existed). A primary goal of mine as an educator, then, is simply to foster peace, justice, and sustainability. Doing so ensures that people are able to find contentment with the human experience and do as little harm as possible to others and the natural environment.

Knowledge is essentially any sort of meaning derived from experience. Rather than being something we obtain – as if to say that knowledge exists of its own accord somewhere ‘out there’ waiting to be captured – is constructed in the minds of human beings, as well as in the minds of other living things. As subjective beings, there are tremendous limitations to the extent to which we can establish truth, either individually or collectively. The scientific method can help us develop rational conclusions about our interactions with the environment, but in the greater scheme of things, such methods barely scratch the surface. And of course, we have a tendency to inflate our egos with a sense of knowledge and mastery over the natural world, which may be to compensate for the fact that many of life’s seemingly most important questions are simply unanswerable. Reason and empirical evidence are vital to education, of course, because they set up a process in which students can establish truth. But again, the questions we face in our everyday lives are rarely as simple as merely establishing one true, correct answer.

With regard to morality, each individual is responsible for developing his or her own moral standards. These values, of course, grow out of the experiences of people living in different situations, in their own unique historical and socio-cultural locations. While all people may lean toward certain moral values (e.g. not killing or doing no harm), interpretations of these values vary considerably and fit within vastly different contexts that influence the application of such values. It would certainly be appropriate for educators to teach ethics education but not in such a way that any ethical perspectives are imposed upon students. Instead, students must be empowered with knowledge of a variety of ethical perspectives and an understanding of how to apply them. Ultimately, they must be given the space in which to decide for themselves what it means to be a moral human being, an understanding that will inevitably develop and redevelop through time.

Philosophy of Education

Educational philosophies provide a vital framework for learning in our society by answering basic questions about what knowledge is, what (and whose) knowledge matters, the purpose of education, as well as how education is organized (e.g. roles of teacher and student, expectations, etc.). We might wonder what education would look like if this framework did not exist. However, a better question might be whether quality education can exist in practice without a coherent underlying philosophy. Even as many educators are caught up with the “urgent matters” of their teaching (Gutek, 2004, p. 1), distracted from questions regarding educational philosophy, they are each relying on their own unique educational philosophy, even though it might be unclear to them. I am not suggesting that an educator cannot succeed without an educational philosophy. But in the absence of one, he or she is essentially performing all the functions of an educator – teaching, advising, and performing critical self-reflection – without any sense of direction or purpose, or a capacity to evaluate and revise either.

The sources for my educational philosophy have been from a variety of classroom experiences as a student, advisor, and teacher. However, a major shift in my educational philosophy took place as I got involved in radical politics, particularly feminism. My involvement with feminism led me to feminist critiques of media, which led me to critical theory, then to critical pedagogy, and of course, to liberation pedagogy. As a result, my educational philosophy is most closely related to the following philosophies, ideologies, and theories: postmodernism, existentialism, critical theory, liberation pedagogy, and Marxism.

Education serves a variety of purposes, but most importantly, it helps individuals grow, make meaning of their world, and to work collaboratively to make change. Putting these notions of growth and change in a political context, education ought to be firmly rooted in social justice, liberating marginalized groups and promoting a more peaceful, just, and sustainable society. Teachers serve as facilitators of learning, in addition to mentoring students. Schooling is one of several ways educational goals can be accomplished.

Student Motivation – Intrinsic and Extrinsic

With regard to students’ motivation to learn, framing the question as whether or not motivation comes from within or from an external source – or perhaps which sources, internal or external, are the primary sources of motivation – is complex, but it also may be irrelevant for furthering our work as educators. Ultimately, any experience of motivation is shaped by internal and external forces. As the self is always existing within the context of a social environment, even if we are talking about an expressed internal feeling (e.g. I enjoy gardening), that feeling is rooted in a cultural weigh (external to the individual) that would make gardening a desirable activity. This might seem like more of a philosophical approach than is necessary, but if we begin thinking about motivation in distorted terms, then our conclusions are likely to be flawed as well.

Stephen Brookfield’s (1999) theories about self-directed learning are useful to this discussion as they engage questions of what constitutes a “self” and how this entity interacts with social and cultural forces – in other words, he addresses this fundamental interplay of internal and external motivations. Brookfield (1999, p. 236) explains, “The self… is not an autonomous, innocent self, contentedly floating free from cultural influences. It has not sprung fully formed out of a political vacuum. It is, rather, an embedded self, a self whose instincts, values, needs and beliefs have been shaped by the surrounding culture.” As a result, Brookfield claims that fundamental to learning is a “reflective awareness how one’s desires and needs have been culturally formed” (1999, p. 236). In other words, rather than asking whether internal or external forces are at work, the more relevant question would be, what are these forces (internal and external) and how are they formed?

Diversity and Social Justice

Educators work with diverse groups of students, often raising the question of how much ought to be done to accommodate differences. What seems fundamental to this discussion, first of all, is clearly establishing what diversity is and how it applies to the lived experiences of students. Specifically that means understanding ways in which power is distributed and experienced based on differences attributed to gender, intelligence, cultural background, etc. For example, presenting heterosexist curriculum when discussing sex education, for example, is not merely a problem of being politically incorrect – it marginalizes LGBT students and restricts them from the same educational opportunities afforded to their peers. The same could be said for teaching psychology only through lecture (and not providing visual aids such as handouts or diagrams), not calling on international students due to an accent or difficulty speaking the dominant language, or failing to provide accommodations for students with special needs.

Regardless of the extent to which educators believe their role is tied to helping students liberate themselves from oppression (which is fundamental to liberation pedagogy), all educators have an interest in pursuing what Henry Giroux calls a “pedagogy for difference,” which call for a “critical interrogation of the silences and tensions that exist between the master narratives and hegemonic discourses that make up the official curriculum of the school and the self-representations of subordinate groups as they might appear in ‘forgotten’ histories, texts, memories, experiences, and community narratives” (as quoted in Gutek, 2004, p. 322). In other words, educators have a responsibility to understand and reconcile the inherent injustice of an educational system that serves the needs of students prescribing to dominant norms while ignoring the needs of others

Improving as an Educator

As an educator, I find myself to be learning and improving all the time. While I might identify as an “educator” and use this label, the reality is that I exchange roles of educator and learner constantly, to the extent that the labels themselves become problematic. Regardless of label, I engage in my own critical self-reflection as a human being, and more specifically, on my role in the learning process. Much of this entails challenging my assumptions and interrogating flawed or biased thinking, trying on new perspectives, and learning more about various subjects.

As I work independently, for the most part, as an adult educator, I have a great deal of control over my personal and professional development. However, I am also quite isolated from other professionals. And with the exception of my Capella classes and a few networks of activists, I am not particularly connected to others in the pursuit of professional development.

Philosophically, I believe that I should constantly be working to make knowledge more relevant and meaningful for diverse groups of students. I prescribe to the pragmatist philosophy that “the curriculum is not antecedent to the students; it is not specified and prescribed in advance. Rather, the curriculum comes from students’ experiences” (Gutek, 2004, p. 77). Furthermore, I also value what Liberation Pedagogy suggests about the relationship between teachers and learners. More specifically, I believe that “genuine learning occurs when teachers and students engage in a shared, ongoing dialogue that creates rather than transmits knowledge. Knowledge is created when teachers and students share and critically reflect upon their experiences” (Gutek, 2004, p. 300).

Conclusion

My philosophy of education has been very effective in my work with students, one-on-one and in groups. I connect well with students, and there has been a great deal of positive feedback on my emphasis on learning being rooted in students’ lived experiences and students taking responsibility for their learning. My emphasis on social justice as fundamental to education has fostered a lot of growth in my students individually as activists and citizens, leading to important social justice work. The credit for these accomplishments is all theirs, but I am happy to have played a role.

On the other hand, my educational philosophies, while demonstrably effective, do tend to “rock the boat” and challenge traditional models of education. As I make a few changes here and there to be more socially conscious and responsible about my decisions as an educator, I am also recognizing that there are institutions that are more open to educators who are influenced by liberation pedagogy and critical theory.

My educational philosophy fits very closely with my personality, as well as my style of teaching, so it is very comfortable for me. If anything, that can be problem at times, as it leaves me so deeply connected to a select group of philosophies that I am out of touch and unaware of other perspectives. Ultimately, I think it is vital that any philosophy of education recognize the value of learning from other philosophies, particularly those that oppose your current beliefs, values, and worldview.

The primary way that my educational philosophy helps me address the needs of students is by helping them become more conscious of and involved in the learning process. I don’t keep any secrets about my goals as an educator or why I may present material in certain ways, and by the same token, I expect them to be honest and open with me about how they approach learning. I don’t consider myself an expert, and I certainly don’t pretend that my pedagogy is perfect. Instead, I believe that the more in tune I can become with my students – their needs, interests, learning styles, etc. – the more effective I will be as a teacher.

 

References

Brookfield, S. (1993). “Self-directed learning, political clarity, and the critical practice of adult education.” Adult Education Quarterly, 43(4), 227-242.

De Beauvoir, S. (1989). The second sex. New York: Vintage Books.

Gutek, G. (2004). Educational philosophy and changes. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.

Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider. Freedom, CA: Freedom Press.