12.09.2012

Uncertainty, Predicting, and Surrendering


 

The result was not a student who learned the right things, but a student who both learned what mattered in school and society and unlearned or critically examined what was being learned, how it was being learned, and why it was being learned. Learning involved ending up with knowledge and skills that could not have been predicted by either the student or the teacher." (Kumashiro, 2004, p. 28)

No matter how much we planned, we could never possibly plan “enough” to control the classroom we were about to enter. And while that sounds simple, it really isn't. As britzman points out in chapter 6, there are several dominant discourses about the teacher's ability to control a classroom, and its implications for how we view student interactions. In unpacking the incident with Derek*, I blamed myself for my failure as a teacher to predict the unpredictable. As britzman (2003) notes about two subjects in her study, “Both... invest in the belief that they must master the art of premonition and instantaneous response—both of which depend upon the teacher's ability to anticipate and contain the unexpected—to ensure control as a prerequisite for student learning” (p. 224). Essentially, my desire to control the situation, and the guilt that resulted from not being able to achieve the impossible, was at odds with my desire for an uncertain outcome in student learning.

I think that wishing for unexpected and unpredictable learning must go hand in hand with recognizing and valuing the necessity of unexpected and unpredictable behaviors, thoughts, and attitudes in our students. Dominant discourses about schools tend to view uncertainty as being unprepared. While “[such] a construct positions uncertainty as both a character flaw and a problem of management that can be solved by what inheres in the person,” I think that in reality, uncertainty leads to more depth of learning and more authenticity in the teacher-student relationship when those relationships aren't negotiated solely by outside forces (britzman, 2003, p. 225).

For example, I was confronted on several occasions with behaviors and demonstrations of learning that I did not expect, but that were very positive. Derek* was very willing to work with me on Thursday after our incident on Wednesday. I realized that I really had no control over how his day would go, beyond what I could ask him to do in the classroom.

Surrendering a sense of control allows me to exchange for a sense of peace about the ambiguity of working in a classroom. It no longer phases me that the students seemed to struggle so much with our lesson on Tuesday or that many of them could not articulate a learning outcome because that is not what learning is.

When I think about what a smoothly operating classroom should look like, I honestly think about a scene like this one (video). It is a busy street in Hanoi that has no traffic signals. And yet there are no accidents. Ever.

The reality is that our need to predict things is a need to control things. Notions about the need for control are formed by larger discourses about “adolescence” , and discourses about the purpose of schooling both of which are informed by economic and political interests that may or may not align with our own (Finders, 1998).

If we really want to delve into critical literacy, we need to be comfortable with not only intellectual uncertainty, but all of the physical and social uncertainties that accompany it.


0 comments:

Post a Comment

 
;