Читать книгу Educating Students with Refugee and Asylum Seeker Experiences - Maura Sellars - Страница 13
Love and Care in Education
ОглавлениеDarder (2009, 2017) in her discussion of the work and friendship that she shared with Freire, provided a definition of that surpasses the commonly held assumptions of the concept of love. She states,
…is a political and radicalized form of love that is never about absolute consensus, or unconditional acceptance, or unceasing words of sweetness or endless streams of hugs and kisses. Instead it is a love that I experienced as unconstructed, rooted in a committed willingness to struggle persistently with purpose in our life and to intimately connect that purpose with what he called our ‘true vocation’ – to be human. (Darder, 2009:567)
Freirean philosophy demonstrated the ways in which the political, economic and social backgrounds of people served to explain the current social and economic inequity in the world. It illustrated how discrimination, injustice and capitalist agendas, such as those expressed in neo liberal influences in education, dehumanize people so that they have reduced capacity to act humanely in regards to themselves, others and the environment. His notion of teaching for love included tolerance and acceptance of diversity, of opposing perspectives and contrary views. Teaching as an act of love for Freire was not about being well meaning and inducting students into an acceptance of the social and moral inequities of traditional schooling. It was about teachers having a deep understanding of the negative impact of these educational systems on the students’ capacities to develop the skills, confidence and competencies that were required for them to transform their worlds. To teach with love demanded that educators at all levels of school engage with issues of social justice and give marginalised students a voice in the educational context of privilege and hegemony.
Many of these themes are echoed in moral teaching from an ethic of care (Noddings, 2005, 2012) . This philosophy of teaching lacks the radical, political perspective of Freirean thinking, but it resonates the message of what it is to be human in the treatment of others in educational contexts. Noddings (2012) reflects on the importance of the human disposition to care and be cared for. Eschewing [10] long, rational debates about the importance of care, Noddings posits that, as humans in the world, people have some experience of being cared for, and as such, can recognise and have the potential to engage with acts of caring for others. For Freirean scholars, Noddings’ perceptions of this capacity for love of self, others and the world may be significantly diminished by the dehumanizing influences of poverty, discrimination and disempowerment; but the individuals for whom this philosophy is most critical are those who have not been discriminated against and are not battling poverty and disempowerment to the degree to which the people championed by Freire and the other critical pedagogues have. This is simply because to qualify to teach in schools in first world countries, it is necessary to engage with the characteristics of neoliberal influences in education. To become teachers, individuals have to successfully participate in the standardization, the competitive component, the dialogue and discourses of the privileged. The degree to which they personally invest in the systemic disadvantage of certain groups of students depends on their capacities to demonstrate moral leadership and reflect on their practice, critically evaluating it, both in terms of self-interest and their potential for service to others.
Noddings (2005, 2012) relied heavily on the very essence of what it is to be human to develop a powerful perspective from which professional decisions could be made, accountability criteria and professional responsibilities mediated and inclusive practices evolved. Her philosophy demands that the most caring and nurturing learning environment for students is a basic right for students and a professional priority for educators. Schools which embrace an ethic of care as a leadership principle do not confine their caring to the students themselves but evidence it in the ways the staff interact with each other and with the wider school and local communities. It was not dependent on rules and regulations for effective implementation, but rather gave precedence to the needs of individual students in their particular contexts. The purpose of educating from an ethic of care is to bring about effective, nurturing solutions for students which acknowledge their unique situations, issues and concerns. From this philosophical perspective, an ethic of care requires more than superficiality. It demands commitment to the lived reality of what education could be. The four constituent actions of an ethic of care are the demonstrated actions of caring relationships. Noddings termed this ‘modelling’. It is lived praxis. As always, effective communication is critical in the development of trusting, caring relationships. Dialogue in the ethic of care facilitates deeper understanding of the perspectives and concerns of others, promotes caring and empowering solutions and allows for an analysis of the patterns of behaviours and responses that impact on the students, their caregivers and the wider community. [11] The strength of dialogue as articulated in this philosophy is both the acknowledgment of ‘humanness’ of all the participants and the dignity of difference and diversity.
Dialogue is also important to distinguish between the authenticity of the ethic of care and the virtue ethic. In this context the virtue ethic is the enactment of the choice to take decisions that are assessed by the teachers and educational systems as ‘good’ for the students. This frequently relates to practices and procedures which students dislike, are inappropriate for them as individuals or are simply a somewhat blind adherence to the status quo. Much of this notion relates to Freire’s concerns for the role of teachers to show leadership in issues of social injustice and systemic unfairness. The underlying motivations for employing a virtue ethic may be dissimilar, but the outcomes are very similar in that students are disheartened, disempowered and frequently disengaged from their learning. Dialogue places students themselves in the discussion in the ethic of care. This dialogue helps teachers get to know their students better, develop a commonly interpreted framework for interactions and helps teachers assess how effective their caring has been. It is also the means by which different perspectives can be discussed and examined for rigour, different ways of knowing and doing can be explored and the channels through which students can examine issues that impact in their own lives and affect their beliefs, values, dispositions and attitudes.
The mutuality of the relationships of care that are foundational to this philosophy reiterate the Freirean mandate that people must empower themselves and participate actively in the process of transformation. In this instance, the cared for must also contribute to the acts of caring by becoming carers. This reciprocal dynamic may be the key to successfully building school community with shared values and respect for others. The contribution of the students in these caring educational environments supports the development of informed, caring and dignified communication with others and becomes part of the modelling principle, the lived acts of responding to being human and the capacities of humans to develop empathy, tolerance and respect; foundational attitudes and attributes of teaching for love and for care. Caring is not just to be read about, discussed or subtly mandated as part of a hidden curriculum (Giroux & Penna, 1979), it is practiced as collaborative, not competitive, learning. It is a daily, ongoing commitment to explicit, strategic pedagogical approaches for engaging students with each other in positive and mutually supportive interactions. The notion of practicing this dedication to caring for others also involved acts of care in the wider school community that had the potential to change lives for the better. In this manner, students were empowered, both by their altruistic acts of caring and by the responses they receive as a result. Noddings views this aspect of the ethic of care as a component of moral education [12] which was not associated with the theories of moral development explored by the cognitive developmentalists (see, for example, Kohlberg, 1975). This concept of practice has the potential to be particularly powerful in empowering students. Education that empowers has capacity to transform.
The remaining principle of the ethics of care is confirmation. The ethic of care remains the only theory of moral education to include a principle such as this. It is best understood as the acts of affirming the best in someone by working with them to help them grow in the ways that they are striving for, in the ways that they value, and in the ways that are important to them. Confirming supports the educational notion of high expectations for all students, in which every learner is considered capable of expanding on their relative strengths. For this principle of confirmation to be authentic, it must be valued by both the teachers confirming the achievements and the students whose competencies are being valued and enriched. This process is often facilitated by the dialogue that enables teachers to get to know their students’ goals and aspirations. In the action of confirming someone, it is important that the affirmation be intended to support the development of the student in becoming the best person they could possibly be. The continuity of dialogue and caring interactions that allow this trust to develop are an essential part of this process as establishing, developing, and maintaining the caring relationships. This is because the development of the trusting interactions and dialogue that enable true confirmation, takes time. This process may involve the continual practice of checking, assessing and evaluating values and goals. The trusting dialogues developed as part of this process may require critical reflection (Sellars, 2017) of decisions made by both students and teachers, the rationales that underpinned them and the alternative dialogues that could have been considered to support the students’ striving to become the best humans they could become, empowered by their capacities to care.