Thursday, October 22, 2020

Academicizing through vulnerability: education as a method of liberation and struggle

 

I’m not used to reading “academic” writing that is hopeful and spiritual, so it was very refreshing (and empowering!) to read Palmer’s book, The Courage to Teach. My original post that critiqued Fish’s book as a technology of colonialism was my attempt to offer a contingent analysis about how the academy is an inherently political site. My engagement with Palmer’s book required a dialogue with myself.  This dialogue confronted my identity and integrity as a teacher, student, and scholar within the academy. After our class’s discussion of the book, I think that teachers can implement Palmer’s pedagogy to academicize the classroom in the pursuit of liberatory education.

I agree with Palmer that teaching is heart work. Which is to say that teaching is both a profession and a life that operates at the convergence of intellect, emotion, and spirit. Put simply, one doesn’t stop teaching. In class we joked about the analogy of the teacher as the heart or loom that joins students, the discipline, and the teacher together as being sappy, but I also think it is true…regardless of how effective that teacher is at teaching. To be a good teacher therefore requires more than knowledge of one’s discipline and teaching techniques; it requires knowledge of one’s subject position and how their classroom operates as a political space. I would argue that denying these observations would deny the radical potential of teaching because teaching requires knowledge of the self as well as the students. As a student, it’s so powerful to feel like you’re seen and validated by a teacher as someone that is worthy of academic consideration. I thought it was very poignant when Palmer discussed how marginalized groups like women and black folx have been oppressed and their silence can be rooted in fear. This is important because as Palmer argues, traditional teachers are fearful of students (fear of losing power, credibility, or being “bad” at their job) and students are fearful of teachers. Most of these fears, are fears of the heart and as a result, we need a pedagogy that addresses teaching and education as heart work; otherwise, education is a product of exclusion and oppression.

Teaching and learning through the heart require vulnerability. This vulnerable heart work can create a community of learners or a community of truth. “If we dare to move thorough our fear, to practice knowing as a form of love, we might abandon our illusion of control and enter a partnership with the otherness of the world” (Palmer, p. 57). In other words, as teachers learn to love themselves, which includes their strengths which are also their weaknesses, teachers begin to embrace their fears for the better. Teaching from a place of vulnerability means teaching from a place of curiosity, hope, and empathy. Instead of teachers becoming seemingly fearless and omniscient authorities, teachers can recognize and acknowledge their fears, and in doing so, empower their students to acknowledge and embrace their fears as well. Teachers can embrace the awkward silences in the classrooms as well as their bad teaching days as part of what makes them a good teacher while still holding themselves accountable for improvement.

This leads me to my final point: vulnerable teaching and teaching as heart work creates the conditions for ethical academization. As we discussed in class, academization, in Fish’s terms, is teaching a topic and class, in “academically” critical and fair way—one that is free of partisan influence and free of political soapboxing. I’ve already discussed why this is problematic so instead I turn to a way to reform this technology: a community of truth with engaged scholars that learn from the texts as well from the experiences of themselves as well as their peers, seems to be what Fish strives for when he waxes about the beauty of academicizing. Palmer’s theorization of the community of truth democratizes the classroom such that students can engage in legitimate and nuanced debate about the subject matter while still recognizing the historical and contemporary stakes of the topic. For instance, when I work with my debaters to discuss how American Hegemony can lead to patriarchal violence, I do not require that my students cite evidence before they explain their personal interactions with the patriarchy. At the same time, I encourage my students to situate their experiences and their thoughts within a context of a global struggle. While I may be idealizing and cherry picking an example, I think that it is fair to say that it is more than possible, it is necessary, and even an act of joy, to validate and contribute towards my students thoughts, while still challenging them to engage and utilize a deep knowledge base. As teachers, students, and scholars, we are obligated to do more than acknowledge the politicization of the academy, we have to actively fight to utilize the spaces that we are privileged to access to help empower students and ourselves to engage in liberatory practice.

#DecolonizeEducation

 

 

 

1 comment:

  1. Hi Kinny,

    Thanks for providing such a critical and nuanced perspective on the imperative to #DecolonizeEducation! I love the example you shared about how you encourage your debaters to engage with their own life experiences, and those of others, while encouraging them to situate said experiences globally. Reading your post, I found myself thinking about hooks' (1994) discussion of transformative education in which she states:

    "For those of us on the margins (people of color, folks from working class backgrounds, gays, and lesbians, and
    so on) who had always felt ambivalent about our presence in
    institutions where knowledge was shared in ways that reinscribed colonialism and domination, it was thrilling to think
    that the vision of justice and democracy that was at the very
    heart of civil rights movement would be realized in the academy. At last, there was the possibility of a learning community, a
    place where difference could be acknowledged, where we
    would finally all understand, accept, and affirm that our ways
    of knowing are forged in history and relations of power" (p. 30).

    I share that passage at length because I think it speaks to the power of working to #DecolonizeEducation by foregrounding the powerful and painful heart work you (and others we've read) describe. In order to "academicize ethically" we have ourselves have to be vulnerable and aware of our own positionalities so as to facilitate a co-intentional community of learning in which students' disparate experiences are valued. In so doing, we can apply critical pedagogical practices that affirm people in their wholeness, subverting the colonial logics that authorize Fish-like principles of oppression and domination in the academy. I hope this leads to the actualization of the imperative you outline - for teachers, students, and scholars to "actively fight to utilize the spaces that we are privileged to access to help empower students and ourselves to engage in liberatory practice."

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences!

    -Leah

    ReplyDelete