Recently, I had the opportunity to visit Mamre Homestead (http://www.mamre.com.au/) and see the work that goes on there. Mamre Homestead is an organisation run by the Sisters of Mercy, and it involves a wide number of inter-related activities, all aimed at some kind of empowerment. That was the main reason for my interest; I was curious about the kind of ‘education for social change’ opportunities that were available to people in Western Sydney. Of course, linked to this, I was particularly interested in the way that these programs might engage with and challenge racism and the oppression created by prejudice.

A friend of mine mentioned Mamre Homestead, so I got in touch with Sister Mary Louise, who was more than willing to explain to me what happens there. As mentioned above, there are a number of different programs. Firstly, there is the Learning Links program which runs for at risk youth from local high schools for two days every week. It’s been going for a number of years at the moment, and has about 16 students with two facilitators. The aim of this program is to empower students to be aware of their capacity to make choices in their lives, and recognize potentially poor choices. I was particularly curious to see if this project could be considered, in any way, Freirean.

My initial impression: sort of. I know that’s not particularly illuminating, but it’s not really a cut and dried situation. Firstly, let’s establish what are the features of a Freirean educational practice: Freire generally worked with adult, in an informal setting, drawing students from a marginalised group or class of society. Freire’s purpose, delivered through his literacy programs, was to encourage the development of critical consciousness – the ability to see the world for the way it is – and hence empowerment. To do this, Freire developed a model that was based on the students own experiences, motivated by the students’ own interests and centred on a problem posing approach as opposed to the ‘banking’ model that Freire believed was commonplace.

Clearly, there are points of similarity and difference between Learning Links and a Freirean model. I believe the major point of departure was the intended purpose; Freire’s model always planned on changing the participants and thus the world. In other words, the aim was to overcome oppression on a wider scale than the purely individual. However Learning Links doesn’t really seek to change society in that way; rather, the emphasis is restricted solely to the individual. He or she must learn to modify his or her behaviour.

Of course, there are other differences, too – for example, Learning Links works with young people, as opposed to adults, and is an adjunct to a formal schooling system, as opposed to an informal stand alone program. However, there are numerous similarities, too – the basis of both programs is the students’ own experiences, and there is a real emphasis on problem solving, rather than depositing content or knowledge. Certainly, it was worthwhile comparing the two programs.

There was another reason that I wanted to visit Mamre Homested. In addition to Learning Links, the volunteers there run a refugee education program. Working with recent arrivals from places like Sudan, the volunteers educate them in things like English, child care, cooking and cleaning. Although this might sound banal, I think this accurately reflects some elements of Freirean practice, too – these are the skills that will actually help the refugees become active members of society, although there was no element of activism or political education inherent in the programs.

The work that Mamre Homestead does is vital and valuable to the community. Sister Mary-Louise summed it up as providing people with the skills that allow them to become effective members of the community. In some ways, this only goes half-way. There is no ‘critical’ element to the work, by which I mean the opportunity for these people to come to a fuller consciousness about the world and the way dominant ideologies affect it.

Next, I will be talking to some people who work with homeless people in education programs, to see if that fits a Freirean perspective.

The importance of democratic education in today’s schools is highlighted in this article by Susan Engel and Marlene Sandstrom. This article identifies that, rather than shiny binders and expensive anti-bullying programs, the best way to deal with bullying and its attendant problems is through building a sense of community, where everybody involved in childrens education works to challenge incidences of bullying and encourage the democratic essentialities of
tolerance, participation and inclusivity.

The full article can be read here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/opinion/23engel.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=there%27s%20only%20one%20way%20to%20stop%20a%20bully&st=cse

The part I particularly liked was where the authors highlight the problems associated with standardized testing and an increasingly crowded curriculum. They write:

Yet, in American curriculums, a growing emphasis on standardized test scores as the primary measure of “successful” schools has crowded out what should be an essential criterion for well-educated students: a sense of responsibility for the well-being of others

Makes my research seem even more vital in this context.

Recently, I met with Dr Rick Flowers, my supervisor, for another doctoral meeting. The purpose of this meeting was to consider how my research has been getting on, and to decide what are the best ways forward regarding said research. It was a really good meeting. Once again, as I was reviewing my notes before the meeting, I was pleased with how far I had come. Then again, as soon as I’d had this meeting, I was reminded by how far there is still to travel!

Anyway, there were a few key learning points about for my research from this meeting. Firstly, Rick suggested that I needed to ground my research in a particular issue. This was of vital importance. To be honest, I think this exposes a bit of a lack of understanding on my behalf; I’d got so convinced of the idea of the importance of a completely student-negotiated curriculum that I’d kind of lost sight of the fact that this is precisely what Freire himself had done. For Freire, it was illiteracy that was the grounding for his work on empowerment.

Therefore, it is important for me to consider what kind of issue that I want to ground my work in. It is easy for me to say that I want to look at citizenship education or active citizenship – but these ideas are probably a little too broad if I’m going to be working on specifically active citizenship. In brief, the students I work – and myself, of course – need something to be active about. Fortunately, there are plenty of possibilities for just such a topic. Rick and I brainstormed a few ideas: the environment, specifically water pollution. Substance abuse. Drink Driving. Alcohol fueled violence. Refugees, racism and asylum seekers.

We did discuss one of these at length: the issue of refugees and racism. It must be stated that, considering the headlines of today, it is certainly a very topical issue, with the talk of the Pacific Solution and so on. Even more so, it is particularly appropriate for Western Sydney, which is often identified as a ‘heartland of racism’.  Originally, I had concerns about this kind of project, because, as is clear from even the most limited understanding of Freire’s work, Freire worked with those who were oppressed; he used a kind of bottom up approach. I didn’t see how it would be possible for me to do this, considering my limited access to people who were refugees; my school is pretty uniform, although there are changes taking place pretty slowly.

Secondly, although I had read quite a lot of Freire, it had been quite narrow in scope. Thus, when Rick asked me about my action research project and how it would be based on Freire’s principles, I struggled to explain how it might work. What I need to do know is read more about the ways that Freire’s work has been applied in particular contexts. Rick suggested that I explore two phenomena in particular; photovoice and popular theatre, so these two ideas will be the focus of my reading for a considerable period to come.

Thirdly, we had the opportunity to discuss what my portfolio might look like. Although we didn’t discuss this much, we did talk about the online forum. Here, Rick cautioned me to make sure that I kept this as an intellectual exercise, because it needed to be this if I was going to keep using it as part of my forum. We talked about the best ways to keep it working, and agreed that the use of social media would be a valuable tool, as well as the university mailing lists. Getting this up and running will be one of my key projects over the holidays.

However, the part of the discussion that I thought was the most important focused on what I’m contributing to the academy by my research. In short, what am I doing that is new or unique? What are the particular features of my research that are important?What is the importance of my research? What am I doing that is new or different? I think that it is important to be clear about the benefits of my work. Here are my original thoughts to answer this question:

• It’s the first time (at least, the first time that I’m aware) that educators in Australia have tried to link Freire’s pedagogy with citizenship education.
• The context of the work is vital – it’s intensely practical. It’s not simply a theoretical discussion of Freire and education, but it is using Freire’s pedagogy to challenge the oppression of Racism in Emu Plains, Sydney. Personally, I think that this makes my research vital.
• Finally, unlike may Freirean approaches to education, this particular project is looking at children and Freire. Most Freirean prjects explore adult education. This too makes it valuable to the academy.

I was speaking to a number of staff at my school the other day, and I commented that I was going to go and see one of our students playing sport on the weekend. This staff member expressed surprise at such an action – and also suggested that I might be crossing the line of staff-student professionalism. I’d never considered it like that, before, but these comments did cause me to think about what I was doing – was I acting unprofessionally? Was I endangering my career, and the safety of the student? This idea had never crossed my mind before – and ever since I was a young teacher, I’ve often gone to see students play sport, perform in theatre shows or similar things. I’d certainly never really considered my motivation for doing so; it just seemed something that I should do.

Ultimately, I don’t think what I’m doing crosses any kind of boundaries of appropriateness. At the end of the day, a school is a community – or more correctly, a community of communities. There are the communities of practice of teachers. There are the social communities of students. There are the religious, ethnic, cultural and sporting communities within these groupings.This is an important point because I believe that communities are sustained – primarily- through relationships. Thus, it is important to develop these relationships to their fullest extent. Any relationship – and interestingly, Freire makes this exact point – must use as its starting point an understanding of where each member of that relationship comes from; that is to say, it is not enough for me to perceive student simply as a student, or as a boy or as gifted. Rather, I must do my utmost to understand their own life experiences and stories – I need to know about them as a unique individual if I am to come to understand them at all.

I like this idea; I think it is clearly linked to a movement away from the banking model of education and towards a better understanding of the human principles that at the heart of learning. Therefore, to address the issue that started this line of thought, what I was doing by going to this was twofold; firstly, I was learning more about this student’s background and motivations, as hell as his interests, and secondly, this student was learning more about me. Hence, our relationship (which was already pretty good) takes another step forward, and I am better able to assist him in his learning. Sounds very professional, if you ask me!

I was teaching my Year 8 English class recently, and I had one of those perspective moments; you know, when you look around yourself and suddenly it’s like you are seeing everything through fresh eyes. Anyway, that’s what happened; we were in a computer room, and I had kids working on laptops, other kids sitting in front of the floor watching the projector screen and even a few standing outside the classroom furiously arguing with each other.

Ten years ago, I would have been horrified if I had stumbled onto a room that was as ‘messy’ as that. I would have been looking for students sitting in silence, studiously copying from textbooks while the teacher lectured. Okay, maybe I was never as blinkered at that, but I think I would have been concerned by what I saw.

Anyway, I had this perspective moment, and it kind of filtered out all the garbage about classroom behaviour and learning outcomes and other stuff, and allowed me to focus on the actual learning taking place. And that’s the point: despite the ‘messy’ classroom, there was no doubt that there was learning taking place – for every student in the classroom. Let’s think about what I mean by learning: firstly, there is a requirement for every student to be engaged. Secondly, there is a need for students to be challenged – at whatever level they are currently not working at. Finally, there is also the call for reflection. I honestly believe that reflection is a crucial part of the learning process, and it is something that I actively encourage students to take part in.

Those students working on a computer were actually putting the finishing touches on a task requiring them to analyse what Australian and Japanese school aged children might be proud of; it was a challenging task for these high achievers, requiring a level of logical thought that is right at the top end of Bloom’s taxonomy. Meanwhile middle achievers in my class were engaged (and I use that word deliberately) in watching ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ which fits really nicely with our area of study.

But more than passively watching the video, the students were actively involved in critiquing Gore’s point of view; in fact they were analysing how they structured his argument – defining each new piece of information as an example, or a thesis, or evidence. It was great. Sure, they might have been sitting on the floor, or not writing in their books, but they were learning – and enjoying it too.

And the two outside? Well, they were in the heat of a discussion about the reality of climate change, and the causes of it.

Messy classrooms: the way of the future?

I was reading somewhere – not sure where – about the actual etymology of the word education. Rather than meaning ‘to teach’ or ‘to learn’ it actually means ‘to lead’ or ‘to lead out.’ I think it’s from the Latin, originally. It’s an interesting thought, though, isn’t it? Rather than meaning to absorb or dispense knowledge, or to sit there passively storing it up until you are ready to regurgitate it on some examination.

Instead, it’s much more active – more like a ‘guide’ or even a mentor, isn’t it? Even more importantly, there is no suggestion of being the repository of all knowledge; rather, there is the idea that we are all in this together. Just a few thoughts. What do you think?

I recently had the opportunity to have another informal conversation regarding my research project. In this, I interviewed a member of staff at a school who is responsible for facilitating the Student Representative Council (SRC) at a middle-sized systemic Catholic high school.

I wanted to speak to her (lets call her Miss P) to get an idea of what the SRC’s aims and purposes are – and how effective they are in meeting these aims and purposes. The results were interesting – and also quite heartening. Firstly, I explored the ideas behind how people become members of the representative council. The process is quite convoluted:

1. A student must be nominated by 2 other students, and also a member of staff must countersign this nomination.

2. Then students take a vote on the nominated studenst.

3. The students with the most votes are then interviewed by the teachers responsible for facilitating the SRC. During this interview, they are presented with the SRC role description (more on this below) and asked whether they could uphold the qualities and expectations outlined in the document.

I was lucky enough to get hold of a copy of the SRC role description, and I thought that the fact that one exists suggests an interesting perspective already. The role description generally sets out the expected code of behaviour of a member of the Student Representative Council: for example, one of the statements suggests that students on the SRC need to ‘model behaviours that demonstrate integrity, jusctice and peace’ or ‘be committed to the school community through attendance at reflection days, athletics and swimming carnivals, fundraising events, extra curricular activities and information evenings.’

There is little that is explicitly managed about fostering democratic ideals, but I didn’t expect that. When I asked Miss P about what she thought the purpose of the SRC was, she said that she didn’t really have a role deciding that; rather, the purpose of the SRC was determined by the students – all Miss P did was facilitate what they wanted to do. So, if, for example, there was a really heavy emphasis on sporting and house involvement from the SRC in a particular year, that’s what the focus or purpose of the SRC would be. On the other hand, if the SRC was not a vibrant community, or not particularly motivated, then the SRC would have limited impact upon the school.

I did question what kind of power that the actual SRC had within the schooling environment (linking both to my ideas about empowerment of students and Cogan’s description of Australia’s SRCs as without real power or meaningfulness) and Miss P suggested that, really, the SRC were on their own. Miss P could advise and assist them to run presentations, for example, to deal with issues that they had identified, but they actually had little access to the existing power structures within the school.

This raises a number of important issues:

1. Firstly, I think that the idea of a student-negotiated issues is essential.

2. Secondly, I was concerned that, if this is a typical features of SRCs, they are really more of a regulatory body – responsible for monitoring and addressing behaviour amongst the student body – more than a democratic body aiding in the empowering of students.

I was at the Penrith rugby league game last night (Penrith beat the Doggies, go the panthers) and, while I had a great time, a few beers with the brother-in-law, steak sandwich, hurled abuse at the touch judge etc etc, there was one part of the evening that struck me as a little strange.

Basically, one of the main sponsors of the Penrith Panthers (Go the Panthers!) is the Department of Education for NSW. As concerning as it is that the Department needs to sponsor a football team instead of spending the money on training staff, that’s not what concerns me.

What does concern me is the tagline that goes with the recruitment drive; the announcer at the game said it about 5 times – before the game, at half-time and at the end of the game. The tagline went like this: ‘Are you looking for a career that is innovative and creative and means you still have time for sports, friends and family?’ I mean, seriously, you still have time for sports, friends and family!

I was horrified when I heard it, to be honest. Immediately, I started thinking: is this the best way to encourage people to become teachers? And are people who are interested by this ‘time for sports, friends and family’ likely to be our best teachers? Would you entrust your children to someone who’s just teaching to fill in time before he or she can go play football?

Don’t get me wrong; I understand the importance of work-life balance and I think that teachers come in two sorts: those who have it and those who don’t. But I don’t think anyone should become a teacher solely because it offers opportunities for a good work-life balance. To me, teaching is a vocation, not a job you do because you need to earn money somehow. The responsibility that you, as a teacher have, for the nurturing and development of young minds is far too important to be done by someone who doesn’t really care about it.

As part of my doctoral research and training in the first year, I recently completed a 4 week online module on Creative and Critical Thinking run by the Australian Technology Network out of the Queensland University of Technology. It was facilitated by Dr Inger Mewburn.

Essentially, the course had 4 main strands – the first two looked at critical thinking and the second two looked at creative thinking. All of it was directly linked to the idea of research, too. Firstly, we examined the typical idea of critical thinking – that of evaluating and finding fault, before in week two we explored a wider definition of criticality. In week three, we examined the differences between creativity and creative thinking, and in week four we looked at ways that we can utilise creativity in our research.

All told, an excellent program. And I get a certificate, too!