|
|
|
Philosophy of Teaching
A central theme of my philosophy of teaching is the belief that it is more important to teach students how to think than to simply teach them what to think. In this light, a university-level education is not just a quantitative process consisting of the sum total of knowledge one is supposed to have memorized throughout the course of their studies, but rather a qualitative process by which the student is transformed both internally in the way s/he understands their own precarious existence in both time and space and externally in the way s/he orients themselves within the larger social collective in which they find themselves living. In short, I envision education as a process involving the acquisition of new analytical skills intended to help make sense of existence, relate to others from both within and without one's own communities (indeed, to help destroy or at least diminish any false "us" vs. "them" cognitive dichotomies), and deconstruct dangerous myths uncritically passed down to us by previous generations.
A key aspect of my philosophy of teaching is my own personal philosophy of history. Along with many other scholars, I am convinced that studying the past is inherently useful to the present. History, I believe, is not just a broad aerial survey of the landscapes and contours of past societies and consisting of dry dates, names, and 'facts', but rather includes a much more intimate perspective beginning within the minds of historical actors (insofar as the historian is able to reconstruct the subject's mentalitι) and flowing outward into their surrounding communities. This inside-out directional flow of the historian's intellectual vision allows for a much more empathetic view of our species' collective past to take shape within the minds of our students, further lending the power of historical knowledge to the positive molding and shaping of the present. Jacob Burckhardt famously argued that "History is what one age finds worthy of note in another." Following in Burckhardt's vein of thought, I believe that by finding something "worthy of note" in the past something we feel is, somehow, important we reveal and confront our own society and its various interests, peculiarities, and anxieties.
Our world today suffers from a general inability to empathize with the views of others. Intolerance and impatience are often far more common than understanding and forbearance. Samuel P. Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" theory, which envisions a post-Cold War era led by conflicts stemming from diametrically opposed cultural and religious identities, offers little more to a world broken by centuries of unremitting conflict than the grim prediction of more of the same. In contrast to Huntington's pessimistic philosophical perspective, my philosophy of history and by extension my philosophy of teaching envisions the story of our species as one of interconnectivity between diverse peoples and communities. I do not consider the story of our species on this planet to be one of increasing divisiveness and factionism (as if we were to believe in the various myths that often serve as discursive buttresses to the "histories" of modern nation states) but rather one of decreasing awareness of humanity's intimate connections. By incorporating these themes into my lectures, in-class discussions, and other classroom activities, I hope to leave an imprint of tolerance and understanding where there once may have been narrow-mindedness and insularity. Following the lead of David Stockley, I believe that one of the primary merits of the historical perspective is its ability to empathetically reconstruct some semblance of the past, providing students with a rare window in on how historical actors imagined the world and positioned their places within it.1 This empathetic method of historical analysis can also be applied to addressing various contemporary problems and issues, such as cross-cultural communication and cooperation. Thus, by leading students through the often tortuous paths of foreign mental worlds, we are able to demonstrate the variety of experiences of human existence on our planet and, I believe, further provincialize our own sense of temporal, or teleological, superiority.
However, one is still faced with the difficult task of circumventing the various tensions and biases of our own time and place, should they come up, within the classroom. For example, how is one able to create an environment suitable to freedom of thought and personal conviction while at the same time encouraging critical analysis and inquiry? Oscar Chamberlain and Anthony Millevolte's recent article "Teaching Old Controversies before New: The Galileo Affair and Darwinian Revolution" provides us with some direction here. In the article, Chamerlain and Millevolte discuss the tensions inherent in covering certain subjects in the classroom, such as Charles Darwin's theory of biological evolution. Pointing out that students almost always come from different and often conflicting social milieux, Chamerlain and Millevolte stress the need of developing pedagogical methods designed to teach difficult subjects and concepts while at the same time deflecting any potential for conflict within the classroom. The method proposed by Chamerlain and Millevolte is largely one of displacement. By dividing the class into two opposing camps each defending one of two positions on a now largely uncontroversial subject the instructor is able to demonstrate the value of analyzing issues from an outsider's perspective, or, as Chamerlain and Millevolte have phrased it, to "[try] different positions on for size."2 By implementing this method within my own classrooms, I hope to foster a sense of tolerance and mutual understanding to clear the air, as it were, and establish a comfortable and non-threatening environment for learning and growth.
Lastly, one of the reasons I was so quiet in my primary school classrooms was my fear of seeming unintelligent in the eyes of my peers if I were to say the 'wrong' thing, or reveal a lack of understanding on a commonly understood topic. My fear was so great that for the vast majority of my primary school education I sank back in my seat, tuned out, and allowed my grades to plummet downwards. However, what this fear tends to mask is that there is often more than one individual in a class who feels confused or uninformed on any given topic under discussion. Therefore, by creating an environment in my classrooms that fosters individuality, intellectual safety, and mutual respect, I hope to coax those timid voices out of their silent spells and encourage them to engage, interact, and enhance their learning experience.
1 David Stockley, "Empathetic Reconstruction in History and History Teaching," History and Theory, Vol. 22, No. 4, Beiheft 22: The Philosophy of History Teaching (December, 1983), pp. 50-65. See: http://www.historyandtheory.org/archives/indx2125.html#anchor361898
2 Oscar Chamberlain, Anthony Millevolte, "Teaching Old Controversies before New:The Galileo Affair and Darwinian Revolution," Perspectives on History, Vol. 48, No. 5, Controversy in the Classroom (May, 2010), pg. 24. See http://www.historians.org/perspectives/issues/2010/1005/1005for2.cfm
|
|
|
|
|
