You can't walk where I walk

Someone once told me that life is like a fast moving stream. You can put your foot into it, and even let it flow over you for a while, but you can never put your foot into the same river twice. That's quite profound, but there is something even more profound. It is this: You can't walk where I walk. In other words, you can't experience what I experience. We may be sat watching the same movie or TV programme. We may read the same book, participate in the same conversation, or sit in the same lecture. But your experience will be different to my experience. We may come away with similar messages or impressions of what we have observed or experienced, but because we are unique individuals, we are by nature different to each other, and our perceptions will also be different. That is one very important reason why in schools, standardised testing, homogenised curricula and batch processing by age need to be changed for more personalised approaches to education.

It's all down to individual perception - what psychologists call the 'representation of reality'. My reality is slightly different to yours and yours from mine. It has little to do with you and I viewing the same thing from slightly different angles, although sometimes that can be a factor in creating different perceptions. No, it's not about different angles, it's about different perspectives. A number of variables cause each of us to view life uniquely, and to represent reality from different perspectives, including our age, gender, culture, background, health, preferences, personal beliefs, in fact just about everything that wire our brains uniquely, and make us individuals. When teachers attempt to differentiate learning, they generally focus on aptitude and ability or in some cases, whether a student has a disability. Some teachers are sidetracked into considering 'learning styles' but that is a big mistake, as I have previously discussed. Carl Rogers advocated 'unconditional positive regard', a philosophy that plays out when every student is considered to be of equal worth in the classroom, regardless of their previous 'form'.

What teachers should be focused upon is the whole child, and how they perceive life and represent reality differently to everyone else in the room. Differentiation should encourage diversity not simply make provision for it. It should celebrate the fact that we are all different, and include every single voice in the classroom, giving each an equal weight. That's hard to achieve, but with some fore thought and practice, and a great deal of patience, teachers can encourage each student to participate fully and play to their individual strengths. We are not that different from each other really. We all have the same needs, to be respected, to feel we belong to the group and to have a voice. Each of us is the same, but in uniquely different ways. If you can understand that, then you will understand why you can't walk where I walk.

Photo by Steve Wheeler


You can't walk where I walk by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Free thinking

A lot of stuff never gets done because it's 'against the rules'. Rules and regulations are the bane of creativity, and can stop innovation dead in its tracks. Every organisation has an IPD - an Innovation Prevention Department which is there to ensure that the rules are abided by, and that nothing happens without a rubber stamp of approval.

My reading of 'The Facebook Effect' recently has led me to believe that mavericks and anarchists - those who tend to bend the rules, or simply ignore them - are at the centre of many creative projects, and in some cases actually become the gamechangers. Mark Zuckerberg and his Harvard student friends have radically changed the way we communicate with each other, and they have changed it on a global level. Regardless of your opinion of Facebook, you would probably agree that it was a game changer. Zuckerberg was not, and is not someone who 'tows the line'. He got into trouble while at Harvard and ever since, he has led an edgy existence at the vanguard of a movement which has fractured many of the social conventions that existed prior to the advent of online social networking.

Zuckerberg isn't the only one who has kicked against the rules and bent them to get where he needs to go. Richard Branson, in his recent book 'Screw it, let's do it,' also admits to being a maverick (but we all knew that anyway). He says 'Though I have never followed the rules at every step, I have learned many lessons along the way. I am still learning and I hope I never stop.' Branson has carved out, time and time again, business opportunities that have broken the conventional mould with outrageous success. Beside their vast fortunes, what do Zuckerberg and Branson have in common? They are both free thinkers. They disregard the structure and restrictions of their surroundings, and dream up new ways to circumvent the constraints imposed upon them by 'the rules.' For them, the way forward is to 'just do it.'

There are many other free thinkers I could talk about - in the field of art (Picasso, Monet, Pollock), music (Mozart, Stockhausen, the Beatles), and science (Einstein, Darwin, Edison) - who were renowned for bending the rules and sometimes ignoring them. Creativity in this sense, is not so much about building on old models (although this is sometimes the case), nor is it about extemporisation around a known theme. No, it is more to do with what Margaret Boden called 'transformational creativity' where scant regard for what is acceptable or achievable, is replaced by the will to make something happen regardless of the constraints, the rules, the expected.

Is this the kind of ethos we see in our schools, colleges, universities? As teachers are we fostering a sense of the impossible in our learners, and are we nurturing dreamers and entrepreneurs? Or are we instead continuing to impose rules and constraints which are no longer necessary or simply outmoded, because 'it has always been done that way?' Carl Rogers, a free thinker in his own right, once made it clear that the educational situation which most effectively promotes significant learning is one in which 1) threat to the self of the learner is reduced to a minimum, and 2) differentiated perception of the field of experience is facilitated (Smith, 2004)

In clear language, this means that people learn best when they feel that they are under no constraints to express themselves and when they are given licence to change things and make them personal. How could this be applied to our own classrooms, and how many of us as teachers facilitate free thinking within our practice? Next time, don't ask for permission. Just do it.

'It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission'

Image source by Jack Lyons


Free thinking by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.