So reading through Ayers Chapter 3, on creating a classroom environment was interesting, and filled with a lot of wonderful ideas, and yeah ... yay? I don't know how much more I can say. I think the only real issue is when you get a classroom, what limitations, structures, budget, guidelines are you forced to deal with and how can you go from there? Making it engaging, warm, inviting, open, creative, unique, personalized, interesting, malleable, spontaneous, etc etc, are all wonderful. Sometimes I do wonder why our classrooms get progressively less interesting and more ordered as we age. I definitely was not any wiser/more organized as I grew up, and my methods of thinking, interests and personality are just as chaotic as when I was a child, so why not allow that to continue? A lot of this relates to a podcast that I really enjoy; and this particular episode (found here: Katy Says Nature School podcast) deals specifically with Nature School, where the guest, Katy Bowman, a prominent biomechanical engineer, sends her children. Her whole philosophy on life is incredibly interesting to me, and one of the aspects she deals with is returning to nature and living a holistic lifestyle that is aligned and well. The nature school her children attend actually teaches everything outside, no classrooms, and has the students out and interacting with nature ALL THE TIME (yes even taking a portable little potty with them for natures call :p). It's a pretty drastic change from our normal schools, but it definitely has HUGE benefits. Students are taught the same kinds of things, but instead of playing with colorful toys and sitting on a carpet, they are walking in a forest, counting berries or pine cones, and being engaged with real life. I'm definitely in love with the concept (I follow a lot of her cool ideas, or at least, try to) and would love to move my own teaching towards this kind of mentality. Chapter 3 from Hopkins, on the Five Key Themes for Creating the Restorative Classroom was also very interesting and very ... nice ... Not a lot I could disagree with on that end as well. I'm sure the biggest detractors for this type of class dynamic would point to time constraints, age/maturity level of students, and archaic arguments like "Well that's just not done!! That's not practical!" which don't hold any water.
What did interest me most, and which was not mentioned in any way, was how closely modeled this approach is on traditional forms of conflict resolution, especially those employed by tribes in Papa New Guinea and the surrounding Islands. I read a lot of incredible examples from Jared Diamond's amazing book "The World Until Yesterday" which analyzes indigenous peoples from around the world and identifies the lessons, practices and truths we can learn from them (and things that we shouldn't learn!) in contrast to our Westernized view of everything. It is a wonderful book, filled with incredible lessons, but like the restorative classroom, I'm sure that seeing it's lessons in practice is a truly humbling experience. Jared identifies that small tribes and communities, usually less than 200, do not use judge based or rights based conflict resolution strategies like we do, and people are not obsessed with wrongs being righted or the idea of "justice" being restored. Similar to what Hopkins outlines, questions such as "What do I need to move on from this?" are asked in community settings, with everyone having a unique voice, and from there, actions are decided upon in order to allow everyone to redevelop relationships and move on. No one demands retribution (well, I guess they could, but it's not common), and relationships are often mended and grief shared. There are of course downsides, such as generational grudges and inter-tribe warfare that can consume cultures. I'm guessing a lot of those issues could affect restorative classrooms as well. If students hold grudges and don't want to move on, you can't really force them. In a top down system, you can just have them swallow their pride and move on, arbitrarily assigning a sense of closure, which isn't possible in a restorative/tribe council type of way. I do think the emphasis on "harmonious" is a little too optimistic for me. Tension, conflicts and division are natural elements of being human, and more importantly, almost ALWAYS present in communities (at one time or another). Trying to expect them to be eliminated by any system is naive. Why not use them as an advantage? By focusing more on working relationships, rather than harmony, we can teach students to develop skills to cooperate and accept others, without it having to be perfect. Indigenous cultures often left relationships in an imbalance, and used them in the future for favors or trade, because they realized that imbalances in relationships were inevitable, and as long as they were working towards keeping a relationship, they could co-exist. I know the word "restorative" is getting a lot of airtime these days, and I wonder when exactly came into vogue, but I do like how Hopkins piece, and the related ideas behind Ayers, tie into age old customs and practices which have proven to be effective for centuries. I would love to find more ways in which traditional cultures and knowledge are reflected in our pedagogy and how we can implement other effective examples and techniques :)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
October 2016
Categories |