Pre-session reading:
- Read Race and the Neoliberal University by John Holmwood.
- Read Improving teaching: Enhancing ways of being university teachers Gloria Dall’Alba
Reflections on the session
It is extremely odd to be a student again, in a classroom environment after 6 years of being out of the ‘habit’ of learning. One of the most surreal aspects of this is the feeling of walking into a room where there are over 100 people sitting in rows, in a hot room with barely any aircon, and attempting to find a seat. As I walked into the room and found myself squeezing past my ‘classmates’ and apologising for knocking things over and disrupting people I couldn’t help but wonder why we still arrange classrooms in this manner in the first place. It’s inaccessible for those who have invisible illnesses or who are fat (the chairs are very small and uncomfortable), and because the setup is crowded and uncomfortable the environment is not particularly conducive to learning. However, we still set rooms up in this way, particularly when teaching large groups. This is a particularly relevant conversation considering that the Disability Service gave a briefing regarding Individual Support Agreements and accessibility within the university, but the room itself was not accessible.
Upon entering the room there was a slide up asking us all to grab a label, write our names and pronouns on it and then introduce ourselves to our nearest neighbours and have a conversation about who we are and what our teaching practice is. At this point I had only been teaching for two weeks and I was not yet sure of what my teaching practice was, let alone how I could attempt to describe it to a colleague who had been teaching for years. However, I found that speaking to other people on the course about their teaching practice helped me to solidify what I thought my own was or might be given time. As a method of allowing students to get to know each other organically without ‘forcing it’. I think that it worked well for most of the people in the room, although some people made sure to sit with and speak to people they already knew and worked with.
After a while, Lindsay began handing out sheets of paper with 8 quotes about teaching on them and one quote highlighted. Each section of the room had a different highlighted quote. Ours was:
“In its earliest conception, erotic potency was not confined to sexual power but included the moving force that propelled every life-form from a state of mere potentiality to actuality. Given that critical pedagogy seeks to transform… to some extent it must rely on the presence of the erotic in the classroom.’“
hooks, b. 1994. Teaching to Transgress. Routledge: London. p.194
She then asked us to silently contemplate the following:
- Who do you imagine saying it?
- What does it mean to you?
- What else does it bring to mind (ideas, images, events, memories)?
- In what ways do you agree with it?
- In what ways do you disagree with it?
- What are the implications of this belief for teaching practice?
After silently contemplating and possibly writing notes by ourselves we were asked to discuss the quote in twos and threes and then more widely as a larger group of six. Almost immediately the conversation became fixated on the word ‘erotic’ and the consequences that using such words could have in a classroom today. Questions around issues of safeguarding and the politics of power were also raised, particularly because some of the people in the group taught on Foundation or BA courses where many of the students had only just turned 18 and some could even be classed a vulnerable adults. We also discussed teaching in terms of the phrase ‘sex sells’ and how this quote could be misinterpreted or twisted to fit the ideology of an educator who may be wanting to take advantage of their students.
At this point I felt that some of my colleagues in the group were missing the point slightly, and allowed the conversation to be derailed by the mention of ‘sexual power’. Although I definitely feel that words like erotic and sexual should be used with care when teaching, if for no other reason than there is already a power imbalance which has a lot of potential for exploitation. It also highlighted to me the power of context, and the ways which quotes can be used – or misused- depending entirely on the identities of the writer and reader of the work. hooks’ positionality as an African-American, female-identifying feminist writer undoubtedly affects both our reading of the text and of her as an individual. If we had been assigned to read the entire chapter this quote had been taken from, rather than just being given this quote out of context, the conversation may have been different and more nuanced. I think this is a very important point that we should all make to our students when we ask them to read or quote a piece of writing, and ask them to note how their own situation affects their reading of the text.
One of my fields of interest is the study of mythology, esoterica and shamanism which often uses similar language to that used by hooks above in order to discuss ways of transforming and transmuting energies or ways of thinking. In these philosophies, sex, the erotic or sexual energy is not merely pornographic (although this this not excluded), it is also energetic and transformative. I also have a sister who is a sex and relationships coach and therapist who often uses similar language to refer to subjects such as reclaiming or reconnecting with feeling our joy/pleasure in an embodied sense in our daily lives as people. This relates to hooks’ discussion of the concept of Eros in the chapter as a metaphor for the embodied passion that an educator must feel about their subject in order to engage students. If we are not interested in or passionate about what we are teaching, how can we expect students to engage with, or learn from, us?
I think it is important that educators familiarise themselves with terminology of this kind, particularly because we may have students who wish to explore subjects that are related to the erotic, sex and sexuality in their work and they will be looking to us to guide them. We need to be able to converse about these subjects in a way that expresses nuance and maturity without shutting students down or shaming them for their interest. Encouraging an embodied approach to teaching also has an impact on accessibility. hooks mentions in this chapter that when she first began teaching and needed to use the bathroom she had no idea what to do – she could not remember any of her teachers needing the bathroom or having physical needs of any kind while teaching (hooks ppg 191-192). We must remember that both students and teachers have bodies that react physiologically to emotion and require food, water and comfort breaks. This is particularly true for students or staff with access needs, who have found themselves little served by the ethos of institutional learning as “…a site where the body had to be erased, go unnoticed.” (hooks, pg 191)
After this activity we were asked to get into pairs and map out the history of education as we thought we were aware of it after the pre-session reading. We then wrote our answers on post-its which we put onto a wall in the classroom so we could chart the history of institutional education in the UK. This was a fun and interactive activity that I would like to use with my students when relevant. I personally like activities which combine learning with movement and class interaction rather than learning by rote. I think it is important for students, particularly those within arts schools, to come together to create something during lessons. My colleagues on the course seemed to enjoy this activity, although being so many people in a large room there was quite a lot of tripping over each other.
As a conclusion to the session, we were asked to consider the pre-session reading and answer some questions about it on a Google doc. Again, it was good to see all of the different perspectives on the reading. I think using digital versions of the post-it note exercise is a great way to keep students engaged, both in-person and online, while also checking their learning.
Responses to the reading:
To what extent are individuals personally responsible for their success?
I think this question is quite difficult to answer. Traditionally the model in education has been to encourage and empower students to ‘overcome’ any barriers they may be facing. While this acknowledges those barriers to some degree, it also overlooks the impact of the trauma caused by those circumstances and how this may, in turn, affect their ability to study. As outlined by the Harvard University Center for the Developing Child website, what we call Executive Function (EF) is a series of neural pathways which are responsible for our ability to plan and execute multiple tasks at once. EF involves things like mental flexibility, timekeeping, forward planning etc. EF pathways form gradually over time via activities like play as young children, study and extra-curricular activities as young people and work and study as we grow to adulthood. However, as human beings we come with a certain amount of ‘hardwiring presets’ which are located in deeper parts of the brain and essentially are triggered when the brain perceives danger, the fight, flight or freeze response is a perfect example of this. Living in environments which are consistently stressful can trigger the fight, flight, or freeze response consistently and thus impair a person’s EF capabilities. As Holmwood suggests, some of the biggest barriers to student attainment and learning are living within neoliberalist capitalist states which are actively hostile to immigrants, people of colour, people with disabilities and people who are poor (Holmwood ppg 10-11). I think that he does not go far enough to explain the traumatic effects these circumstances can have on the brain and what that can mean for students on a deep psychological and neurological level. Additionally, students who are poor or who experience xenophobia or racism are consistently re-traumatised by the neoliberalist environment within the university, particularly if that University has a high profile and therefore high fees.
Aside from the above, I also think the question is difficult to answer because different people define success differently. I think it is important to be aware of the subjectivity of the concept of success as a teacher because our own ideas, ambitions and biases can severely impact our students if we hold them to the same standards and imprinting we hold ourselves to. If I, as a white-presenting lower middle class woman of 30 with quite a lot of privilege have certain internalised ideas about the nature of success which I push onto my students who have very different positionality to mine that is not only unfair but could in some cases be quite cruel. It therefore follows that if those who design curricula and assessment critera are privileged, cis-het, white men and women that their standards will reflect that and will not take into account the learning needs or barriers of a neurodiverse, queer, Black student for example. If we define success by the current model which was outlined during Thatcherism, then individuals are responsible for ‘overcoming’ their own barriers by themselves with no external help from community or family. However, as a firm believer in the phrase ‘it takes a villiage’ I disagree with this sentiment and think that it is important that universities decolonize in order to provide students with as much chance of ‘success’ as possible.
What is the justification for some people earning less than others?
Most of the time the justification for some earning less than others is based on arbitrary meritocratic ideals. It is frequently remarked upon by popular commentators that footballers earning more than nurses, doctors and teachers is a gross example of the unfairness of capitalism. In my opinion there is no justification for there being such an extensive wage gap that billionaires can exist in the same city as people using food banks. After reading the Holmwood chapter, it is interesting to think that funding for certain sectors, such as STEM, directly correlates to how well graduating students are paid once gaining an entry-level role. Although it would be reasonable to assume that students who spend a longer time studying should be paid more, this is not necessarily reflected in the entry level salaries for various industries. Particularly within the arts, funding cuts and consistent devaluation of this multi-billion pound industry has severely affected the salaries of graduates entering junior level roles, which reflects Holmwood’s analysis. It is difficult as educators to maintain student enthusiasm and retention when considering this point, why should students enter (and stay in) a sector that has very limited budget but high energetic and emotional cost? Only students who are already well off enough to have family support would be able to enter and gain any ground in a sector of this kind, which would therefore limit diversity and adversely affect any student who needs to work for a living rather than working to gain experience.
What does social solidarity mean to you?
Being actively anti-racist as a daily practice rather than as a performative act when it suits. Constant evaluation and re-education on concepts and precepts I may have around race, class and gender which allow me to think critically about the world around me and pass this criticality onto my students. Having compassion for students and encouraging them to rest and enjoy their time in education rather than encouraging grind culture. Amplifying and listening to the voices of my colleagues and students who experience marginalisation in different ways than I do.
Bibliography
hooks, b. (1994) Teaching to Transgress:Education as the Practice of Freedom. London: Routledge, pp 191 – 199. https://academictrap.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/bell-hooks-teaching-to-transgress.pdf
Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. n.d. Executive Functioning In Adults: The Science Behind Adult Capabilities. [online] Available at: <https://developingchild.harvard.edu/science/deep-dives/adult-capabilities/#:~:text=Serious%20early%20adversity%20and%20trauma,and%20compromised%20executive%20function%20abilities.
Holwood, J. (2018) Race and the Neoliberal University: Lessons from the Public University. In G, Bhambra, D Gebrial, K Nişancıoğlu eds. Decolonising the University 1st ed. Pluto Press, pp 37 – 47. https://library.oapen.org/viewer/web/viewer.html?file=/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/25936/1004145.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y