Teaching mathematics without computers in my early years as
a teacher meant standing in front of the classroom, expert, authority figure,
in charge. Except for occasionally sending students to the board, that was my
place in the classroom. As innovative with gadgets and visuals as I could be, I
was still front and center.
When I moved to a teaching position in art schools, whether
with academic courses or studio courses, I naturally gravitated to the front of
the classroom--too much of the time.
The teacher, as dispenser of exams, criticism, knowledge and
grades is automatically granted de facto power. Standing in front of rows of
students all looking at you affirms that power. You stand, they sit. You speak,
they listen. You call on them to assure that they have heard what you said or
that you can clarify their understanding of what you said. You are selecting
and dispensing the knowledge.
At one point this didn’t make sense to me any more, though
I’m not sure why. But giving up power seemed to be a way of gaining a more
workable power. Small classes sat around a conference table, larger ones in a
circle. I sat in the circle with the students, changing my place randomly
through the semester. I found value in sitting next to quiet students, vocal
students, unprepared students, and students of different genders, races and
ethnicities.
I usually gave a short intro to the material and required
each student to have a comment or question on the material of the day. This
gave them a kind of power over content of the same kind as I had. This worked in
small group projects as w ell. I could refocus and elaborate as needed to
ensure main ideas were covered.
We all faced one another knowing we were all responsible to
one another for learning the material. We were all in a sense teaching one
another, even if in small bits. Journaling was required to assure each student
was prepared for each day’s discussions.
In studio classes, I began to sit with the students in
critiques as each student laid out the aesthetics, intent, process and criteria
by which they wanted their considered. I was expected to be the main critiquer
with the most important things to say.
But it didn’t always work out that way.
I found these changes to be valuable and evolving
investigations of how to consider power at work in the classroom.
