Places for silence and stillness in schools of today: A matter for educational policy

Abstract

In this paper, it is my intention to not only explore the notions and significance of places for silence in education today, but also to develop insights into diverse understandings of silence – such as aspects of power in silence and issues of silent students – to inform school practices and educational policy. The discussion will be illustrated by some students’ experiences of a place in the school’s playground – the silent place known as the Peace Area. The students at this playground emphasised the significance of a silent place, a place of stillness, to visit during one’s time at school. A place for relaxing together with friends, but also a place to be alone with one’s thoughts. The students clearly expressed their desire to withdraw to a silent and peaceful place during the school day. But, how many places of silence and stillness are there in the schools of today? As humans, we are, in our daily life, more or less surrounded by different forms of sounds and noise, but also of silence and stillness, even though we do not always recognise or hear the silence. Silence can also be experienced and understood in various ways: pleasant and something to be longed for or unpleasant and unwelcome – or even in some cases as something to be feared. An essential question to raise for future educational policy is not only to what extent students can be in a place of silence and stillness during the school day, but also whether places of silence and stillness are appreciated in today’s schools.

The Peace Area is my favourite place because it is quiet. It is important just because it is quiet. I get peace and quiet and I rest here or I finish my work. I can get away from the rush of people when I’m here. It’s a very relaxing place and I really enjoy being here. I often use it at playtime and lunchtime to read, draw, watch birds or sit and relax.

This statement was made by a 10-year-old student who participated in a previous research study conducted at a primary school in the state of Victoria, Australia. This study focused on students’ experiences of important places at their school. In this paper, I use some of the students’ quotes from this earlier research, particularly relating to their experiences of the silent place in the playground: the Peace Area. ¹ I consider the quotes and reflect on their meanings and implications, and connect them with a theoretical discussion, all with the intention of adding further insights to existing research in the area of silence and stillness in schools (see for example, Lees, 2012; Mendes-Flohr, 2012; Stern, 2014; Olin, 2008; Von Wright, 2013). This paper should therefore be viewed as a theoretical contribution to the field of education and its policy in a broad sense. More specifically, the significance of silence and education, but with the theoretical discussion exemplified by, and connected to, some students’ experiences.

The particular place, the Peace Area, mentioned by the student in the quote above, was part of the primary school’s playground. The most significant characteristic of this place was that it was a site of stillness and peace: students were not allowed to do anything loud or disruptive here. According to the students the silence and stillness of the place were important to them in terms of allowing them to relax and withdraw from the stress and hectic pace of school. Or as the student above expressed it, the Peace Area was a place to: “get away from the rush of people”. In a study by Stern (2014), the children, young people and adults who participated all spoke of their positive experiences of, or their desire for, solitude in school; that ability to just sit on their own in silence. Lees (2012) highlights the need for places and spaces of stillness and silence in school, not only for the students, but for the teachers as well.

Given the intense pace of the school day, with shouted instructions, ringing bells, movement between activities, lessons, objectives, venues, multiple social interactions, it is no wonder that people in schools might want time out in silence. It is more surprising that not all schools appreciate this human need (Lees, 2012: 101).

As schools mirror society, questions relating to people’s everyday lives are accentuated: how many places of stillness and silence are there in present-day society? Also, how much noise, or perhaps even silence, is acceptable in today’s society and schools? Englund (2005) identifies a concern in present-day society about constantly increasing levels of noise. Dangerous levels are often recorded, especially in places of education (Babisch et al, 2001), and as Lees (2012: 74) states: “[a]ll children lose out in schools when noise levels make learning difficult”.

However, noise had already been identified as a problem as far back as the 19^th century. One reason for this was that many cities in Europe were overcrowded due to the era of industrialisation. This, in turn, resulted in “the carpet of noise becoming more and more intense” (Englund, 2005: 30, own translation), and because of this, the value of silence was refined and revalued. In this way, it is not just the understanding of noise, but also the understanding of silence, that changes over time.

Mendes-Flohr (2012: 12) emphasises that today’s human beings are overwhelmed by the “cacophony of urban life”. High levels of urban noise pollution is a major health issue during the 21^st century, and some people even point out that this is one of the biggest contemporary environmental problems (Passchier-Vermeer & Passchier, 2000). However, acceptable sounds, and acceptable silence, are probably not the same today as they were during the 19^th century.

High levels of noise in today’s world affect all aspects of society – of which school is an essential part. A sign of the value and aim for silence in contemporary societies is that some places are transformed into places for silence and stillness. One example of this is the Peace Area in the playground exemplified in this paper, even though it is probably not so common that a playground contains such a silent place. Other examples are that some areas, such as in trains and buses, are transformed into so-called quiet zones, even though these areas are not totally free from sounds (Maitland, 2008). In these cases, what is meant by silence is that there is “the absence, not of sound per se, but of noise which is obtrusive or salient” (Cooper, 2012: 55).

One issue to consider and reflect upon, is how stillness and silence is appreciated and valued in modern educational systems. In particular, this relates to whether or not there are places for silence in today’s schools. In this paper, it is my intention to not only explore the notions and significance of places for silence in education today, but also to develop insights into diverse understandings of silence – such as aspects of power in silence and issues of silent students – to inform school practices and educational policy.

In the following sections I explore silence as a complex and multidimensional phenomenon. Notions of silence and its aspects of power as essential dimensions in the life of school are then outlined and discussed, followed by an exploration of the complexity of silent and/or silenced students and what it means to be silent. As these notions continue to inform each other, the theorisation becomes interwoven with the discussion in often non-linear directions. Finally, I conclude with the implications for school practices and educational policy.

Silence: A complex and multidimensional phenomenon

Silence is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon. There are many forms of silence, not only in different educational settings, but also in everyday life. Foucault (1978: 27) emphasised that “[t]here is not one but many silences […]”. How then can the word or concept of silence be described and understood? As silence, to some extent, is a part of human life, a question to reflect on might be whether silence can be noticed or heard? Silence can occasionally appear as distinct and loud in a deafening way: it can be hard to avoid. Given this, humans are more or less surrounded by different forms of silence in daily life, even though the silence is not always recognised or heard. Sometimes the silence is not even noticed, even if it is present. Silence can also be experienced and understood in various ways; pleasant and something to be longed for or unpleasant and unwelcome, or even in some cases as something to fear. However, “[s]ilence ‘as such’ is neither good nor bad”, according to Von Wright (2012: 94).

Silence as a phenomenon and concept can be regarded as abstract: silence cannot be seen or touched. Despite this, however, silence is often mentioned in terms of something that can be both seen and touched, something that is concrete and tangible. Alerby (2012b: 66) gives examples of this with sayings such as “a wall of silence, as quiet as a mouse, deafening silence or a veil of silence”, and other sayings such as “a minute’s silence, silent revolution or deep silence”. As can be seen by these sayings, silence as a phenomenon or concept is made up of individual judgements as well as metaphors.

Etymologically, silence as a word comes from silere, a Latin verb meaning to be silent, and there are many words synonymous with the word silence, for example; stillness, quietness, calm, hush, soundlessness, lull, quiescence, inaudible, mute, dumbness and taciturnity (Roget & Dutch, 1972). Given this, the word or concept of silence can be considered as a complex and multidimensional phenomenon.

One dimension of this complexity and multidimensionality is, according to Van Manen (1990), that the utterly obvious is the most silent. Expressed in another way, what is taken for granted, the totally self-evident, is the most totally silent. As a consequence, we have to challenge and question those things we take for granted, and ask what is actually happening in relation to what appears to be happening. Van Manen (1990), argues that this is something which researchers in human sciences must be aware of. He also stresses that, in accordance with a phenomenological viewpoint, the text – and the words – emanate from silence: the text partly speaks through silence. This is expressed by Brown (1966: 258) as follows: “Speech points beyond itself to the silence”. Therefore, when reading a text the reader needs to be attentive and sensitive, and be open to the silence that exists between and beyond the words.

According to Bollnow (1982), genuine silence means a fulfilment that transcends spoken words, and in the course of fulfilled silence, the conversation becomes deeper as a result of the inwardness that is essential to silence. He also emphasises that pauses that occur in conversation should not be regarded as empty. Instead they are filled with reflection on what has just been said, and also on what remains to be said. Although there are many different dimensions of silence, one is, as Bollnow stressed, communicative. In connection to the communicative aspect of silence, Jaworski (1993) emphasises that silence which is of significance never occurs when a person is alone, but only when two or more people are involved (Jaworski, 1993). “[I]t only takes one person to produce speech, but it requires the cooperation of all to produce silence”, state Pittenger, Hockett and Danehy (1960: 88). How can this then be understood? The question arises as to whether silence or significance can only emerge when two or more people are present – cannot a person on their own experience meaningful silence? This is something I would claim, only that person can, in most cases, determine whether the silence is meaningful or not. Furthermore, the students who spent time at the Peace Area clearly stated that they got a great deal out of the experience of being alone in a silent place during the school day. One of the students confirmed this as follows: “It’s a place where you can sit quietly by yourself ”.

Sometimes, silence between two people can indicate an understanding between the two without any words being said (Bollnow, 1982). People understand one another without the need to use the spoken word: it is a sort of agreement without spoken words. In the terminology of Buber (1993), it means that: “the word of dialogue has happened in a sacramental way” (17, own translation). This tacit understanding between two people can also be expressed with the following words: “It is the mutual silence that has the sensation of belonging together – a good friend is one you can sit with in silence” (Alerby & Elídottír, 2003: 42).

The students in the Peace Area focused on silence as something pleasant and perhaps something to be desired. Silence is, however, more multifaceted than that: there are many different aspects of silence, or as Mendes-Flohr (2012: 15) expresses it: “Silence has many ‘voices’, diverse articulations of what is sought by the absence of noise”. This is worth exploring, especially in connection to education and school life.

Silence and aspects of power: Essential dimensions in the life of school

In the current neoliberal era there is an emphasis on the human ability to explicitly and verbally express ourselves, with the goal of achieving better results on the standardised tests and assessments that national and international educational policies stress are important. (Hargreaves, 2009; Moss, 2007). “This reveals a tension between, on the one hand, uttered and explicit expressions and, on the other hand, silent and implicit expressions, of importance to discuss in connection with the contemporary educational agenda” (Alerby & Westman, 2013: 3).

In education, a paradoxical situation often occurs when the teacher, on the one hand, attempts to silence students – while giving out instructions for example – and on the other hand attempts to engage students in discussion. There is also often an unclear boundary between the silence that is aimed at when it comes to controlling the students and maintaining order in the classroom, and the silence that is used as a strategy to promote learning. Given this, there is always an asymmetry between the teacher and the students. “A vital component of an educational relation is asymmetry; the asymmetry between a teacher who has authority and young students who are on their way to entering public life” (Von Wright, 2012: 93, emphasis in the original). Jaworski (1993) claims that teachers’ silence illustrates their position of dominance over the students. He considers that it is through silence, among other things, that the teacher often tries to attract the students’ attention, interrupt them, demonstrate dissatisfaction, regain order in the classroom or calm a tense situation: it is a form of pedagogical strategy.

Thus, it can be claimed that there are aspects of power in silence. Foucault (1978: 101) stressed that silence is a “shelter for power”. Another example of the connection between power and silence is, according to Freire (1972: 30), when dominant members of society silence the oppressed, which he terms the culture of silence. It is therefore important to be observant of the silence existing in schools, and to ascertain whether it has an oppressed voice, or perhaps is sheltering power. Perhaps a student’s silence arises out of fear? The student might have been forced into silence for various reasons, for example through fear of ridicule or being laughed at. In addition, different aspects of power through inhibition, suppression or ignorance are also common in bullying situations. Situations of bullying in schools, which may happen during playtimes when adults are absent, often include dimensions of silence. An example of this is that silence can be used to exclude someone from a society or group by withholding information and giving disparaging glances (Alerby, 2012b).

These dimensions of silence show the extent of its power and that it can be unpleasant and sometimes even brutal. Arendt (1958) stated that it is the silence of good people that is dangerous, not the evil nature of evil people. Arendt’s line of reasoning – and the view that silence can cause danger, fear or anxiety – is highly relevant, and is something to be aware of in different educational settings, especially connected to issues of bullying. According to Gunnarsdottir et al (2015) the victims, the bullied persons, can become silent because they do not dare to speak about their everyday life to the adult world, for example their parents.

As mentioned above, silence can be used to withhold information and exclude a person from a group. Another aspect of silence can occur when people remain silent even though they have observed and are aware of a bullying situation among students in the playground but, for some reason, choose not to act. This is devastating to both the bullied person and the bully himself/herself, and as Arendt (1958) describes, not reacting and not making one’s voice heard is one of the dangers of good people’s silence. If such silence prevails and people do not act there is, according to Arendt, a risk of evil becoming normalised and conventional. This leads to a further risk, of people not reflecting and deliberating on the situation and what is actually happening. If bullying situations are not recognised and identified, but instead met by silence they can carry on undisturbed, which in turn might lead to acceptance. To borrow Arendt’s words: “bullying risks becoming a banality” (Alerby, 2012b: 71).

Additionally, many students in today’s society and schools have such inner noise and restlessness that even if the silence is present, they can’t hear it. For some, creating inner stillness and silence in a loud and noisy place is not a problem. They can turn off the cacophony of noise more easily than others, for example in school playgrounds that are often quite noisy during the breaks, when the students use them for recreation and different games and activities.

However, high noise levels were not the case in the Peace Area, exemplified in this paper. The students who spent time there were not allowed to be loud and unruly. Instead they were asked to undertake quiet activities in the site, such as reading, working on assignments, talking quietly to friends and sitting with their own thoughts and musings. The characteristic feature of this place was its stillness and peacefulness, its silence, and the students appreciated and valued the place just because of that. A student explained the importance of the site in the following way:

It’s very quiet and it’s a place where we can do quiet stuff … or you can go there and breathe … […]. When you are tired, you can go there and be for yourself. It’s nice and quiet and you can talk to friends and watch the birds and watch nature. And no one makes any noise here. […]. It’s good, I like it. I like it because we can just sit there and talk and dream and so on.

Life in school has a significant impact on the student’s lives, not just in the present but in the future too. A student at this particular school made the point that the silent place, the Peace Area, will be responsible for making many memories: “This place [the Peace Area] is important to me because it is where I have spent time over seven years. I’ve got lots of memories from my time spent under the wattle tree”. Thus, how they experience and remember their life in school becomes of great importance and encompasses many different dimensions; educational, educative, social, to name just a few. But what is interesting about the student quotes from the primary school discussed in this paper is that the students so clearly expressed their appreciation of having a place of silence and stillness, a place in which to find calmness and peacefulness.

The complexity of silent and silenced students

School is a place where a lot of different people of different ages – students, teachers and other staff – come together in different types of activities. These activities can be educational in character, but can also be other types of social and educative activities. Life in school could, thus, be likened to a life that Arendt (1958) calls Vita Activa. This kind of life is, according to Arendt, an active life and she states that elements of action, production and work are embraced in this life, elements that in turn are central features in the life of school. Students, as well as teachers, are acting, producing and working while at school. However, human life also consists of other elements, as we sometimes need a contrast to the active life, in the form of time and space for contemplation and consideration in a peaceful and quiet place. Arendt (1958) terms this as Vita Contemplativa, a contemplative life, consisting of elements such as reflection, volition and discernment.

In the student quotes exemplified in this paper, the students clearly expressed the value of having the opportunity to retreat to a quiet place during their time in school: a place where they could be more or less silent. Merleau-Ponty (1996) claims that to be silent is something more and something different than not speaking or making one’s voice heard. To be regarded as silent, he claims, the silent person must have the ability, or freedom, to actually speak, to raise his or her voice and express something verbally, but choose for some reason not to do that. Given this, a student can, according to Merleau-Ponty’s reasoning, only be regarded as silent if the student in question chooses to be silent, even if he or she has something to verbally express.

In the playground during breaks, most of the students are talking, playing, running, jumping, shouting, fighting and laughing, they are far from silent (Villanen & Alerby, 2013). In fact, it is often quite noisy in school playgrounds. However, some students might be perceived by others, or by themselves, as silent (Alerby & Westman, 2013). Maybe these students continue to be silent even though they have opinions to share in relation to a discussion and maybe they don’t answer their classmates’ or teachers’ questions. To be able to contribute to and be an active part of a conversation, silent spaces are needed. A person talking has to pause speaking to invite the other person into the conversation: to create silent spaces between the words. Without silent spaces between the words, regardless of whether the words are spoken or written, communication would hardly work (Alerby, 2012a). Maybe the silent students are not given these silent spaces required for voicing their thoughts and opinions. It may also be that these students do not take the opportunity to fill the silent space with their own words, even if offered it.

In line with the reasoning of Merleau-Ponty (1996) should a person be regarded as silent only if the person in question has something to say, but does not voice it. Given this, if students are to be regarded as silent, they should at the same time have something to verbally express. Perhaps, many of the silent students have answers to their classmates’ or their teachers’ questions, and thoughts and opinions related to the discussion. However, for one reason or another they choose to not verbally express these, and in that way, remain silent.

A student might not only be silenced by oppression and fear, as stated in the section above, but also because no one will listen. To really listen to another person, it is essential that attention and awareness are directed towards that person. That in turn is a matter of giving the other person time and space to speak: time and space where silence can prevail. A person can receive silence from somebody, but the same person can also give away silence to another person. To be able to listen to another person one must at the same time be silent oneself, and when the conversation then flows on, it is about reciprocity regarding silence versus speech. In conversation with others sufficient time for silence must be allowed in order to let the other person enter the conversation (Alerby, 2012b). The significance of listening and its relation to silence is also stressed by Schultz (2010: 1), who puts it as follows: “Understanding the role of silence for the individual and the class as a whole is a complex process that may require new ways of conceptualising listening”.

It seems therefore, that it is by the teacher taking a step back and permitting silent spaces that opportunities can be given for the students to express themselves and, in that way, grow. If the teacher discerningly allows silence, he/she will at the same time facilitate those students who are not so verbal. In this sense, it is important to be aware that a person, for example a student, who is verbally silent is not automatically silent in thought or mind. To promote learning, it is an advantage if teachers in different educational settings attempt to elicit the tacit knowledge and tacit language which, according to Polanyi (1969) and Merleau-Ponty (1996), exists in every person.

Implications for school practice and educational policy

It is likely, most people need from time-to-time to withdraw to a place of silence and stillness. The students in the Peace Area clearly expressed this need, the importance of having a quiet place to retreat to while at school: a place to go to “[w]hen you are tired, you can go there and be for yourself ”. By reconsidering the school and its playground as a place for both Vita Activa and Vita Contemplativa, to use Arendt’s (1958) terminology, the human need for stillness and silence may be valued and appreciated as an essential dimension of life in school. Alerby and Elídottír (2003: 42) express the value of withdrawing to a silent and peaceful place in the following words: “Silence at a quiet place can then be used to ‘make sense’ of thoughts, emotions, actions and the context in which these are embedded”.

As mentioned earlier, it is quite unusual for a school playground to include silent places. One striking and obvious outcome of the students’ quotes highlighted in this paper was that the students clearly expressed both their wish and their need to withdraw to a quiet place while at school. The students at this particular playground appreciated and valued having a place in school where they could relax together with friends, and they also valued sitting on their own in a peaceful place of silence and stillness. But, how many places of silence and stillness are there in the schools of today? As places, schools are, as already noted, usually full of sounds and noise, sometimes even too noisy, especially the playgrounds at playtime when a majority of the students are there and use them for numerous activities.

However, as regards the silence that exists in schools and their playgrounds, it is worth observing how the silence is experienced; pleasant and something to long for or unpleasant and something unwelcome. Silence is in certain situations a prerequisite for reflection and learning to take place, while in certain other situations it can be totally devastating. A student can be silent or silenced for a number of different reasons; for example due to shyness, fear, contemplativeness, a demonstration, caution or a wish to find stillness. From time-to-time one person can experience a situation of silence in a totally different way compared to another person, even though both of them are in the same situation. Aspects of power and marginalisation in relation to silence are therefore important to recognise in education.

As “policy in and of education really does matter”, according to Tesar and Arndt (2017: 665), the complexity of silence is something school leaders, heads, politicians, teachers and those who have the opportunity to form future education, should be aware of and take into consideration when forming educational policy. To connect the argument in this paper to educational practices as well as educational policy, silence and stillness must be seen as essential parts of life in school. Silence can, among other things, offer opportunities for students (and teachers) to contemplate and reflect on issues that are important for them as illustrated by the student in the opening quote: “I find peace and quiet and I rest here or I finish my work”. Therefore, for those engaged in education at various different levels, it is crucial to discuss just how places and spaces in schools are formed, created and used, in order to identify viable or non-viable sites for silence and stillness.

Some concluding remarks

To conclude, I would encourage those people who create future educational policy, together with educational practitioners, to discuss and reconsider the value of places of silence and stillness in different educational settings. Especially as the world as it now is engulfed, not just by the “cacophony of urban life” as Mendes-Flohr (2012: 12) puts it, but also by a cacophony of social media, to paraphrase Mendes-Flohr. It is (almost) never quiet in today’s society, or in today’s school. Thus, it is essential to not just raise the issue of to what extent students can “get away from the rush of people” and be in a place where they can “breathe” during the school day, but also the issue of whether places of silence and stillness are appreciated in today’s schools. If future educational policy makes provision for quiet places and spaces in schools then both students and teachers will gain, not just in relation to their teaching and learning but also to their wellbeing. Perhaps it is, above all, a question of daring to listen to and appreciate silence and stillness in school practice and policy?