Empowering students: Pedagogy that benefits educators and learners

Abstract

This article argues that one of the main goals of social or civic studies is to empower students. However, traditional teaching practices often have the opposite effect of disempowering students. Traditional teaching practices are understood to emerge from the history and context of public schooling, from early practices, which have been reified. After describing this context, the article reviews the meaning of and literature around empowerment, which relate to the democratic purpose of schooling. The conception of empowerment that is presented is developed from Foucault’s work on power and knowledge. After this discussion, the article provides recommendations that aim to improve teaching practice in this area. These recommendations emerged from the teaching of an integrated teacher education course and include strategies such as inquiry, relationship - and community-building, problem or issue scenarios, and discussions. Comments from the student teachers who took the education course are included. The article demonstrates how empowering students does not disempower teachers, as teachers may fear.

Introduction

Schools are institutions embedded in their sociocultural environments. They develop in particular conditions and as a consequence of people’s actions, such as the establishment of policies and procedures. Over time, many of these become so well accepted that they become norms. Many actions and procedures become ‘hidden’ in the sense that they are taken for granted and understood to be the ‘right way’ to do things (Bourdieu, 1990; Foucault, 1980a). Most people in Western nations will have similar conceptions of what schools are, what distinguishes them from other institutions. Despite broad ideological differences and heated discussions over the features of these components, most people will agree that schools are institutions where children learn knowledge and skills from trained individuals. They will agree that students should be grouped together using criteria such as age, and that they will progress through various ability levels. Many will also agree on some other broad processes. For example, they will consider learning to encompass the acquisition of knowledge and skills through various subject areas. Student progress, many will agree, should be evaluated regularly using a variety of possible means. These features of schools became reified when public schools were established in the 19th century, and they drew from business practices (Broom, 2011; Callahan, 1964; Foucault, 1980a). They are socially constructed and are, thus, contestable. They were implemented at a time when ‘modern’ societies also became bureaucratized (Weber, 1978).

As public schools were established, a hierarchy of authority was established, with final authority vested in the state. We see the increased rationalization of procedures, the development of written policy books, the training of a specialized teaching force, the movement of students through the grades by achievement, and a focus on efficiency (Callahan, 1964; Weber, 1978). Students came to be seen as objects to fill with knowledge and to compare to others and to benchmarks in order to rank and classify them (Foucault, 1980b).

Teachers, as key individuals within these constructs, often ‘buy into’ these conceptions. As a result, they can end up teaching using traditional methods that developed during the time when public schooling was established. These more traditional teaching strategies can include teaching within discipline boundaries, seeing knowledge as a good that is consumed by students, and viewing students as ‘empty vessels’ to be filled with knowledge. This conception can lead to a form of teaching in which students are treated as impersonal ‘objects.’ Students are dehumanized as they become objects to whom things are done (they are researched, written about, compared, ranked, labeled, and to be filled with learning).

Freire (2000) has described this conception of teaching as the “banking” model of education. This traditional form of teaching has many drawbacks. One of the major ones is that it can destroy students’ enthusiasm and love of learning. By applying Ford’s factory model to schools and seeing students as objects to whom techniques are applied, students can be disconnected from their learning. This approach can end up disempowering, rather than empowering, students, particularly as the behavior that is usually rewarded by teachers is passive, such as following of the teachers’ instructions, doing homework, learning class content, and completing work on time. This focus on compliance, with the aim of making classrooms “manageable,” can squash the development of students’ sense of empowerment. This article will argue that one of the main goals of teaching, particularly for social and civic studies teachers, should be to empower, rather than disempower, students. After discussing how empowerment is understood, the article will provide recommendations for social and civic studies teachers to try in their classrooms. These methods aim to empower students and address traditional, modernist teaching practices.

What is empowerment?

One of the main goals of social and civic studies under the progressivist conception (Broom, 2012; Evans, 2004) has been, and continues to be, the development of good citizens (Arthur and Davies, 2008; Banks, 2007; Callan, 1997; Campbell-Patton and Quinn Patton, 2010; Crick, 2000; Dewey, 1938; Gidengil et al., 2004; Levine, 2007). In curriculum documents, good citizens are primarily understood to be individuals who actively participate in their nation’s civic affairs, whether by engaging in more traditional practices such as voting or more activist means such as boycotting or protesting (Ross, 2012). These processes require individuals to be active. Significantly, active behavior comes from individuals who are empowered, that is, individuals who feel they have the ability to enact social, political, economic, or other change; to manage or to influence others; and/or to engage in actions that influence others.

Empowerment is closely related to self-efficacy, among other factors. Self-efficacy, similarly to the concept of agency, is the belief that one controls one’s life and that one can make positive changes in one’s surrounding environment, including in politics (Bandura, 1997; Beaumont, 2010; Fox et al., 2010). A number of factors can influence self-efficacy, including feeling a sense of community mindedness or having a sense of civic duty (Levinson, 2010). Self-efficacy is linked to one’s identity (Breakwell, 2001), to how individuals understand or label themselves. Agency and motivation are not sufficient, though. Awareness is also necessary for active civic behavior (Russell et al., 2010).

Empowered individuals can consider varied perspectives, negotiate with others, amend policies as needed as they can think independently, make their own decisions thoughtfully and with reference to relevant information, and act on that knowledge. These behaviors make our democracy richer, deeper, messier, and more complex. The ability of individuals to actively engage with their worlds, to be empowered, is a civic right and a responsibility. It is the very essence of democracy. When carried out thoughtfully, it has a number of benefits for both individuals and their surrounding social environments.

Educators should be cautious of conflating good behavior with good civic behavior. Individuals who are good rule followers don’t necessarily make for active citizens. Varied opinions, vibrant discussions, contestation, and negotiation are valuable as they push individuals to justify their thoughts and actions (Dewey, [1916] 2008, 1938). They are the fitting processes for inclusive and pluralistic democracies.

Due to its importance and value to both individuals and society, empowerment has become increasingly popular in a number of subject areas, such as in Business. Business studies have found that empowering workers benefits companies, for example, as empowered individuals are able to work independently to achieve the company’s goals. A burgeoning literature investigates how managers can empower their employees (Bowen and Lawler, 1995).

Teachers will no doubt agree that empowering their students is a worthy goal, but they may be caught up in traditional processes that are viewed as norms, which may affect their ability to teach effectively in this area. Alternatively, they may incorrectly feel that empowering their students disempowers them. Next, this article provides some recommendations for what teachers can do and explains why power is not a zero sum game.

Empowering students

Sharing power does not mean a person has less. Instead, teachers maintain and gain power by sharing power, for power is more than a top–down form of control (Foucault, 1980b), as it is conceived to be in bureaucratized societies (Weber, 1978). Power is the ability to influence one’s environment, but it is complex, multifaceted:

By power, I do not understand a general system of domination exercised by one element or group over another … what needs to be understood is the multiplicity of relations of force that are immanent to the domain wherein they are exercised, and that are constitutive of its organization; the game that through incessant struggle and confrontation transforms them, reinforces them, invents them; the supports these relations of force find in each other. So as to form a chain or system, or, on the other hand the gaps, the contradictions that isolate them from each other; in the end, the strategies in which they take effect. (Foucault, 1980b: 121)

Power, in other words, is like a spider web and it involves a number of variables working through and within varied contexts. These variables influence each other and, in turn, are influenced by this context and by forms of knowledge or discourses. These variables can create systems, but these systems are always incomplete in the sense that they have gaps, and these gaps open spaces for resistance, of many forms.

Significantly for teachers, where there is power, there are pockets and spaces of resistance, and the more oppressive the power, the more sly the resistance can be. As many teachers know, the more one tries to control or micromanage students, the more students tend to resist that control, the more they can appear to conform only to completely fall apart when away from the watchful eyes of the teacher, or the more disempowered and apathetic they can become. By micromanaging their students, often due to their fear of losing classroom control, teachers can burn themselves out due to the effort they have to extend in preparing detailed lessons, and the stress they put on themselves to always watch their students. Furthermore, students’ long-term engagement with learning can be negatively affected and students can take power by resisting the teacher. The more teachers try to control students, the more students can resist, but in ways that are harmful to them, for they can come lose their self-motivation or their love of learning. If instead of micromanaging their students, teachers can learn how to empower them, teachers will make their own lives easier, avoid burnout, and help students take responsibility for guiding their own learning. They will thus benefit their students, themselves, and our society overall. It seems counter-intuitive, but by giving students power, teachers gain power and better classroom control.

Teachers can avoid micromanaging their students by gradually building students’ capabilities and giving them greater control and choice over their own learning. They can build students’ confidence by encouraging them during the process. Building confidence develops optimism, which links to action (Banack et al., 2007). Early in the year, teachers can guide students through learning processes such as inquiry projects. As the year proceeds, teachers can begin to provide less detailed criteria and more choices to students. They can provide students with general directions and goals and allow the students to direct their own learning. Furthermore, students can direct their learning in varied ways (rather than following the teachers’ set conception of how the work should be done). Teachers could also allow students to display their learning in varied ways. By allowing variety, teachers can foster students’ abilities to think outside the box and demonstrate their valuation of varied abilities, or multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1985).

Trusting their students is important. Teachers can believe in the ability of students to guide their own learning and their ability to do the work that has to be done. By trusting their students, teachers create trusting environments, build capabilities, and empower students to manage themselves. For those students who are not motivated or have poor attitudes, teachers can consider that these students have probably been forced to conform to industrial, educational processes that are not in their style, and they have become apathetic or they have lost their confidence or interest in learning. Often, bright kids sit at the back and are off task and bored. Teachers can reach these students by recognizing what factors are affecting varied students. For those who are bored, teachers can provide extension or challenge activities that link into the students’ interests. For those who are apathetic, teachers can work to design activities that tie into and then build from their interests. For those who have lost motivation, teachers can provide positive feedback and care. For all students, teachers should work to build relationships with them in a classroom that is a community based on care and respect of individuality (Kalbach and Forester, 2006). Indeed, relationships are at the heart of teaching, not content knowledge, although that is also necessary. By providing an environment in which students are cared just for being who they are, and by knowing their students and appreciating their strengths and abilities, teachers can create positive and empowering learning spaces. They can build their students’ self-esteem and help to reframe positive self-identities that help students feel they can influence their environments positively. As identities are composed of layers of labels acquired through experience, they can be changed. These factors relate closely to empowerment. Indeed, Boston University’s “Making Decisions” Empowerment Scale includes self-esteem, optimism, self-control, community participation, power, and emotional engagement.

Teachers can also change how their students think about failures. They can introduce their students to the work of inventors, such as Edison, who understood failure to be a natural and healthy part of learning. Teachers can help their students see that failures don’t end learning; rather, they provide feedback for students to learn from and continue their growth. Regular and positive formative feedback is invaluable to students.

Instead of teaching knowledge as something “finished,” teachers can help their students see how knowledge itself is changing quickly and continuously based on new additions. A biology textbook, for example, already contains out-of-date information by the time it reaches high-school classrooms. Teachers can involve students in interesting projects looking at how our knowledge of various subject areas has grown over time, based on the work of scholars in that field. As Einstein said, “I stand on the shoulders of giants.”

Teachers can also role model their own processes, how teachers develop their teaching from their own practices, based on reflection on these. Teachers can remain “living” learners by seeing how their own disciplines are evolving over time (Palmer, 2010). They can share this learning with their students. Math, for example, has not always been what most textbooks today teach. Teachers of social and civic studies can engage their students in projects where they study the biographies of individuals who have added to our knowledge of math, little by little.

Furthermore, and significantly, teachers can see knowledge as living and something acquired by students as they actively engage with their experiences (Dewey, [1916] 2008). That is, teachers don’t “give” their students knowledge, students “acquire” knowledge through their interactions with others in what Dewey called “experiences.” Teachers can help students make sense of their experiences through reflection, or discussion. In short, teachers can empower their students through student-focused lessons that engage them in inquiry and reflection and that are nurtured in and through relationships. Next, the article presents an example of how teachers can integrate these elements into their practices.

Teaching for empowerment: An example

Aiming to empower their student teachers, four education professors combined their courses to create an inquiry, student-directed, cross-disciplinary, problem-based course for Bachelors of Education students at a large university in 2011 and 2012. They grounded their work in relationships, which aimed to build community and nurture students’ beliefs in themselves and their self-confidence, and in which diverse ways of thinking were valued and validated. The methods the professors used are discussed next, with the comments of students, who participated in the program, woven throughout the discussion. These comments were collected after students had completed their program and with ethics approval. Students were invited to participate in interviews and their answers were anonymized. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded using deductive coding and a grounded theory approach (Glaser, 1992), and then analyzed. The four professors worked together to code the data. They conducted the analysis at various levels from codes to themes, and they moved between the data, codes, and themes several times. They consistently discussed the data, codes, and themes to ensure they all agreed with each others’ analyses.

As mentioned earlier, teachers can empower their students by making them feel valued for being themselves. The instructors worked hard from the start of the course to build communities of practice in which all students were valued. The students appreciated this:

Yeah it was just kind of helping me to feel confident in that being myself was okay, and as long as I had the best intentions and I was working with what I had to work with. Like, we had all the different areas to grasp and work with, that that was okay. (Student Interview LR 1, 2011)

Because it made me confident that … I can be quiet me, and I can be confident in being quiet me. I don’t have to be this loud, funny person at the front of the classroom. Then, just create an environment where it’s okay to just be who you are, and it worked really well for me. (Student Interview PS 1, 2011)

Students need to feel safe and wanted, that the environment is theirs. (Student Interview CB 2, 2011)

Given space to be oneself. (Student Interview CB 2, 2011)

Was a positive experience with instructors. Never felt uncomfortable. And felt respected. (Student Interview TB 7, 2011)

Drawing from foundational educational disciplines, the instructors planned the course together. They had students work together in small and large groups as well as individually to explore practical, real-life issues. The issues involved the students in inquiry projects that emerged from problem scenarios that captured students’ interest. Students were challenged by and enjoyed the life-like explorations:

Approach, although intense, really forces you to investigate different issues and perspectives, shows complexity of life in general, there isn’t one right answer … Liked the open-endedness, could take it in the direction that suited you but then hear other views so you think about it differently. (Student Interview CM 3, 2011)

Students conducted research on the topic to understand it better and then developed their approaches for how best to address the issue through critical and collaborative engagement with their peers:

… Really sharing with your colleagues so that we can all grow. I like to share, but for me, I usually think, ‘Oh what do I have to offer that they don’t already know?’ But, it’s nice to just have that dialogue, because I grow a lot from that dialogue. (Student Interview LT 1, 2011)

The educators used dialogue, open questioning, and dialectical reflection to stimulate student interest and learning. They were “guides on the side” not “sages on the stage”:

I felt very safe to explore who I was, felt very supportive, and the community that the staff exemplified, I internalized it and came to really think about myself. (Student interview CA 1, 2011)

As the students familiarized themselves with the framework, they were given increasing freedom to direct their learning. Students came together with their peers to share, explore, discuss, and debate what they have uncovered. These class activities were planned and led by groups of students. Students took part in developing and running the last issue:

I wasn’t having to learn for someone else’s agenda, I was learning for myself, and to be able to be the best teacher I could be. And learning to work with other people and share my ideas with other people, rather than learning to get the highest grade in the course, and get the scholarship, and get the job. It’s just being with other people, and working with other people. (Student Interview PS 1, 2011)

A sample inquiry project began with a story that set out a scenario with an issue or problem, in order to engage students and open multiple possible inquiry questions. Teachers of social and civic studies could choose local issues in the community or global issues, such as child poverty. They could have students read a story of one child in their community living in poverty. Students could then meet in groups to explore their initial responses, their thoughts, on the scenario they had read. They could then work in groups to research the topic more deeply and develop class activities to explore the issue further with their classmates:

Working in groups strengthens who you are, for sure, because you’re going to intermingle with people that you maybe don’t work so well with. (Student Interview S1, 2011)

For example, students could explore the extent of child poverty in their community. They could visit centers that aim to help youth in poverty. They could investigate the multiple discourses about the causes of, and possible solutions to, poverty. They could meet with and interview children or mothers living in poverty. They could explore statistics that look at the rates of poverty according to factors such as race, education, and family makeup (single parent or not) through class activities and discussions. After delving deeply and widely into the topic, students could create their individual responses to the problem explored. These could be handed in to the teacher in multiple mediums, depending on the interests and skills of the students. For example, they could write reflective essays or create videos or paintings with explanatory paragraphs. As the students became more comfortable with the process of carrying out investigative projects, the teachers could give them increasing freedom to explore issues or problems that are of personal relevance to the students.

Using inquiry, problem-based methods in classrooms that are respectful of students’ varied abilities and interests, rather than focusing instruction on cramming knowledge into students’ heads or using traditional teaching strategies, can empower students. Students come to build their self-confidence, sense of self-efficacy, ability to solve problems, research information, and communicate that information and their interest in and ability to engage with issues occurring around them. By empowering their students, teachers benefit their students and society in general. Teachers should not be afraid of empowering their students. Quite the opposite, for as the famous old quote states, teachers know they have succeeded in their practice when their students out-perform them.