STUDENTS' EXPERIENCES IN A SELF-DIRECTED SETTING: DIALOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS Trevor Sem Connor B.A.Sc., University of British Columbia. 1987 B.Ed.. University of British Columbia, 1988 THESIS SUBMIïTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Faculty of Education O Trevor Connor 1999 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSrrY April 1999 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author.
Transcript
STUDENTS' EXPERIENCES IN A SELF-DIRECTED SETTING:
DIALOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS
Trevor S e m Connor
B.A.Sc., University of British Columbia. 1987
B.Ed.. University of British Columbia, 1988
THESIS SUBMIïTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS
in the Faculty
of
Education
O Trevor Connor 1999
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSrrY
April 1999
All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy
or other means, without permission of the author.
National Library 1*1 of Canada Bibliothèque nationale du Canada
Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliogaphic Services services bibliographiques
395 Wellington Street 395. nie Wellington Ottawa ON K1 A ON4 Ottawa ON KI A ON4 Canada Canada
Your fi& Votre referenca
Our nk, Norre relerencrr
The author has granted a non- exclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or sel1 copies of this thesis in microform, paper or electronic formats.
The author retains ownership of the copy~@~t in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts ffom it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.
L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la forme de microfiche/tilm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur fomat électronique.
L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.
Abstract
The purpose of this nsearch snidy was to document and analyse the nature of
snideats'rxperiences in an echxcaîional inaovatïon at "New Educanon Secondary School"
(NESS)-a xcoadary school in a mid-skd town of British Columbia rhat was founded on
notions of xlf-paceb s e i f d k x t d educatioa khough a moderate amour of r e s e ~ c h had
k e n underraken ac this school at thc ~ i t of thrs snidy. none of the sniciies haci focused
exclusively on the students' experiences at the rhool. It was also found in the resevch
litenturc on educauonal change mû reform efforts chat tbut is a notcd lack of m a c h into the
nature of snidents' experiences in the thnies of schwl nform.
This snidy drew on qualirative case smdy methods, including snident interviews and
anecdotal observaions of sa>dcatr' interactions at thc rhool. In~mew rcsponses. togedier
with the researcher's understanding of the sating, provideci the foundation for the analysis.
- Much of what the saidcars qmcd amund thc ~lationships they dtveloped ar
die rhod-dationships with rtackrs, pcers. the cuniculum and themselves! The mdysis
focuses on the reflexive nanire of the nlatiomhips snidcnts experienccd with Pen and
teachers. AIso examinai arc the snicknts' interactions wirh tûe cunicuium materiais which
were developed specifically for the self-paçeb self-regulaied p r o p m at .XESS. This f o m of
curriculum is a necessary pomt of enay rhat tc;ichen q u i r e in orâer CO gain access to che
school M e of the students. The fuial type of relationship explond in the snidy is one chat
smdents YDculated having with themselves. spe=ificdy in t e m of a e m m e r in whch the?
saw chernives developing in the self-nplated environment of ihe s c b i .
The diaiogical nanuc of these four kinds of relatioaships aniculated by the students
participaring this study is ex3mined in t e m of xlezted literanirr on the "diidogicd self."
namely writings of Martin Buber. David Hawkins and Charles Taylor. A model is proposed
of the 'devefoping self of snidcnts at NESS in rcsponse to their nlationships with Fers.
t e x hers, cumculum and themselves- -
.** u
Dedication
To the three who remind me daily of what tnily matters;
Cowtney, Sydney and Matthew.
To the two whom 1 love more that they will ever know;
Denis and Deila Connor
To the one who is my life;
Maria
Acknowledgments
This was a journey of patience and perseverance. Thank you Allm and Phi1 for
showing me what it means to practice "inclusion". This thesis would not exist without the
conversation that informed our dialogical relationships. Thank you to dl Our friends who have
not abandoned us and have continued to ask "How is it going?'without laughing too hard.
Thank you to the Connon, Mattices, and Wilsons for your support and astounding faith.
Thank you Matt, Syd and Court for letting me do my "Master's" again and again and again.
Most of ail, thank you Marla for never giving up. This was worth it babe. Now I'rn back.
Table of Contents
.. Approvd ...................................................................................................... u
... Abtrac t ....................................................................................................... IU
.................................................................................................... Dedication iv
........................................................................................... Acknowledgments v
3 ...................................................................... Students and School Reform - ............................................................................ Self-Directed Education 3
.................................................................................................. Appendix A S l
.................................................................................................. Appendix B S2
Chapter 1
Introduction
The purpose of this thesis is to put fonvard an account of the experiences of students
who were involved in an educational innovation-a secondary school developed around idelis
of self-direction, self-pacing and continuous progress. New Education Secondary School
(NESS)' opened in 1992 and has been the focus of severai research projects undenken by
staff rnembers enrolled in graduate programs at Simon Fraser University and San Diego Stritr
University. This research has documented and analysed various aspects of the prognm.
Baicaen (1993) studied the development of the program and the structure of the decision
making processes during the planning of the school. French ( 1993) described the school's
Specid Needs program, specifically in terms of the integntion of mentally and physically
challenged students. Mehrassa (1995) examined the mathematics program from both the
students' and teachers' perspec tives. Ellis ( 1997) studied educational re fom and the wny
change was mediated in the school. Sivia (1998) examined the "Ieming conversations" that
occurred between teachers and students. None of these theses, however, considered the
prograrn specifically from the perspective of students in an effort to make sense of their
experiences in this reform effort.
The lack of attention to students' perspectives of educational reform is not an
uncornmon phenornenon. As Enckson and Schultz (1992) sate,
Neither in conceptual work, nor in empincal research, nor in conventional wisdom and discourse of pnctice does the subjective experience of students as they are engaged in leaming figure in any central way. . . . In sum, virtually no research has k e n done that places student experience ai the center of attention. (pp. 466467)
l ~ e w Education Secondary School is a pseudonym. The school is located in a mid-sized town in British Columbia.
This thesis focuses on the nature of six students' expenences at NESS. What are the
key elements that shape their experiences? What can we leam from these students about
educating youth today? This introductory chapter sets the stage for the thesis by demonstrating
the paucity of research of this nature in the reform literature, which serves as a basis for the
justification of the study. Ln order to introduce specific aspects of the innovation at NESS. the
history of self-directed education is briefly examined and an overview of the program is
described.
Students and School Reform
Michael Fullan (199 1) takes an extensive look at educational reform through the cyes
of its stakeholders: teachers, students, school and district administrators, consultants. parents
and the community. He notes that during the 1980's there was an increased awareness of the
need to involve students as "active participants" in their own education although little chanse
has taken place as a result. He says:
Unless they have some meaningful (to hem) role in the enterprise. most educational change, indeed most education, will fail. 1 ask the reader not to think of students as mnning the school. but to entertain the following question: What would happen if we treated the student as someone whose opinion mattered in the introduction and implemeniation of reform in schools'? (Fullan. 1991, p. 170)
Nicholls (1995) echoes Fulh ' s remarks and rnakes the argument that not to seek the
opinions' of students contradicts their constitutional freedom:
Students should be included in these negotiations or quarrels, which are about what a good school is as rnuch as about how to get one. They should be included not rnerely because this will increase their motivation or l e m more effectively the lessons others have assigned hem. They should be included because the intelligent, collaborative formation of the purposes that govern action is the essence of freedom and of democratic social life. (Nicholls, 1995, p. 162)
Fullan presents data collected in the 1970's fkorn a large-scale and srnaller-scale project
on the role of students in Ontario schools. The findings show that a majority of snidents were
generally dissatisfied with the school system, indicative of what was labeled "the dienation
theme." Students across al1 sectors felt disconnected and this trend did not change in the
L980's. More recent research refers to a theme of student engagement (or disengagement).
Somewhere, 1 suspect, down in the elementary school. probably in the fifth and sixth grades. a subtle shift occurs. The cumculum-subjects, topics, textbooks, workbooks, and the rest-comes in between the teacher and student. Young humans corne to be viewed only as students, valued primarily for theù academic aptitude and industry nther than as individual persons preoccupied with the physical, social, and personal needs unique to their circumstances and stage in life. (Goodlad, 1984. p. 80)
Secondary schools are still entrapped by a multitude of competing and sometimes
conflicting agendas for what ought to take place in classrooms. The above research indicrites
that the student seerns to be lost in the resulting dissonance.
Fuilan (199 1) identifies the lack of research of students' points of view in reform
efforts as k i n g problematic and he even undertakes a number of studies to examine students'
ideas. However. the resulting data and analyses of his research into students' perspectives of
reform seem perfunctory and superficial. While Fullan ( 199 I ) reports that students often feei
alienated in reform efforts. his explmations and recommendations are frequtntly lirnitrd ro pat
and simple answers in the form of recomrnended teaching strategies. such as cooperrttive
This thesis attempts to move beyond a superficial examination of students' opinions
and aims to develop a way of undestanding the key elements of their experiences at NESS. It
is useful to begin by discussing the specific features of the school's educational program.
pnmarily the notion of sel f-direc ted education.
Self-Directed Education
The notion of self-directed leaming is not new. Dewey (19 16) established the
underlying assumptions related to education that focuses on the individual learner. The
"progressive" aspects of Democracy and Education center on the belief that schools must be
concemed with irnproving the democratic quality of living in today's society and faith that
students are capable of l e m h g to create these new and improved ways of democratic living
(Dewey, 19 16). Della-Dora and Blanchard ( 1979) state that in a self-directed educationai
program, students have opportunities to choose what is to be leamed, how it is to be leamed.
when it is to be leamed, and how to evaluate their own progress. This needs to take place in a
setûng which provides students with the active assistance and coopention of teachers. other
adults, and peers. As Della-Dora and Blanchard ( 1979) state.
Learning about the self is an essential part of education: it is learning to grow in the fullest sense. The development of self-directed learners must then include development of a positive view of self as an agent for self-actualization and self-direction. . . . Learning is a personal matter. . . . The personal meaning that a self-directed learner discovers in the process of learning . . . becomes that individual's means for achieving hisher chosen ends. Self- directed learners have discovered deep persona1 meaning in the process of leaming. When an individual's perceptual field includes a view of self in the process of learning, and that view has meaning, the learner recognizes why (s)he is . . . and what s(he) is capable of becoming. (p. 8)
The progressive education movement. which reached its crest in the 1930's and rxly
1940's. saw the most active implementation of self-directed learning activities. The core
curriculum movement and the use of teacher-pupil planning was one example of studrnt-
centered initiatives (Della-Dora & Blanchard, 1979). The "Eight Year Study" compared
progress of students in some of these experimental programs with those in conventional
schools (Aikin, 1942). The experimental programs developed alternative ways of preparing
students for coliege. These alternatives vvied widely but included varied cumculum content.
student choice and control over courses ruid student participation in planning. The study found
that students in the experimental schools did as well or better than their counterparts
academicaily and in leadership roles. Aikin (1942) M e r states that students from schools
that had made the greatest changes from the "traditional" high school programs were
significantly more successN in college, judged by most criteria, than students from the
conventional control schools. These conclusions, however, were criticized by many as the
research studies were not as comprehensive or weil defined as they should have been (Della
Dora & Blanchard, 1979; BIoom, 1987).
Another wave of student participation in decision making came during the period of
"unrest" in the late 1960's with a number of schools developing ungraded, individualized,
continuous progress education prograrns (Kapfer & Ovard, 197 1). The following decade
"was undoubtedly the penod of selfdirected learning charactenzed as it was by a plethora of
empincal studies . . . to popularize the concept [of self-directed education]" (Brookfield.
1985. p. 51. It was during the "hey day" of self-directed education in the 1970's that the key
decision makers who developed the "NESS Concept" (Balcaen. 1993) formed their initial
understandings of self-directed education. It would take more than a decade for their ideas to
corne to fruition in the development and opening of NESS.
Next. specific feanires that are unique to NESS' implementation of a self-directrd
program are presented. A fairiy lengthy description of two cntical aspects of this
implementation is warranted: the Teacher Advisor Program, and the unique curriculum
materials that were developed by the staff. This description, together with a brief account of
the physicd environment and generd management of the school. is necessary in order to fully
appreciate the students' accounts of their expenences at NESS.
Setting
I was a teacher at NESS from the tirne it opened in September 1992 until December
1996 when 1 took an administrative position at another school in the district. During 1990-9 1.
1 was part of a large group of teachers who spent a year and a half writing curriculum material
and establishing procedures for the school opening. One of the most important and far
reaching tasks that was undertaken before the opening was the development of the School
Mission Statement and accompanying Student Exit Outcornes (see Appendix A). The ideals
that were identified helped the original staff forge a united vision for the school and are critical
to understanding the staff's initiative. They have continued to form the basis upon which
many decisions are made regarding new strategies of curriculum delivery. The statement of
exit outcornes provides the philosophical structure upon which pedagogical decisions continue
to be made at NESS.
The physicai plan of NESS was designed to facilitate the implementation of the unique
curriculum delivery model. As such, many of the student work areas are larger and more
cenualized than in a conventional secondary school. The building was designed so that its
open areas can be increased in size to allow for expansion of the program.
There are two interdependent components of the students' progrm: the Teücher
Advisor Program and the cumcuIum delivery model. The Teacher Advisor (TA) Program is
critical to students' success as it serves to support them in al1 their endeavors. In this system.
each teacher acts as an advisor for 20+ students from grades eight to twelve. These students
remain with their TA for their whole career at NESS. The role of the TA is to encourage
planning and to guide students in their academic punuits. In addition, the TA serves as the
students' advocate and parental contact. This d o w s students to develop n relationship wirh a
teacherlmentor over a five year penod. In a system that places much of the responsibili ty for
progress on the student. the TA is vital in establishing and implementing accountability in
terms of tracking students' progress.
The tracking of students' progress is vital because of the continuous nature of the
curriculum program. The timetabling has grade 8 students on a conventionai eight-blxk
rotation with approximately 30 students per class. Grades 9 through 12 are on a self-directeci.
continuous progress system in which students design long-range plans with the help of thrir
teacher advisor to rnove through their courses. They move freely about the building dthough
they are encouraged to structure their t h e into two rnoming and one aftemoon work sessions.
These students must set up their own seminan with teachers or arrange to attend some of the
schedded seminars that are offered within various courses. The instructional materials and the
Iearning strategies common to the conventional classroom were reworked to serve students
and teachers in this new system.
Learning guides (LG's) are the key elements to the cumiculum delivery. They are
packages that contain the BC Ministry's Intended Lemïng Outcomes for their respective
courses. The LGTs are intended to help students with each element of the system: self-pacing.
self-direction and continuous progress. First, the LG's must provide for self-paced learning
which means that they should permit students to l e m at their own rate, rather than a mte
imposed by the teacher. as in conventional group instruction.
Second, the LG's are intended to be self-directed in that students cm choose trom
altemate ways of achieving the stated outcornes. Leaming guides include a wide variety of
activities: written work, readings, videos, seminars, and cornputer work, to narne a few.
Many guides provide opportunities for students to "challenge" the material or to devise their
own method of meeting the course objectives. Some guides also include altemate fonns of
assessrnent in order to better meet the needs of the students. Students are encouraged to se&
out different ways of receiving credit for courses through integration of their activities and
using their own areas of interest and motivation. There is a real effort to eliminate the
duplication that so often happens in many school learning activities. For example. if a student
word-processes an assignment for a technology course, this assignment might also be npplied
for credit in a keyboarding course.
Third, LGTs should provide for successful learning expenences at varying degrees of
self-initiative and self-direction. It is hoped that by providing this form of diversity, students
will increasingly value independent study and learning. These guides also assist teachers in
creating interesting and motivating learning environments. Kapfer and Ovard (197 1) state,
In such environments, the teacher's role, nther than king one of presenting information, becomes one of facilitating or managing a total environment for leaming. In his new role, the teacher spends much more time taiking with snidents as individuais and in small groups rather than taking at them in groups of twenty, fifty, or one hundred. (p. iv)
At NESS students are typicdly enroiled in two academic courses and two elective
courses each semester. Students are expected to produce a daily plan which outlines what they
will be working on that day and where they wiil be working. Schedules for teachers are
posted and students are expected to organize their time to coordinate their various seminars
and general work areas. This places the responsibility for planning the day on the shoulders of
the student. Seminars are flexible and offered as often as needed. Most other contact is made
with teachers by seeing them informally in large work sessions.
Students work in srnail groups while teachers circulate in a tutoring role. Often times
students are assisted with the course content by a teacher other than their course marker. Each
tirne a student successfuliy completes a learning guide, course marken contact TA'S through a
mark tracking program and "pink slips" are given to indicate progress. If a student is not
progressing, the TA is made aware of this through the lack of feedback (or negative fetdback)
from the student's course markers, This is where the TA then takes on the role of "motivator."
OresS. "counselor" and "hard-liner" in an effort to deal with the student's lack of pro,
It is in the specific context of NESS' implementation of self-directed schooling,
principally through the TA system and LG's developed for the school. that the students'
experiences cari be located. Not only is there a need for research that documents and iinülysrs
students' perceptions of their experiences as they are in the throes of such educationd
innovation, but there is also a need to use these findings to enrich Our understanding of the
process of education.
Overview of the Thesis
This chapter has outlined the research problem and provided an overview of the
context for the study. The subsequent chapters are structured in a manner that diverges from
the typical presentation of a research thesis. Specifically, the presentation of this thesis follows
the chronology of the research as it emerged. Chapter 2 justifies the "qualitative" nature of the
methods chosen to elicit and analyse the participants' accounts and undestandings of their
experiences at NESS. Chapter 3 presents profdes of the six students who participated in this
study, together with pertinent excerpts fiom their interviews and relevant information
regarding the context in which their statements c m be interpreted. These findings prepare the
way for Chapter 4, which reviews literature pertalliing to the specific themes that emerged
from the data. Normady, literature is reviewed in order to develop a theoretical frmework
used in gathering and analysing data required to address the research problem and questions of
a study. However, the problem for ihis study required reversing this order-that is, first
probing and synthesking the participating students' perceptions of their experiences, and only
then examining literanire that helps to interpet and understand the findings of the study.
Chapter 5 analyses the students' ideas about their experiences ai NESS and Chapter 6 prescrits
the conclusions, Limitations and implications of the study.
Chapter 2
Methodology
Beginnings
It is often thought that research is a process of "revealing" what is in the ~vorki.
waiting to be discovered. through a sequential and rigorous procedure that ensures
observations and interpretations are as neutral, objective and "true" as possible. Cenainly. this
is the case for some foms of research. In this study of students' perceptions of their
experiences in an innovative secondary school, however, it is not the case that the researcher
is a neutral, unbiased observer. This is not to say that the results of the research process are
not valid, reliable or trustworthy, but to acknowledge how 1 am implicated and embedded in
the work.
First. as the researcher in this study, I was also a teacher at NESS and had a history
with each of the participating students. 1 had access to contextual information about their
families and background which inevitably coloured my understanding of them and their
actions. I believe this to be a positive atuibute in this study. and 1 rnake no attempt to develop
a pretense of distanced objectivity. Throughout the thesis, 1 include relevant details regarding
my familiarity with the students in an effort to provide a more "honest" portraya1 of my
observations, interpretations and analyses.
Second, as one of the founding teachers at NESS, 1 was in the throes of change and
innovation myself, smigghg at tirnes with what it meant for me to participate in an
environment designed for students' self-regdation and pacing. Where appropriate, I discuss
my own reflections and accounts of how these innovations unfolded. Although some readers
rnay object to w hat may appear as digression, 1 hope with these "tangents" to p o m y a more
complete account of the students' experiences and the research processes by including
occasionai references to my own develophg understanding of NESS.
T'hird, this thesis represents my own Leaming and culmination of graduate training in
education. The occasion of reflecting on my own leaming and self-regulation has enriched my
understanding of the students' expenences 1 have atternpted to portray in this work. As a
result, there are a few times when 1 have found it productive to speak to my developing
understanding of the research processes 1 undertook and the clarity in my understanding of
"the problem" that only emerged after some time had lapsed in the snidy. For exarnple. 3s
mentioned in Chapter 1, it was only after 1 had some sense of the students' experiences that 1
knew what literature to tum to in order to further understand what I was finding.
This chapter fmt examines the asumptions underlying quantitative and qualitative
research using Roberts' (1982) application of Pepper's (1942) "world hypotheses." I then
outline the research methodology used to examine the students' expenences and discuss my
reasons for adopting a qualitative approach in this study. The role of quditative methods in my
research is then examined. Finally. 1 descnbe my data collection and analysis processes.
The Metaphysical Assumptions of Qualitative Research
This thesis is an attempt to determine the nature of students' educational experience at
NESS. The search for the character of these experiences is not easily counted or measured. As
such. this study required the use of qualitative methods that sought to develop a way of
understanding the essence of the students' expenences. 1 have not determined the single
"tmth" or account that the students collectively expressed but 1 have extracted n tmth that
seems to resonate with both students and teachen at NESS. As Roberts (1982) says,
The generation and development of knowledge is a matter of putting a construction on reality. . . . If a piece of research is a contribution toward putting a selected construction on reality, does it follow that there are legitimate constructions of. . . reality which are qualitative? To corne to grips with that question, we need the assistance of a coherent means for comparing fundamentally different ways people have used to put constructions on reality. (p. 278)
How then do we substantiate the value that a qualitative study c m bring to
understanding an educational setting? We füd the answer in Robert's (1982) explication of
Pepper's (1942) work. In World Hypotheses: A sttidy in evidence, Pepper (1942)
successhilly argued that mankind's interpretations of reality are better undentood within the
context of six rnetaphysical systems, or "world hypotheses." These are not scientific
hypotheses about the world. Instead. they are metaphysical presuppositions that people use to
think about reaiity, establish cnteria for measwing ûuth, and determine what types of evidence
are admissible in particular systems. Pepper labels his six world hypotheses: animism,
mysticism, formism, mechanism. contextualism. and organicism (Pepper. 1942).
Roberts (1982) dispenses with anirnism and mysticism in the context of education
research as neither of these requires the Western understanding of evidence. The four
remaining are referred to as the four "adequate" hypotheses and Roberts clearly groups theni
in pairs: formism and mechanism, contextualism and organicism. The meanings of the four
world hypotheses are extensions of their labels. Formism is concemed with the form of
things, noting measured similarities. or idealized forms. Mechanism is similar to formism in
that it attends to the causes or influences the "mechanics" that bnng about a certain outcorne.
Roberts (1982) notes that "to establish a degree of similarity and strength of a relationship
(elements of formism and mechanism) requires quantitative data" (p. 279).
Unîike formism and mechanism, contextuaiism and organicism rely on information
about the "quality" of events. Contextualism focuses on an event in its context. According to
this view, we have no adequate knowledge, and therefore no real understanding. of a situation
until we comprehend the context in which it takes place. "Establishing linkage is the essence
of contextualism" (Roberts. 1982, p. 279). Organicism. as is suggested by its name, is
concerned with the integnted wholeness of occurrences. Where contextualism warrants the
consideration of alternative interpretations of an event, organicism is dnven by an attempt to
resolve cifiering representations into one cohesive explmation. An organicist treatment of a
study requires that selections and judgments are made (Roberts, 1982).
Quantitative and qualitative research studies serve different and equaiiy valid purposes.
A researcher needs to determine the type of understanding that is being sought by the study.
Both methodologies yield different kinds of constructions to be placed on the reality of
education (Roberts. 1982).
The contexnialist/oqanicist metaphysics associated with qualitative researc h . . . eventuates in a reality constructed in terms of the qualities of. . . education situations and their place in the totaiity of people's lives. stressing warranted conceptual linkages between event and context, context and totaiity. (pp. 288-289)
It was the desire to represent the students' ideas within the context of the NESS srtting
that led me to seek out qualitative methodologies. Roberts ( 1982) presents a convincing
argument that, if we agree there are two radically different, but equally valid, metaphysicd
presuppositions behuid the two different methodologies. then "excessively nmow
constructions of what really constitutes knowledge in . . . education cheat [graduate] students
of the richness and diversity of what we do as a professional organization" (p. 29 1).
It is in this anaiysis of these two research methodologies that 1 am able to place the
contribution that this work makes to the education profession. This thesis was first a search
for an understanding of students' experiences. The contribution that this thesis makes,
however, is not in the findings or data that are presented in Chapter 3. If it were the case that
the "upshot" of the thesis consisted in the findings of my interviews with students, 1 might
feel hesitant about the size of my sampling and the depth of the interview process. The
interviews did serve as a platform for the contextual analysis of the students' experiences. The
contribution this thesis rnakes, however. is found in the organicistic synthesis and
representation of the theoretical significance of the "findings." Roberts ( 1982) notes that there
is a "theory of tnith" which is discemed differently for each world hypothesis. The procedures
for getting at "truth" of the qualitative systems are:
contextualism-extent to which intuitive interpretation is satisQing, useful in explaining
organicism-sense of wholeness (absolute wholeness = absolute tmth)
(Roberts, 1982, p. 281)
Roberts notes that no single research report is "pure" with respect to world
hypotheses. 1 wodd like to put forward, therefore, that this conceptuaiization of students'
expenences at NESS also Fulfills the organicist test of "tnith" in that it provides a coherent
way of looking at how students understand their experiences. "In organicism, . . . there are
successive approximations to an absolute truth, and one gets closer to it as one's knowledge is
more and more integrated" (Roberts, 1982, p. 280). The task of this thesis will be to
demonstrate for readers the fruitfulness of the conceptuaiization of students' experiences ot
NESS which is put forward as the contribution of the work. Next, the specific nature of the
qualitative methods that were used in this study are discussed.
Qualitative Methodologies
Although this work is not a pure ethnography, it is ethnographic in nature, following
Atkinson and Hammersley's ( 1994) suggestion that ethnognphy refers to forms of socid
research having the following feanires:
a strong emphasis on explorhg the nature of particular social phenornena. nther than setting out to test hypotheses about them:
a tendency to work prirnarily with "unstmctured" data, that is, data that have not been coded at the point of data collection in terms of a closed set of andytic categories;
investigation of a srnail number of cases, perhaps just one case. in detail:
analysis of data involves explicit interpretation of the meanings and functions of human actions, the product of which mainly takes the form of verbal descriptions and explanations, with quantification and statistical analysis playing a subordhate role at most. (p. 248)
The research that I have undertaken involves trying to determine the essence of the
çxperience of six students in a unique high school setting. As Atkinson and Hammersley
(1994) have outlined, I am not trying to prove or disprove any hypothesis but am more
concemed with representing the ideas which the participants see as crucial. In doing so, I
incorporate many of the elements that Atkinson and Hanmerdey use to characterize
ethnographic research including trianguiation and respondent validation.
'Triangulation is not a tool or a strategy of validation but an alternative to validation"
(Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p.2). It has been critical for me to make sure that the themes and
ideas that have emerged from the data are faithful to the students' beliefs about their
experiences at NESS. Confidence is increased by "member checks" with the participants
themselves, as well as formaily checking with "others" in the school to see whether the idras
rang true (Roberts, 1982). The "research is an interactive process shaped by (the researchrr's)
persona1 history, biography, gender, social class, race, and ethnicity, and those of the people
in the setting" (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p. 3).
Data Collection
Before the fomal research was undertaken, 1 received approval from the Simon Fraser
University Ethics Cornmittee to proceed with the snidy. Al1 student participants received a
letter outlining the intent of the study and returned a signed consent form from their parents.
They were al1 informed that the interview tapes and transcnpts would remain confidenrial and
their anonymity would be assured. The students were dso told at the beginning of the
interview that they were free to stop the interview at any time or refuse to answer any
question. Although these safeguards are necessary, these measures did not seem to be of
much concem to this panicular group of students.
My choice to interview ody six students precluded a complete representation of
students at NESS. As Atkinson and Hammersley (1994) suggest, however, 1 was more
concemed with getting to know in depth a s m d group of students who were selected on the
basis of my perception that they had varied experiences at NESS. 1 decided to interview six
students (3 males and 3 fernales) who had k e n at NESS for at least three years. 1 chose six
participants as this was a manageable number of interviews to nanscribe and yet should have
allowed for a nurnber of different viewpoints and Lived experiences (Glesne & Peshkin.
1992). Having k e n a teacher in the school since its inception, I knew each of the students
although to varying degrees. 1 had taught or regularly worked with all but one of the students.
The interviews combined what Glesne and Peshkin (1992) term "open" and "depth-
probing." The open interview means that the interviewer begins from a platforrn of established
questions but is prepared to "foliow unexpected leads that arise in the course o f . . .
interviewing" (p. 92). This was complemented by "depth-probing," where I pursued "al1
points of interest with various expressions that mean 'tell me more' and 'explain"' (p. 92).
Such a broad-scale approach to undeatanding is drawn from the assumpiion that qualitative researc h, notably nonreductionist, 1s directed to understanding phenomena in their fullest possible complexity. The elaborated responses you heu provide the affective and cognitive underpinnings of your respondents' perceptions. With this picture you have obtained what is characteristic of qualitative inquiry: the native's point of view. (Glesne & Peshkin. 1992, p. 92)
1 started the interviews with a set of general questions (see Appendix B) regarding the
students' experiences in NESS for the past number of years. These were used as a platfom
for discussing their ideas about the system. 1 felt that it was criticd to let the students frel open
to telling their story. Each interview involved the student talking about her or his family and
upbringing. I then asked them to describe a typical day at NESS. The students were also
asked what they thought were positive aspects of NESS as well as those areas that needed
improvement. Much of the remainder of the interview involved seeking clarification of these
generai ideas as 1 tried to gain an undeatanding of each individuai's experience.
The interviews were not without their own pitfalls. After transcribing my first two
interviews, 1 realized that i was leding or supplying words while the students attempted to
answer my questions. As a consequence, their answers were sometimes cunailed and did not
achieve the depth that 1 thought they were capable of. This lesson was quickly absorbed and 1
had much better success in my subsequent interviews as a result.
A second problem hvolved the mechanical malfunction of a tape recorder in my third
interview. The batteries to the recorder were apparently too weak to record sound but not too
drained to stop the tape. 1 was unaware of the problem und 1 Listened to the tape. The= were
only two minutes of recorded sound. This was quite disheartening as the mishap occurred
during rny third interview and 1 felt the quality of this discussion far surpassed the fust two
interviews. I repeated the interview. My second interview with this student was equally rich
with issues and ideas about being a student at NESS.
The main source of data for this study has been the transcnpts of the six interviews
that I conducted benveen Apnl and May of 1996. Al1 except two took place over lunch hour in
a small room in the teacher preparation area of the school. The other two occurred after
school. Each interview was between forty-five and ninety minutes in length. Each interview
was tape recorded and then transcribed. 1 aiso took bnef notes to augment the interview
transcripts. The transcnpts were then shown to the participants to ensure that the written
account captured the essence of the interview. It should be noted that the presentation of onil
conversation in written form c m be curnbersome and awkward to read. I transcribed the
interviews verbatim but have corrected grammatical erroa and added punctuation to the quotes
when they are presented as data in this document. 1 have taken the liberty of removing any
verbal sounds (Le. uhrnm, ah, uh huh) and repeated words that often occur in normal
conversation. This is done to increase the fluidity of the passages. Every attempt has been
made to conserve the intent and meaning of the students' original words.
Data Analysis
The data analysis has been the most difficult and most rewarding part of this process
for me. Being part of this particular educationd environment for the past five years, 1 have
formed many opinions and made many judgments on the ability of this new system to meet the
needs of the students. Having started my Master's degree at the beginning of the second yeÿr
of the school's operation, 1 was always examining what was going on with somewhat of a
critical eye. This was coupled with the fact that there were seven or eight colleagues who were
also at various stages of graduate work, four of whorn 1 worked with very closely in the same
department. There was a tirne when I struggled with some of the ideas I was exploring
because it was difficult to rernember whether in fact they were my ideas or those of one of my
coileagues as we often discussed ideas throughout our day. It was not untilI had completely
finished my interviews and started to sift through the data that I began to feel really
comfortable with what I was thinking.
The open-ended nature of the data collection in an ethnography lent itself to presenting
the data in a "narrative" form.
Interviewhg is currently undergoing not only a methodological change but a much deeper one related to self and other. The "other" is no longer a distant, aseptic, stedized, measured, categorized, and catalogued faceless. respondent. but it has become a living human being . . . finally blossoming to niil living colour and coming into focus as real pesons, as the inteniiewer recognizes them as such. Aiso, in learning about the other we leam about the self. That is, we treat the other as a human being, we c m no longer remain objective. faceless interviewers, but become human beings and must disclose ourselves. learning about ourselves a s we try to leam about the other. (Denzin & Lincoln. 1994, pp. 373-374).
Profiles of each of the six participating students are presented as Chapter 3. These
f o m part of the explicit interpretation of the students' experiences, a key component in an
ethnographie work (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994). This was the first step in a long journry
toward developing rny understanding of the essence of the students' ideas.
Maxwell ( 1992) discusses the idea of "interpretive vaiidity." This refers to the notion
that qualitative research is not only concemed with providing a valid description of an object.
rvent or behaviour in its setting but is also "concemed with what these objects. events and
behaviours mean to the people engaged in and with hem" (Maxwell, 1992, p. 285).
1 contacted each of the students after 1 had finished the drifts of their profiles and gave
hem copies dong with the full transcription of each interview. Each of the students felt that I
had captured the essence of their original expenence and, interestingly enough, they were ai1
quite grateful for having had a chance to review their interviews with me. 1 realize that
qualitative research by its nature is susceptible to bias.
Conclusion
This chapter has outiined the qualitative nature of the research methodology and
descnbed the process of data collection and analysis. Chapter 3 presents the data in the form
of student profiles. This is done in order to give the reader the understanding that 1 daveloped
of each of the participants.
Chapter 3
Experiences
Introduction
In Chapter 2,I discussed the nature of "qualitative" research of educational
phenornena. This chapter presents narratives of six students at NESS in order to gain sornr
insight into their expenences. Before presenting the profiles, it is wonh reviewing brietly the
methodological stance taken in this study:
It used to be that "facts" were bbcollected", realities were "perceived," and data "presented." The curent view is more of one in which field "experiences" are "transformed" into data through encounten between the researcher and the researched: they are b6transiated" from one culninl context to another; and they are "constructed" dnwing upon the peaonal and intenubjectivities of those involved. (Ellen. 1984. p. 10)
As Glesne and Peshkin (1992) stated. "rather than write research papers, qualitative
researchers translate social expenences and construct narratives" (p. 10). In this chapter. I am
constructing these narratives or profiles for the reason that this research is more a portrayai of
the lives of these students in this setting than a search for results. It is necessary to try to
reconstruct their experience in order to make sense of their struggles and successes. in this
type of qualitative research it is impossible to separate myself from the data. therefore it was
critical for me to create these profiles to represent the students and their different perspectives.
Included in the profües are accounts of my relationships with the students. The
profiles are also interspersed with my own ideas and questions that arise out of the interviews.
narrative profdes, and initial insights that occurred in my attempt to make sense of the
students' experiences.
Jill
lill was a sixteen-year-old student whom I had known for five years at the time of this
study. She was one of the original students in my TA group during NESS' opening in
September of 1992. Each TA group formed unique relationships and ours was no exception.
Our TA group was "close knit" as we had gone away on annuai trips to the Gulf Islands md
had breakfasts and lunches throughout the years. Ji11 was very active in this group and was
well liked by her peers. She took on much more of a leadership role during my last y e u at the
school,
Initidly, Ji11 was one of eight Grade 8's in my TA group of twenty-two cross-gradçd
students. We got to know each other fairly well as we both comrnuted from across toivn rind I
drove her home periodically through our first year. This gave us additional time to talk. Her
easy-going personality and rnaninty ensured that Our conversations were rarely superficial.
She had attended the elementary school near NESS but had moved away and now commuted
across town to maintain contact with her friends after the family moved. Her rnother was also
very interested in the progrm at NESS and the philosophy on which it was based.
Ji11 had a unique living arrangement during that fint year as she altemated living one
week with her mother (and her stepfather) and one week with her father (and her stepmothrr
and their two kids). She handIed this situation incredibly well but the arrangement started to
break down and Ji11 ended up living solely with her mother a year later. She currently has ü
very supportive situation at home Living with her mother and step father. Her rnother has had
an active role in her education and is adamant that Jill succeed in high school unlike her older
sister. 1 mention this as background information even though it did not corne up in the
interview but we had discussed it numerous times over the past few years. This is just one
example of the many significant experiences that occur in a student's life to which teachers are
ofien not privy. 1 sometimes think that it is a miracle that snidents are even able to focus on
school with all that goes on in their lives. During our foliow-up interview, Jill remarked that
having a teacher know her family situation was fundamental in her staying connected to the
school. She felt that there was someone who tnily knew her and had a clear picture of what
she was al1 about. including her suuggles and her tnumphs.
As part of the TA program, we talked daily and had informal meetings every couple of
weeks to examine and assess her progress. Jill led di meetings that 1 had with ber mother with
whom 1 taiked regularly. Our noon hou interview in a small office off of the teaches' work
area felt extremely cornfortable as Ji11 and 1 were both used to it.
The interview becarne much more of a conversation Iike many of Our previous
discussions. only the focus was more on her whole expenence and not the immediate
pressures of daily life. Ji11 was a diligent student in Grade 8 and as a result was acadernically
successful. She had always shown a maturity beyond her years. Grade 9 through 11 however
had not k e n as easy for Jill. She was very aware of her own lack of effort and procrastination
and made no real excuses for it. She had struggled with the daily responsibility and self-
discipline that was demanded of students in this system.
I have my iips and dorvns. Some days like this iveck, I've gotten lots of'rvork dune so I'ni renlly happy and I wnnt to do more biit sometimes rvhen [I'ml doivn I just don ' t wunt to be Iiere. . . . I've had problems and I still do Iiave problems but I'm working my rvay throlrgh it anyway . . . slowly birt siirely.
Despite this, she recognized the strength that she gained from a system that made her
responsible for her own motivation.
I think it's [a] good system becnuce I knorv when 1 get out there thot 1 eitlter have to do it o r l 'm going to go nowhere right. So in this system. if pli don 't do it yori get nowhere and y011 get behind and yoir can 't rven see the light nr the end of the tzinnel anymore becarise yoti're so fur behind.
1 think Ji11 was speaking for many students here when she descnbed the idea of falling
behind and feeling very much in the dark. It is the students' ability to manage this very real
responsibiliv of self-discipline that determines whether or not they are going to be successful
in this system. This is a critical part of the difficult "narrow road" that they have chosen.
Ml's hstrations with the system were not focused on her own procrastination and
work ethic, although these were issues that she struggled with, but more on the negative
interactions she encountered when some teachers sought to impose guidelines without
providing valid reasons. This is probably a common student response in any system although
in this atmosphere of collaboration and cooperation, these types of inconsistencies are perhaps
more apparent to the students who have been given a certain arnount of responsibility.
There were a number of other issues chat came up during the interview that generated
positive emotion as she discussed her experiences. It was clear that Ji11 appreciated the
Aexibility and freedorn of choice that was offered m this setting. She had a sharp academic
mind and combined this with a strong creative side.
Mr. X in science jcist gave me an oral test for learning guide one instead of going rip [to] write because I have test phobia of some sort. He jitst gave me an oral test because he know that I have trorible ivith tests.
This allowed her to feel a degree of owneship or control over the curriculum. She went on to
I iike ir becarcse if yoii have an octivity that y i i don ' t really understand or y011
clon 't really ivunt to do und c m thirik iip cin altemate ussigninrnt to do. pi( go tdk to your marker about it. They '11 rnost likely say " Yeah siire go allerid. " becarlre they want to see new things not just the regiilar stated things and they 're more willing to change them if yori 're ivilling to put a little bit more effort into thinking about it and being more creative.
Shortly after this interview, she finished the best Biology 1 1 project that this same
teacher had seen in y e m showing her depth of understanding dong with wonderful creativity.
This is perhaps what Glasser (1992) was refemng to when he wrote about empowering
students and giving them control over their work. Students produce quality work when they
feel they have that ownership. Early on in our interview, Jill referred to this need to produce
quality work when she tdked about a seminar in which she was discussing the learning guides
with a group of teachers.
I >vas jrut nsked to go to n seminar about a learning guide 2 in Socials 10 and what do teachersfmm English have in Socials because it coufd have been brought in that you coiild get both credit for Socials and English. I went to t l m seminar ivith teachers. I thocïght it was really interesthg because they forind orir view and we know their view. For the rime periods that they put in, it says 20 minutes. . . . They forind out that it takes way longer. The bottom line wns personally i'm not going to hand in something that I don 't like and su its going to take me more than four hours to do a storybook
Jili made it clear that she was going to take the ùme she required to produce the quality
of work that she knew she was capable of. This was further clarified in our follow-up
interview. I asked her if the fact that it took an extra year to graduate had been a problem for
her. Her response was that it was not and she had the grades to prove it. She also felt she had
grown in maturity and had the skills to do what she wanted now. This was a common feeling
from al1 of the students in this study.
The previous quote ailuded to Jill's need to produce quality work but she was also
very animared as she described a seminar where a group of students and teachers discussed
ways of improving the humanities learning guides. She felt empowered by al1 of this. She felt
validated and "heard" and this was pivotal for her. When asked as a final question what she
thought was the most valuable part of the system at NESS, she again carne back to her
relationship with teachers.
I would think the close interactions with the teachers. Yori can sir down with them and talk with them and you can tell them your point und they cun [el1 you [theirs]. 1 like that juît because it gives me a sense of feeling thut they are listening tu me. Not just like "Oh okay, yeah okay that's yorir comment." . . . The teachers are good. They 're attentive to whnt yori say and yocir opinions They actrially acknowledge [what] yocr are saying and that yuil have an opinion.
She tnily believed she had exceptional relationships with teachers. In Our follow-up
discussion a year and a half after our orignal interview, this stilI remained the key component
of school for her. It was the many different interactions with teachers that allowed her to
develop those relationships. She had a close relationship with me, as her TA, and stated
during our follow-up interview that this was critical for her. Her positive interactions with dl
her teachers were exemplifed in her recollections of the seminar as well as the flexibility of
her science teacher. A typical JilYteacher interaction might go as follows:
They don 't tdk that much because they don 't say anything unless you go rcp and ask them a question. Most of the time they ask for your opinion Jrst. If they think that's right or you're on the right rra& then they '11 rnaybe add a little bit more infomtion und then you go on your way and you're done. I think it 's good because they Iisten tu ris and yoti don ' t have to sit there and listen tu them babble on about what I don't want to hear. Ha ha ha.
Not having to M e n to teachers "ramble on" was comrnonly expressed as a positive
consequence of the system although students could not escape it entirely. Jill felt that she had
Remendous control over the type of the interactions she had with teachers and their frequency .
As was stated earlier, she felt "heard." This was a powerful statement corning from a member
of a group that often cries out that no one understands them (teenagers). It was these positive
interactions that appear to be the building blocks of the relationships that she found so criticai.
Jill's expenence was far from perfect however. A week and a half after Our interview.
the pressures in Ml's life grew to the point that she and her rnother and 1 were having
discussions of how we could get her an immediate transfer to another school. This is not
uncomrnon in that students, or more often their parents. feel that a lack of progress c m be
solved by moving to a more stmcnired institution. Ji11 wanted to make the transfer at a very
awkward time in the year and it would not have been advantageous for her. This was coupled
with the fact that she was the lead in a play that was to open in four weeks. As a result. she
did not transfer and remained at the school for the next year and a half. I bnng up this point
because here was a student and parent who had specifically chosen to corne to this school
when it opened. They truly believed in this f o m of education. Despite this she came to a point
where the option to transfer to a different school looked extremely attractive. Ji11 was able to
work through this particularly stressM time in her life and, a y e u later, was feeling very
cornfortable having graduated one year d e r the typicd five yeu high school program. She
believed that the gains from the program far outweighed the struggles she had to go through to
ac hieve hem.
Kathy
Kathy had been at NESS since she was in Grade 8. We f i t got to know each other
through our interactions in Physics 11. She was an outgoing and wrüm spinted person who
appeared to enjoy We. I felt we had a good student-teacher relationship as she was never shy
about asking questions and having discussions in the lab. She was also a part of a group of
six or seven close-knit girls who were very bright and held sharp opinions on how NESS was
functioning and whether it was beneficial to students or not. I thought that her opinions would
provide a nch background for the interview.
For two people who usually felt reasonably at ease around each other. she appeared
quite nervous at the beginning of the interview.
interview with Kathy was tough. 1 felt like she was nervous and 1 was nervous in that 1 wanted her to keep talkmg a lot. She seemed to give only one or two sentence answers to the questions. 1 felt like 1 was barely scratching the surface. 1 am not sure if there is more but I will need to see the transcripts. (Journal, 1996)
The whole interview seemed uncomfortable as if each of us was unaccustomed to oiir
new roles. I felt like 1 hadn't gained an accurate sense of the ideas of this thoughtful and
intelligent young person. Upon transcribing the interview. however, 1 was able to see that she
had a number of very astute observations and had in fact offered considerable insight into her
experience.
Kathy's family was very supportive and she also felt well-guided by her TA who was
very involved in her planning. He checked her planning every day which was "a pain but
definitely helpN." She really enjoyed having the responsibility to choose when and how to
proceed through her courses.
Knthy: Sonzedays you jiist want to take it easy and ivork on sornrtliing like Engiish or Socials so it 's better.
Trevo r: Why is it better?
Kathy: I jrist like it betrer this rvay. 1 get bored rvith subjects sometimes so I rvant to take tirne off from them and then when yori get bored of the other ones yoii go back. So it 's good to switch around your sribjects.
This was very similar to the flexibility and freedom that Jill found so imponant.
Kathy, Like ail of the other students, appreciated the social aspect of the environment but also
felt caught by it. She mentioned that it provided a great opportunity for students to work with
each other.
I know in Socials right now there's lots ofpeople that are on different rrnirs. I can help my p e n d s with what I've already done and they can help me ivith what I 'm doing now, so it 's really helpfiil.
Similar to JWs experience, however. was the disadvantage that Kathy had
experienced in falling behind. This weighed heavily on her as well as her family. There was
support at home but there was also the pressure to finish in the expected five years. Her advice
to other students on how to avoid the pitfalls of procrastination was to "rnnke contact with
o lrr mnrker so thnt yoil don 't ivnste rime. People take advanrage of the freedom and jrist sir
and tnlk' (she was reaiIy talking about herself too).
There were a number of apparently contradictory statements in Kathy's interview. As
the interview progressed 1 asked her whether NESS was a "good" place to be. She responded,
Yeah, i f s okay. I f I Iiad the opportrinity to do it again I think I worild go to X or Y (nvo other local high schoois). I can't leave now fhough becarise I'm only harway throrigh Grade I I and I'm not going to be finished Grade I l by the end of the year.
1 must say that this startled me. She had given me the impression that shr loved the
setting and just needed to get herself back on track. She first responded that the transition to
Grade 9 was difficult but then she stated that she did well in Grade 9. It in fact was Grade 10
where she fell behind (socializing being a big part of that). So here she was saying that
although it was a great place and there were a lot of advantages, the consequences of her not
perfonning up to expectations were too great. She would choose not to do it again.
As our interview continued, Kathy reflected on the Future value of this experience.
I think this is going to be a really good experience. They tell yoci that rhe students that cornefrom here do bener ut university because they have the self motivation. They realize what they have tu do.
This came up in ail of the six interviews that 1 had. There was a fascinating "urban" myth that
pervaded the school and was enhanced by a Vancouver Province article (Febmary, 1997)
extolling the success of the school's English 12 provincial exam marks. Paraphrased, the
students dl stated that this place would help to prepare them for the "real" world. Many of
their justifications for k i n g in the school related to this idea. It was often prefaced with the
statement, "They Say it will . . .." The students believed that this system would provide them
with an experience that more closely resembled that of the business world in which the
graduates hoped to work. It was just a question of whether they could handle the
consequences of their own decisions.
Kathy believed the system was working for the majority of students and she thought it
W ~ S "excellent for getting good marks and teachin~ yod' It was interesting that she was so
positive about the experience and the type of learning that was going on yet would not choose
to r e m . 1 think that this was a common response. Students appeared to really value the
ability to work harder for a higher grade. This ability to feel in control of their achievernent
was a huge plus in their minds.
1 think that the rnost important rhing that I'm leaming here is tu Iinve srif motivation. I'rn finally getting so that I'm producing the learning guides ctnd everything and if's great. [Otlier] people I taik tu [say], " Woiv, you can do that. " I f ' s great that you can finully see yonrseifand [can see that] yoti 're teaching yourself und you 're going through school on your own. It 's n great feeling.
The consequence of this freedom, and the opporhmity to work for a higher grade. was
the corresponding increase in the time taken to complete tasks. There was always the pressure
of üying to graduate after five years of high school. The tension between the value of the
higher grades and the increased time was one chat these students continually experienced. 1
believe that it was the expression of this tension that saw Kathy continually waiver over her
desire to leave or stay. It became clear that Kathy was frustrated with the system and the need
to take an extra semester to finish al1 of her required courses before going on to post
secondary education. Kathy was interested in going into medicine and she saw this extra time
as a bit of a roadblock in that it was simply extending the number of years that she needed to
spend in the education system.
In the year and a half since the original interview, however, Kathy has resolved many
of her doubts about the value of her expenence and she has corne hil circle in her thinking.
She now feels that the whole education process has k e n invaluable and the struggles are a
very necessary part of preparation for bigger things that she wants to do in life. There was
definitely a maturity and sense of having accompiished something mcult that gave me the
impression that what she had Ieanied about henelf was equally important to what she had
learned in her courses. She still had a strong desire to go on to medical school, and what I
noticed was that she had a much clearer picture of what she nceded to do in order to
accornphsh her goals.
Cindy
Cindy was bom and raised locally. She had a sister who was two years younger and
also attended NESS. Cindy was active, played a lot of community softball and enjoyed riding
horses. She was in Grade 9 when NESS first opened, having transferred from a conventional
systern at another school in the district. The reason for the transfer was that she fell within the
NESS catchment boundaries. 1 chose to interview Cindy because a colleague felt that she was
someone who had thought deeply about her own education and expressed herself well
whenever they ralked. 1 had worked with her occasionally in the large. open science lab but
we did not really know each other. The interview was then a "getting-to-know" process luid.
as had been suggested, Cindy was interesting and easy to tak to.
Very quickly in the interview, Cindy revealed that her experience at NESS was heavily
clouded by the negative feelings that her family had developed around her progress at the
school. She made it clear that her biggest problem had been the pressure that was put on her
by her parents. She resented this pressure but loved them enough to conclude that although
she appreciated the system, she would rather have gone to another school just to make her
parents happy. They had gone so far as to say that she fded a grade even though she was
eaming good grades and would simply graduate a year late. This was a year later than the
children of her parents' fi-iends. It was ironic however that these other students might be
graduating on t h e fiom other schools but a number of them would need to corne back to
school to upgrade their marks. As we talked about these stmggles. she clearly saw her
parents' point of view.
When asked what she would change about the prograrn. she took a long pensive pause
and said,
I would make it su that parents were more aware of whnt the kids rvere doing and going through. [Have] a parent night rvhen al1 the parents hnd tu come and see what it's like tu be in the school. . . . I think they'd be in for a real sitrprise. They don ' r know hoic* hard rve are nctitnlly working.
She recognized that her parents had never been part of a prognm like this and as a result
perhaps did not fuUy understand the nature of the problems that were inherent in it. The
tcacher in me responded that her idea was ingenious in that it would provide parents with a
way of glimpsing some of the struggles that their children faced daily.
Cindy continued to share with me some of her struggles. She said that she wished shc
had changed schools. "Somefirnes I rvish I transferred becmsr it is a lot hnrder Iiere tiicm Ut ( 1
rrgultir school. I mcun I uni beliind in everythiny. " 1 asked her to elaborate on this and she
provided some insight into an issue that students are faced with daily at NESS.
It ' s really hard afrer being in a school (elementa y schooi) where yort are alrvays set and yorir teachers say, ' O b , go home and reud these pages. Answer [the] questions and then come back tornorrow and we '11 mark it. ' . . . Afer being in a scheduled [class] it is really hard to motivate yoirrself:
As Cindy alluded to, this acceptance of responsibility for setting one's own deadlines
and work completion was very difficult for many of the students to get accustomed to. Al1 of
the interviewees acknowledged this as one of the most difticult parts of the program but dso
the most valuable in t e m of the satisfaction that cornes from having taken on the ownership
and comple ting the task. Embedded in this was the self-discipline required to keep from
socializing and to stay on task, especially when you get behind. She recognized the value in
this stmggle and realized that this was a necessary "skill'' for later in hfe.
If yoii want tu go sorneplace, you really have to go for it, work hnrd m get where yoii want ru be and that is something that d l help you luter on, because at college or university, it is ~ i p to you if you want to go.
Cindy's discourse about the value of what is required to complete a task falls into a category
of Iearning about self that 1 will discuss in Chapter 5.
Combined with the stmggle to stay away fkom socializing was the balance Cindy
stmggled to find between doing "quality" work and perfection. " I am totnlly doing rvell. I
Iio vr A 's and B 'S. I griess i am sriccessfiil becaiise I am getting good grades. " It is interest ing
that she was encouraged away from doing quality work as a result of her need for perfection.
When I wns in Grade 9, Mrs. K actrtally said "Cindy look o u ' r e taking too long on these assignments" but I was getting really good marks and everything. She said, "It's great that yori are doing them really well and but yori [need] to hrirry up. " That S my problem, I tend to be a perfectionist at things sometimes. . . . If I ,vas to do everything to 100% al1 the tirne l 'd be here forever. . . but I am starting to jrtst get the rvork in und get onto the rie-rt guide so thnt 1 cnn go faster und do things faster. I giless it 's not recllly t h great in the long mn but it kelps tu get the leaming giiides dune and for rny parents to br okuy.
In this case. the encouragement to move on was made by someone whom 1 consider to be an
exemplary teacher. It was not done coercively and I do not think that Cindy perceived it that
way. Cindy's response indicated that she, as a result of the time issue. had moved away from
doing "quality" work. It was difficult to separate her desires (doing a task to perfection) from
ihose that she felt were her parents' (to complete high school in five years) .
Cindy stniggled with this negative feeling from her parents and hrr own feelings thrit
her progress wûs adequate. She was almost teary as she talked about these negative
interactions with her parents. She gained strength as she shared how successhl she felt. She
seemed to feel good about all of her schooling despite the fact that she would be graduating a
year after her friends at other schools. This didn't bother her at dl, as she was getting good
grades and she considered this a good trade off. As well, there were a number of positive
aspects of the prograrn that she felt shaped who she was.
She attrïbuted the system for giving her a renewed self-confidence and ability to
Cindy: When Ifirst came here oh I was really scared of talking to the teacher but now I am okuy about going and getting help.
Trevor: Mar is the most valitable thing that cornes out of this whole process for you?
Cindy : It has kind of made me more self confident.
Cindy perceived that the system played a role in her development and increased self-esteem.
One of the reasons this happened was a result of the relationships she cultivated with the
adults in the system. She enjoyed the different relationships and interactions that she was able
to have with teachers. She developed a special relationship with her TA. This particular
relationship had grown partly because this TA worked at developing these relationships by
working with the students outside of the school (going away to retreats, etc.). This seems to
have bonded his group and, as a result, she felt very close to him.
Chdy: I like how the teachers are in this school too. Yori set to krioiv them more. You know that this person is jlist like yoii. jiist like a normal person. ïhey 're older and they 've gone tliroligii iiniversity. 1 hink titut is really nent becmise tlzey are not tiiis person in front of the chss [that] jiist points a stick and [sa-] go do this. do that. It is kind of cool when yori get to bzow yoiir teadiers like thnr.
Trevor: How and why do you get tu knoiv them hrre?
Cindy : Yori can go up to them and talk to them. Yoii get talking to them and yoii just get to know them on a more persona1 level. At the normal schools, they jiut stand there and tell yori whnt to do and then sit down at the desk and work thro~igh stufi [Here] it makes the teachers more approachnble and strifl 1 really like that aboiit our school. At first I ,vas really nervoiis about asking for heip and because its like, "Oh no, the tencher. " Ha ha, biit once y014 get to know them. it is easy.
Cindy loved the close relationship she developed with her teachers which she felt was a
function of the system. Another by-product of this, as she stated, was that she gained
confidence and was able to work with adults much more effectively.
In our foilow-up interview, it was clear that Cindy, like Kathy. had worked through
her struggles and was able to see the value in these struggles. Both of their families had also
corne to understand the system and were able to provide the appropriate support to their
children as they finished their secondary education. Unlike Kathy, however, when asked if
she would choose this route again. Cindy was very slow to answer and left the question
hanging with '7 do not really know. " 1 sensed that the "self-directing" had taken its toll and
perhaps, in retrospect, would not have been repeated.
Andy
The interview with Andy was very easy as he communicated clearly and
enthusiastically about his expenences at the school. Our first interview was wonderful but the
tape had not clearly picked up the interview so I was forced to ask Andy to meet again (1
surmised that the batteries in the recorder had been too low to record but not low enough to
stop the tape). I began our second interview by apologizing for the tape malhinction dunng
Our fint interview but he was clearly unperturbed by the loss and moved ahead as if this was
simply a continuation of our initial interview. He settled in very quickly to restating his
background and he filled my mind with endless ideas and thoughts as he reflected with
incredible awareness on the school and its varied and unique attributes.
Andy came from univenity educated parents who were very supportive. He spokr
with pide and respect about his family and referred a number of times to the fact that he could
often get help at home for most of his subjects. Andy started at NESS as a Grade 9 student
after one year at another local high school. He moved to the new school, without quite
knowing what to expect, with the convenience of the school's location being the primary
reason for the switch. Andy had done weil in elernentary school and was particularly strong in
math. His fust year at NESS was unproductive and he felt he didn't get "focused" until the
latter part of the year. It was not surprishg then that he turned to Math 9 to get on track
completing it in "two and a haif weeks." He finished only four of the prescnbed eight courses
that year but steadily improved by completing more courses per year in his next three years. It
was interesting that despite the fact that Andy graduated a year and a half behind whar he
would have at another high school, he was emphatic about his praise for the program. He felt
that the higher expectations of the program (70% is a minimum for completion) resulted in
everyone setting higher standards for themselves.
At this school yori have to have at least sevenry [percent to move on in a course]. It's weird how a seventy worild be really poor for someone at this school yet at other schools someone woiild be like. " Woiv, I got a sevrnty. Thnt 's a C+. " I've gor to be happy with that, riglit? I heur sonze of these commercials rvhere, "Oh well, yoii can't settle for a C. " Well. rve c m 't even settle for n B practicnlly.
were more than worth it. It should be kept in rnind that Andy planned to go to university and.
as a result. his attitudes and opinions were formed with that goal in mind. He returned
frequently throughout the interview to this presupposition that al1 of his work at school was a
preparation for university and a professional career. When asked if this (school) had been a
good experience for him, he responded,
Yeah. I think so (emphatic). If? was just in X (hisjirst high school), I don 't think I'd learn very much. This system makes you do everything on yolir orvn. Yoic have tu be more individual to figure orit things. Yoci've got to be focrised and on task and al ways knowing what 's aroiind yoic. ivhat 's going on,
As a confirmation of this observation, he relates the story of his cousin
My cousin was a straight A student in high school and she just bombed riniversity. She coiîldn 't take it becatise ir rvas so different, it \vas just stress. This school teaches yoci, it prepares [yoii] for that. Yori have to actrinlly sign up for seminars, go to classes, just like at icniversity. Yoii have to like get rhere on time. . . . They introduced this new CAPP program for al! the schook We've been doing al1 that for tliree years now so there 's not real change for tis.
The continuation of his Lne of reasoning here, as he tallced about the system and then
made the connection to Career and Personal Planning (CAPP), was significant in that he
recognized the cumculum of CAPP as k i n g something that he encountered daily at NESS.
Andy commented that the important skills of planning and organization were imbedded in
what he was expected to do. That he was able to connect this to the cumculum of CAPP as
well surprised me. 1 was continuaiiy amazed throughout the interviews at the Ievel of self-
awareness that these students had in regards to the leaming environment and their experience
within it. hcluded in this was their strong ability to articulate and communicate these ideas in
the interview setting (as weii as informaliy in the school).
This subjective assessrnent of these students and their ability to cornmunicate was
echoed by a student teacher. He made the genenlization that students at NESS seem to be
rnuch more confident in their ability to communicate with teachers. This was certainly in
keeping with the way that Andy and Cindy thought about themselves. Andy offered up his
reason as to why he believed this to be tme.
It is really weird how that happens in this sysiern. 1 think that [rhis happens] becattse you have io go to yortr teacher so mrich. always asking questions instead of rhem alivays teaching yori, instead of them teaching a whole class and doing the talking al! the tirne. The srridents have tu do a lot of talking as ive11 as rrying to get across ru the teuchers how they (the studenis) iinderstcmrl it. I think rhat's important. It improves someone S a b i l i ~ to commiinicatr wih another person. This school teaches yori that jrisr rhrough irs systrm ivirhour yoii leaming it throrigh other cotrrses. Jirst being social with other people rind stlifl . . . I never really did thnt when I \vas with any other school and it I don't see it comingfrom anywhere else so it miisr be coming from the school system. Its more open because of the independence. Obvioiisly it jusr teaches you alniost like you're in the reai world, trying ro survive on your own. So il's prew interesting and quite unique.
In this paragaph, Andy summarized the main idea that cornes out of dl the interviews. namely
that the interactions in this system require a student to deal with affective issues of confidence.
self-esteem, etc. These traits form part of the "implicit" cumculum of life, and are critical in
everyone's development into positive contributing members of our society.
Andy was a bright young man who took a manire view of hirnself in this program. He
knew he had difficulty applying himself in the fmt few years at NESS. It was interesting,
however, that he viewed this more as a leamhg expenence, rather than begrudgingly, as
Kathy did. Andy in fact graduated a year and a half after he would have in the replar system.
Throughout the interview, Andy showed a high level of reflectiveness about his own practice
and study habits as weii as insighdul comments about others. He attributed some of this to the
system as illustrated above. He dso taiked quite analytically about the type of courses one
couid take in summer school and the courses that must be taken during the regular school year
because of their relative importance in his education. This type of curricuiar planning is
something that NESS students are required to do on a regular basis. They are the ones who
control when and in what order they progress through their courses. This level of
responsibility and freedom is a double-edged sword and forms the irnplicit curriculum that is
not as easily accessed in other school environments by the nature of their systems.
Andy had a lot to say about the way he was treated by his f i t Teacher Advisor and
the fact that he disagreed with her to such a degree that he would do the opposite of what shr
wanted just to spite her. It is interesting that 1 have vivid mernories of this particular TA
talking about Andy dunng Our fint year and a half of operation and how she didn't know how
to handle him. Obviously the tactics that she used were in fact the very thing that he rebelled
against. 1 also remember when she stopped talking about Andy and I questioned her one day.
She said that he had been transferred out and wished good luck to his new TA. In the next two
years I did not even known who his TA was. In the interview Andy revealed that it was a
much more productive relationship for him.
I feel ifyou have n little more freedorn. yu[< have to think about iliings. . . . A good tencher or a good TA gets the person to think tlzq 're doing it for themselves which tliey are bict yoii have ro get (theni) to think that w q . She doem 't force it doivn your throat brtt she keeps track of whre you are. she 's realistic. I think ifyou get throcigh ro people thar way, that's how the! cari br siiccessful. Basically to be sciccessfiil in this school you l w e to leam how ru be selfmutivated, be focused on work. be on rask. Yoti don7 have io nlwnys work al1 day but yoic do have M know how much tu do and realistically how mcich you should accomplish. . . . Yoci stan leaming these rhings slowly and grudually.
One of the other areas that Andy spent some time discussing was the idea that he
worked very closely with other studenü and as a result learned a tremendous amount from
them. Kathy, Ji11 and Cindy also identified this as a positive aspect of the program. Andy
explained in detail how a couple of his fnends approached their studies and how these
different styles were all able to mach the same goal (course completion) in very different
ways. He had certainly learned and espoused the ciifferences in other people.
I've leamed so much becatise of talking to other people and jcist trying to leam a linle bit from every person. It ' s really a lot different than any other school 1 th in k.
Many teaches in conventional schools employ a variety of teaching strategies in ordrr
to facilitate this type of interaction among students. Andy felt this was an extremely valuable
part of this system for him.
Ryan
1 had never taught Ryan but, like most teachen in the school, I was very familinr wirh
his amiable and easy going personality. As such, our interview was a very relaxed discussion
over lunch in a small office. As he ate his nachos, he jumped right into an animated
dissertation on the rnerits and pitfalls of the system at NESS. This animation even resulted in
his spilling his water al1 over his lunch early on in the interview. just mother reason for the
two of us to laugh together. The resulting transcript left me with many ideas and tmgential
topics so, as with al1 the interviews, 1 needed to be quite selective in what I chose to highlight
from our discussion.
Ryan came from a separated family where both parents were working professionds
(his mother and father were both in education). His older siblings had long since moved out of
the house so he lived a very independent life at home with his mother. Ryan transferred from
another school in the district at the beginning of his Grade 10 year and NESS' f i s t yerir of
operation.
Me and a brinch offiends came from X (amther local higli school) and we were thinking, "Yeah it's going tu be so fun. If's going tu be so easy. " Biit it's not ut ail. It has definitely been hard.
There were many casualties of the system (students who were unable to handle the
freedoms of the system and ending up leaving) during that fmt year as the school became a bit
of a dumping ground for students who were looking for a fresh start from ail the other schools
in the district. There are still casualties but 1 do not think thai is really much differczt from any
other system.
Ryan was a young man who had always been touted as having tremendous potential.
He knew this and people continued to remind him. He had a relaxed and carefree approach to
life and had no real interest in pursuing post secondary education.
I don? plan on going to University and gening n doctor's degree. I f I do nnything, I'm going into radio or music production or something dong thnt line. I don 't even plan on doing that for n while. When I get out ofschool, I plan on going to Mexico. That's not for eveqone but I have chosen to do thnt and 2 feel that i f1 want to take an extra yenr or an extra nvo years tu get out oj. schooi iveii, thar 's bener me being here than sirring ar my ilouse on my h i r r doing nothing.
Ryan echoed the feeiing of the others that the extra time spent finishing school was not a
drawback. As Ryan discussed later in the interview, many of the adults in his life did not fer1
quite the same way.
As I worked through the interview transcript and tried to draw out the key issues. 1
continudly retumed to the notion that Our discussion always skirted the issues of respect.
Early on in the interview, Ryan gave a clear message of how he felt he was treated by certain
people at NESS. Ryan and I had tried to rneet two or three times and finally we were both
there at the same tirne and we both had the tirne. 1 leamed, however, that one of his Grade 12
teachers and his parents were having a meeting at the sarne time. Meetings of this nature at
NESS are most often a three-way conversation between parents, teachers and the student. 1
suggested that we could postpone our interview in light of Ryan's other cornmitment. 1
thought perhaps he felt obligated to be with me after al1 our efforts to get together. This
assumption could not have been further from the mith:
Ryan: Teachers are still on that concept where [stidents] have to be done nt here. If they 're not doing it, let's have the whole family meekng and get everyone together and mnke eveyone mvare and make them feel gziilty thnt th- 're not dune tlzis.
Trmor: And you don 't think that w r k r
Rym: Not that it doesn ' t work, I just don 't think it's right. I don 't think that just because a kid can't get something done as fart as sorneone else would Zike them tu that they should be pressrired or interrogated for it. ThatS one of the main reasons I didn't want to be in rhat meeting that they 're having today. I've heard it befiore. [They are] going to tell me " Oh you 're a brighr and
intelligent student Ryan. You have so miîch poten tial but you jzut sit in the great hall in this one spot md you don't do anything. You have to for this reason. " Shnt up ha. ha, ha. Yori've told me that. Yoidve said it tu me before and it is obviously not rvorking so let me realize it myself because there's going be n tirne rvhen I know that I'm going tu (snnps fingers). Boom. I ' m going tu reake it, I nieari I do think abolit if .
Trevoc Are you going to finish [that course]?
Ryan: I know 1 will. Whether they d o that or not coiîfd make nie care less because its not going to make me speed rip or make nie slow down at al!.
Ryan considered the parent-teacher meeting to be a farce and felt it was out of a lac k of
respect for hirn that they were going ahead with the meeting. The perceived conflict was
between Ryan and this teacher who felt he waç not going to be in a position to finish the
course. Ryan had a tremendous arnount of respect for the teacher's knowledge and ability to
terich but had little tolemce for the way in which this tcacher interacted with hirn on a daily
basis. He felt the conference was completely undermining the sense of responsibility that he
had taken over his education. There is an overt and coven power stmggle constantly going on
as the system tried to give over the power of responsibility and planning to the students and
yet individual teachers appeared to struggle with relinquishtng this power. It is the nature of
these daily interactions between teachers and students that separates NESS from most other
institutions. It is the nature of these interactions as weil that forms the basis of the respect for
which students are so desperate. The educational program at NESS has resulted in many
teachers having to rethink the way in which they interact with students.
I need to restate the first part of an earlier quote because it was so powerful. When I
asked him whether or not the pressure that was put on hirn by teachers worked (or was
effective), his response was, "(It's) not that it doesn 't rvork I just don 't think it 's right. " I
thought about the phrasing and he did not use the word "unfair" as most people would who
feel slightly persecuted but perhaps agree in part with what is king done to them. Ryan chose
to be very forceful and Say that it was not "nght."
Ryan's statement foreshadowed the idea that some interactions he had experienced
with teachee at NESS may have been coercive (Glasser. 1992). or even a form of punishment
with little effect on his motivation (Kohn, 1993). In this particular instance, I had to agree
with Ryan as 1 did not feel that this nineteen year-old man was going to respond to any heavy
persuasion or artifîcial , d t trip. As he clearly stated, "I corild care less (rvhat fiey say). " He
knew that he was the one w ho had to fmally do it. This is a difficult lesson for parents and
teachers to learn as these young people start to resist the extemal controls that have before
affected their behavious. It should be noted that Ryan did indeed finish this particular course
and went on to graduate that spring.
Near the close of our time together, I asked Ryan if he wouid choose to go back to a
conventional school. He answered with his usual wit that left me smiling.
I couldn 't go back, I couldn 't sit in the clnssroom again. It woiild drive me ssnpid. I would just be sitting there thinking whut am I doing Iiere?
Underlying his response. however. is a tmth that certainly encourages one to contemplate the
number of hours that conventional education forces students to sit in a stale classroom and
listen without much regard for their input.
We ask children to do for most of a day what few adults are able to do even for an hour. How many of us. attending, Say, a lecture that doesn't interest us. c m keep our rninds from wandering? . . . Yet children have far less awareness of and control over their awareness than we do. (Holt, 1975, p. 50).
Recently. I was discussing my findings with a group of friends whose children attend
another local high school. They started asking questions and describing some of the various
bias' that exist in the community regarding NESS. One friend then brought up a point that 1
myself have stniggled with for a long time conceming the program ai NESS. He recounted the
enthusiasm that he gained from some of his special teachers as they shared their passion for
their subject and questioned whether there was an oppominity for this at NESS. Although this
system did not preclude this happening, there was certainly less of a forum for it. As i said,
this had been a concern of mine since More the school opened and 1 was amazed to End diat I
had an answer for him with such clarity. 1 believe that having spent the last few months trying
to undentand the experiences of the students, 1 realized what many students felt in a
classroom was captured by Ryan in the previous quote. My answer, without much thought.
was, "How many of your teachers in fact p b b e d you like that?" Upon reflection, vie dl
could think of a selective number of teachers that certaidy were able to share their courses
with a passion and we al1 benefited from that. But for the most part. I would sugpest that we
were "driven a bit stupid" in the classroom setting. Jill also made reference to this when she
shared that it was nice not to have to listen to a teacher "p on and on and on." The importance
of the control that students have over their interactions cannot be over emphasized. 1 belicve
that is Ryan's message and it leaves teachers with an important thought on which to dwell.
Kurt
Kun and 1 did not really know each other except for the fact that we were two people
who had shared the same workplace for the previous four years. Between the time that 1 hlid
asked Kua for an interview and our actual interview, he had written an anonymous letter and
placed it in teachers' personal trays. It was a very well thought out and well written critique of
the system through a student's eyes. The anonymity of the author did not last and there were
some personal repercussions for Kurt as a result of specifically mentioning a teacher in the
letter. Obviously, this provided a nch foundation for a conversation and there was never a luil
in the interview nor a lack of opinion to explore.
Kurt was an intelligent young man who came to NESS as his third high school in two
yean. He lived on his own and worked part time at the local London Dmgs. The school
system appears to have failed io stimulate Kurt and he simply shuMed from school to school
through lack of interest and attendance:
I didn 't do any work there (hic second school) but they pretty much possed me because of the work I had dune at [rny first school]. They pushed me throngli su I had al1 passes and rnaybe al1 P's. I came here in Grade 11 and I was, I think, two years in Grade 1 I and then I was in Grade 12 last year and I 'm in Grade 12 this year.
1 think Like many students, Kurt was drawn to NESS by the lure of a system that
provided more freedorn. This nearly proved his undoing.
nie first year rvas reaily rorigh because when yorcfind out hoiv mrtch freedom yori have you take advan tage of it as mrich as possible. So I wasn 't here much dri ring the first year and at the end, it was a renl iry check. The second year I kneiv that I'd have to start doing some ivork becarise I rvasn 't getting mything dorze.
Kurt took four years to complete Grades 11 and 12. He seemed to be arguing that the
whole process was very wonhwhile and by the end of the interview. 1 was hard pressed to
disagree. He strongly supported the program, despite the fact that he found fault with some
aspects of it and had little respect for some of the people involved. Somehow from his
experience, however, he seemed to have stumbled across a simple idea that I believe is even
missed by some teachen in the program.
I think leaming more is definitely more important than getting throiigh on tirne brtt ail that people are concemed about is finishing on tinte. Stridents see thar m n more important criteria than knowing the ivork. Any reaclier worrld say tiicrr howing the work is way more important thanjinishing on time worikln't they ? "
This idea was echoed by d l of the students with whom 1 talked. The program pushed
them to work towards mastery and when students are exposed to doing quaiity work, they
become motivated and do not want to do anything but quality work (Glasser, 1992). The
students seerned to understand the tndeoff for lengthened time (Kathy mentioned this clearly
in my follow-up interview with her). Some teachers and parents were having more trouble
with this concept.
I've leamed a lot more here than I did there [previoru schools]. At a regidar school, it is so easy to get by withorct knowing the stuff. Ifinished so many corirses where I honestly didn 't know the material. I just got by on either copying dorvn whnt I had to or knoiving certain things. At this school I've found in most of the courses [that] ïrn learning a lot more here.
This was somethuig that appeared to be very clear to the students here. They
understood the fact that they could not coast their way through courses. If they were not
engaged with the material, they were not going to move forward.
The higher mark reqiiirement it forces you to do better. At other schools. I'd be like 5&51% and I'd just get by. . . . Whereos here, it tnkes yoir longer b~i t you retain more of the stuff that yoii leum.
This was one of the factors that made the system so chdlenging. One of the criticisms
of the program was the fact that rnany students were unable to finish in the "normal" five
years. As Kurt alluded to here, however, this could be regarded as a positive part of the
program because it brought a different type of accountability into the system. Although there
were greater fieedoms and students were able to be a bit more evasive in terms of their
attendance, there was no "curricular evasion." There was no possibility that a student could sit
in the back of a class and do relatively little work and be pushed through the system. as Kun
had done in his last two schools. At NESS, students needed to show that they understood and
had engaged to some degree with the course cumicula in order to move on. 1 think that Kun
was proposing that this had a higher degree of value than passively moving through the
system.
Combined with this course accountability was the ability of students to have a greütcr
say in the way that they interacted with the curriculum. Kurt talked about the negotiation thrit
went on with his History teacher in order to complete a leaming guide:
A good exampie wodd [bel in History 12. Mr. T is my tencher and rvhen I go and rake a leuming guide to him. I osk him whnt I have to do. He [sqvs], " Whnt do yoid think of these activities? Whnt do yori think rvould help you the most?" I look through the activities and I see which unes I could learn the most front and that's the one I end up doing. . . . When it's something that p n pick ortt, you get a linle more motivation to learn it becaiise you think, here's something I really need ro knorv. Yori work harder.
This afYorded Kurt greater flexibility in choosing his path through the cumculum. As
Kun aiiuded, the opportunity to choose could lead to a greater degree of ownenhip over the
work. Kurt undentood, as well, the intangibles that could not be measured on a test or by
one's graduation certifkate. He talked about leaming to motivate hirnself, organize hirnself
and present himself to othen in a way that would benefit him in the future.
If one is to agree with the argument that very linle of what is taught in today's schools
has practical relevance to our students, then teachers need to reflect on what students need to
take away from the experience. Sumrnerhill's founder and prophet, A.S. Neil (1975) q u e d
that the explicit curriculum of the school, in and of itself, offers nothing of beneht to today's
youth. There is much of his argument that has merit, so the question rernains. what i l anything
is of import in the school system. His answer to this dilemma was to throw out the system
completely and provide children with a nurturing environment in which they can decide what
thev wmt to do. Hechinger ( 1975) successfully argued that leaving students to their own frer
will and whim is a recipe for disaster. The answer lies in providing a certain degree of
freedom in the choice for the curriculum as there is nothing sacred about much of what is
taught at the secondary level. What is crucial is the need for students to make choices and then
learn to produce quaiity work in conjunction with their pees and teachers. Learning how to
work with other people requires the full array of intellecnial. social, and physical skills thot
these students will require as they proceed to future endeavours in education or the work
force. The idea that students must negotiate their tasks. seek clarification. and continual1 y
interact with ieachen and fellow snidents to complete the task reflects a wide variety of
experiences that they will encounter when they leave this system. Kurt shared his philosophy:
Things aren't going ro happen by thernselves. Ifyotr want it tu be, yotr have to go out and do it yormelf. Yoir have to really work hard to get things clone. Jtut thinking about it's not going to make it happen, you actrîally have to put yottr thorrghts into actual work . If's sornething yori c m 't really ttnderstnnd. yoti c m 't realize it until yoir 've gone through it. . . . At a regiilar school yoir 've got set classes and pic go tu those classes and yotd experience cerrnin rhings but here yotï've got so many areas to go fo. [In] a regrifur schooi ).ou have fwe or eight teachers and yoir don? even meet haif the other teadws. Here like you meet al1 the other teachers. Yoti get to talk to al1 of them and there is more opportunities to voice your opinions about rhings. I mean countless tintes I've been in the Great Hall and a teacher cornes up tu me and says, " What do yoii think about this?" or he asks me questions aborrt stuff: That doesn't happen at a regrt fur school so I think here it tenches yotr to do it (commtinicate) because you have more oppurîtinities tu but I don ' t think most of the students ore taking advantage of that.
1 needed to keep in rnind, as I taiked to Kurt, that this was his third school in less than
two yem. I wondered whether he would have in fact graduated fiom any other institution. He
certainly represented hllnself with distinction during our brief conversation and he exemplified
many of the qualities that NESS is üying to instill in its students: self-actualized individual,
communicative person, creative contributor (see Appendiw A: NESS' Mission Statement).
As we finished Our conversation, we were dmwn back to Kurt's ideas about teachers
and he expressed the need for respect that al1 of the interviewees voiced so clearly.
Not ail teachers but some teachers need to trereat the st~ddents ivith more respect because at this school. . . . we're sripposed to tuke more responsibility but I don 't think we are getting the necessary respect that goes with that. . . . By respect I menn if readiers talk tu students more like this, (referring to rhe intetvieiv) ifthey tried tu get more feedback for what rvas going on. i f s positive. it would get more things done.
Conclusion
The students came frorn varying backgrounds and had different stones to tell regcirding
their expenence at NESS. Each one. however, talked about how they h d been changed by
their experience. The common element that affected that change was the interactions they had
with the people in the building. Cindy taiked about the confidence she ha5 gained from talking
ro adults. Ji11 stated that her interactions with teachers were the most important factor in her
education. Andy noted that dialogue with othen (both students and teachers) had helped
define who he was.
These profiles provide a focus from which to view the litenture. Being an empirical
study, it was essential to establish the critical issues that the students raised and then proceed
to see what the research Literanire has to Say. The students identified their relationships as key
to their experience. What is most notable, however, is that they link these relationships to their
own pesonal development. Chapter 4 will now examine that Literature surrounding
relationships, and in particular, their dialogical nature, with the intent of providing a
perspective toward my anaiysis in chapter 5. Drawing From the ideas of Anstotle and Buber.
who regarded the purpose of education as one of developing character, 1 will be explonng the
notion that these dialogical relationships afTected change in the students and were an integral
part of their developrnent and education.
Chapter 4
Literature Review
Introduction
This Chapter introduces the literature that informs and broadens my understanding of
the themes emerging €tom the interviews with the students. First 1 examine the notion
"character education" and the idea that the school has the challenge of meeting not only the
intellecrual but also the affective needs of its charges. This requires an examination of the
studentlteacher relationship and the need to understand its dialogical nature. Then 1 review the
cumculum literature focusing on the constmcts of an explicit and implicit cumculum which
help shape the analysis that 1 bring to the students' ideas in Chapter 5.
Character Education
Buber in a speech to a group of teachers in 1939 stated. "Education wonhy of the
name is essentidly education of character" (Buber. 1968, p. 104). Education of character can
be triviaiized through the notion that schools cm instill values through programs that
mistakenly assume that dispositions and habits cm be "taught" by presenting propositional
knowledge. 1 would argue that the process of character education is much more complex and
demands that we expand Our notion of identity and character formation, as 1 will pursue with
the construct of dialogism in Chapter 5.
The phrase character education has two meanings. In the broad sense, it refers to almost anything that schools might try to provide outside of academics, especidy when the purpose is to help chiidren grow into good people. In the narrow sense, it denotes a particular style of moral training, one that reflects particular values as well as particular assumptions about the nature of chiidren and how they l e m . (Kohn, 1997, p. 429)
This has Ied to the development of many programs designed to instill values in today's
youth. The idea that many of society's problems can be explained by the erosion of American
core values is suggested by many proponents of the contemporary "narrow sense" of character
education. Kohn, however, questions this and other underlying assumptions of these
prograrns and 1 agree with his position.
If a program proceeds by trying to ''fix the kids"-as do dmost d l brands of character education-it ignores the accumulated evidence from the field of social psychology demonstrating that much of how we act and who we are reflects the situations in which we find ourselves. (Kohn. 1997, p. 43 1)
Here Kohn is telling us that we cannot fix kids. What we c m do is provide an
environment in which they are able to grow and develop. He suggests that we could leam
from ideas of the late W. Edwards Deming and the "Total Quality Management" movement.
The essence of Deming's ideas is that the system of an organization. whether it is at the
classroom level or the school wide level, determines how weil it will function. Problems w ith
a panicular corporation, therefore, are a result of systemic flaws as opposed to a lack of ability
or effort by the employees (Latzko & Saunden, 1995).
Thus. if we are troubled by the way students are acting, Deming, dong with most social psychologists, would presumably have us transfonn the stmcture of the classroorn rather than try to remake the students themselves-precisrly the opposite of the charac ter education approach. (Kohn. 1997, p. 13 1)
As 1 will point out in Chapter 5, this is what has been attempted at NESS. The
structure of the system has been altered so that students have a different kind of relationship
with their teachers and the educational system as a whole.
People cm only develop character through active involvement with other people and
situations. Following this view, educational prograrns must be based on developing and
strengthening the relationships that occur w ithin them (McKeon, 1947; Edel, 1982). Kohn
agrees and goes on to make it clear that:
If we want to help children grow into compassionate and responsible people, we have to change the way the classroom works and feels. . . . Our emphasis would not be on forming individual characters so much as on transforrning educational structures. (Kohn, 1997, p. 437)
The structure of the classroom can be viewed in terms of the extent to which teachers
and prograrns foster caring relationships with students. How educators relate to students and
how educators encourage students to relate to one another is critical for dowing individuals to
develop into confident, social beings (Kohn, 199 1). If, as Buber (1968) claims, education
must have as its central purpose character development, then Robinson ( 1994) provides a
sound argument outlinhg the keys for creating an environment that is conducive to character
education.
In her study of classroom interactions between four elementary teacherç and their
students. Robinson (1994) talks about the dynamic nature of these interactions in terms of
"empowerment." Following Freire's lead, Robinson argues that empowering practices take
place in classrooms in which teachers and students are in didogical interaction with each
other. Buber agrees when he says:
Through the reciprocal act or interaction, the children and adults engage in a dialogue that allows the exploration of previously unknown paths of knowledge. This means that at the heart of teaching and learning lies classroom interaction. In dialogicai interaction the teacher becornes a resource of the learner's self-actuated development. (in Robinson. 1994. p. I I )
Buber (1958), in establishing the cnticai components of the didogicai teacherlstudent
relationship, states that:
in order to help the realization of the best potentialities in the pupil's life, the teacher must really meet him as the de finite peson he is in his potentidity and his actuality; more precisely, he must not know hirn as a mere sum of qualities, strivings and inhibitions, he must be aware of him as a whole being and affirm him in this wholeness. But he can only do this if he meets hirn again and again as his partner in a bipolar situation. And in order that his effect upon hirn may be a unified and significant one he must also live this situation. again and again. in al1 irs moments not mereiy from his own end but also from that of his partner: he must pracûce the kind of realization which 1 cd1 inclusion. (p. 132)
Buber is explicit about the high level of commitrnent that teachers must have toward
tnily understanding the whole person that they are working with. There is also an onus on the
student to participate in this dialogue and practice "inclusion" in order for the relationship to
develop to its full potential. The extension of this notion is that unless this dialogue occun. the
individuais thernselves will become frustrated in their own self-acniated development.
"Dialogical interaction is collaborative and constitutes an invitation to become a penon by
allowing the I-Thou relationship to develop" (Buber, 1970 in Robinson, 1994, p. 15). Freire
(1970) adds:
Founding itself upon love, humility, and faith, dialogue becomes a horizontal relationship of which mutual trust between dialoguers is the logical consequence. (p. 80)
The teacher and the student are reciprocal and equally important participants in each
other's own being. The extent to which they give of themselves to this relationship and
dialogue is consequential in their development. This ideal will be explored as 1 examine the
students' expenences as they relate to this relationship in Chapter 5. The most cornmon
platforni upon which dialogue takes place between student and teacher is the curriculum. 1
now examine the concept of curriculum and its many definitions in order to clarify its place in
these discussions.
Curriculum
Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P.. Taubman, P. ( 1995) published an exhaustive
review of conceptions of curriculum over the past cenniry. They cite a series of characteristic
de finitions listed by Jackson ( 1992) which span almost half a century:
I . A course; a regular course of study or training, as at a school or universi ty .
2. A course, especially, a specified fixed course of study. as in a school or college, as one leading to a degree. The whole body of courses offered in an educational institution, or by a department thereof.
3. Curriculum is al1 of the experiences children have under the guidance of teachers.
4. Curriculum encompasses al1 leaming opportunities provided by the school.
5 . Curriculum [is] a plan or prograrn for al1 experiences which the learner encounters under the direction of the school. (Jackson, 1992, pp. 4-5)
The authors note the plethon of definitions but do not see this as problematic. Their
sentiments are echoed by Goodlad (1979) who comments:
Who is to say that one of these courses deserves the word "cumcuium" attached to it and the others do not? That one is right and the othea wrong? Yet this is the box we get ourselves into in attempting some single. proper defulltion of cuniculum, a questionable activity in which curriculum specialists have far too long engaged. We need defmitions, of course, to carry on productive discourse, but attempts to anive at a single one have inhibited
discourse. If sorneone wishes to define "curriculum" as a course of study. this is legitimate-and certaidy not bizarre. Let us begin there and see where it takes us. If someone wishes to begin with curriculum as "the experiences of students," let us see where this carries us. But let us not begin by throwing out each definition and seeking only to substitute another that merely reflects a different perspective. (Goodlad, 1979, pp. 44-45 in Pinar et al.. 1995. p. 28)
Keeping this in mind, 1 have considered the notion of two types of curriculum that
students engage with on a daily ba i s at NESS. 1 bnefiy explore the conceprs of "explicit" and
"irnplicit" curriculum within the literature as I feel they serve to elucidate certan aspects ot the
students' experiences exarnined in Chapter 5.
Briuman (199 1) uses the term "explicit" cu.rriculum in comrnenting about a discussion
that a student teacher (Jamie) was having with a class. She wntes, "Jamie decided to t'ake class
time to t a k about the relationships between the explicit cumculum, the hidden c ~ c u l u m .
school structure and her own teaching intentions" (Britzman. 199 1. p. 79). Pinar et al. ( 1995)
report that "Erickson and Schultz ( 1992) distinguish between studies of students' engagement
with the so-called manifest C U ~ C U ~ U ~ and the implicit or 'hidden' cumculum*' (Pinar et al..
1995. p. 783). They go on to make the distinction that "the hidden ~urriculurn is the
ideological and subtimuial message presented within the overt cumculum, as well as a by-
product of the nul1 curriculum" (Pinar et al., 1995, p. 27).
Given the contextual uses that have been presented. the explicit (or manifest or ovçrt)
cumculum is characterized by the experiences of the students as well as the plan or program
for al1 those learning experiences. From a teacher-researcher's perspective this analysis cornes
closest to what 1 would cornfortably call curriculum in the classroom. The implicit (or hidden
curriculum), like Pinar et al.(l994) suggest, is more ideological and somewhat subliminal but
has been made more explicit by the Ministry of Education in the province of British Columbia.
The implicit c ~ c u l u m includes ail of the behavioun and vdues that we wish to instill in
students. These have k e n outlined to some degree in the BC Ministry's Integrated Resource
Packages (IFtP) for Career and Personai Planning (CAPP).
Overd, CAPP 8 to 12 rnakes a unique contribution to the development of students as well-rounded, balanced individuals. It complements the acadernic and vocationdy oriented courses that constitute rnuch of the curriculum in
grades 8 to 12 by focusing on students' personal development and on how their schooling and extra-curricular ac tivities relate to their future plans and life after school. Including CAPP 1 1 and 12 among the courses that are required to meet graduation requirements recognizes that emotional and social development are as important to the development of heaithy and active educated citizens as are academic achievement and the development of intellectual and physical skills. The inclusion also recognizes the need for students to understand the personal relevance of their studies and acquire the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that can help them make appropriate persond decisions and manage their lives more e ffectively .
The curriculum for CAPP 8 to 12 has been designed to help students prepare to deal with a world of complex, ongoing technological change. continuous challenge, expanding opportunities, and intricate social evolution. Learning opportunities that are relevant and experiential help students becorne thoughtfid, carhg individuds who plan and reflect, make informed choices. and take responsibility for their personal and career development. The curriculum encourages students to show initiative and accountability in decision making and helps them develop planning skiils ranging from time management to self-assessment and from goal setting to locating and accessing sources of support and assistance. These skills apply to their work in every other subject area and to the activities they will undertake following graduation. CAPP 8 to 12 helps students relate their learning in school to the demmds of the working world and the expectations of society. It also provides opportunities for students to maintain, reinforce, and develop those skills, attitudes, and behaviours that will allow them to enhance their persona1 well- being throughout their lives. (British Columbia Minisfry of Education, Skills and Training, 1997, p. I )
The implicit cu~cu lum is also included to varying degres in al1 of the other IRP's
across the cumculum. "Learning oppominities that are relevant and experiential help students
become thoughtful. caring individuals who plan and reflect, rnake informed choices, and take
responsibility for their personal and career development" (p. 1). This exemplifies the
"implicit" curriculum and is an attempt by the Ministry to legitirnize this very real and critical
part of a student's educational experience. The degree to which educational institutions are
able to facilitate this type of learning experience is a question worth explonng and will be
exarnined in Chapter 5.
Conclusion
According to Buber, the purpose of education is the development of character.
Character is developed through interactions with other people. When people interact and there
is cornmitment by both parties to be invested in the developing relationship, the resulting
association becomes didogicd in nature. This relationship becomes the "cl;tssroom of
character." The students noted the power of these positive relationships by identifying them as
the most important aspect of their experience. They also acknowledged, quite clearly, the
disdain that they held for people who were not commined to carrying on an "inclusive"
relationship. The critical aspect of this key relationship centers around the puticipants' abilirirs
to develop a mutually tnisting and reciprocal dialogue.
I included a bnef discussion of the literanire surrounding curriculum as it too was an
active component in the students' development. The dialogue and conversations that informeci
the relationships were most often grounded in an explicit cumculum. This. in turn. facilitüted
the exploration and developrnent of the implicit curriculum. The explication of this series of
connections is the purpose of my analysis in Chapter 5.
Chapter 5
Synthesis
This Chapter uses the salient Literature to synthesize the thernes that emerged in the
analysis of the students' experiences. 1 have developed the constructs of explicit and implicir
c ~ c u l u m as a lens through which 1 rnake sense of the students' ideas. The cornmon criticül
element of their expenence-relationship+is then examined from the notion that each studtnt
engages in four dialogical relationships: student-teacher. student-peer. student-explicit
cumculurn. and student-self. It is the linkages or connections of these dialogical relationships
that address the implicit curriculum. The literature and the students appear to concur that this
implicit, or character. curriculum is a crucial component of the educational system. I finish by
suggesting that teachea in al1 types of educational settings nced to be consciously w x e of
their daily interactions with students as these f o m the endurinp component of students'
experiences.
There are a number of significant themes that seem to Boat to the surface as 1 work
through the data collected frorn the six interviews. The students paid little attention to the
structure of the system. hstead, and without exception, the students concentnted on
describing how they were treated, both positively and negatively, by others in the system and
how this made them feel. Their attention clearly centered on issues that were dmost solely
affective in nature.
New Lens for CurricuIum
Tt is the fundamental distinction of the importance of the affective aspect of the
students' education that frames my analysis. The picture that emerges and that illustrates the
students' experiences involves an expanded notion of curriculum. As a consequence, I now
envision the curriculum of NESS as k ing much broader and more uniquely defined than 1 had
previously thought. 1 originally defined cuniculum as king "explicit" or overt, refemng to the
common use of the term. 1 now would like to introduce the notion of an "implicit" or affective
curriculum.
The "explicit" or overt curriculum is perhaps andogous to both Aoki's curriculum as
"plan" and curriculum as "lived"(Aoki. 1993). In his sense. a teacher works hard to develop
lessons and create plans that will engage students. This plan always changes once
implemented hy the v e y fact that it involves people. The res~ilt is the cuniciilum as "lived."
which students and teaches experience in their classrooms. The "explicit" cumculum of
NESS involves sirnilar plans. albeit in a much different fom. as the students interact with
teachers, each other, and the various forms of content presentations. This would include dl
the learning guides. learning conversations, serninars and anything else that focuses on course
content and its delivery to and by the students. Ryan speaks to the sense of ownership that
students are developing around what has conventiondly becn the teacher's domain. The
students talk of this "explicit" cumculum and have clear notions of what they are learning md
the role of the course content in that leaming.
The "implicit" curriculum at NESS involves more than simply the ideas as they are
presented and the variety of teaching methods in which the students receive these idens
(Freire's banking metaphor of education). The students must work daily through the m l
concept of an implicit curriculum which includes developing a sense of ownership over one's
education and responsibility for the daily planning and execution of that plan. hbedded in this
curriculum is self-discipline. procrastination, socializing, freedom, and an understanding of
"self." What 1 am attempting to describe here is the part of schooling that the students
identified as criticai to their school experience. NESS is an anomdy as it rnakes a conscious
and oven effort to teach or at least attend to the "implicit" curriculum. As a result of its
suucnire, students are required to take responsibility for their own leamîng. They m u t deal
with ihis added responsibility while experîencing freedom which they, upon entry. are
probably quite unaccustomed to. They have even corne to the point where they defend the
right when teachen try to rescind this freedom. These negotiations play a role in the
development of the various relationships that students have in the school.
The Nature of Relationships
There are many issues that pervade the students' conversations during Our interview
qessions so 1 chose those ideaî that were alluded to by al1 six participants. The key component
linking the students' themes is relationships. The picttire that has evolved in my mind is one of
a wheel with the student at the hub (Fi,gre 1). Situated on the outside rim are teachers.
curriculum, peers and self. The connections radiating out From the hub are the spokes which
represent the relationships between the student and these other parts of the system.
Figure 1 : Stridents ' Relntionships ut NESS.
Extrinsic Curriculum
Students described the connections between themselves and teachen with concepts of
control, respect, and responsibility . They spoke about their relationship to the curriculum in
terms of flexibility, quality and ownership. Other students or peers were also thought of as an
integral part of the participants' educational experience. Lastly, students continually articulated
ideas and thoughts about their personal struggles, and as a consequence, growth. 1 decidrd to
represent this as a relationship that they had with their "selves." They used language like self-
discipline, self-confidence, motivation, control and responsibility io describe intemal issues
that they faced regularly at NESS. All of the descriptors that the students use are a function of
their different relationships.
Robinson (1994) captures the essence of what 1 believe the students felt was critical to
their experience at NESS. Hrr work illuminates the consmcts that I have been considering to
represent the students' ideas in my analysis. She saw the classroom as a continuous series of
interactions that were either empowering or disempowenng. Her vision was a fluid classroom
in which al1 participants. adults and children. were both teachers and learners (she ultimately
included herself as researcher in this conceptualization). I believe that this is also captured by
David Hawkins (1974) in his essay. "1, Thou, It." He dludes to a school of thought
which is expressed by saying, in one way or another. that people don't amount to very much except in t e m of their involvement in what is outside and beyond them. A human k i n g is a localized physical body, but you cm't see him as a peaon unless you see him in his working relationships with the world around him. (p. 50)
This supports the themes that I propose involving the student and these different
relationships. As the title of his essay suggests, Hawkins too, acknowledges the importance
of an extemd content or source that provides a platform for relationships. Hawkins adds:
No child, I wish to Say, c m gain cornpetence and knowledge, or know hirnself as competent and as a knower, save through communication with others involved with him in his enterprises. Without a Thou, there is no 1 evolving. Without an It there is no content for the context, no figure and no heat, but only an &air of mirrors confronting each other. (Hawkins. 1974, p. 52)
The "It" in my analysis is the explicit cumculum that was descnbed in Chapter 4. It is
a vehicle with which students and teachers can build relationships. The relationships are key
for a student to work through the implicit curriculum which is critica. to hislher development
as a contributing member of society.
Deci and Ryan (1985) have proposed that human beings have t h e fundamentai needs:
The fmt is the need to feel autonomous or self-determining, to have ownership over one's
actions. The second is to have a sense of oneseif as competent and effective. The last is to be
part of a social world and be connected to others. Students acquire a sense of significance
from doing significant things. from being active participants in their own education (Kohn.
1994). While exûmining these relationships. it became clear to me that, in order for thcse
students to be successful in this prograrn, it was a necessary condition that they become
actively involved in the process of "making" the prograrn. They should be included not inerely
because this will increase their motivation or d o w them to engage with more interest in their
studies. They should be included because their role in cri tically examining issues that affect
them directly is the essence of freedom and of dernocratic social life (Nicholls. 1995). Unless
students have some meaningful (to them) role in the enterprise. most educational change.
indeed most education, will fail (Fullan, 199 1). This is especially tme at NESS as there is iin
increased responsibility placed on the student to take ownership over the process.
The notion of students being active participants in their education requires an
environment that facilitates and fosters negotiation. It is through a dialogic understanding of
the educational setting that 1 have tried to make sense of the students' experiences. Britzmm
(199 l), although writing about teacher education, illuminates the need for this type of
discourse in other settings.
Dialogic discourses cm offer different ways to reconceptualize practice and, most significantly, attend to the complex vulnerabilities of lived experience in ways that move beyond essentializing the self and thus abstracting the individuai from the social world. (p. 239)
It is through meaningful dialogue that the dialogical relationship is developed.
Dialogue involves conversation between people and an exchange of opinions and ideas.
Dialogue is the sealing together of the teacher and the students in the joint act of knowing and re-knowing the object of the study. Thus, instead of tramferring the knowledge statically, as fmed possession of the teacher, dialogue demands a dynamic approximation toward the object. (Shor & Freire, 1987, p. 14)
The examination of the dialogic "ailows us to move beyond the conversation itself to
attend to the conditions of its production: the words we choose, the way we reinflect them
with past and personal meanings, the style used to position meanings, and the mix of
intentions that are inevitable when speakers interact" (Britzman, 1991. p. 238). The resulting
analysis informs the students' individual expenences and the resulting personal narratives that
1 constructed.
Taylor (199 1) clarifies the crucial elements and reasons for necessitahg a dialogical
representation of self with a conversation metaphor. Like the sawing of a log. or ballroom
dancing, conversation is a paradigm case of didogical action.
Conversations with some degree of ease and intimacy move beyond mere coordination and have a cornmon rhythm. The interlocutor not only listens but participates with head nodding and "uh-huh" and the like, and at a cenain point the "semantic tum" passes over to the other by a cornrnon movement. The appropriate moment is felt by both partnen together by the virtue of the common rhythm. The bore, or compulsive talker, thins the atmosphere of conviviality because he or she is irnpervious to this rhythm. . . . An action is dialogical, in the sense that 1 am using it, when it is affected by an integrated. non individual agent. This means for those involved in it, i t s identity as this kind of action essentially depends on the sharing of agency. These actions are constituted as such by a shared understanding among those who make up the cornrnon agent. (Taylor, 199 1. pp. 3 10-3 1 1)
The dialogic nature of these students' education involves the very real participation in
numerous dialogues. engaging knowingly or unknowingly in a variety of discourses. The
following analysis examines the dialogical nature of the various relationships that are key to
the participants' experience: student-teacher, student-curriculum, student-peer and snident-
self.
The six students in this snidy felt that their relationships with teachea constituted one
of the most important components of their experience at NESS. Iill felt the most vaiuable part
of NESS is
the close interactions with the teachers.. . . You c m sit down tvith them and tak with them and you can tell them your point and they cm rell yoir theirs sort of thing and. . . it gives me n sense of feeling that they are listening tu me. You know and not just like. "Oh okay tlzat's your comment but for why. . . . What you say and your opinions, they actually acknorvledge that your saying if to them and you have an opinion.
JWs cornments resonate with Hawkins' analysis.
The importance of this (interaction) in the "1-Thou" relationship between the teacher and the child is that the cMd Lems something about the adult which we cm describe with words like "confidence," "tnist" md "respect." You have done something for the child which he could not do for himself, and he knows it. (Hawkins, 1974, p. 56)
The open area architecture of NESS facilitates the one-on-one interactions of students
and teachers. The types of conversations are varied in length as well as content. For the
purpose of focusing my discussion, 1 have identified three different types of interactions that
students and teaches typically have at NESS.
The fmt example of student-teacher interaction is exemplified above as Jill alludes to
what Sivia (1998) defines as a "leaming conversation." In her thesis. Sivia recognizes the
importance of these interactions as students and teachers negotiate the meanhg of the rxplicit
curriculum. The teacher, through learning conversations, challenges the student to consider
new concepts and then apply this new knowledge to increasingly complex situations. As
Freire (1970) suggesü, this type of conversation is a Fundamental component of education as
the teacher models and then invites the snident to become part of the cognitive discourse that
shapes the student's intellecnial development.
Only dialogue. which requires critical thinking, is also capable of generating criticai thinking. Without dialogue there is no communication, and without communication, there can be no tnie education. (Freire, p. 8 1)
Jiu felt that it is cntical that the teacher approach this type of interaction as a learner who is
ready to value and accept the students' ideas.
A second type of snident-teacher interaction is one in which teachers formdiy and
informally try to encourage individuais or groups. As a teacher, 1 did not spend much time
reflecting on the importance of this particular type of conversation but the students ail spent
considerable time in the interviews expressing their feelings and opinions about how they are
treated by teachen in these spontaneous interactions. All of the students offer unsolicited
advice for teachers in this regard. Ryan is quite clear on how teachers can be more effective
instead of undermining the very thing they try to encourage:
Well I think I rvould help the student instead offorcing the stiident. Mrs. X is a really great teacher . . . and I've leamed a lot of things from her. m e n I go and see her as a murker she 's a really good teacl~er bru dien she nets up and starts [teacher voice] "Yoii 've got to do tjtis. yuu 've got tu do that rznd y d r e (i really bright strident but -ri 're not going to mnke it in life and na na nu z-. " I don 't want to henr thatfrom yoii. Yori're a teacher and you're here ro be helping me. not to make me ~vorry and think I'm not going to siicceed in life becarise I'm not doing a lenming gctide in English. That's the exact feeling I get when she comes up to me and says, " You 've been sitting here and you need to go see yoiir marker down here and yoic have to be sitting tliere. " WHY? Ifyou go away and leave me alone I ' m going to do my thing and $1 need help I will come see yori. So I woidd say thnt if I was a teacher I ,voiiltl try to help i/ze student more instead of forcing them. you knoiv. . . . Help nrid ivork together. Tenchers here sho~tld be more (likeljriends. I menn in rny case I get dong better with teachers who treat me as they \voiild trent others.
Kurt echoes these feelings:
Not al1 teachers biit some tenchers need to treat the students wirh more respect. . . . We're supposed to take more responsibiliiy birt I don't think ive are getting the necessary respect that goes rvith thnt and. . . &y respect I niean if teachers talk to students more like this [refemng tu the interview] I mean if they tried to get more feedback for what was going on, it 's positive. it ivoiild get more things done.
Hawkins (1974) speaks to the sarne issues that Ryan and Kurt identify.
Long before Bettelheim, Immanuel Kant had given profound support to the proposition that , in human affairs generaily, "love is not enough." The more basic gift is not love but respect, respect for others as ends in themselves, as actual and potential artisans of their own leamings and doings. of their own Lives; and as thus uniquely contnbuting, in tum, to the leamings and doings of others. (Hawkins, 1974, p. 48)
These students are asking to be treated respecdully and to be shown that they are
valued as important members of society. They want to be treated like the mature adults they
are expected to be, especially when the responsibility for progess rests squarely on their
shoulders. Buber (1970) talks of the "1-Thou" relationship as one of openness, directness,
mutuality, and presence. In defining "dialogue," he introduces the concept of bbexperiencing
the other side" of the relationship. This is what the students are asking for-"Please see me
for who 1 am and who 1 am trying to become." This is central to the respect that they seek.
A third and more formal student-teacher interaction exists in the regular contact that
TA'S have with their students, sometimes including parents. Andy talks about his relationship
with his fmt TA:
In rny first hvo years. 1 had Ms. K os a tencher. She was tpino to get me to work and I don 't think she was trying to slow me dorvn or wkntever but ifs just how she brought it abolit. . . yori want to get aiwy from her like not do it [his work] tu kind of like irritate her or whatever. Yoic 're thinking, if I did this it would really get lzer off ha lia but I feel like if yoic have a little more freedorn. yori have to think about things. . . . Yori have to get the person to tlzink t lwy 're doing it for themselves which they are but yoic have fo get [them] to t l h k thnt way.
He went on to descnbe how his present TA sets redistic goals with him and is
continually asking him how he is doing in relation to these goals, negotiating deadlines and
acting more as a cntical friend than a disciplinuian. The difference between these two
approaches, 1 believe, is the essence of what students are crying out for. Fullan ( 199 1 ) relates
numerous studies indicating students feel that few teachers understand them (p. 17 1 ). Shor
(1986) posits that "students will resist any process that disempowers them . . . teachçr-talk.
passive instruction in pre-set matenais. punitive testing, moronic back-to-basics and
mechanical drills . . . the exclusion of student CO-participation in curriculum design and
governmce" (p. 183). It is the attention to the implicit curriculum, the development of self
through diaiogic interaction, that facilitates this transition to dealing with the whole student.
The varied interactions between students and teachers provides the opportunity for a
deeper development of the dialogical relationship. "Dialogical interaction is collaborative and
constitutes an invitation to become a penon by allowing the 1-Thou relationship to develop"
(Robinson, 1994, p. 15). The purpose of these interactions is the personal development of the
students although it also means that the teachers themselves are changed.
Student-Curriculum
The platfonn upon which many of the student-teacher interactions takes place is the
explicit curriculum. The Ministry of Education's prescribed integrated Resource Packages
(IRP's) in the BC secondary school cumculum are the starting point for much of the dialogue
that goes on between a teacher and a student. In this way, the curriculum forms a very real
part of the interactions. In addition, the nature or fonn that the curriculum takes at NESS
requires that we examine its influence in the students' experiences. There are two distinct
associations that 1 wish to examine: one is the "1, Thou, and It" relationship that Hawkins
( 1974) puts forward, and the second is the "1-Thou" relationship of Buber ( 1958).
Historically, the curriculum (explicit) is something that is presented to the students to inpst.
Erickson and Schultz (1992) employ the image of "school l u n c h to convey what they see as the mainstream view of curriculum and pedagogy in relation to the student. In this image the teacher's job is to take packages of "mind- food" from the freezer (the written curriculum), thaw and prepare them (instruction, and monitor students' eating until the food is gone (classroom management). (Pinar et al.. 1995, p. 78 1)
This is similar to Freire's ( 1970) banking metaphor where information is depositrd
into students' rninds. later to be withdnwn during evaluation. Both of these metaphors
represent the student as a passive receiver of knowledge and knowledge as extemally
constructed.
A current representation. however, sees knowledge as much more fluid and involves
students interacting and having a role in developing or at least choosing portions of the
curriculum. Hawkins ( 1974) suggests that the purpose of the curriculum is to foster
intellectual growth but it also forms the bais of the relationship between a bbchild" and a
teacher.
The teacher has made possible this relation between the child and "It," even if this is just having "It" in the room: and for the child even this brings the teacher as a peson, a 'Thou," into the picture. . . . It's a bais for communication with the teacher on a new level, and with new dipnity. (p. 57)
The students in this study revealed a sense of ownership over the curriculum. Ji11
tdked of the negotiation that she was able to go through in order to determine her area of study
in Biology, as well as the method of evaluation. Kurt. the veteran of three different
educational institutions, felt that he learned more at NESS. It was his control over the
curriculum that gave him this sense of accomplishment.
When I go and take a leamina guide to him (mv teacher) and I ark him what I have to 20, he asks yoir. "whatdo y011 think would help yoli the most?" I look throrigh the activities and I see which one I corild Zeam the most from and that's the one I end up doing. . . . When it's something thnt yo~i pick out, yoii kind of get (1 linle more motivation to leurn it because you think ive11 hem's something I really need to know and yoii work Izard tu ts( . . .Thot's probab- rhe best example t c m corne rcp with as to why I Zearnrd more here.
This is a good example of Hawkins' uiangular representation of 1, Thou and It. The
key factor here is that the 1-It relationship is the focal point and as such, provides an entry for
the Thou (teacher) who can then mediate, and in doing so, develop the 1-Thou connection. It
is important to reiterate the necessity that the teacher enter this dialogue as a resourcr of the
lemer's self-actuated development (Buber. 1958).
In "1 and Thou," Buber ( 1958) suggests that man has two pnmary attitudes in which
he approaches existence. One is the 1-Thou relationship and the other is the 1-It relationship.
The key to these reldonships is not the nature of the object to which one relates. but the way
in which one relates to the object. By this he means that an 1-Thou relationship c m exist
between a man and an object while two humans can have an 1-11 relationship. 1 suggest that the
fluidity and involvement that students have with the cumculum at NESS means that the
explicit c ~ c u l u m is placed on the level of 'Thou" in that students begin to interact with it and
make it into an extension of their own interpretation of the world around them. In a greater
sense, the students develop a regular and continuous dialogue with the implicit curriculum.
The interna1 dialogue takes the f o m of indecision. guilt, empowement, confidence, pride,
etc. These are the emotional manifestations of the irnplicit curriculum as the students intenct
with ieachers. peen and the explicit curriculum in their daily joumey.
The interaction between the student and the curriculum is such that each is changed by
the interaction. The c ~ c u l u m is truiy changed by the student as she or he works through the
course content. The students thernselves are changed to think in ways they previously had not
and, as a result, are themselves also affected by this dialogicai relationship. The curriculum. 3s
it resides in the school setting, is also fluid. Learning guides and evaluation materials are
continuously changing as a result of the triangular relationship of the student. teacher and
cumculum. As a teacher, the evolution of the leaming guides for my courses was largely a
result of my observations of the student-curriculum interactions.
The opponunity to work with friends and other students on a regular basis was
definitely presented by the participants as a two-sided coin. As Kathy suggested, the
temptation to socialize and waste time was one of the biggest obstacles that students had to
overcome in order to be successful.
But a lot of time is wasted in the great hall. People just sit t h e and talk. The teachers get on yorir case sometimes but there's so much freedom down there thut a lot of people take advantage of it. I know I'm &ad for that ha ha ha and I just sit there and talk. Ifthee is no one to tell yori to sluit ~ i p and work o i i jlrst keep on talking (she laicghs).
it was also me. however, that the benefits of collaboration were very evident. Ji11 and
Kathy both mentioned the importance of small group serninars. Kreisberg (1992). in
explonng the notion of "empowerment" in classrooms, makes the following observation:
Through the process of dialogic discussion, students experience the ability to make a difference in a group. They experience having their opinions valued. In the process of sharing opinions and identifjing, selecting, and justiQing analyses and choices, students are chaüenged to speak, to Listen, and to make decisions. They are encouraged to achieve the balance between assertion and openness so essentid to empowerment. . . . At their best, the kinds of dialogic conversations described above build confidence, enhance self-esteem, and encourage M e r participation. . . . Through dialogue, decision making. and action on issues both outside and within the classroom, students become clearer about their convictions and better able to work with others. (Kreisberg, 1992, pp. 167-172)
Although many of the student-student interactions are not strucnired as formd
cooperative ventures per se, the elements of collaboration (dialogue, negotiation of rneaning,
mentoring, modeling, etc.) are expenenced daily and form an important part of the students'
developrnent. During her interview, Kathy mentioned that different people have different
strengths and they ail worked together to help each other through various courses. Andy
talked ahnut the leaming styles of two of his friends and how he had hecorne more diwiplined
as a result of working with them. The value of these interactions cannot be underestimated.
The crucial element Andy extracted from his accounts of his interactions with his peers was
that students needed to develop the necessary self-discipline and self-control to determine the
appropriate type of interaction (social or work related) and the length of tirne spent.
Basically to be sriccessfiii in this school yoii have ro leam how to be self motivated, being foctised on work. being on rask. . . . Yoir don ' t itcive [O work al1 day but yard do have to know how much tu do and realistically Iioiv mrich you should accompiish.
Al1 of the previous relationships play a role in the last dialogical relationship that 1 wish
to consider: the development of self or what 1 have referred to as the "student-self"
relationship.
Student-Self
There is a constant struggle within each student to defme who he or she is and what he
or she is doing in this world. This is further stretched by students' need to take responsibility
for their own actions as they engage in their education. It is necessary to explore the didogical
nature of the students' interactions in order to fully understand the need for this to occur in the
educationd setting. As Day and Tappan (1996) explain, the development does not in fact go
on within the self, but is mediated by the various relationships that we have been exploring.
A focus on dialogue necessarily moves the researcher away from charting individual developrnentd trajectories toward identifying what rnight be cailed shared or "distniuted" developmental û-ajectories. Development, from a narrative/dialogical perspective, does not go on within pesons so much as it goes on between penons, in the relationships and conversation that they share. This fact suggests that researchers explore the dynamics of moral action that
emerge frorn discourse and dialogue between persons engaged in genuine and mutual interchange, such as friends, spouses, or coworkers, thereby extending Vygotsicy's [1978] concem with how, in the "zone of proximal development." the more competent can assist the less competent to advance to a higher developmental level. (Day & Tappan. 1996, p. 75)
The interviews with the students were punctuated by many references to how they
perceived themselves and how the school and its system was the catalyst to their personai
developmen t.
Ryan stated:
I du believe rhaf rhis has heiped me make decirions and be smarter. . . . I tliink 1 am a better person for being here because as rnriclz as I rvnnt to lenve, 1 orn (1
berter person by learning by m y e &
Cindy felt:
[NESS] has made me more se[fconfident.
Andy reasoned:
Students have to do a lof of talking which is very important, ir irnproves rlwir abiliîy to communicare with onother person. . . .This interview worrid have been very diflailt for me before. . . . This school teaches yori to coni~n~iniccifr throrrgh its system. . . . Becarise of the independence it teaches yoic. i fs nlmost like y u are in the real worid. . . . I don ' t see it coming from onyvhere else su it mrist be coming from rhe school system.
Andy made the daim that dialogue (talking) is a critical component of education. He
actualiy pointed to the notion of dialogue as the reason for his increased ability to articulate and
cornmunicate his ideas. 1 believe this is one example of the internai processes and self-analysis
that occurs as students develop within this didogical frarnework.
The struggles that students encounter in deding with the issues of responsibiiity and
discipline mean that they must constantly reflect on who they are and what they are doing. The
fact that they are forced into this self-examination is how the impiicit curriculum is made
explicit in this setting. Each of the students' other relationships shape and mold their identities.
The dialogical sense of self described by Taylor (199 1) means that a person's identity is
siniated, not within themselves but within the shared meaning that cornes out of conversation
and the subsequent combining, colliding and redefining that occun during the process. As
Bakhtin (198 1) States:
The importance of stniggling with another's discourse, its influence in the history of an individual's corning to ideological consciousness, is enormous. One's own discourse and one's own voice, although bom of another or dynamically stimulated by another, wilI sooner or later begin to liberate themselves from the authority of the other's discourse. This problem is made more complex by the fact that a variety of alien voices enter into the struggle for influence within an individual's consciousness (just as they suuggle with one another in surrounding social reality). (p. 348)
The students expressed their ideas about the importance of having the freedom. time
and power to work through the issues they encountered daily. The challenge of working in
this system with the freedom it allows, has been a stmggle for d l of thern. The thoughtful and
insightful answers of d l the students regarding these struggles suggest that each of them had
developed a reflexive ability to self-examine. Kathy talked of the importance of her extra year
in that it allowed her to mature and understand the level of discipline required to be a doctor
(her career aspiration). Ji11 remarked chat the extra time had shown her that she had the iibility
to stick with a difficult task and complete it. This development occurred as these students
interacted with teachers, other students and the cumculum. Placing the onus on the students to
comrnunicate with others, and thernselves, in order to progress through the prognrn facilitates
this reflectiveness. Day and Tappan ( 1996) comment on coming to self-understanding thus:
The goal of development is not simply a matter, therefore, of speaking in one's own true or "authentic" voice. Rather, it is a matter of engaging in ongoing dialogue with the words of others, and thereby coming to a more "self- persuasive," and less "authoritative" sense of self-understanding. (p. 72)
The students showed that the process of developing one's "authentic" voice occurs in
the spaces in-between the interactions where meaning is made and sense is determined. During
our interview, Ryan shared his feelings regarding a meeting that his mother was having with
his English teacher. Ryan was confident that he would Finish his Engiish 12 course although
his teacher was not so sure. Although he respected her knowledge and teacbing ability. he
resented the language and methods that she used to express her concem for his progress.
Their dialogue served to s trengthen his resolve that he was in control of his o m destiny . This
is an example of how the students have developed a strong sense of who they are and what
they are capable of. How Ryan views himself and others has been shaped by al1 his
interactions, both positive and negative. How he views himself, in turn, affects his behaviour.
Ryan's identity is molded by these interactions and the resulting judgments he makes
conceming their personal relevance. As Taylor (199 1) says.
To have an identity is to know "where you are corning from" when it cornes to questions of value, or issues of importance. Your identity defines the background against which you know where you stand on such matters. . . . [Human beings] sense of who they are is defined partly by some identification of what are tmly important issues. or standards, or goods, or demands; and correlative to this, by some sense of where they stand relative to these or where they measure up on them or both. (pp. 305-306)
The development of a dialogical self f o m a natunl completion to the circie of
relationships that 1 envisioned to illustrate the students' experiences. The student-self
relationship is informed by the interactions that the student has with others. hlissing from the
relationship diagram depicted in Figure 1. however, is the fact that the teachers and peers
themselves are involved in their own dialogical processes that serve to define who they are.
This is a logical extension of the notion that al1 people in the process are not stagnant and
defined by Our everyday understanding of the labels of student, teacher and peer. Robinson
(1 994) stresses the importance of the interchangeability of these roles for the empowerin;
effect of open-ended dialogue. In a sense, student becomes teacher and teacher becomes
student, which results in a further perturbation and growth of one's own sense of self (this
has certainly been the case for me as a mearcher, teacher and reflective person during this
pesonaiiy illurninating research process). Ryan offers sagely advice to teachers regarding the
importance of dialogue, not oniy through his words but through his energy and tone that
indicate how emphatic he was about this:
That's what needs to be done definiteiy is more talkr, more get togethers. When I came in here, I didn 't think of you as a teacher. I thought of you as Mr. Connor wanting to talk or even jicrt Trev wanting io talk. I think that made it even better.
As stated earlier. "Education wonhy of the narne is essentidiy education of charactei'
(Buber, 1968. p. 104). This seems to ring tnie as I consider the experiences of the students
involved in this study. Their attention to relationships and the affective cornponents of their
program resonates with Buber's claim. The students' development was a result of the
dialogicd interactions they had with teachers, other students, the C U ~ C U ~ U ~ and themselvrs.
These interactions form the bais for what 1 have referred to as the implicit curriculum. This
real component of the curriculum attends to the development of the students' character and
values. This development is a result of the dialogicd nature of the relationships. The meaning
that the students' make of their experience is constituted in the shared understanding that
comes out of their interactions (Taylor, 199 1). This shapes their identity and in tum what they
will do with their future.
Chapter 6
Conclusions
The objective of this thesis was to put forward an account of students' experiences at
NESS. The interviews with the students ailowed me to constntct profiles that were able to
capture, aibeit in a limited sense. what these students h d experienced in the program at
NESS. In retrospect, however. 1 reaiize that I have done more than offer a description and
synthesis of the participants* experiences at NESS. This thesis pub fonvard a way of
understanding the experiences of the participants in the educational program at NESS. The
contribution of the work is a normative claim about the way we ought to understand studrnts'
educationd expenences at NESS.
The students' profiles in Chapter 3 provide a sense of what it was like to be one of the
participants in the study but, as I came to ternis with the data, I began to develop a wriy of
interpreting and understanding their accounts. This understanding. although initiated from the
data was not inductively derived from the accounts. I "played with the themes and ideas that
emerged in an effort to make sense of the students* experiences. I began a dialogue with the
data and the literature that informed the resulting construct of relationships. The notion of the
wheel with the student at the hub and the teacher. cumculum. peers and self on the rim wu a
creation that came out of this process. This modei c m not be inductively determined from the
data but is a theory that is useful in its ability to understand the way in which snidents*
relationships, in any setting, can be viewed.
As a result, the upshot of this work is theoretical, not empirical. and the validity
resides in the consistency between my rendition of the understanding of the students'
experiences and the literature. The validity is in the coherence of the ideas contained in the
theory and the ways in which Buber, Hawkins, and Taylor have descnbed human interaction.
The notion that a student participates in four dialogical relationships requires that we reflect on
the ways we interact with students. If a students' sense of self is informed by the relationships
with these "others," then it is critical to establish an environment that ailows for these
relationships to flourish. It is also critical, as the conuolling agent in the educational setting,
that teachers understand the notion of "inclusion" if they t d y want to be a part of this
important diaiogicai relationship.
The importance of this thesis is contained in the notion that w e are dialogical beings.
Dialogism descnbes the undestanding that a person's identity exists not within themselvss but
is siniated in relationships they have with objects and other persons. Our construct of self
resides in the interactions and conversations that we have with others. Our sense of self is in ri
constant state of flux and is infonned by the developrnent of our relationships with those that
we come into contact with on a daily basis. Our "self' is also affected by Our interactions with
"others" through different media: books. television. cornputers. etc. Not only are we chünged
through the interactions with these various others (both animate and inanimate) but we affect
change in "them" as well. The interchangeability and fluidity, not only of our own identity but
of those with whom we come in contact. is the essence of the dialogical view of self
(obviously the "others" are al1 "selves" in their own right). I wish to explore the implications
of this view of the development of self in this concluding chapter. Educationally. these ideas
need to be considered when teachers decide what, where and how to teach.
The findings of this study emphasize the importance of relationships in the educational
setting. Education that focuses on the student requires that attention be directed at examining
dialogical relationships as they relate to students. What might that type of system look like'?
NESS is an example of an institution that is atternpiing to provide students with an education
that requires their active participation. This is done by focusing on improving the student-
teacher-cuniculurn relationships.
My intentions were to examine the educational system of NESS through the eyes of its
students. How do students make sense of their experiences at NESS? What is it that the
snidents value in their educational experience? What 1 found most interesting is that the key
elements of the students' experiences are Iess concemed with the system and focus more on
interpersonal relations. It is these interactions that are in the forefront of these students' minds.
The way they are treated, the level of respect they are accorded, and their penonal growth as a
result are issues that appear to be salient to their experiences.
It is perhaps not surprising that relationships ernerged as the cornrnon element from the
students' interviews. The closeness with which students and teachers must work together in
this setting results in numerous daily one-on-one interactions. The student-teacher relationship
and the character development that takes place when these two participants tnily engage one
another seems to be central to students' expenence, as the following excerpt from the
interview with Ji11 portrays:
Trevor: What is the most impurtunt thing that goes on here?
Jilk I worild ttrink the close interactions with the teachers. Yort çarz sit down with tliem and talk with them and you can tdl them yow point and they can tell yori [theirs]. I kind of like thnt because it gives me a sense of feeling rhat t k y are Zistmirzy tu me. And not jrist like "oh okny, thhankr for your comment birt for why. . . . Whot yoii say and your opinions. thqv actidly acknowledge that your snying them and you have an opinion. . . . I think it 's good becarise they listen to ris. . . . I iike tlrose teacher/stzîden t seminars becaiise if really helps to knoiv tire teachers and tu nll them how we frel.
This finding suggests that the way we suucture school systems should focus much
more on relationship development because, once that happens, then curriculum cm be
considered and explored arnidst those positive and productive relationships. The simplicity of
Jill's answer belies the profound impact that relationships should have on practice. She
obviously sees the interactions that she has with teachers as building blocks to their
relationship. This in tum shapes who she is by the very fact that she feels valued and
respected by those with whom she is in contact. There is no mention of the explicit curriculum
and the importance of covering the material. The predorninant message coming from Ji11 and
ail of the other students is that they yearn for those interactions where they feel valued. They
also leam from those same interactions. The learning that takes place can most certainiy be
inteuectual in that the students explore various concepts and gain new insights. 1 submit.
however. that this is the minor component of learning that takes place. The most endunng
component of these interactions is that students l e m about themselves. As a result of their
conversations, there is an intemal dialogue that occurs as the students make sense of the
cacophony of voices that inform their sense of self. Taylor (1 99 1) cornments on this type of
dialogue:
F i s ] places dialope at the very center of our understanding of human life. an indispensable key to its comprehension. and requires a transforrned understanding of language. . . . Human beings are constituted in conversation: and hence what gets internalized in the mature subject is not the relation of others, but the whole conversation, with the interanimation of its voices. Only a theory of this kind c m do justice to the dialogical nature of self (pp. 3 13- 3 14).
lill's sense of self is located in the space occupied by the dialogue that she shares with
teachers and students at NESS. Her understanding of herself is constantly being informed by
her interaction not only with the people but also with the curiiculum and the environment thrit
surrounds her. Macy's ( 199 1) notion of "self-as-process" helps to conceptualizr this dyniimiç
interdependence:
The perspective of mutual causality brings to view a world where "everything flows." To be interdependent and reciprocally affecting is to be in process. In this fluid state of affairs the self is no exception. . . . Basic to [this theory] is the perception of the self as process: Mutud causality . . . involves the perception that the subject of thought and action is in actuality a dynamic pattern of activity interacting with its environment and insepamble from experience. (pp. 107-1 14)
1 am making the assumption that the reason for exploring the idea of self and the
ramifications of actions that affect this notion is that the purpose of education is to foster the
development of "character" in young people (Buber, 1968). It is Kohn (1994) who helps to
draw these philosophicd constmcts into the practical realm:
We should embrace affective education, but in the context of building community rather than attending to each individual ~ep~mtely. We ought to work with students rather than doing things to them. . . . Students do not corne to believe they are important, valued, and capable just because they are told that this is so or made to recite it. . . . Students acquire a sense of significance from doing significant things, h m being active participants in their own education. (p. 284)
This active participation means that teachers must respond to the students' need to be
part of a dialogical relationship. The analysis of students' experiences in this study directs our
attention toward a reflective practice that acknowledges the dialogical nature of self. Tachers
need to be asking themselves how they treat their students and whether they themselves have
committed to be a part of this kind of dialogue. The students also need to be prepared to
participate in this discourse. A monologue will not suffice in meeting the needs of these
students. It will simply appear as a dissonant gong among the other competing "voices." To
commit to this dialogue is to give freely of oneself. As Buber (1958) comrnents,
In order to help the reaiization of the best potentiaiities in the pupil's life, the teacher must really meet him as the definite peson he is in his potentiality and his actuality . . . He must be aware of him as a whole king and affirm him in this wholeness. . . . He must practice the kind of realization w hic h 1 cal1 inclusion. (p. 132)
Buber is clearly outlining the environment that allows for dialogical relationships to
b s is also the starting point at which teachers c m begin to truly attend to the implicit
curriculum. This curriculum cannot be taught explicitly except through modeling and Living the
cuniculum. If teachen want their students to l e m respect, this cm only be done through
interacting daily in a respectful manner. If teachers want their students to lem responsibility.
the students must be given responsibility. If teachers want their students to adopt certain
values, they must live those values. If teachen want their students to becorne reflective
people, they must ailow students the opportunity to reflect, they must mode1 reflective
behaviour and they rnust develop a community where reflection is a valued practice.
If we want to help children grow into compassionate and responsible people. we have to change the way the classroom works and feels, not just the way each separate member of classroom acts. Our emphasis should not be on forming individual characten so much as on transforrning educational stnictures. (Kohn, 1997, p. 437)
The students in this study continually rerninded me that they are people who are
desperate to engage in thoughtful dialogue as part of the process of self-discovery. 1 had
forgotten what it was like to be a student and the power that one @es away to those who are
in the traditional position of authority. It is not unlike the relationships that 1 have forged
during my work in this master's program. My most valuable courses have been those in
which 1 felt 1 had a voice and I was one of a group of people working through different
problems. The content or curriculum mattered Little as 1 reflect on my experience months or
even years later. It is the relationships that 1 formed with other students and the extent ro
which I felt validated by the various professors that has left a Iasting impression. It is also the
Freshness and dignity that my advisors give to my ideas that have been the only thing that has
ktpt me froni giving up. As 1 penevere in getting to know the students in this study throuph
this thesis, 1 have become one of them as 1 recognize the struggle of feeling ovenvhrlmed.
wanting to quit and not feeling adequate to complete the task. This inner struggle or dialogue
appears in al1 of the students' lives and 1 believe is a cntical part of their education expenence.
Missing from my concluding analysis thus far is the mention that this dialogical view
of relationships also requires that we reexamine how we allow students to interact w ith the
cumculum. As was suggested in Chapter 5. both students and curriculum are changed
through thek mutual interaction. If we are ro do justice to this dialogical view of the
educational setting, then we need make sure that students are active participants in the choice
and development of cumculum. Even in a system where students are given responsibility and
freedom with regard to pacing. where teachers are cornmitted to developing deeper
relationships with students, there needs to be an oppominity for students to engage in
"dialogue" with the curriculum. This is consistent with the notion that knowledge is socially
constructed and generated through an individual's active participation. " ffiow ledge emerges
only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient. continuing, hopcfitl
inquiry people punue in the world. with the world. and with each other" (Freire, 1970, p.
58). This is the final component of my consmict of the student as a "dialogical self."
1 have contuiudly been reminded during this project of what education is really about.
These are real students with very complex Lives. Too often teachers try to fit them into boxes
with which they may not feel cornfortable. If teachers wouid take the tirne to meet each snident
in his or her own place, to commit to a common discourse that respects dl involved, they
would then be able to be part of something that the students have identified as valuable. 1
believe it is appropriate to conclude this thesis with the words of Andy, who makes this point
so aptly:
I 've learned so much because of talking to other people and just try ing to Zeam a littie bit from every person. It 's really a lot different than any other school I think. . . . The students have to do a lot of talking as well as îrying to get across to the teachers how they understand it. I think that 's important. It irnproves someone 's ability to commcinicate with another person. If yoii werr to ask me to do this interview four years ngo I probably rvodd have clioked or not been very Aelpfiil. . . .This school almost teaches yoori that jiist througli its qstern withorit yori learning it tlzrorigh other courses. Jlist being social rvith other people. . . . I dori 't see it corningMm anyvhere else so it nziist be coming fronz the school system.
References
Aikin, W. ( 1942). The story of the Eight-Year Stiidy. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Aoki, T. ( 1993). Legitimating lived curriculum: Towards a curricular landscape of multiplie iîy . Journal of Cicm~culiim & Supervision. 8 (3). 255-269.
Atkinson, P., & Harnmersley, M. (1994 ). Ethnography and participant observation. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Aandbook of qualitative research ( p p . 245-260). London: Sage.
Bakhtin, M. ( 198 1). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University o f Texas Press.
Baicaen, P. ( 1993). Intrudiicing Thomas Haney Centre: "To seek clrallenge anil isperimce sriccess. " Unpublished Master's thesis: Simon Fraser University.
Bloom, B .S. ( 1987). A response to Slavin's rnastery learning reconsidered. Reviric uj' Edrrcational Research, 57 (4), 507-508.
British Columbia Ministry of Education. Skills and Training. ( 1997). Career and pcrsond planning 8 to 12: Integrated Resowce P~ickage.
Britzman, D. ( 199 1). Practice makes practice: A critical stildy of [eaming [O teacll. Albany. NY: State University of New York Press.
Brookfield, S . (Ed.). (1985). Self-directed leaming: From tlieory ro prnctice. S a n Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Buber, M. (1968). Between man and man. New York: The MacMillan Company.
Buber, M. (1958). 1 and thou. New York: Charles Scribner.
Day, J.. & Tappan, M. (1996). The narrative approach to mord development: From the epistemic subject to dialogical selves. Human Developrnent, 39 (2). 67-82.
Deci, F. & Ryan, R. (1990). In Dienstbier, R. (Ed.). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personaliq (p . 248) .. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Della-Dora, D., & Blanchard, L. (1979). Moving roivard self-directed learning: Higlilights of relevant research and of promising practices. Vuginia: ASCD.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). ( 1994) Handbook of qriolitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Dewey, J. ( 19 1 6). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press.
Doyle, D. (1997). Education and character: A conservative view. Phi Delta Kappan, 78 (6), 44043.
Edel, A. (1982). Aristotle and his philosophy. Chapel Hill: University of Nonh Carolina Press.
Egan, K. (1996). Competing voices for the curriculum. In M. Wideen & M.C. Courtland (Eds.), The struggle for cumkcrlwn: Education. the state, and the corporate secror. Burnaby, B.C.: Canadian Association for Cumculum Studies. Institute for Siudies in Teacher Education. Simon Fraser University.
Ellen, R. (1984). Ethnographic resenrch: A guide to general conhct. New York: Academic Press.
Ellis. N. ( 1997). Toivard a common agenda: A case study of teacher and srcident roles irt lin innovotive seconday school. Unpublished Master's thesis: Simon Fraser University.
Erickson, F., & Schultz, J. (1992). Students' experience of the curriculum. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curricul~im ( p p . 465-485). New York: Macmillan.
Freire. P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Seabury Press.
French. B. ( 1 993). A critique of the philosophy of mainstrearning students ivitii sprciril educationnl needs. Unpublished Master's thesis: Simon Fraser University.
Fullm, M. (1991). n e neiv meaning of edrrcational change. New York: Teachers Collegr: Press.
Glasser. W. ( 1992). The quality school: Managing srudents withoiit coercion. New York: Harper Collins.
Glesne, C., & Peshkin. A. ( 1992). Becoming qlialitative researchers. New York: Longham.
Goodlad. J. (1979). Curriculum Inquiry: The stridy of c~trricul~rm prnctice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Goodlad. J. ( 1984). A place called school: Prospects for the fiitirre. New York: McGraw- Hill.
Hawkins, D. (1974). The informed vision. New York: Agathon Press.
Hechinger, F. (1975). Summerhill: For and against. In J.M. Rich (Ed.), Innawa~ions in education: Reformers and their critics (pp. 135- 143). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Holt, J. (1975). How Children Fail from Innovations in Education. In J.M. Rich (Ed.). Innovations in edcrcarion: Refonners and their critics ( p p . 49-57). Boston: Ally n and Bacon.
Jackson, P. ( 1992). Conceptions of curriculum and cumculcm specialists. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Hundbook of research on curriculum (3-40). New York: Macmillan.
Kapfer, P., & Ovard, G. (197 1). Preparing and using individtialized Ieaming pcickngesfor upgraded, ccntinuous progress education. New Jersey: Educational Technology hblications.
Kemy, A. (1992). Aristotle on the peSect life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kohn, A. ( 1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's. and other bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Kohn, A. ( 1994). The Tmth About Self Esteem. Phi Delta Kappan. 76 (4). 272-283.
Kohn, A. (l997). How Not to Teach Values: A Critical Look at Character Education. Phi- Delta-Kappan, 78 (6), 428439.
Kohn, A. (199 1). Caring Kids: The Role of the Schools. Phi-Delta-Kappan. 72 ( 7). 496- 506.
Kreisberg, S. ( 1992). Transforming powec Domination. enipowennent and edrication. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Latzko, W., & Saunders, D. ( L 995). Four days ivith Dr. Deming: A strategy jor rrzoriern rnerhods of management. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Macy , J. ( 199 1). Miitrml causality in buddhism and general systems theop. Albany: S uny Press.
Maxwell, J. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Edui.cctiorici1 Revieiv, 62 (3), 279-300.
McKeon, R. ( 1947). An introduction tu Aristotle. Chicago: Random House.
Mehrassa. B. (1995). Toward an intemal view of mathematics: A story of dynarnic growth in a secondary school. Unpublished Master's thesis: Simon Fraser University.
Neil. A.S. ( 1975). Why have exarns? In J. M. Rich (Ed.), Innovations in edciccztion: Refomers and their cri'tics ( p p . 13 1- 134). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Nicholls, J. G. (1995). Conclusion: Threats to creativity and cornmunity. In J. Nicholls & T. Thorkildsen (Eds.), "Reasonr for learning" Erpanding the converscition on stiident-teacher colZaboration ( p p . 162- 1 67). New York: Teachers College Press.
Pepper, S.C. ( 1942). World hypotheses: A stldy in evidence. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P., Taubman, P. ( 1995). Understanding crirric~ilitm. New York: Peter Lang.
Roberts, D. (1982). The place of qualitative research in science education. Journal of Researcli in Science Teaching. 19 (41, 277-292.
Robinson, H. (1994). The ethnography of empowerment: The transfomative poiver of cfussroom interaction. London: The Falmer Press.
Shor, 1. (1986). Culturewars: School and society in the conservative restoration. 1969-1 984. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Shor, I., & Freire, P. (1987). What is the "dialogical method of teaching? lorimal of Education, 169 (3), 11-31.
Sivia, A. (1998). Erploring leaming conversations: Empowering practices in edrrcntion. Unpublished Master's thesis: Simon Fraser University.
Taylor, C. (1991) The dialogical self. In D. Hiley, .J. Bohrnan & R. Shusteman (Eds.). The interpretive t~irn: Phifosophy, science, ntfture (pp. 304-3 14). Ithica. NY: Cornell University Press.
Appendix A
"Everyoae seek challenge and experience success."
This is the school's Mission Staternent that was developed by staff in the year prior to
opening. The staff also developed the following exit outcornes or student goals as a means of
focusing the school's vision for it's studenü. The goal is that students at NESS will become:
High Quality Producers who: mate products and services that consistently reflect high standards; take responsibility for results: use time management skills e ffec tively .
Coilaborative Workers who: express ideas and needs; accept and value the ideas and needs of others; work closely with othen in a changing environment: find creative options and look for consensus: act with integrity; work cooperatively in both cornpetitive and non-cornpetitive environments.
Global Citizens who: interact positively with people of varied cultures; identify the environmental impact of decisions and promote the health of the world's environment; promote the welfare of al1 people in the world.
Socidy Responsible Conaibuton who: participate in the political process: Iive in accordance with the just laws of society; process, assimilate and synthrsize information to determine actions; participate in life-long leaming.
Self-Actudized Individuals who: value themsehes as positive. wonhwhile people: set and achieve personal and social goals; assess information to solvc problems; take responsibility of one's own emotional and physicai well-being.
Communicative Persons who: can intenct using a variety of communication processes and information sources.
Creative Contributon who: develop creative solutions and implement new ideas; experirnent and take risks; participate in and influence change.
Appendix B
The basic questions upon which I based my interviews are as follows:
1. How long have you been a student at NESS?
2. Describe your expenence as a student at NESS?
3. What is a normal day like at NESS?
4. Describe the NESS systern of education?
5. What are the advantages of this system for you'? Disadvantages'?
6. What do you like about the system? Dislike?
7. What advice would you give a new snident just corning into this system'?
8. Do you think this system is working for the majority of the students? Why or why
![How interpersonal synchrony facilitates early prosocial ... · 17 While short-term experiences of interpersonal synchrony in a dyadic context encourage 18 directed helpfulness [9],](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/6012111cb1b08b6c947d13d4/how-interpersonal-synchrony-facilitates-early-prosocial-17-while-short-term.jpg)
