|
A Pinch
of Old, A Dash of New:
Teachers Blending Their Autobiographical Voices
Monica
Taylor, Lesley Coia, Vinni Gallassio, Jeanine Giovannone, Allison
Leventhal, David Olah, & Maria Premus
Introduction
In this paper we discuss
the complexities that arise when teachers and teacher educators
use autobiographical texts as a method of research to reflect on
their personal/professional selves as teachers. Our discussion of
these issues is drawn from an ongoing research project on teachers'
autobiographies that involves members of a group of educators at
various stages in their career who have been meeting regularly to
write and share their autobiographies. The impetus behind the group
is to investigate teaching as a reflective activity; if this is
true, we need to find ways to reflect more deeply on the connection
between our own autobiographies and those of our students as we
work to become more effective educators. To do this, it is vital
that we present ourselves in the process of working through issues
of personal and professional identity. In an attempt to do this
here, we experimented with a format that strives to capture multiple
perspectives of our autobiographical community by presenting the
actual voices of the participants.
We feel that it is important
to collect data and present the findings of groups such as ours
since there is very little public documentation of this type of
research. The literature is silent on the existence of this type
of democratic teacher driven autobiographical work. Making our work
public in this way can, we believe, perform two services. In the
current climate of the importance of research-based teaching (Cochran-Smith,
2002), it is essential to hear and validate teachers' voices and
experiences. In addition, this type of work adds significantly to
the debate on what constitutes research into teachers' lives and
work.
Bomer (1995) writes,
The stories we tell, more than any other act of language reveal
our most dearly held theories about 'how life goes' or at least
'how life might go.' Our experience forms us; what we understand
of experience is what we understand ourselves to be, our identities.
We are the stories we tell" (p. 156).
For the purposes of our
research, autobiographical reflection is first and foremost undertaken
with the intention of making sense, or making meaning, of one's
own life as an educator. The educational significance of autobiography
lies in its ability to help us understand our present experiences
and those yet to occur (Abbs, 1974). Stories about the past are
also about the future. It is this insight that motivated us to use
autobiographical reflection in our writing group.
Autobiography is a narrative
method that encourages educators to critically reflect on their
experiences in theoretical and social contexts. As Ritchie and Wilson
(2000) state, "Without the opportunity for critical analysis
of experience, teachers and students have no way to see how their
experience is itself constructed in and through language and through
institutional and cultural ideologies"(p. 15). Teachers are
traditionally seen as lacking agency. Sunstein (1994) states that
"a teacher is marginalized in the system of the schools; she
must muffle her voice most of the time" (p. 47). Writing autobiography
enables us to focus on our own experiences and set our own agendas,
encouraging the process of conscientization (Freire, 1970)
or the power to understand and know through reflection and action.
As experiences are discussed and analyzed, we are able to name,
reflect, and reinterpret our own actions and practices. Autobiographical
writing objectifies occurrences in our lives so that we can become
spectators looking in from the outside. It provides us with a space
to explore our experiences and beliefs freely, to encourage a "consciousness
of possibility" (Greene, 1988, p. 16).
We choose autobiography
as a vehicle because while we believe it to be a powerful form of
self-reflection, we are very aware of the dangers of promoting an
individualism antithetical to many of our beliefs about professional
collaboration and community building. We are especially interested
in what happens when teachers come together and share their autobiographies,
and in fact construct their autobiographies collaboratively. What
happens to the idea of the self as essentially private? Do we overlook
our differences in the desire for community? Is our writing different
when we write for an audience of our peers as opposed to our selves
alone?
Although autobiography
is traditionally considered an individual and private endeavor,
for reflective educational practice we recognize the importance
of writing autobiographies in a collaborative community of learners.
Florio-Ruane (2000) asserts, "Personal narratives have been
criticized for their tendency to isolate the teacher as both source
of and solution to the problems of her practice" (p. xxii).
Teachers who write autobiography for self-reflection are often viewed
as "Lone Ranger" figures heroically solving their pedagogical
dilemmas in isolation. Rather than taking a dualistic perspective
that opposes the personal and the social, we believe that the use
of autobiography in teacher reflection relies on a complex interplay
of the personal and social. We believe that it is the interaction
between personal writing and dialogue among members of a supportive
community that push us to reflect deeply and critically.
Who We Are: What
We Do
Our writing group, located in the New York City area, is composed
of ten educators at various stages of their careers, including new
teachers who have recently graduated from teacher education programs,
veteran teachers, staff developers, and teacher educators. Although
there is only one male teacher in the group, we are quite diverse
in terms of age, ethnicity, and teaching experience. Our writing
group emerged from an informal partnership that developed between
the education department of a small liberal arts college and a local
urban public school that offers a kindergarten through twelfth grade
education. Prior to the organization of the writing group, a trusting
and respectful relationship was nurtured between teacher educators,
cooperating teachers, and pre-service teachers. It was during this
rapport-building period that the formation of an autobiographical
writing group that would meet periodically to share and discuss
writing was proposed. The initial intention was to provide a time
and space when educators could write personal narratives and come
together to talk about their pieces. The concept of the group was
embraced and we began meeting biweekly.
During our first session,
we brainstormed possible topics but since then the topics of our pieces
have developed from the individual writer, either in response to issues
raised in previous sessions or independently. The format for our meetings
is quite unstructured, and may involve the oral reading of either
parts or full autobiographical texts and group discussions. The shared
texts are either new pieces or the rewriting of a draft. The discussions
address the themes and experiences on which the writing focuses or
ideas for further composing. Usually, all of the members do not share
writing at each meeting. At the end of each session, we reflect in
writing about the purpose and process of our endeavors.
As we continually negotiate
both our purpose for the writing group and the direction in which
it will take, we have grown to become a strong, supportive learning
community. As our community develops, our members often look to
the sessions as a time to reflect on our experiences and pedagogy
and reinvent our identity as teachers. We have grown to rely on
our discussions as a form of support and an outlet for meditation
as was the case after the September 11th incident when our members
anxiously looked forward to meeting as a group to talk in a different
manner (this topic was one that was discussed continually in other
parts of our lives) about the impact on our teaching and our classrooms.
Methodology and
Analysis
The data for this research project, drawn qualitatively from our
writing group, encompassed a collection of our written autobiographical
pieces, reflective field notes on the process of writing autobiographically
in a collaborative setting and the place of personal narratives
in teacher self reflection, and transcribed audio tapes of our meetings.
This research provides, as Merriam (1988) writes, 'a rich, "thick"
description' (p. 11) of the ways in which educators use autobiography
as a tool for reflection in a community of learners. Because all
of the members of the writing group contributed to the data with
their writings, reflections, and transcribed dialogues and actively
participated in the analysis of the data, the mode of our analysis
was participatory and introspective. We moved beyond the role of
"observant participant" (Erickson, 1996) and acted as
both researchers and informants. The data collection and analysis
for this study occurred simultaneously. As a group, we examined
data as they were collected and then arranged the data into "manageable
units, synthesizing them, searching for patterns, discovering what's
important and what is to be learned" (Bogdan & Biklen,
1992, p. 153). As the research progressed, the data were analyzed
inductively by means of constant comparison (Glaser & Strauss,
1967) and by means of triangulation (Gordon, 1980). Our inferences
became categories once they were crosschecked across data sources
for continuity. In other words, as the data were examined, we looked
for regularities and patterns of words, phrases, behaviors, images,
and perspectives. These categories were further developed through
dialogic analysis when as both the researchers and the researched,
we discussed and crosschecked the emergence of themes.
Our autobiographical reflections
have progressed from individual writing to collaborative analysis
of our narratives. As mentioned above, the group was initially set
up with very little structure on what and how the autobiographies
would be written in order to allow the members to determine the
shape and outcomes. As a group, we knew several other members of
the group in various capacities, but we did not all know each other
equally well. While we had all worked in the same public school,
some of us had mentored others as university faculty and as co-operating
teachers, others were colleagues, and some were recent student teachers.
The very formation of the group and the building of a sense of common
purpose and mission were important given these relationships which,
as we shall show, had important implications for our findings.
This is a work in progress.
We present findings on the formation of identity through autobiographical
reflection in a group setting around common concerns. Our findings,
on the conception of the self as it is rewritten around our own
professional concerns, reveal the promises as well as some of the
challenges raised by the use of the autobiographical method in our
desire to become more effective educators.
Perspectives
In this article, we share
four distinct perspectives on the issues of audience, self-censorship,
collaborative writing, and the value of community that have emerged
through the analysis of the autobiographical writing we produced
and the reflections occasioned by these writings (from the transcripts
of the audio tapes and field notes). One of the unique aspects of
our work is the way in which we collectively examine and analyze
the data; we are both researchers and the researched. Through this
process, we discovered the emergent themes presented here. By presenting
four different perspectives we hope to show the complexities of
the autobiographical method, how it raises issues of personal and
professional identity in a context that has implications for teaching
and learning K-16.
We present this section
of perspectives in a variety of styles to capture the distinct voices
represented in our community of autobiographers. These examples
most clearly represent the themes that emerged from our sessions
and our subsequent analysis of the data. Each perspective is written
in a format that we believe is most appropriate to the content of
its author/s. Each reflects a particular experience, however the
perspectives are not particular to the author/s: the emerging themes
overlap and are expressed by the distinct voices of the members
of our autobiographical community.
We begin with Jeanine's
illustration of her reflective process and writing. She provides
a sample of her autobiographical writing as well as her actual reflections
both before and after her piece is shared. Vinni and Allison collaboratively
write the second perspective as they examine the ways in which their
writing has been affected from their move as lifelong writers of
reflective journals to autobiographers within a community of teachers.
The third section is a dialogic e-mail interaction between Monica
and Lesley that addresses the ways in which their narratives have
developed as they strive to move from their roles as teacher educators
to co-autobiographers in the community. The final section, written
collaboratively by Maria and Dave, is an historical account of the
journey that our group has traveled through the bumps and turns
of establishing a trusting, safe community of writers.
The newbie: Jeanine
We begin the discussion
with an autobiographical piece that Jeanine wrote and shared with
our group for the first time during a collaborative presentation
at the University of Pennsylvania Urban Ethnography Conference
in the spring of 2002. We incorporated this reading into our presentation
in order to provide the audience with a sample of our group at work.
The audience was able to witness the ways in which we respond to
a piece of writing and participate in that response. We include
this series of writings here for much the same reasons: to provide
a context for our collaborative endeavor, set the stage for the
perspectives that follow, and to demonstrate Jeanine's viewpoint
as she went through the process of composing, writing, and sharing
the autobiographical piece publicly with a wide audience and later
reflecting on the experience. Jeanine includes a reflection both
before and after the narrative is shared to capture her process
and perceptions as she moves through the various writing stages.
Her narrative is in response to a discussion we had at meeting the
previous December about the feelings that we have on Sunday evenings.
Pre-reflective writing.
I sat down to write this piece as I had so many times before. Nothing
was really different. I knew that I could scribble some thoughts
down on paper that would capture the way that I was feeling at that
particular moment. I would be able to measure the validity of my
feelings when a few days later I would read this piece to the group.
Pre-presenting writing.
When we decided as a group to present an unshared written piece
and carry on our autobiographical research in front of an audience,
I knew that doing so would be a powerful way to show people how
the group works. The difficulty came when I realized it would be
my piece that would be shared. It was hard for me to look at this
piece that was already written and intended for an audience of "friends"
in mind, and now see it as my deepest thoughts spread out amongst
strangers. With this difficulty in mind however, I knew that I had
to hold strong against my urges to look at the piece before the
presentation. I knew that if I did, that I would make inevitable
changes and it would no longer be authentic. As difficult as this
was, I resisted.
Autobiographical writing.
It's Sunday night. I'm watching The Practice and not sure
what I feel like writing about. I'm refusing to do any schoolwork.
I'm not too backed up though, because we've been spending the last
few weeks prepping for the English Language Arts test. I'm scared
of this test. I want my kids to do well. I've been with them for
two years now and I feel that they could be doing better, therefore,
I spend most of my time beating myself up about this. I'm sitting
here thinking about our last meeting and what I want to write about.
I know that we reflected on the past five months or gearing up for
the next five, but I'm finding it difficult to think of either on
any academic terms. Maybe its due to the overwhelming preparation
for this test that has got my brain fried, but at THIS very moment,
when thinking of my kids, I can only reflect on my emotional connections
with them. While the first half of this year bound all of us to
our children in a unique way that will never be lost, other losses
have tied me to my little ones this year. My class for the last
year and a half cannot be defined by academics, I feel.
When I think of my class
I feel it has been driven by and in a sense taken over
by emotion, both theirs and mine. At this time, all I can see are
two children suspended for pulling down one another's pants; anxiety
attacks; and two students now left to a single parent home, due
to a sudden death. I reflect on my class and can only see John asking
my advice on how to stop his chest pains, Kyla needing so desperately
to be a kid and to hear the words "no one could take the place
of mommy," and finally, I see a kid whose name made me shiver
when learning he would be mine, stroll into my class after hours
and show signs of feelings. In one word, EMOTIONAL. It's the only
word that I could use to describe my reflections of the first half
of this year, at this time anyway. I wonder if they could see it,
or will they suddenly be able to one day. While my emotional connections
are very important to me, I can't help but to be bothered by the
fact that I am not able to reflect on the curricular areas met,
or even care about the academics. It's bothering me right now. The
fact is, I don't even know yet if I like my job, but I do know that
I'm not ready to leave just yet, and that's because I never know
who might be lurking at the door come 3:00. So I'll keep trying
and keep learning and learn the curriculum better so that I will
be able to reflect academically more often, but, if it's okay, I'll
lead with the emotions at the wheel. I'm at the point where I am
still a newbie, but I know the ropes. Yet, for as much as I teach,
there is so much more for me to learn.
When will I stop questioning
myself? I know that the answer to this question is that a good teacher
will never stop questioning herself, but it is difficult to feel
comfortable with that answer. When I am the teacher, aren't I supposed
to have the answers?
Post-sharing writing.
As difficult as I thought that this experience of reading my personal
thoughts was, it would prove to be both nerve racking and exciting.
As I read my piece aloud to this small audience, I realized the
fear expressed by Vinni, one of the other group members. Are they
hearing what I am saying, or are they hearing what they think that
I am saying? There wasn't a sense of security anymore. I felt that
these people would judge me on what they heard. As I continued to
read, I became very nervous and uncomfortable.
However, at the same time
being surrounded by my group gave me a sense of security. It was
wonderful to realize the sense of trust I felt for my autobiographical
group. As I finished reading, the floor was opened up to discussion
of my piece. It started as it normally would, with pieces of advice
and the shared opinions of the writing. I immediately began to calm
down. As the session went on it was thrilling to see this audience
becoming involved and taking part in this process of sharing along
with us. I was grateful for this, for it allowed me to experience
even more objective feedback to my writing. I heard wonderful things
from our new expanded autobiographical group. In the end, I took
away important ideas and objective opinions about the kind of person
that I am.
The journalers:
Vinni and Allison
Vinni and Allison collaboratively
wrote the next perspective, which examines the common and different
ways in which they have responded to moving from writing privately
to writing for a more public audience. As they prepared this perspective,
they analyzed their autobiographical pieces, reflections on writing
as members of a group, and the transcripts of our discussions. They
realized through this process that they both greatly valued autobiographical
writing but that they reacted to similar issues, especially that
of audience, in very different ways. The following is their analysis
of their perspectives of being lifelong autobiographers who are
now sharing private writing with an audience.
Vinni and Allison.
Last year we worked very closely, teaching multiage classes (first
and second grades) which allowed us to plan our lessons and activities
together. It was during this time we realized that we both shared
a love of writing. We often found ourselves discussing our journaling
and deciding on the best way to express our passion to our students.
We shared our writing but only writing that we would share with
the students. We each kept a "school journal" that contained
some insightful writing but mostly around topics and stories that
the students could hear. This "safe" writing was the only
kind shared between the two of us. It seemed obvious to us that
the next step in this process would be to join this autobiography
group.
Besides writing for this
group, we also analyze our autobiographical pieces and reflect on
the process. We are very interested in the process of our writing
and more specifically in examining the course of our own development
as writers throughout this process. As a result, we decided to write
this perspective about our writing and how it has changed or been
affected by a public audience.
Joining the group generated
many different topics and stories from the past. It became evident
in our sharing sessions that some people in the group enjoyed sharing
more than others. As a group, we eventually spent a session discussing
how we felt in the sharing process. We wrote about our experiences
and noticed that the common thread in our writing, unlike other
group members, was the issue of "voice." We shared both
similar and different perceptions. We decided to read our work aloud
in hopes of finding themes that emerged. We soon realized our perceptions
revolved around similar themes but often in very different ways.
We have discovered that
writing autobiography has always been a part of our lives and that
our writing has gone through change and transition throughout this
process of being members of an autobiography group. In addition,
we have become very aware of our audience. Allison believes
that she continues to write about issues on which she would have
focused in her private writing. Vinni, in contrast, has noticed
that her writing continues to contain safe topics, often stories
that at some point may have come up in conversation. This issue
of writing safely particularly stands out to her as she compares
her public writing with years of reflective, private journaling.
As for the differences,
Vinni has been struggling with reading the writing aloud to the
group. She finds it very difficult to let out her personal feelings
in the group setting. The reading aloud part is the area that causes
her the most anxiety. The anxiety comes from the fear that what
is being read differs for the reader from what she intends it to
mean. As Vinni writes in one reflection, "Will they hear what
I am saying? Will they hear what I really meant? Or will they create
their own meaning?" The new voice that Vinni experiences in
the group setting is the one that she hears when she is writing
for the group sessions. She feels as if she hears an audible voice,
the one that she uses when she is reading to the group. She reflects,
"The 'aloud' voice makes my writing seem different since I
know that others will be listening. The 'reading aloud' voice in
my head is not necessarily one of censorship but an audible voice
that drives my writing. I have been asked whether I was now writing
for others or am I still writing for myself. I don't think that
I could write for others. The confusion is that I know that the
writing is now going to be reviewed by others."
On the other hand, Allison
feels that reading her autobiographical writing aloud is the best
part. She believes that writing things down before actually saying
them out loud is extremely beneficial because writing things down
make her thoughts more clear and concise. She gives examples of
how she has felt that had she been given the opportunity to write
before speaking her ideas would have been clearer to the audience.
She writes, "I feel like I have been blowing up a balloon,
and when I read my writing aloud, the balloon finally pops."
In her eyes, when she reads her autobiographical pieces, "others
can share my thoughts, my feelings, and my fears about teaching."
We have discovered the
distinct ways we respond to issues of audience only through the
analysis and discussion of our individual texts, reflections, and
transcripts. Up until this point, we believed we felt similarly
about writing reflectively because we view ourselves as lifelong
journalers. But interestingly, we have very divergent responses
to writing autobiographically for an audience. Our perspectives
on audience resonate with those described by our colleagues in the
preceding and following sections. Indeed, they fall along a dynamic
continuum with our perspectives at the two extremes.
The dialoguers:
Lesley and Monica
The following dialogue
is taken from Monica and Lesley's e-mails to each other before and
after sessions with the group. The e-mails have been edited to exclude
parts of the conversations that deal with issues not relevant to
this paper. Lesley and Monica were both public school teachers and
are now teacher educators. They use a dialogue format to capture
the particular nuances of their perspective, which is characterized
by both an awareness of similarity in response and an appreciation
of how their similar viewpoints gave them the opportunity, which
they clearly take, to delve into the differences that make for the
unique perspective they bring to the group. Initially they were
unsure how best to convey this complexity, quickly realizing that
a traditional narrative format would flatten out their differences
into one voice or give one voice more prominence. They therefore
decided on a dialogue since this is most natural to them and reflects
the way they work together.
We hope that this dialogue
shows both how Lesley and Monica's perspectives are similar and
distinct. We all feel that this feeling of sympathy and difference
is something important that has come from our group and something
we increasingly draw on as our work broadens and deepens. We hope
this dialogue helps to reveal at least part of this process and
an intimation of our life as part of the autobiography group.
Dialogue. Lesley:
Monica, the one thing that has been overwhelming for me, is how
your perspective has turned out to be so similar to mine. Or rather
I should say that our perspectives are so similar. I've been thinking
about how wonderful it is that we think the same about so many things,
but also that the particular way you express things give me a slightly
different view on problems I grapple with.
Monica: I agree. The whole experience reminds me of when I taught
at the University of Arizona as a graduate student. I would celebrate
the end of class with a party, and this always began uncomfortably
because of that boundary breaking. It usually took me some time
to get comfortable. So in a way when we began this group in July,
I felt pretty nervous that first day of sharing - especially when
you and I weren't in the same group. I think being involved in this
writing group together gives us another person to talk to who is
coming from the same place. I never dreamt that I would be uncomfortable
but again I chalk that up to my 'jumping- into- things' nature.
Lesley: What is interesting
for me is that the similarity is not a negative, only a
positive. I feel it is something we build on, not something that
detracts from what we think and our experiences in the group. It
is not that I think our perspective is "one" - that somehow
Monica and Lesley think as one - but that the similarities actually
help us go deeper into the issues. For example, when we were talking
in Starbucks after one of the sessions and were looking at
how your writing has changed over time - I don't think this would
have come up or have been so interesting to both of us, if we had
had to deal with big differences in our perspectives.
One of the most difficult
things for both of us early on was the idea of self-censoring. I
suppose, a little arrogantly, we had not considered that this would
be an issue for the others and yet it has been of course (Allison
and Vinni mention it for example). It was through our discussions
that I came to understand how multifaceted this problem was. For
example, I think it was after the second session, we were standing
outside and you mentioned how you were having a problem with how
much of your personal life to include and said that it was hard
to draw a line as you increasingly realized that to explain or describe
teaching episodes needed more of a personal context.
Monica: I think that
that was the first time I realized that so much of who I am as a
teacher is who I am as a person. I think that this realization also
reflects thirteen years of experience. I did not hold such a deep
sense of myself as teacher when I first started teaching. Although
I loved teaching, I felt like it was a game - I was playing a role
rather than it being my life. Now it permeates my every move - even
the people with whom I choose to associate. And so many of my beliefs
about social justice and other issues stem from my experiences as
a child - How could I air my dirty laundry with past students? Would
they think differently of me? Do they want to know me in that way?
I don't even like to share my personal life with people at work
- I usually stick to talking about Michael (my son) because it is
a relatively safe topic.
Of course it was very
naive of us to think that everyone else was not going through the
same thing. Interesting how equalizing the process of writing and
sharing autobiographies is. Why don't we strive to do this more
in our classrooms? Isn't this what Nancie Atwell advocates in writing
workshop? Maybe we need to rethink our pedagogy? Maybe when we were
using personal narrative in our courses, we didn't let it go far
enough?
Lesley: That makes me
think again about our writing, about how both of us have changed
how we write with you loosening up and me enjoying the actual writing
more and more, editing less and telling little stories more often
with less commentary.
Monica: Yes - this
is amazing - I guess I began to let my hair down and stop overanalyzing.
Maybe we needed to stop thinking so much and start telling stories
- show me rather than tell me.
Lesley: I have also been
thinking about how my perspective was initially informed primarily
by my pedagogical goals - I really didn't consider the effect on
me, what it would mean to me to write an autobiography. I was much
more interested in what would happen in the group - what the effect
of the process would be on teachers' thinking. There was a joining
of something - a self-forgetting as well as a self-remembering that
was absolutely fascinating.
Monica: I know exactly
what you mean. I too went into it thinking from a pedagogical perspective
and less from the idea of my own growth as the autobiographer. I
really think that so much of our perspective stems from the experience
of also sharing and participating in the group. It really is the
vehicle that perpetuates the democratic process because it sends
the message that we are also willing to be vulnerable and put ourselves
out there.
The discovers: Maria
and Dave
Maria and Dave share a
concluding perspective in a collective voice, reflecting on the
historical development of the group and the purposes that sharing
our autobiographies in a community of teachers serve. They capture
the continual reflective probing that occurs throughout our process
as we write personal narratives individually, share in our group
sessions, construct our autobiographies collaboratively, reflect
on the process, and return to our own private writing. They actively
explore: How and why does the group work? What do we bring to it?
What do we get out of it?
Maria and Dave.
Each of us in the group has a different perspective, a different
background. We are all at different stages of our teaching careers
and that brings a certain perspective to the group. Whether we are
new teachers, teachers with a few years experience, teachers at
a career crossroads, teacher educators, second career teachers,
or staff developers we all seem to need a place where we are comfortable
asking questions and sharing our thoughts and observations, and
reflecting on our practice.
Over the past eight months
since the conception of this group, many things have changed. Some
of the original group have left, some more joined late but the group
has now evolved into a cohesive unit that works extremely well in
accomplishing our goals, which seem to change as we go along. We
often stop and ask why have we come together? How have we moved
forward? Where are we going? What have not changed are the connections
the members of the group feel and the benefits that they have derived
from the group.
We came together for so
many different reasons. Our first meetings seemed like many undirected
meanderings. We didn't know what we needed or wanted from the group
we didn't know what direction our writings would take, or even at
the time, how to proceed. Somehow we knew that the writing was key.
But even that concept floated around, not knowing where to touch
ground.
We were to write autobiographies but found, at the start, that the
confidence and comfort level that needed to be there for that kind
of intimate sharing fell short. Even the journalers among us had
difficulty with this. Those of us who had never really journaled
much found autobiographical writing and sharing intimidating. We
often felt we had to write for the group or to the group, though
it was not what we sought in the inception of the group. Fear of
others' judgments or critiques and a lack of trust were probably
at the crux of this dilemma. Gradually, however, the group evolved,
the trust developed, and the judgments never came. And we moved
forward.
The group was becoming
a unit. The words "community," "support," "voice,"
"confidence," and "validation" crept into our
writings and into our discussions. We began to write for ourselves
and began to share our ideas and feelings with the others because
we grew in confidence and trust. We did less and less self-censoring
as we realized that we needed to only be ourselves. We discovered
that our words and thoughts would be valued and accepted, and that
through our writings we could grow as individuals, as teachers,
and as professionals.
In addition to that sense
of family and confidence, this group provided all of us with an
outlet for our feelings and a mechanism to explore our teaching
experiences. In each of our situations we found the need to share
our experiences and feelings. While colleagues are kind and empathetic,
the kind of in-depth sharing we do within the group is not possible
at work. Friends and family try to be sympathetic but since most
are not in the education field, they often just don't "get
it." In the group, it is different. In our sessions there is
freedom to express doubts, fears, concerns, plans, goals, and philosophies
as they apply to our work. We find a voice there - a place and means
to explore our innermost feelings and thoughts about our lives as
a teachers. This is a powerful thing. We become more aware of our
feelings and clearer about our perspectives. Especially for those
of us who did not journal much before this project got underway,
the group meetings give direction and purpose to our writing. The
group provides us with the incentive to write about who we are and
what we do as teachers. The journaling, followed by the sharing
and discussions have been a good way for us to reflect on the practice
of teaching, our perceptions of teaching, and the directions each
of us want our careers to take.
In addition to voice,
the group sessions provide validation. Teaching is a solitary practice
in many ways. It's you in a classroom with your students. For the
most part there is no collaboration, no partnership - just you.
This often results in feeling as though you're in it all alone.
In our sessions, as others share their writings and reflections,
we see our own experiences validated in theirs and that is a most
comforting thing.
The group is a family
which gives us confidence and a voice and which provides validation.
If we look at what constitutes this group, you can see that this
is a true example of when the whole is more than the sum of its
parts. The group consists of its participants, the autobiographical
writings and reflections, the sharing and discussions. Each of these
components alone is ineffective. The individuals just gathering
together and discussing could not get to the level we achieve in
this group. The writings, themselves alone, could not get us to
the level we achieve in this group. The discussions, in and of themselves,
could not get us to the level we achieve in this group. It is the
combination of all three -- the people, the reflective writings,
the sharing and discussions together -- that have an incredible
effect. The experience offers so much more than self reflection
ever could. Often too, as we listen to the reflections and revelations
of others, they spark a revelation in ourselves and inspire writing
along the lines of a new perspective.
So we continue to ask
the questions of each other and ourselves. We continue to explore
our beliefs and philosophies and perspectives on our profession,
all within the community we have created - a community that supports
and encourages that exploration. We continue the journey that we
started eight months ago, plotting our course as we go. Our journey,
an unwritten journal that will be written as time goes on.
What Have We Learned
From This Community of Autobiographical Writers?
Although our perspectives
have differed in terms of our individual experiences in the group,
our autobiographical writing in a social setting has been successful
in that we have met our goals. We have developed new reflective
and analytical lenses that we continually adjust, focus, and refocus
to better understand as well as renew our teaching beliefs and practice.
To what do we attribute this success? Over the course of nine months,
our work has revealed a number of interrelated tenets that both
strengthen our endeavors as well as set us apart from other educators
who utilize personal narrative. We attribute our success to the
following interdependent processes that have developed naturally
within this particular group of educators: a truly democratic process
where all members take on the various roles of writers, readers,
reflectors, and researchers; our unique autobiographical process
where we write, share, and reflect on our personal narratives within
a community of writers; and the utilization of an unusual research
methodology that has each member act as both the researcher as well
as the researched.
Why does democracy work
for us? From the very inception of this autobiographical writing
group, we have continually striven to maintain a democratic framework.
In fact, this commitment began as a struggle for all involved as
Monica, Lesley and Vinni refrained from taking roles of leadership
and Jeanine, Allison, Maria, and Dave diverged from their comfort
zone as "students." In fact, the focus of struggle became
the impact of audience, something we had not seriously considered
prior to the experience. As we met and shared our autobiographies
with others, whether colleagues, friends, former students, or former
professors, unsettling tensions emerged. Unplanned, these tensions
brought about the mechanisms necessary to eliminate our discomfort
and build a democratic model for our autobiographical writing community.
The shared revealing of
ourselves through the reading/hearing of our personal narratives
led to the realization of a shared vulnerability and insecurity.
This served as the most important vehicle in establishing a democratic
community. Our democratic model was further enhanced by the human
elements that emerged as we continued to build our community: our
dedication to meeting regularly over time; the development of strong
rapport; and our genuine interests in each another's narratives.
The sharing of responsibilities such as writing, reading, leading
discussions, conducting research on ourselves, presenting, and writing
for publication has led to shared ownership of the writing community
and its goals.
Our democratic community
could not have developed without the unique procedures established
by the members of our autobiographical community. Again, the format
for our meetings was not pre-planned, rather the improvised recipe
of the rituals of our meetings developed through discussion and
interaction. When we meet, we share our narratives, discuss our
responses, and most importantly reflect on our autobiographical
process. Each session takes on a different flavor as it reflects
the varied stories and concerns brought to the table.
Our self-reflection en
masse, in our small trusting community of educators, drives
us to look deeper and more analytically at our teaching beliefs,
experiences, and practice. It is in this space that we truly connect
as well as discover aspects of ourselves that set us apart, but
the distinctions do not feel as drastic or isolating because usually
there is at least one other person that feels the way that we do
and because the setting is so nurturing that we embrace and try
to understand our differences. We have created a community where
everyone has something to contribute - where everyone is a learner,
an expert, a pinch of old and a dash of new. We bring to the table
various talents and strengths that are not set up hierarchically
but rather in a community that relies on the participation of all
involved.
References
Abbs, P. (1974). Autobiography in education. London: Heinemann
Educational Books.
Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen,
S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theory and methods. Newton, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Bomer, R. (1995). Time
for meaning: Crafting literate lives in middle and high school.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2002).
Editorial: What a difference a definition makes: Highly qualified
teachers, scientific research, and teacher education. Journal
of Teacher Education, 53(3), 187-189.
Erickson, F. (1996). On
the evolution of qualitative approaches in educational research:
From Adam's task to Eve's. Australian Educational Researcher,
23(2), 1-15.
Florio-Ruane, S. (2000).
Teacher education and the cultural imagination:
Autobiography, conversation, and narrative. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy
of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.
Glaser, B. G. & Strauss,
A. S. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Gordon, R. L. (1980).
Interviewing: Strategies, techniques, and tactics. Homewood,
IL: Dorsey Press.
Greene, M. (1988). The
dialectic of freedom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Merriam, S. B. (1988).
Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.
San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Ritchie, J. S. & Wilson,
D. E. (2000). Teacher narrative as critical inquiry: Rewriting
the script. New York: Teachers College Press.
Sunstein, B. (1994). Composing
a culture: Inside a summer writing program with high
school teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Comment
on this article
|