Expanding teaching to match my intellectual framework

I’m rethinking an earlier post I noted that my teaching emphasizes only two of the five items that I consider to be linked together in my intellectual framework.

I’m often introducing alternatives, but not so often drawing students into building the constituency to support what is implied by the alternative. I put the alternative out there as if I’m saying it’s good and interesting, now you explore it—it’s up to you—just think about it.

I’m currently thinking about how, instead of accepting my limitations, I could bring in allies to expand the scope of my teaching. For example, when the Action Research course asks students to design an action research process, these allies – if they have appropriate experience in the areas of the student’s interest – could mentor them into undertaking the action research they’re designing. Similarly, when the courses in the CCT and SICW graduate Programs emphasize the personal and professional development of individuals, allies could guide students into cultivating collaborators that would complement the students not-so-well-developed knowledge in the wider political, economic and cultural dynamics that their endeavors are embedded in and buffeted by. The idea is not that all the students become renaissance people, but that they create webs that connect them to sources and advisors in areas beyond their skills and knowledge.

Already there are some developments in the Program in that direction:
Scientific and Political Change is “about analyses of the political influences on the development of science and technology, and, reciprocally, of influences of such developments on political processes and possibilities.”
• Mark Robinson has stretched biomedical ethics so that it includes the economic and corporate changes that are producing new biotechnological products and procedures.
• My versions of critical thinking emphasizes “individuals seeking or creating supportive ‘context'” and mathematical thinking pays attention to “changes in work, technology, commerce, and social life [that] have changed our needs and capacities for mathematical thinking.”
• A planned new instructor for cognitive psychology in 2019 is keen to bring in the study of changing life courses and collaborative processes around emotional development.
• A possible new version of Philosophical Thought.
Biology in Society and Environment, Science, and Society share the premise that “Close examination of developments in the life sciences can lead to questions about the social influences shaping scientists’ work or its application.”
And so on.


1 thought on “Expanding teaching to match my intellectual framework

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s