Values in the Classroom

5

January 23, 2014 by k. liz

I wrote a post last week asking you what you thought about values in the classroom. I’m donning my disappointed teacher eyes right now, because only 2 of you responded. Now, I’m extremely grateful to Anna and Rose, but the rest of you . . . tsk, tsk. 

Anyways, onto content. Here is the question I posed last week: 

What is our role, as educators, in teaching/encouraging/fostering values and/or morals in our students?

This is in one sense, a very small question – because it is not really overseen by authorities or curriculum, it isn’t evaluated in teacher observations, it isn’t on our checklist of standards to be met or benchmarks for success. Morals can often be overlooked as inconsequential or unnecessary when it comes to terms of academic achievement. 

At the same time, this is a huge question – because our role as teachers, as I’ve come to define it for myself personally, is that we are preparing students to succeed as citizens of the world, we are coaching them in ‘discourse’ {how they should both speak, listen, write, and read in the world and situation they find themselves in}, not simply in verb conjugations and grammar structures. We are teaching humans to be humans, not robots to be simple English-speakers. 

Vivian Cook’s (2001) ideas of multi-competency remind us of this, as we can see that competency involves much more than linguistic accuracy. Language, especially, is inherently linked to values and cultural beliefs. We cannot explain ourselves and what we believe without language, and so language, more than subjects like math and science (though those are also rife with values and morals!) is connected to beliefs, values, and morals. Anna agreed with this when she said,

I’ve recently been trying to make language aspects seamlessly weave into WHAT we’re discussing, rather than guiding it. Some values seem to be crosscultural and obviously necessary (like respect).

This is so true, and obviously (well, at least in contemporary language teaching) culture and language are inextricably linked and therefore, topics like this are going to arise in the classroom. Discussions and examinations of cultural nuances and situations are a great place for values and morals to come up in the classroom. But, this does lead to the question, what about cultures that differ in value/moral belief? Are mine right? Do I have a duty/opportunity to teach my own values, even if they are in opposition of my students cultural values? 

Rose took a slightly different stance on the topic, when she said that mostly, we are teaching by example, and students will develop similar values based on watching and imitating what we do: 

Personally I would say that as long we keep the sense of community naturally we are going to find the values we need where we find ourselves standing as equal. I do believe is the teacher role to foster community and encourage them to treat one another based on values, but the teacher will teach also by example. 

I think that this is really important as well. We are a model for our students. When students spend somewhere between 5 and 40 hours with us a week, there is the very real matter that they are watching us and they are going to pick up on things we do. 

One method is teaching values inductively, and the other deductively. One, the students hear about the morals and make conclusions, the other they see morals and imitate – or don’t imitate. 

What do I think? I think they are both hugely important. First of all, what I believe, how I speak about my values had better line up with how I live. Otherwise, we have other major issues!! So, obviously, I do think that there is a place for values in the classroom, and I’m thankful to both Anna and Rose for pointing out the ways this can happen. 

I mentioned that I would be turning back to Freire in my thoughts about this. I can’t get out of my head the concepts I learned while reading Pedagogy of Freedom two {three?} years ago. The neutral teacher does nothing for his/her students. By being neutral, which for some time {and probably still is in many spheres} has been valued, we are not showing our students how to actually think critically and come to conclusions on there own. We are not showing them, because in essence, a neutral teacher does not have a stance, so it appears to students that they have not thought critically through these issues and come to a conclusion {thus, we lack the example aspect of teaching morals.}

According to Freire, we need to be ethically grounded as teachers: 

The climate of respect that is born of just, serious, humble, and generous relationships, in which both the authority of the teacher and the freedom of the students are ethically grounded, is what converts pedagogical space into authentic educational experience.

So, if neutrality hurts our students, do we swing to teaching and trying to reproduce our morality in our students? No. That is not the correct approach either. Students who have had morality transferred or stamped into their lives, really have no morality, they have trained or conditioned habits.

My take on the issue:

My students should be able to look at my life, see a measure of objectivity, but also a measure of critical thinking and know where I stand on issues of morality and value. I don’t want my students questioning what I believe about an issue. BUT, I don’t want my students to think that I will look down on them or think less of them if they adopt a stance different than my own. My students should know that I have strong views, and that I want them to have equally strong views. I want to present them with all sides of an issue or discussion and allow them to reach their own conclusions. 

By example, I need to be consistent in what I say and what I do. In discussion, I need to provide multiple viewpoints, not just one side. 

Remember, this is key, we are training humans.