Authenticity in and through Teaching in Higher Education
eBook - ePub

Authenticity in and through Teaching in Higher Education

The transformative potential of the scholarship of teaching

Carolin Kreber

Share book
  1. 202 pages
  2. English
  3. ePUB (mobile friendly)
  4. Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub

Authenticity in and through Teaching in Higher Education

The transformative potential of the scholarship of teaching

Carolin Kreber

Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations

About This Book

What does it mean to be authentic? Why should it matter whether or not we become more authentic? How might authenticity inform and enhance the social practice of the scholarship of university teaching and, by implication, the learning and development of students?

Authenticity in and through Teaching introduces three distinct perspectives on authenticity, the existential, the critical and the communitarian, and shows what moving towards greater authenticity involves for teachers and students when viewed from each of these angles.

In developing the notion of 'the scholarship of teaching as an authentic practice', this book draws on several complementary ideas from social philosophy to explore the nature of this practice and the conditions under which it might qualify as 'authentic'. Other concepts guiding the analysis include 'virtue', 'being', 'communicative action', 'power', 'critical reflection' and 'transformation'. Authenticity in and through Teaching also introduces a vision of the scholarship of teaching whose ultimate aim it is to serve the important interests of students. These important interests, it is argued, are the students' own striving and development towards greater authenticity. Both teachers and students are thus implicated in a process of transformative learning, including objective and subjective reframing, redefinition and reconstruction, through critical reflection and critical self -reflection on assumptions. It is argued that, in important ways, this transformative process is intimately bound up with becoming more authentic.

Rather than being concerned principally with rendering research evidence of 'what works', the scholarship of teaching emerges as a social practice that is equally concerned with the questions surrounding the value, desirability and emancipatory potential of what we do in teaching. The scholarship of teaching, therefore, also engages with the bigger questions of social justice and equality in and through higher education.

The book combines Carolin Kreber's previous research on authenticity with earlier work on the scholarship of teaching, offering a provocative, fresh and timely perspective on the scholarship of university teaching and professional learning.

Frequently asked questions

How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on “Cancel Subscription” - it’s as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time you’ve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlego’s features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan you’ll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, we’ve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Authenticity in and through Teaching in Higher Education an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Authenticity in and through Teaching in Higher Education by Carolin Kreber in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Pedagogía & Educación general. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.

Information

Publisher
Routledge
Year
2013
ISBN
9781135098926
Edition
1

Chapter 1


Surfacing the complex meaning of authenticity


Authenticity, teaching, scholarship and practice are all open to different conceptualisations but it is the notion of authenticity that carries the greatest ambiguity and hence is the most resistant to straightforward definition. Indeed, as Vannini (2007) observes, an ‘important and widely recurrent criticism of the concept of authenticity is that it is difficult to define and that it suffers from inextricable ties to various ideologies and philosophies’ (p. 65). In this chapter I discuss different ways in which the notion of authenticity has been construed, building on our everyday usage of the term. I show why authenticity is a contested notion but argue that dismissing it on the grounds of it being ‘pernicious’, as at times it has been argued, is misguided. I also show how the three broad perspectives on authenticity outlined in the Introduction – the existential, the critical and the communitarian – emerged from the reading of relevant literature in the fields of education and philosophy as well as recent empirical work exploring lecturers' and students' conceptions of authenticity. Not all of these research findings will be revisited in the chapters that follow; nonetheless, I see merit in offering a more detailed discussion of the multifaceted meaning of authenticity at this stage. Not everyone, therefore, may wish to read the section on empirical work entitled ‘Different facets or dimensions of authenticity in relation to university teaching’. It is possible to jump this section altogether and reconnect with the discussion in the following chapter, which offers an illustration of authenticity specifically in the contexts of (the scholarship of) university teaching and learning.

Authenticity: a contested notion

Authenticity is a complex concept, a characteristic it shares, for example, with intelligence, wisdom or creativity. Intelligence is a particularly useful case in point given the different perspectives that have informed our understanding of this notion. Is there one general form of intelligence represented by factor g (Spearman, 1904), a two-factor model encompassing crystallised and fluid intelligence (Cattell, 1963), a triarchic model of analytical, creative and practical intelligence (Sternberg, 1985) or an emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1998), or are there multiple intelligences, including abilities such as intra and interpersonal intelligence, musical intelligence, spatial intelligence, bodily kinaesthetic intelligence, existential intelligence and so forth (Gardner, 1999)? Given these different conceptualisations, would an acceptable definition of intelligence not need to take account of the fact that the concept has been construed in multiple ways, rather than offer only a partial view? Authenticity, we saw in the Introduction, is likewise informed by different philosophical perspectives. A definition of authenticity would then also need to acknowledge the existence of the various perspectives it is informed by and thus reflect the multilayered meaning of authenticity that these give rise to. The main idea to hold on to here is that a defining feature of authenticity is its conceptual complexity, a characteristic it shares with intelligence and perhaps related constructs such as wisdom and creativity. What I would like to do next is to show that although authenticity shares with these other (otherwise unrelated) concepts the attribute of conceptual complexity, there are two further important attributes that it does not share with these concepts. Identifying these attributes, I argue, may explain why authenticity, unlike intelligence, wisdom and creativity, has been slow to enter the educational literature. What are these attributes?
One refers to the extent to which our everyday conceptions of these terms are readily transferable to the realm of education; the other pertains to the degree to which these terms themselves are contested. I address each of these in turn.
Our familiarity with concepts such as intelligence, creativity and wisdom predisposes us differently towards their utility or value in relation to education than does our familiarity with the notion of authenticity. To be more specific, we ‘know’ that Einstein was intelligent, Van Gogh creative and our grandmother wise, and if she wasn't, we have heard of one who was! When we hear that education should strive to foster these three abilities in students we are less likely to object as we can immediately perceive their value for individuals and society. As I intend to demonstrate in greater detail below, in our everyday lives we also encounter the term authenticity, but our everyday understandings of the term are not always helpfully transferred to the context of education. Think for example of ‘the authentic Rembrandt’ versus ‘its replica’. What could this distinction between the original and its imitation mean in the context of education? Even if we were to perceive an analogy between a ‘genuine Rembrandt’ and a ‘genuine teacher’, for example, would we not still find the underlying idea of ‘original’ versus ‘copy’ to be unsatisfactory in certain respects? The extent to which our preconceptions, or everyday understandings, of these terms constructively enter into the context of education is therefore the first difference I would like to highlight between authenticity and notions such as intelligence, wisdom or creativity. In other words, I suggest that the attribute of ‘perceived/endorsed educational relevance’ is shared by intelligence, wisdom and creativity (Sternberg's triarchic theory of intelligence, incorporating aspects of analytical, creative and practical thinking, has long been recognised for its relevance to educational settings, for example) but not necessarily by authenticity. However, the more profound difference lies elsewhere.
I might consider certain behaviours to be intelligent while someone else might not, but it is rather unlikely that anyone would find the behaviours I consider to be intelligent to be objectionable or even distasteful. The idea of emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1998), for example, is perhaps not universally accepted as being part of what it means to be intelligent, but no one would doubt that this ability that we call ‘emotional intelligence’ is something positive that enhances our lives. Of course, the ability to ‘read’ the experiences of others could be used for questionable purposes (a torturer can be assumed to empathise with the victim but feel no compassion, for example), but such depravity does not contradict the general claim that emotional intelligence as such is a quality that adds an important dimension to human interactions and well-being. With authenticity, by contrast, such general acceptance cannot be assumed. So while concepts such as intelligence, wisdom and creativity share the attribute that they are widely perceived to carry a positive value in our society, not everyone believes that authenticity carries a positive value. Challenges to authenticity come principally from two directions.
The postmodern critique is essentially a dispute of the humanist ideal of the unified integrated self. Postmodernism challenges the notion that people have a core essence or single and stable identity. Instead, identities are viewed as ‘fluid’, ‘free-floating’ and constantly ‘shifting’. From a postmodern perspective authenticity emerges as a flawed concept as we can never really know anything with certainty, including ourselves; and more importantly, there is no stable or core self that we can become more ‘true’ to. As I argued elsewhere (Kreber et al., 2007), the issues emphasised by postmodernist thinkers help us appreciate the complexities associated with the notion of ‘authenticity’ and see more clearly the tension between viewing the self as an essential core versus an ongoing construction. Taking on board the postmodernist critique of stable identities is helpful in that it leads us to view the notion of ‘authenticity’ not as something fixed, or something that one has, but rather as a project that one always seeks to strive towards in particular contexts. Although our values may change over time and we assume multiple identities in our lives, we strive to experience congruence between what we do and the values we hold dear. As Vannini (2007) put it: ‘authenticity may be a feeling associated with being true to one's self, but we must not rely on assumptions which render such self static and the act of “being true to it” stifling … ’ p. 67) and later ‘Professors change identities …; and often they even become radically different from what they used to value as they receive tenure, age and retire …. In a sense professors, like all human beings, derive their uniqueness and complexity precisely from this tension of becoming’ (p. 68). The notion of authenticity is therefore not fundamentally incompatible with an understanding of identities as being both shifting and constructed.
The other, and perhaps more profound, challenge to authenticity is associated with the ‘malaises of modernity’ (Taylor, 1991), especially the increased individualism we can observe in our societies which is coupled with a withdrawal and feeling of alienation from the public sphere. Critics observe that the self-help books (and related DVDs, websites, workshops on how to live the authentic life, etc.) released over the past twenty-some years are partially to blame for the expansion of the ‘me culture’ that has eroded engagement in public life. The argument goes that these publications and initiatives purport that the path to a happier or more meaningful life lies in focusing on and finding oneself, whereas, in reality, the solution to our most pressing problems cannot lie in promoting further individualism but rather in a strengthening of community life and public engagement. How might one respond to this analysis?
Charles Taylor (1991) argued that it is possible to feel strong sympathy for these observations but still see value in the notion of authenticity. However, for the concept of authenticity to continue to have significance in our times it must be construed dialogically. True authenticity, in Taylor's view, involves recognising and being open to ‘horizons of significance’ – the various cultural norms, traditions, expectations, purposes or ideals that we as a community agree on and are already bound by. He further explains that horizons of significance offer ‘a picture of what a better or higher mode of life would be, whereby terms such as better or higher offer a standard we ought to desire’ (Taylor, 1991, p. 16). Horizons of significance thus provide a sense of personal connection with something larger than ourselves, and this ‘something larger’ is the social and political community we are part of, with its culturally shaped purposes and traditions. This perspective stands in profound contrast to a view that associates authenticity with narcissism, self-centredness and withdrawal from community life, and, consequently, as the cause of many of our social problems (e.g. Potter, 2010).
The negative sense that some people have of authenticity renders it a difficult concept to promote in the context of education. It seems important to emphasise at this stage that the criticism that is typically levelled against authenticity grows not only out of the observation that the public sphere is narrowing but that the underlying self-centredness is seen to be coupled with a potential for the blatant disregard for others. Chickering et al. (2006) pick up on this problem. Early on in their book Encouraging authenticity and spirituality in higher education they offer a brief definition of what they mean by being authentic: it ‘means that what you see is what you get’ (p. 8) and ‘What I believe, what I say and what I do are consistent’ (p. 8). However, aware that according to this definition even the most deplorable atrocities could be labelled as acts of authenticity, they add in the following paragraph: ‘History tells us of individuals who were authentically evil…. But we strive for an authenticity that is kind, caring and socially responsible’ (p. 8, emphasis added). That there is not necessarily a direct connection between one's true self and an underlying character of honour, considerateness and compassion, as assumed by Rousseau, was highlighted also by Bernard Williams (2004), who showed that these linkages are, at the very least, not quite as straightforward. By connecting the concept of authenticity with a sense of social responsibility, Chickering et al. (2006) turn authenticity into something positive and attach to it a distinctly moral quality. As noted in the Introduction, the individual's external orientation towards community, which is captured in the notion of social responsibility, is central to the comm...

Table of contents