Connected Teaching

Relationship, Power, and Mattering in Higher Education

Harriet L. Schwartz

• Publisher: Stylus Publishing
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781620366394
• Topic: Pedagogía
• Subtopic: Educación superior

At a time when many aspects of the faculty role are in question, Harriet Schwartz, the author of Connected Teaching, argues that the role of teachers is as important as ever and is evolving profoundly. She believes the relationships faculty have with individual students and with classes and cohorts are the essential driver of teaching and learning.This book explores teaching as a relational practice – a practice wherein connection and disconnection with students, power, identity, and emotion shape the teaching and learning endeavor. The author describes moments of energetic deep learning and what makes these powerful moments happen. She calls on readers to be open to and seek relationship, understand their own socio-cultural identity (and how this shapes internal experience and the ways in which they are met in the world), and vigilantly explore and recognize emotion in the teaching endeavor. Connected Teaching is informed and inspired by Relational Cultural Theory (RCT). The premise of RCT is that the experience of engaging in growth-fostering interactions and relationships is essential to human development. RCT's founding scholars believed the theory would be relevant in many different settings, but this is the first book to apply them to teaching and learning in higher education. In this book, the author shows that RCT has much to offer those devoted to student learning and development, providing a foundation from which to understand the transformative potential of teaching as a relational practice.

PART ONE

CONNECTED TEACHING IN ACTION

1

WHAT IS CONNECTED TEACHING?

What does it mean to connect with students? What does connection look like given that much of the work of teaching and learning is solitary? At the same time, how do we think about connection in the digital age when some students seem to expect us to be available almost 24/7?

In this chapter, I explore the significance of relationship in teaching and learning. Next, I illuminate three central Relational-Cultural Theory (RCT) concepts that serve as building blocks for the rest of this book and, more broadly, connected teaching: relationship as a site and source for learning, power-over and power-with, and relational clarity.

As described in the introduction, Jean Baker Miller and the founding RCT scholars challenged the prevailing Western idea that autonomy is the goal of adult development. Instead they proposed we are at our best when we have the capacity to engage in and maintain growth-fostering relationships (Miller & Stiver, 1997). Relational capacity and competence are the goals of development, and through connection with others we become our most authentic, creative, and productive selves (Jordan, 2010; Miller & Stiver, 1997; Surrey, 1985; Walker, 2004).

The RCT focus on relationship as central is not intended to disregard the reality that learning and teaching require self-direction, discipline, and solitary work. Rather, I believe the founders were pushing us to challenge the cultural glorification of self-reliance by admitting that the narratives of lone heroes and individual achievers are inaccurate, failing to acknowledge the colleagues, spouses, friends, benefactors, and others who contribute to success. RCT does not negate the hard work and solitary hours inherent in the lives of teachers and students. However, this individual effort is not the whole story.

As I write this book (a far too solitary endeavor!), I spend hours alone thinking, struggling, writing, and rewriting. RCT would not discount this solo work. RCT would, however, have me acknowledge that I am able to write this book in part because my wife gives me space to do the work and she encourages me when I doubt myself or feel frustrated or tired. Likewise, when I feel stuck in my thinking, I turn to close trusted colleagues—they do not solve the intellectual puzzles for me but join me in my wandering and wondering. My former department head, now retired, reads very rough first drafts and provides feedback. Several of my friends and colleagues read specific chapters and provide invaluable critique and encouragement. I do not do this alone.

The RCT focus on relationship allows me to avoid getting stuck in the idea that I should do this alone. I share the stories of those who help me, attempting to demystify the appearance of lone achievement that can cause others, students, for example, to feel as if they fail if they cannot achieve alone. A lifetime of building relationships gives me a solid set of resources critical to writing this book—I am convinced that if I did not have these people around me, this book would have been more of a struggle and less developed (or might not have come to fruition).

At the same time, we are not always literally in relationship (Surrey, 1985). RCT suggests relationship rather than separation as an organizing principle and concurrently acknowledges that we are not always in active connection with others. Applying RCT in the educational realm, I propose that relationship implies the availability of intellectual and emotional connection. We are not always connected to our students, nor they to us. But ideally they experience us as relationally available to them, accessible for connection. This does not indicate we are literally and infinitely available for a text or call. Nor does it imply that teaching and learning relationships do not occasionally include misunderstandings and conflict. However, in connected teaching, our students ultimately trust that we will reply to them with regard and a commitment to their learning.

This is a deeper sense of availability than “if I e-mail her, she will respond.” Rather, it is the sense that if a student contacts me, I will be intellectually and emotionally available and receptive. I will neither dismiss nor shame the student who does not understand something. I will not judge the student who is afraid of failure. I will meet the student’s curiosity and dreams with enthusiasm. I will offer valid and valuable critique. When I realize that I was not as effective in class or as present on a video call as I intended to be, I will reflect and attempt to do better next time. I will meet students with respect, commitment to their learning, openness, and enthusiasm. I will constantly strive to become a better teacher. I will share the reality of the scholarly life (joy and frustration, collaboration and solitude, obstacles and insight). And I will provide students with challenge and support as I strive to help them strive. In it all, I will honor their humanity and my own.

A relational teacher is attentive and responsive with students; this intent and ability to connect is inherent in all aspects of teaching—creating an online learning space, setting the tone in the classroom, and structuring and assessing assignments. Relational teaching is not simply a strategy we enact when we are advising; rather it is the foundation of the entire teaching endeavor. Relational practice is evident in single meaningful interactions and longer term teaching relationships (Cress, 2008; Giles, 2011; Hoffman, 2014; Karpouza & Emvalotis, 2018; Liang, Tracy, Kauh, Taylor, & Williams, 2006; Liang, Tracy, Taylor, & Williams, 2002; McMillan-Roberts, 2014; Schwartz, 2009; Schwartz & Holloway, 2014, 2017).

Connected teaching is also evident in “the teacher in my head.” When I am working alone as a writer, I sometimes think something through with one of my teachers or colleagues simply present in my internal conversation. This can happen when I imagine this person as available to me, that they would be receptive if I reached out. But if I were to worry this person would dismiss or ridicule me, then I would experience the kind of unhealthy separation and isolation described by RCT (Jordan, 1990, 2010).

It is not through separation, but through more highly articulated and expanded relational experience that individual development takes place. . . . By relationship I mean an experience of emotional and cognitive intersubjectivity: the ongoing intrinsic inner awareness and responsiveness to the continuous existence of the other or others, and the expectation of mutuality in this regard. (Surrey, 1985, p. 6)

Intellectual and emotional availability between teachers and students is central in productive teaching, learning, and other intellectual endeavors. In RCT parlance, when we experience growth-fostering interactions, we build a base of psychological resources that help us through subsequent moments of conflict and disconnection (Miller, 1986). Applied to teaching and learning, growth-fostering interactions and the experience of teachers and colleagues as intellectually and emotionally available may be one of the most important and yet least recognized resources for the intellectual and emotional journey taken by students and teachers alike. The foundation that I develop through meaningful interactions with trusted mentors, teachers, and colleagues is part of the internal strength that drives me when I am working alone, feeling frustrated, considering intellectual risks, playing with ideas, and aspiring to reach beyond what I once imagined I could do.

Three Fundamental Ideas

In the following sections, I explore three foundational elements of RCT as they relate to teaching. First, I examine relationship as a site and source for learning. Second, I analyze power in the teaching and learning relationship through an RCT lens. Third, I consider relational clarity.

Relationship as a Site and Source for Learning

Connected teaching consists of and creates five elements that drive learning: energy, knowledge, sense of worth, action, and desire for more connection. Readers familiar with RCT will recognize these as The Five Good Things, as first identified by Miller and Stiver (1997). These components are both essence and outcome as they form the heart of what goes on in connected teaching and are further generated by meaningful interactions and relationships.

Energy. How does connection increase energy? Most obvious perhaps is the additive nature of vigorous intellectual dialogue. However, beyond simply building on each other’s ideas, two people who are deeply engaged with each other experience a joining with, a connection that validates each person’s relevance and legitimacy as teacher and student (Edwards & Richards, 2002; McMillian-Roberts, 2014; Schwartz, 2013, 2017; Schwartz & Holloway, 2012, 2014, 2017). As I bring my best intellectual self to a student and respond with enthusiasm, I convey to the student, “You, in this moment, the person you are with these thoughts and emotionality, I see your worth, and I want to share this learning moment with you.” My energy in turn activates the student’s energy as she can more fully be herself and take intellectual risks. And sometimes students light the spark and their energy invigorates us. This is mutuality in teaching and learning.

Positive psychology (Fredrickson, 2001) suggests that positive emotions such as joy and curiosity position us to think creatively, while emotions such as fear and anger initiate a fight-or-flight response and narrow our thinking to focus on survival. Positive emotions poise us to be open, take risks, and think broadly—and to be creative. Healthy and meaningful academic connections enhance these positive states, and then relationship and positive emotions combine to facilitate students’ creativity, intellectual growth, and increased confidence.

Knowledge. Just as passionate intellectual dialogue clearly generates new knowledge or knowing, so can routine teaching interactions. Those brief e-mail exchanges or conversations after class that help students understand assignments or apply learning may not in and of themselves shift a paradigm or change a life, but often they keep the batteries charged and combine for bigger knowing. These short, focused interactions enhance a student’s repertoire and knowledge (of both self and discipline). Students experience these interactions as powerful because they are moments of reconstruction rather than simply rote or additive learning. “At times this moment is about reconstructing knowledge, coming to understand a concept at a deeper level or with more complexity. Elsewhere, this moment is about reconstructing self, coming to understand one’s self differently” (Schwartz & Holloway, 2012, p. 127). Sometimes the fire is started by a lightning bolt and other times by a series of small sparks. Reconstructing is learning in its most dynamic form and is the experience that animates students (Schwartz & Holloway, 2012).

Sense of worth. Students experience an increased sense of worth when teachers respond to them in a manner that seems beyond just doing one’s job. We feel validated and aware of our own worth when someone welcomes us, joins with us, and responds to our unique being, thoughts, and feelings (Giles, 2011; Karpouza & Emvalotis, 2018; Schwartz, 2013; Schwartz & Holloway, 2012, 2014). In part, this manifests as intellectual mattering, though intellectual mattering is not the only dynamic that increases students’ sense of worth.

In addition, students see themselves more positively when they realize they are not alone in their struggles and when they feel challenged by a professor. Faculty who self-disclose stories of their own experiences as students, wrestling with content or the difficulty of balancing work, school, and family, help students contextualize their own trials. Students realize they are not failing or incapable but rather encountering obstacles inherent in the learning experience (Schwartz & Holloway, 2012). In addition, students who feel respectfully challenged by engaged faculty are more likely to be open to assessment and feedback and to experience critique as a sign of their worth and potential rather than failure and shame (Schwartz, 2009, 2017).

Finally, these interactions and relationships increase educators’ sense of worth as well (Karpouza & Emvalotis, 2018; McMillian-Roberts, 2014; Schwartz, 2013; Schwartz & Holloway, 2012, 2017). In that moment when students have found me helpful, I know that my presence in the exchange was valuable, and so in helping, I am validated (I should not need or invite students to validate me, but acknowledging that I experience affirmation through good teaching exchanges helps me maintain relational clarity). When a student seems energized and more focused after we talk, I sense that I am right where I need to be. “People tend to feel empowered and worthy if they feel they have an effect—an impact—on others” (Miller & Stiver, 1997, p. 35).

Action or movement. Creative thinking, growth, and a boost in confidence spark the student toward action. This is most obvious in positive and enthusiastic interactions, such as when a student meets to clarify a paper topic and leaves with ideas, energy, and a plan—he is positioned to move forward on the paper. The link between connection and movement is also evident though perhaps less obvious when students are mired in the difficulty of their work or academic journey. Think of a time when you met with a student who was slightly upset or frustrated, perhaps not understanding course content or feeling overwhelmed and unsure about continuing in the program. You meet with the student and discuss the challenge. Often, students seem lighter and more optimistic at the end of these meetings; this response is so typical it hardly seems noteworthy, and yet rarely is the problem fully resolved or the work completed.

So why does the student feel a little better? Because connection and all that it brings help people get unstuck. This is significant for all students, particularly for adults trying to move through their academic programs amidst the challenges of balancing family, work, and school (Kasworm, 2008). Through engaged conversation and real presence, we convey to students that they matter and their challenges are real and can be overcome. Connection boosts energy and is a forum to begin to solve problems, and this moves the student from feeling stuck or paralyzed to seeing a step forward. The power of connection to fuel movement may be one of the most important yet overlooked aspects of teaching. As we will see in chapter 2, we do not need time-intensive long-term relationships to engage in these kinds of powerful relational moments; these can happen in one-off interactions as well.

Desire for more connection. Experiencing our multifaceted selves in mutual regard with another person pushes away our doubts and reinforces that our deep struggles and big ideas (and the less noteworthy moments in between) are valid. Connection helps us get unstuck, move forward, and see our own value; these positive experiences prompt us to seek more connection with each other and with others in our academic and professional worlds. RCT proposes “the goal is not for the individual to grow out of relationships, but to grow into them” (Miller & Stiver, 1997, p. 22).

Power-Over and Power-With

Writing primarily about the ways in which a male-normed and male-privileging society subordinates women, Jean Baker Miller interrogated the hegemony of the male-dominant culture. Her insight helped women understand how, for example, the surrounding culture led them to devalue their roles as caregivers and to discount the meaning and life-sustaining energy they found in relationships. Miller sought to redefine power:

For women today, power may be defined as “the capacity to implement.” . . . This has not been the meaning of “power” in the past. Power has generally meant the ability to advance oneself and, simultaneously, to control, limit, and if possible, destroy the power of others. That is, power, so far, has had at least two components: power for oneself and power over others. (There is an important distinction between the ability to influence others and the power to control and restrict them.) (Miller, 1986, p. 116)

Miller (1986) continued, “Women start, however, from a position in which they have been dominated” (p. 117). This reality lingers. Even for children raised in homes where parents model egalitarian adult partnerships (perhaps more important in opposite-sex couples in terms of conveying equality), children encounter gender stereotypes and power dynamics in school. And even if they escape this in the classroom and on the playground, children are surrounded by a culture that still shows men as mighty and women as seen through the male gaze, a culture wherein when they are old enough to understand, they will realize that on average an equally qualified woman will earn less for doing the same job as a man.

While Miller framed the argument around gender, other founding RCT scholars extended her work, arguing that people of color; people with disabilities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people; and those living in poverty are also marginalized and experience emotional and physica...