Democratic Education for Human Flourishing at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education

4 November 2024

I am currently enrolled in the class “Schools in Action: Reflecting, and Acting in a Time of Crisis” with prof. Linda Nathan who founded 3 schools in Cambridge, MA (USA). We are studying and reflecting on our key principles for a democratic education, and I would like to share with you some of my latest thinking with this text, which I wrote after visiting one of the schools here in Cambridge, MA:

 

I enter the colourful third-grade classroom and sense a surprising coherence of order, softness and playful attention. The teacher is offering a gently-spoken mathematics lesson with all the students sitting in small pods of 2-3 students, assisted by a pair-professional. She engages the children with short and clear explanations, inviting them to discuss her mathematical problem portrayed on the wide screen, The teacher then rhythmically pauses their conversations with a light bell and inquires with them solutions to the problem. As they diligently raise their hands to give their answers, the teacher celebrates the correct responses, and inquires about the process they used to reach these by asking some of the children to stand up in front the class and explain their method to others. She is clearly opening a flow of ideas, especially from those who came up with the answers in ways that she did not expect: “this sounds interesting, come and show us all how you found this out,” she says to one student, encouraging autonomy and individuation. The teacher did this also with one of the students who was sitting a little on the outside of the group next to the pair professional, presumably with special needs. This was a clear sign to him and the class that diversity is welcomed. As another student shares their answer and describe their own process, she joyfully asks the class: “what kind of homie is he being now?” referring to a set of characters proposed in their teaching method who each have their unique talents. As one student shouted out the “Eagle-Eye Detective” homie, the teacher then gave a look to the class where they all repeated the name of the homie with joy. There are a number of democratic principles put forth in here:

  1. Democratic principle #1: Students are being invited to think freely, build their own meaning-making abilities and find their own problem-solving pathways,
  2. Democratic principle #2: Peer-led learning is taking place not only as students take time to discuss among themselves in small groups, but also as they watch each other perform in front of the class and learning from one another and
  3. Democratic principle #3: Positive human development is taking place as the teacher is helping to support students’ character growth by naming moments when they embody a homie and collectively encouraging a full class cheer. This democratic principle includes the development of teachers, for which there was little evidence in this school visit.

Furthermore, Dewey, in his “Democracy is Radical” text, opposes strongly the tendency in education to fill “empty vessels” and “impose organization” which involves a “one-size-fits-all” approach. This form of education prevents quality equitable classrooms that are accessible to and inclusive of all people (democratic principle #4), especially those with divergent learning styles. The teacher, in accordance with Dewey, allowed students to think more freely for themselves and encouraged them to develop abilities and creativity in problem-solving. There is significant data showing that complex problem-solving, which involves creativity and self-confidence, is one of the most important skills needed to engage with an increasingly fast-changing world. In addition, Dewey’s education vision counters what he calls the “totalizing belief in markets and a valuing of individual economic gain over all other considerations” as a fundamental goal for education, towards more humanistic values of freedom.

This third-grade teacher’s style exhibited an important sub-principle of the 3rd pillar (Positive Human Development): building strong relationships between students by actively engaging emotional and relational dynamics coherent with positive youth development. Children were facing one another, not using any paper/pen to write their answers, but instead using language and explaining their thoughts to their peers. This emphasizes relational interaction, and the teacher made explicit and positively reinforced a nonverbal dynamic occurring during the discussions which would help to build trusting and caring relationships among the class: “I like the way you are facing the speaker”. Linda Nathan’s “Big problems require big solutions” article proposed the following recommendation: “Rethink the relationship between social-emotional learning (SEL) and academics. SEL cannot be an add-on but must be an integral part of the school day.” There is a lot of evidence showing that the quality of relationships contributes significantly to wellbeing and resilience, and such relational practices were used in this classroom. One particular process-oriented educational practice I think would have further contributed to the children’s relational bonding, strengthening of secure attachment styles (another sub-principle of the 3rd pillar) and a sense of empowerment in finding their own voice would have been to ask children to reflect on their relational experience by asking a question such as “during this exercise, what kind of emotion did you experience and what did you enjoy in your partner(s) as they shared their thoughts?” Finally, I noticed there was no interactions between the teacher and the pair professional, even though the assistant did verbally engage with the content and offer responses. I wonder the ways in which they model collaboration and caring communication between them as a pair of adults in the room for students to learn about trusting, loving and skillfully collaborating teachers.