Response to "Teaching Adult English Language Learners"

I appreciated how cogent and personal Richard Orem’s Teaching Adult Language Learners was. The book in general was brief, but the content seemed to be chosen with such care. Since Orem seemed to have such a personal relationship with the material he chose, I paid extra attention when he occasionally extensively summarized the work of another author. I was especially intrigued by Orem’s commentary on Jane Vella’s Learning to Listen, Learning to Teach: The Power of Dialogue in Educating Adults because it centered on two values I think are essential in the adult classroom—strong teacher-student relationships and dialogue—that are particularly abstract concepts for young teachers to learn to plan and integrate into a syllabus.

I thought it was interesting that Orem focused his audience’s attention on principle # 9, the acknowledgement of the power difference between teacher and learner, so much more than the other principles. I wanted to explore hypothetical reasons for his rationale for doing this on my blog, as well as consider potential classroom applications of this thinking and further research I can do on this topic. Orem describes principle # 9 as follows,

(Vella) draws an example from a conversation that she had with Paolo Freire in which Freire said, ‘Only the student can name the moment of the death of the professor.’ (p. 17). Vella is telling us that so long as there is a power gap between teacher and student, learning will not take place effectively. The learner and teacher must see themselves as collaborators in the process of problem solving. Given the power gaps that exist within certain cultures (Hofstede, 1980), it is no wonder that some students have a difficult time warming up to the idea of the teacher and student as co-learners. (Orem, 11).

Upon reading this passage again, I believe that Orem highlights the difficulty of establishing the teacher and student as co-learners because he sees this as a challenge instilled in some learners culturally.  I think that is an interesting idea, especially when I juxtapose it with the sociological research that Orem describes later in his book that shows that different cultures have different attitudes and preferences in relating with power. I think that a lot of this passage still bothers me though.

Vella’s commentary from Freire involving the “death” of the professor as a prerequisite for a true relationship where the teacher and student are co-learners seems extreme to me. I have not read Pedagogy of the Oppressed, so I only have a sense of the theories of Freire. However, I would like to believe that some authentic dialogue and learning could exist before my future students see me as a collaborator. Also, the implication of such a radical, even painful, shift in the classroom culture being necessary seems difficult. It also brings me to the second part of this quote that still confuses me. Orem says that this relationship between the teacher and student and collaborators is primarily difficult because of resistance for the student to adhere to these roles.

I would like to argue that I believe that participating collaboratively is equally difficult for the teacher. It is easier to lead with sheer authority and by giving the information to students rather than guiding them to it. Culturally, I believe that teachers also adopt the perception that teachers must be authorities as much as students do. Teachers and students have the same concept of “the teacher” in their minds, except the teachers have to fight a concept they have been also taught to imitate. In many ways, I think I have to figure out how to kill that image of the teacher as much as much as my future students do. I have noticed in my class presentations that I switch to “teacher mode” by giving bold directives, and performing; I do not feel like my student self when I am teaching my peers. This seems problematic, or at least feels awkward. I am not sure how to coach myself to have a persona that balances authenticity with leadership and student inquiry with the obligation to provoke discussion. I definitely agree that this is the most difficult of Vella’s principles.

I believe that I need to do a few things to further develop a more authentic co-learner teaching persona. It seems obligatory to read scholarship in this area such as Vella’s book and Pedagogy of the Oppressed. In addition, I believe I need to teach myself through one of Vella’s other principles influenced by Freire: praxis. I need to teach more, particularly in contexts where students guide instruction more, then reflect on it. I think an ongoing reflection on the process of tutoring an adult, would help me develop a better understanding of being a co-learner, then I could translate this relationship between one student and myself to a larger group.