WHO IS THE 'KEEPER OF THE PEDAGOGY' ? (PART TWO)

Developing a shared pedagogy is a way of working that leaves the door open for new conversation, new research and new ideas to strengthen the practices we have already built, it does not abandon the journey midway or change direction completely without significant processes of investigation and dialogue. A shared pedagogy is the baseline of understanding that both declares our deeply held beliefs and defines our practices; it brings us together and unites our approach. When educators begin to delve deeply into these discussions, they soon realise that cohesive pedagogy doesn’t happen by accident, it requires time, trust and tenacity.

Educating in a paradigm of constant change, we know that pedagogical change is most often tied to people change. It can happen suddenly when key leaders in a school move on, and sometimes, it can occur slowly when different members of a team change over a period of years. Either way a change of teachers and/or leaders, always has an impact on the pedagogy of the school, often reawakening a perceived need to retreat to ‘the basics’ and reiterate our ‘baseline for practice’. 

In this space of change, I have seen how easily it is for hard working teams of educators (who have spent much time and effort working on shared beliefs and practices), to forget their ‘pedagogical heritage’and feel the pressure to jump on board with the latest shiny new program that passes the school door. The allure of such programs is filled with promise, often offering an ‘elixir’ to the perceived deficits of the past. This ‘chop and change’ approach comes from something I am beginning to call a ‘pedagogy of remedy’ and it leaves me wondering …

In times of flux and change, who is the ‘keeper of the pedagogy’?

Who holds our pedagogical beliefs and carries them forward through dialogue, holding them at the forefront of every decision, practice and action of the team?

How do we take the courage to stand firm in what we have understood and developed together over time, using this knowledge and experience as a space to contest new theories, programs and ideas?

For our practice to grow and strengthen we must recognise that we all have a responsibility to make time for dialogue and continue the journey, questioning practices and digging deeply into the marriage between beliefs and actions. If we don’t, we risk losing our shared understanding and purpose, instead ending up with a ‘pick and mix pedagogy’ which achieves everything and nothing, all at once.

The responsibility of aligning beliefs to pedagogy does not fall on the shoulders any one person alone, it is the ordinary magic in all our hands.

Fiona