Making the Ordinary Meaningful:
An Experiential Journey

Presentation to the 8^th International Conference on Holistic Education,
Mexico, November 2000

Roger: When I started teaching 20 years ago I noticed how students were fascinated with mysteries, the out of ordinary, but they weren’t always discerning in using this knowledge, and they weren’t connecting it into a coherent story which had deeper meaning for their lives and was grounded in everyday living. I realized that many had a thirst for spiritual meaning. My own spirituality at the time was about exploring ideas and theories, intermingled with some contemplative practices such as meditation and aikido. I designed courses for both adults and students around an “Earth Mysteries” theme, using an inquiry and experiential approach, where students could ask questions and construct their own understanding. I offered these at night and in the college enrichment program once a week.

These programs were very popular, making the out-of-ordinary meaningful – rather than just sensational -  challenging many students into other ways of thinking about their world, provoking a deep sense of meaning, purpose and a connection to their inner being. Dream interpretation was very useful in helping students see meaning and connections in their lives and to understand how to use symbology and metaphor. We have continued to offer such courses and recently I have been using the College computer network to reach other students with information and dialogue. For example, there is a popular dream interpretation web page where students anonymously send in their dreams for interpretation.

Sue: The problem with embedding such a course in other schools was that it relied on teachers taking it who also had an interest in this sort of thing, and it required acceptance by other staff and parents. We then realised that the essence of what engaged students was the sense of mystery. This could be found in any subject if teachers knew where to look.

In my science classes  I gave my students scope to explore the fascinating and we came up with amazing crazy notions - What was at the edge of the universe? Is the earth hollow? Are there parallel universes? – ideas which deeply engaged and perturbed my students.  I found that students were motivated in learning the more mundane facts because they tied into these fascinating explorations, enabling a better understanding of both, and resulting in improved academic outcomes. In the process I found that student’s imagination and deep questioning were stimulated. My students even wanted to acknowledge and record this deep questioning by having class T-shirts filled with the questions and stories of the year – which they all wore into their exams.

As I shared my own emerging fascination for my subject with colleagues I found them, like me, becoming re-enchanted with what they were teaching, finding depth and richness in what had previously seemed like dry fact. This lead to wonderful lessons and experiences with their students. But this was just a beginning.

Roger: We then tried to find ways we could encourage students in all our classes to ask their own questions, find mysteries, and make connections to their own purposes, goals and life journey. We were amazed at the compassion, wisdom and depth of feeling in many of their responses. These students exhibited immense thoughtfulness and humanity, which had been ignored in the everyday routine of their lives.

I then expanded this approach of inviting questions to the whole school using the computer network, with a website which encouraged and published students questions and had resources for teachers who wanted to link students deep questions with class activities. Site hit rates indicate the interest students have in each other's questions and their need to question. I am currently trying to incorporate what I have learnt into designing web-quests for students - and possibly teachers!

 Sue: I found that setting up a classroom environment at the beginning of the year which encouraged this deep questioning and critical thinking set the tone for how we looked at the ordinary within our subjects. Students were no longer passive receivers of facts but were actively engaged in examining theories, deciding their significance, and determining how they would integrate them within their own belief structures. It was a real exercise of making meaning intellectually as well as spiritually as we played with ideas. For example, when we discussed Newton’s seemingly boring principle of gravity, which students had done to death in their last 4 years of schooling,  students wondered for the first time, what really was matter? How plausible or believable is it that matter has a basic property which enables it to attract? And once you start questioning what matter really is, it is a small step to questioning what is reality itself. Here is an excerpt from a student’s journal just after such a lesson.

What is reality? What is real? There are so many possibilities, we could be living on a hollow earth, all atoms could be galaxy's, human beings could be combinations of infinite galaxies, we could all be figments of our own imagination, all be someone else's dreams, singularly matter and not any mind, and if so what do other people perceive us to be.  Are we all lumps of mass that people view and create our own personalities for.

What are people?  Are they bodies wandering aimlessly around the earth looking for a purpose they can never find?  Are they real? Do they appear the same to everyone?  Am I always the same to everyone, the same matter, but different mind?  And if so, how can we say that we know someone, if we can only really define their matter.  And even then, matter appears different to every one. 

This student later told me how she was going through a relationship crisis which had caused depression and confusion in her life. She said that being able to write to a journal where she could safely voice her big questions and uncertainties had been a life-line - an opportunity to work through things for herself, while being acknowledged and supported by the teacher.

Students can’t make meaning in a vacuum – there is a need for supportive learning environments because students can be left feeling very vulnerable. It is important that students can have a say in the process and are given the opportunity to choose not to participate, or to suggest ways that would be more comfortable and useful for them. While I do a lot of team building in all my classes to help bring students together, I realized that the ongoing critical thinking in my science classes promoted a climate where students were having deep insightful discourses with each other. Students worked through conflict positions using an inquiry process which valued all approaches and perspectives – and in doing so developed increasing understanding and appreciation of each other, and the diversity within the class. This led to a wonderfully friendly and supportive atmosphere, enabling students to share their innermost concerns.

We then looked at how we could explicitly teach principles of emotional intelligence and effective dialogue in our other classes – making processes more transparent and helping students develop sophisticated inter-personal skills to assist them to live in a pluralistic society. This had a feedback effect – high level dialogue led to improved student relationships, a willingness to invest self and go deep resulting in better topic understanding.  

Roger: We have also been interested in helping students (and teachers) explore and understand the implications of different epistemologies and world-views - for example the difference between mechanistic reductionistic Newtonian thinking and quantum and systems thinking. 

In my computing and enterprise classes I explored systems thinking by asking students to consider the broader issues associated with study topics. For example: Do computers make the world a better place? Can a computer appreciate art? Could a computer have a soul? We asked questions about our government's information technology push. Students participated in electronic forums organisised by the state government.

We were surprised at the enhanced quality of the learning experience that resulted from applying new science metaphors, whole systems thinking, multiple intelligences and meta-cognition in general. Students were more likely to question fundamental assumptions and look beyond simplistic 'answers'.

Sue: In my physics class we legitimately explore quantum thinking as part of the course.  Year after year as we deeply investigated the wave/particle duality I noticed students grappling with the nature of paradox and dichotomies. They initially tried to find a nice logical linear solution before being pushed into the state of mind that could cope with dualities - moving from an 'either/or' world to an 'and/both' world.  I noticed profound effects on my students -- an ability to cope with uncertainty, change and crises,  with increased confidence and resiliency. There was  also a 'quantum leap' in their thinking as they began to look beyond the obvious in everything they tackled, juggling multiple perspectives.

I then developed an approach to the quantum topic which explicitly discussed the metaphors and paradigms that affect our everyday lines -- what did it mean if the ideas of quantum physics replaced a Newtonian view of the world? I again noticed a profound change in many – a more philosophic understanding of their knowledge and ways of thinking – a meta-cognitive awareness which students told me made them feel incredibly empowered and emancipated. They could now see other paradigms in the world which had bound them and could now helicopter above them.

This success led me to introduce the concept of  paradigms to my journalism class. While they had always been skeptical of the commercialism, opportunism and lack of humanity in the media they never really saw it as a 'paradigm'. Their new understanding made them more determined to design a magazine which could elevate the reader - transform, perturb and encourage a better world – they wanted to be part of establishing  a new paradigm - a new way of thinking and being in the world.

By explicitly teaching these new metaphors and paradigms to our students we were enabling a mind shift where students could not only see things more meaningfully, but could see a place for themselves in the world.  And perhaps more importantly we were facilitating new ways of thinking and being in the world which gave students the ability to look for wise solutions to world problems.

Roger: In trying to encourage reform of college curriculum and teaching practices we found that many teachers were still locked into an old mechanistic paradigm and couldn’t see the need for change. In my college I looked for different ways to perturb this complacency. Being network manager of our school enabled me to run electronic staff and student surveys, using the intranet to publicise findings. Voting patterns via e-mail for example, showed that over 70% of students had some underlying belief in spirituality! 

I gave some tongue-in-cheek questionnaires that explored acceptance of different paradigms (Newtonian, New Science, New Cosmology, Transpersonal) - people could find out if they were a 19^thC, 20^thC or a 21^stC thinker. These generated considerable discussion. I followed that with whole staff professional development sessions where staff were introduced to some of these new ideas and approaches. There were more internet surveys and opportunity for small group discussions on what teachers (and students) really valued in education.

We now have a dialogue about values and purposes, and momentum for change. Many teachers now believe that it is important to discuss world-views, question underlying assumptions and explore different epistemologies. We are in the process of developing a curriculum framework based on some holistic principles, plurality, choice, meaning and rich learning environments. 

Sue: We were still grappling with the problem of how to bring spirituality explicitly into education, given the many different beliefs of staff and students and the disinclination of many to openly use the word spirituality. We found that during this whole process of working with students and teachers we had begun to question the nature of our own spirituality. We found that if someone asked us to explain it we no longer referred to the ideas or theoretical constructs that we had used in our mystery courses. We found that we had grown and changed - there was a reflexivity between our own deepening spiritual practice and the work we were doing with others - our spirituality was less expressed in ideas and more in the quality of relationships we were having.

There was a stripping away of dogma as we got to the essence of what it meant to live, breathe, act and be a spiritual person. We explored what this meant to us, our practices and the processes we went through. We realized how important it was for us to be on our own inner and outer journeys - a kind of mindful living. We began to think this might be the same for teaching in general. Meaningful learning for students seemed to be linked to meaningful learning for teachers.

We wondered how we could bring mindful living practices more consciously into our teaching. I realized that some activities that I had designed to give students an experience of a scientific phenomenon, in order to motivate questions, resulted in students adopting a more mindful approach to their lives. 

For example, in one exercise I blindfold my students and ask them to walk along a corridor to a courtyard, thinking about the role of light in their lives. When they take off their blindfolds and look around, they connect deeply to the phenomena of light, seeing it with fresh eyes, appreciating it fully and exploring its significance. I realized that they were looking with scientific aesthetic appreciation – an awe and wonder – as well as a sense of personal gratefulness. 

These attitudes of mind, or quality of attention are fundamental to the process of mindful living. The deep effect of such exercises on them was evidenced in the poetry they wrote in their journals and their enthusiasm as they came into class with stories of things which left them in wonder and delight. They were making connections for themselves, appreciating things for themselves, and finding meaning for themsleves.

If  I was already unconsciously encouraging development of spiritual practices  then did it matter whether I consciously brought frameworks of spirituality to my teaching? I realized that by being aware of what was happening I could ask a subtle question that could help students transfer the understanding of a particular activity to their lives. Also, it enabled me to more fully understand and appreciate their responses – I could begin to see the profound hidden in what might previously have seemed superficial. In fact it enabled me to be more mindful in my relationships with my students and to value the different ways they make meaning.

Roger: Over the years we have been exploring many different teaching practices that could fit under a 'holistic' umbrella. These were in themselves very useful, enhancing the learning experience for students, and creating better learning communities. However it became clear that much richer learning experiences were possible if these practices were integrated and students were given more choice and control over the form of their learning.

For example, in my computer class I gave students more choice - and responsibility - by suggesting they organise a computer help desk. They ran training sessions for other students and teachers, solved computer problems, and documented their own progress. Students used their preferred learning styles to gain more knowledge and skills, worked on team projects and used peer and self assessment to increase the effectiveness of their learning.

This engaged a whole group of students who were normally turned off school. These students had to make choices every day – choices about what they learn, when they learn and how they learn. This generated self-reliance, confidence and an ability to make meaning of experiences far beyond a teacher-led textbook driven classroom. Six of these students were rated in the top 10 out of 120 applicants for several jobs.

Such multi-purpose, rich, interactive learning experiences also enable opportunities for both planned and unplanned outcomes. Students began to design their own learning experiences with an enormous sense of pride, ownership, leadership, self-motivation and confidence. Not only did they learn but they taught - the taught each other, they taught their teacher - and they taught students and teachers in neighbouring schools!

We now deliberately design class activities that are multi-purpose, multi-pedagogical and multi-perspective. Choice and control over one's learning and the richness of tasks leads to depth and meaning for each student and empowers them as learners.

Sue: So, can we ensure meaningful learning for students by just implementing a whole lot of holistic practices as richly as possible? Well, over the last couple of years I have been working in a university physics department, in an action research project, helping lecturers design better learning experiences for their first year physics students. I initially wanted the lecturers to develop coherent frameworks which could inform their teaching and enable them to deal with complexity in the classroom. However, they were not interested in learning about educational frameworks – “not more irrelevant jargon” - they just wanted simple practices that could make a difference. One would say to me “just give me one thing I can do.” 

So that’s what I did. Although they used some of the holistic practices described on the previous list – group work in lectures, and a more reflective and inquiry-based approach – they found that many of the students resisted their efforts, found them meaningless and didn’t understand how these practices could help them pass. In many cases the learning environment did not support student risk taking and the lecturers didn’t see the need to generate supportive environments. Holistic practices without a coherent holistic framework didn’t get results. At this point they might have given up – but they had to do something because student numbers were falling.

During the project we got many different types of feedback from students through questionnaires, interviews and focus groups. Although the lecturers initially wanted to dismiss student comments, the deep interviews, which enabled them to see the 'inner' student, caused them to revise their thinking. As physicists they expected inquiry into the educational process should follow the rules of scientific research – find general rules and principles which can be applied. 

However the student body was diverse and inconsistent. In trying to understand how students learn and find meaning the lecturers pushed themselves into a new state of mind – one that could deal with plurality;  and one that looked past the negative responses to see the opportunity for a richer understanding. They searched for frameworks that could explain this complexity. This process resulted in a self-generating inquiry cycle, in which the lecturers themselves have grown and changed.

A key to helping teachers transform their teaching is to  encourage a personal journey, a going deep within self,  a process of inquiry with spirals of practice, feedback, reflection and modelling. It doesn’t matter where the teacher starts. If the teacher brings their whole person to the process they enable not only growth of understanding but growth of self. In this process it is important for the teacher to have the ability to tune into the learning space, to tune into the student, in order to get feedback about how they are making meaning of the experience, how they are learning and growing. In this shared space the teacher forgets all the plans and ideas and just ‘is’ authentically in the moment with the student or class in ever deepening relationship. As the teacher understands their students better they develop richer frameworks of learning which enable them to not only design better activities but get deeper feedback from the students.

So what frameworks can assist in this process? I began to see a correlation between the inherent nature of science, the nature of students and how they learn, and the nature of spirituality. I realized that when activities resonate with all of these then a learning field or system results that enables students to gain deeper meaning.

So what is the nature of students? We have found useful theories such  as Maslow’s Needs Hierachy, Whole Brain Learning and the Developmental theories of Rudolf Steiner and Kieran Egan. I particularly found the ideas of Egan very powerful. By starting where students are at – their nature of being rather than what they know – teachers can design activities which tune into this stage of being. My students exhibit a range of characteristics and preferences from these stages. At the beginning of the year they are predominantly Romantic with a preference for being told the facts. Their preference for exploring extremes and the exotic is one reason they find the mysterious so meaningful. During the year I deliberately perturb them into Philosophic and Ironic understandings using stories that explore different frameworks and by presenting anomalies.

So what is the nature of science? Having worked as scientist I have been really concerned that the so called scientific method and traditional positivistic views of science don’t really capture all the things that really happen when a scientist does science. How does it capture Einstein’s imagination, the serendipitous discoveries, hunches, the sense of wonder, the insatiable curiosity, the deep questioning, the collaboration, controversies, enigmas and paradoxes? In fact when you start thinking about the nature of science you begin to see how much it relates to a spiritual journey. Is it possible to teach science in such a way that it deeply connects to each students' growing articulation of their spiritual being, and at the same time, connects to their particular stage of development?

So what might a 'learning field' look like in practice? In electrostatics I ask students what they think an electron really is and how do they know this? I ask them to challenge all their previously held beliefs and to ask what these stand on - how do they really know? What evidence supports their view? What are they relying on and what have they assumed? How much is intelligible? 

It’s a process of stripping away and finding the essence, pulling away interwoven knotted threads, realizing that much of our knowledge is built on dodgy foundations. But isn’t this also part of the process of deep inquiry and reflection that people go through on spiritual journeys?  

I am also connecting to that need within each student at that age to really question themselves, their parents and society. I am encouraging them to construct their own frameworks and to develop some understanding and criteria for the process of construction, perturbation and change, which they can bring to other experiences in their lives. I am also providing a supportive environment for a process which can often be painful.

Roger: Thus in our experience to make learning more meaningful we need to

Understand the nature of the topic or subject with 

• its stories of inquiry, purpose and human endeavour; 

• its history, future and moral and ethical dilemmas;

• its relationship to other topics, to students and to the world; 

• its paradoxes, enigmas and anomalies.

Have a range of teaching and learning practices that 

• addresses multiple ways of thinking and knowing; 

• build on cooperative and community learning; 

• promote curiosity, inquiry and critical thinking; 

• allow diversity of expression through dialogue, journaling, storying; 

• create opportunities for personal and collective choice, action and responsibility.

Acknowledge spirituality and soul by 

• listening to the inner life through dreams, intuition and insight; 

• promoting reflection and contemplative practice; 

• valuing service and ethical practice; 

• developing a sense of purpose, place and vocation; 

• allowing for self-expression and creativity; 

• enchanting through a sense of mystery, wonder, awe and reverence;

• supporting deep questioning and transformation.

Providing learning environments 

• with rich and integrated learning experiences; 

• that are safe, caring and supportive; 

• valuing questions and discernment; 

• promoting self-expression and creativity; 

• authentic, honest in-the-moment relationships.

Recognise 

• developmental stages of thinking and knowing; 

• the full range of needs of the whole person; 

• physical, emotional, mental and spiritual journeys and growth.

Understand 

• the strengths and limitations of different world views and paradigms; 

• the role of story and metaphor.

Then, in the presence of students 

be fully present in the moment as a whole person in authentic relationship with the Cosmos.

Overarching frameworks can be really powerful but there are many frameworks and many ways of seeing things. We have come up with an evolving framework which is powerful for us because we have given it meaning.  We hope it has some meaning for you.

References and Reading:

Banathy, B. (1991) Systems Design of Education: A Journey to Create the Future.

Bennett, B., & Rolheiser-Bennett, C., & Stevahn, L. (1991.) Where Heart Meets Mind. Toronto, Ontario: Educational Connections.

Brendtro, L et al. (1990)  Reclaiming Youth At Risk. Indiana: National Education Service

Brussat, F.&M. (1996) Spiritual Literacy: Reading the Sacred in Daily Life. New York:Scribner

Caine, G., Caine R.N., & Crowell, S. (1994). Mindshifts. Tucson, Arizona: Zephyr Press

Cajete, G. (1994). Look to the Mountain: An Ecology of Indigenous Education. Durango, Colarado: Kivaki Press.

Capra, F. (1991). The Tao of Physics.  Boston: Shambhala.

Capra, F. (1982). The Turning Point. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Capra, F. & Steindl-Rast, D. (1991). Belonging to the Universe: Explorations on the Frontiers of Science and Spirituality. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco

Capra, F. (Ed.) , (1993). Guide to Ecoliteracy. Berkley, California: Elmwood Institute

Capra, F. (1996). The Web of Life: A New Synthesis of Mind and Matter. London: Harper Collins Publishers.

Davies, P. (1995). Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature. London: Unwin

Dufty, D., & Dufty, H. (Eds.) (1994). Holistic Education: Some Australian Explorations. Belconnen, ACT: Australian Curriculum Studies Association.

Egan, K. (1986). Individual Development and the Curriculum. London, Hutchinson

Egan, K. (1997). The Educated Mind: How Cognitive Tools Shape Our Understanding. Chicago: The University Of Chicago Press

Flake, C.L. (Ed), (1993). Holistic Education: Principles, Perspectives and Practices. Brandon, VT: Holistic Education Press

Fox, W. (1990). Toward a Transpersonal Ecology. Boston: Shambala

Gardner, H. (1985). The Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Grof, C. (1993). The Thirst for Wholeness: Attachment, Addiction and the Spiritual Path. San Francisco: HarperSan Francisco.

Grof, S. , & Bennett, H. (1992). The Holotropic Mind: The Three Levels of Human Consciousness and How They Shape Our Lives. San Franciso: Harper.

Kessler, R. (2000) The Soul of Education. Virginia: ASCD

Knudston, P., & Suzuki, D. (1994). Wisdom of the Elders. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Lazear, D. (1991). Seven Ways of Teaching: The Artistry of Teaching with Multiple Intelligences. Palatin, IL: Skylight Publishing.

Lovelock, J. (1979). Gaia. : Oxford University Press.

Miller, J.P. (2000) Education and the Soul: Toward a Spiritual Curriculum. State University of New York Press

Moffat, J. (1994). The Universal Schoolhouse: Spiritual Awakening Through Education, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

Moore, T.  (1994) Care of the Soul: A Guide for Cultivating Depth and Sacredness in Everday Life. New York: HarperPerennial

Moore, T.  (2000) Original Self: Living with Paradox and Originality. New York: HarperCollins

Palmer, J.P., (1993). To Know As We Are Known: Education as a Spiritual Journey. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco

Palmer, J.P., (1998). The Courage to Teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

Prigogine, I. (). The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos and the New Laws of Nature.

Orr, D. W.,  (1994). Earth in Mind. Washington, DC: Island Press

Sheldrake, R., & Fox, M. (1996) Natural Grace: Dialogues on Science and Spirituality. London: Bloomsbury Publishing

Sinetar, M. (2000) Spiritual Intelligence: What We Can Learn From The Early Awakening Child. New York: Orbis

Swimme, B. ((1996) The Hidden Heart of the Cosmos. New York:Orbis Books

Swimme, B. & Berry, T. (1992) The Universe Story. San Fransico:Harper

Talbot, M., (1992). The Holographic Universe. New York: HarperPerennial

Tobin, K. (Ed.) (1993) The practice of constructivism in science education. Hillsdale, New Jersy: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Torbert, W.R. (1991). The Power of Balance: Transforming Self, Society, and Scientific Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Wilber, K. (1983). Eye to Eye: The Quest for the New Paradigm. New York: Anchor Books

Wilber, K. (1980) The Atman Project: A Transpersonal View of Human Development. Wheaton, Illinois: The Theosphical Publishing House.

Wilber, K. (1998). The Marriage of Sense and Soul. Melbourne, Australia: The Hill of Content.

Zohar,D & Marshall, I. (2000). SQ: Connecting With Our Spiritual Intelligence. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing