Democracy in Education

Through my observations I have been able to see the way education functions within society in a greater sphere than just through traditional formal schooling. I have also been able to observe how through informal or nontraditional forms of education democracy is utilized in order to allow individuals and participants to really take on the learning process in new and different ways. Democracy was explored in unique ways throughout all of my observations, but it was not always practiced in extremely successful ways that could make a real change in the system of education. This is not to say it wasn’t ever successful however, because I feel there were times that democracy was evident and successful, and that was a very powerful thing. Even though the use of democracy in nontraditional forms of education is not always utilized in the most beneficial way, for the most part, educational democracy seems to be considered when structuring an informal program. Participants actively engaged in the process of learning because they had goals and expectations for spending time learning. Through many of these programs ideas of equity, equality, and accessibility were consistently considered and this structured much of the learning. Through this exercise in looking at democratic education I observed themes that re-occured within many of my observations. The two themes that seemed to thread their way through all of the programs and events in which I documented and profiled the democratic process were power and community. The themes were exemplified in all of my observations in different ways. Through reflecting after the observation I have been able to work through these issues and the way they operate in education.
When I observed the Chicago Public Schools board meeting, this idea of power was evident. Who has the power? the board. Who wants and needs the power? the teachers, administrators, parents, and students. That was echoed in many of the presentations given by speakers that participated and argued for their rights and ideas to be heard. This is a problem because the power is only coming from the top, and the source of power is not distributing the resources for the education of Chicago area students equitably. There are gaps in the standards of education between the schools on the north side of the city and the south and west sides of the city. Schools in areas that have less are given less in terms of supplies and means for education, and more and more schools are closing and forcing students into new schools that are becoming over crowded. The speakers were obviously furious over the forces of power in the CPS board, but it was hard to take them seriously in many ways when they refused to follow the rules of the board meeting, did not listen to the woman telling them time was up (a short amount of time was allotted to the participants, but that was so every voice was heard that registered, and people were not bumped out), and they spoke out of turn, spoke when they were not registered, and booed speakers they did not agree with. For a democratic system to work I feel that all of the forces need to work together and create an order so that it all works together. This involves listening to all parties and respectfully arguing your opinions and not booing people that you disagree with and speaking out of turn or over people. The ideas that we read in the Foucaultion notions segment of class have to do with power coming from all levels and everyone. This is a theory that I think should be applied to democratic societies. We all should have power and we all should respect other opinions and people. This lack of respect is mimicked by and taught to children, and often times they do not learn to think critically about a situation and respect people with ideas that differ. This creates all sorts of societal problems as one shuts down and refuses to listen to opposing viewpoints.
One of the educational programs that I observed where a Foucaultion idea of power seemed to be applied, and worked incredibly well was in the Louder Than a Bomb workshop held at the Art Institute of Chicago. In this program every member whether they were a youth member or an adult “supervisor” had some sort of power to create their own experiences while learning. The program allowed the participants to explore the museum in their own way and choose their own art works that inspired them. No one told them what the work “meant”, what to look at, or what artworks were most esteemed, instead they were free to make their own meanings and respond to art in new and creative ways. Not one student or facilitator held more power than the other, and all of the students’ choices was regarded as just as important as the next. In the second half of the program the group engaged in a writing exercise that was facilitated by youth members. Every member whether adult or youth participated in writing a poem based on what inspired them. They then shared in an open forum that was supportive and gave weight to every poet in equal ways.
This type of facilitation of a program was also seen in the teaching artist workshop that I observed. In this program the “tween-aged’ students were given a great amount of power to experiment with art, and the teaching artist took on a facilitator and learner role where she kept things in order, but also allowed for experimentation and art experiences, while also learning herself about new ways to discover line and drawing in looking at art and making art. This democratic idea of facilitation is one that is very interesting, and one that I explore in my teaching. As a museum educator I allow my students to have a choice in what they learn, and to experience art in new ways through independent meaning making and interpretation. I am interested in the idea of choice in terms of experimenting with art and allowing my students to explore making. I work primarily with early childhood education, and allowing them to see education in different and democratic ways is always interesting. At times it is hard for a 6 year old to understand that they have a choice in the way they create and what they explore (or sometimes the parents are concerned that we are not instructing them on a step by step “craft”), but when they understand their role as artist and creator the learning is truly unique and interesting. This idea of choice and exploration is incredibly poignant in art education and exploration.
The second intertwined theme that I came across in my observations was community. The School of the Art Institute of Chicago student government open forum was an interesting way to see community in higher education. I attended a large university during my undergraduate career, and community was something that was stressed amongst groups at the school. People were always wearing orange, and students attempted a sense of belonging in the university community. This is not to say that individuals were not left out of the community, but community was an important aspect of the education. At SAIC I do not feel that same urgency for a sense of community, and to me that is okay. As an adult graduate student I am not looking for the same school spirit that I did during my time pursuing my Bachelors degree, but it was interesting to hear the students, especially the younger undergraduate students, express their interest in creating community at SAIC. I thought of the Foucaultion notion of community and how with community there is always someone left outside of the group. If SAIC has a community, I am definitely not a part of it. It was interesting to watch the students think of ways to create community and talk through their ideas of power within the school. They all seemed to want to make SAIC a more democratic institution for the students.
I used Foucaultion notions and democracy to think through many of the issues that I came across while observing education outside of the classroom. Ideas of democracy were discussed regularly and attempted in unique ways, but for me I agree with the idea that power comes from everyone, not just one source, whether it is the top or the bottom. When we give power to one source it just seems to become cyclical where the bottom rises to the top and so on. I was intrigued by the open forums that many of the informal programs used to allow students to have power, and this is where I think democracy was really evident.