Time flies - several weeks since my last post. My class work is not particularly demanding. I haven't done any artwork for REQUIEM for 5 weeks. And frankly since I've been working 7 days a week on afterworld there is no time. We are finishing the last episodes - 111 through 120 are in compositing. 121 through 130 are in animatic and character posing has begun. We will never do 130 episodes of anything ever again. ooofff.
A question and the attendant responses in my "how not to suck as a teacher" class was intriguing...and typical. Should a teacher invest trust in their students...and something about that extending to take home tests. Here's my thoughts:
The word invest implies giving something with an expectation of return of some kind. Holding an expectation brings vulnerability. Zen would recommend letting go of expectations and I ascribe to this. So for me it's not about trust it is about intention. Which, I believe is an order of magnitude more difficult to achieve than trust. Trust is too easily expected as clear intention languishes.
Trust is a natural consequence created through a clear contract or covenant between individuals when action and intention are congruent. Trust is not something that I carry in a bag on my back and can give or bestow on someone - I can't create it alone - it is only in the context of two people agreeing on intention, expected action and desired outcome that trust can be created.
I've heard it said that "trust is a risk survived".
When the contract is clear and the mutual expectations are agreed upon - then time and effort can be invested and trust will be the result. Faith and hope then are the investment tool. Anything other than this way is blind and unconscious - and doesn't end well.
Investing trust with the expectation that the trust will be warranted or that behavior will validate the trust given is a wonderful ideal. However in a world where most people move too easily to the "Why don't you trust me" pole, our culture places little true demand on individuals to actually make and keep commitments.
Learning from experience - trust is certainly important for growth and healthy relationships. It requires a certain kind of willingness to take risks and to be vulnerable. Both student and teacher have been hurt by betrayal of trust and expectation.
Turning to the concept of take-home tests. If the so-called test is meant to be a test in the truest sense of the word then there must be an element of challenge in the form. A test of facts and knowledge is not a test if the student is free to look up the knowledge and regurgitate the facts - that's a test of knowing how or where to find things in books. That's a valid test if that was the intended attribute to be tested. It's a subtle difference, yes, but call the "thing" what it is!
If the intended purpose of a test matches the form then it's a good test. One does not take the pole position at the Indy 500 by passing the written test.
If it is a test of synthesizing facts into an original thought then open books are indicated. Articulating the original thought is the test. The books are simply the raw material. The point is - trust your students and be clear about the point of the test and the intention behind the process.
Carl Jung said: "An understanding heart is everything in a teacher, and cannot be esteemed highly enough. One looks back with appreciation to the brilliant teachers, but with gratitude to those who touched our human feeling. The curriculum is so much necessary raw material, but warmth is the vital element for the growing plant and for the soul of the child."
I would invest my heart in order to create trust.
D_
