Figure 6:1: Continuum from monologic to dialogic In reflecting on practice, it is helpful to be able to recognise where along such a continuum one’s practices and beliefs sit. This can be a first step to decisions in changing one’s practice, and to trying out new approaches. The advantage of diagrammatic representations such as in Figure 6.1 is that it provides a language through which to describe what a practitioner has ‘felt’ but the practitioner may not have had the language to describe what may be a source of unease and the reasons why. Figure 6.2 expands the language and with it concepts that practitioners may find useful to talk about their practices. Having the language and understanding the reason why is necessary to change in practices and beliefs. The important things to remember about representations such as in Figures 6.1 and 6.2 is that they are representational, and metaphorical; that is, these representations will not exactly match any one practitioner’s practices, rather they are a means of providing ways of thinking and talking about pedagogical practices. Practitioners always move along such continuums, the question is, where do they spend most of their time, and what does this say about their beliefs about learning, teaching and their perspectives of their learners? In Figure 6.2, Sfard’s (1998) metaphors of learning are placed on a continuum, alongside the monologic-dialogic continuum. The acquisition metaphor, explains Sfard is found in language such as “knowledge acquisition” and “concept development” that assumes the human mind is a container to be filled with certain materials and that learners own this knowledge. Freire (1972) calls this the “banking metaphor”. “Once acquired, the knowledge, like any other commodity, may now be applied, transferred (to a different context) and shared with others” (ibid, p.6). This idea of learning as gaining possession over something is persistent and implicit in much of our traditional use of language to describe and discuss learning. The new metaphor, which she calls the participation metaphor, uses language such as knowing, reflection, communication, community, dialogue, inquiry, communities of inquiry, development through participation, democratic and so on. There is a shift, notes Sfard, from “having” as in the acquisition metaphor, to “doing”. For example, “knowledge “is replaced with “knowing”, an action word, referring to using, constructing and co-constructing knowledge in context. In the participation metaphor, context is implicit in learning and seen as offering rich possibilities for learning and participation in activities rather than accumulating “private possessions” (p.6). Learning
78
