3.2. Moving from monologic teaching experiences to dialogical teaching and learning

 becoming aware of their evaluation of different perspectives, and the processes involved; and

 valuing hearing different contributions from colleagues, and what it means for their own understanding.

3.2. Moving from monologic teaching experiences to dialogical teaching and learning

Particularly in the first two to three weeks of this condensed course which took place over six weeks, meeting two to three times per week, students struggled with the very different experience that dialogical teaching and learning involved them in. Initial discomfort lasted longer for some than others, as they learnt to take responsibility for their own learning and growth. At the core of the struggle seemed to be what they perceived as a lack of structure, and no provision of clear answers from the authoritative voice of an educator. Additionally, beyond the usual challenges of lack of time to read and digest material in a condensed timeframe of a between semester course, there was the extra challenge of applying theory to practice. Students’ struggle led the educators to modify the last sessions, by spending some considerable time in working this challenge through with the class. A further challenge was the writing up of the report. As one student said, it was “a little bit of a hybrid” (Xavier) combining report writing format and academic writing where analysis and planning had to be supported by critical appraisal of theory.

Learners’ journey involved shifting from being a relatively passive recipient in previous courses in this Masters’ programme, to becoming an active agent, as described by Holly and Melvin.

Not so much of a top-down approach. It’s like the facilitators (of the course], they basically, they don’t just come in and they start pouring information into our heads. Maybe for some of us they are not so used to this kind of approach they may find it threatening…. (Holly)

for ... lecturers [in the previous courses and other programmes], they are a bit more direct. This is what you need to know, this is what you need to put in your assignment. (Melvin)

Shifting from a highly structured, educator centred approach, caused confusion for some:

Like the last lesson [in week 3 of the course] that we had, unpacking some of the learning theories, I don’t really understand what are we trying to drive at. But unpacking the learning theories, are we supposed to have a critical insight on what the theories meant? Or because different people will have different interpretations, is that the way or the approach that they want us to unpack, or should they tell us what they perceive this particular theory espoused and share with us? Yeah, so I don’t know. I don’t see much, yeah, helping us understand what the main theories espouse or the main focus. Or rather base it on our own interpretation, which I feel very confusing because many people, discussions, here and there but…leading here and there, but I don’t know exactly…yeah, eventually what it leads to. (Doris)

Confusion over instructions and the goal of the activities is one thing, and always an area for improvement on the part of the educator. So, certainly this was a potential issue, for this student at least, if not also for others. This aside, the comment that, “I don’t see much, yeah, helping us understand what the main theories espouse or the main focus”, indicates that Doris is looking for a definitive answer, rather than expecting to engage in a process of interpretation and exploration of application. Not surprising then that she expresses confusion evidenced in her statement that, “Or rather base it on our own interpretation, which I feel very confusing because many people, discussions, here and there but…leading here and there, but I don’t know exactly…yeah, eventually