Delegator Routines
The delegator teacher aims to construct classroom encounters that provide transformative experiences for students. Knowledge is supposed to be part of a humanizing process that makes people better individuals, not simply individuals with more content. Because this approach assumes some model about human potential, the routines used must do more than introduce content, they must facilitate a process of personal development. Inevitably, this approach places more demands on continual exchanges between students and teacher. A couple of routines are described below.
Routine 7: SHOWeD
Drawn from Freirean model the SHOWeD routine leads learners through a series of questions in response to an initial situation (codification).
Step 1: SEE
The first questions are descriptive in nature, they ask learners to describe
what they SEE.
Step 2: HOW COME?
Following this, the questions focus on HOW COME people are behaving this
way. Considered the first level of analysis, this stage elicits learners
initial interpretations.
Step 3: OUR LIVES
The facilitator next looks for personal occasions in OUR LIVES that compare
with the situation and refines the initial analysis based on our own experience.
Step 4: WHY?
As the basic definition of the situation become clear, the facilitator pose
the WHY question that moves the group in search of scholarly based hypotheses
that can be used to interpret and diagnose the situation. Comparison of
competing theoretical orientations may provide room for discussion.
Step 5: DO
Finally, learners are asked to decide, based on this analysis, what actions
they are willing to DO.
This routine allows a great deal of space for cross-disciplinary dialogue and connection to personal experience. It provides a flexible, yet guiding process that works toward deeper levels of analysis.
Adaptations for the internet
The chat room environment may prove too rapid for some of this dialogue.
More reflective postings may work better, especially if contained within
discussion group rather than large classroom listserves. The assignments
that lead students through these steps could be distributed via email from the
teacher with discussion groups sending responses to their conversations to the
teacher (who can distribute them to the whole class or publish them on a web
site for common reflection). Some sort of reflective process should be
built in so that students can comment on their development (and any concerns
about what is restricting it).
Routine 8: NIF Discussion
The National Issues Forums, developed by the Kettering Foundation, are designed to draw people together in public dialogue around controversial topics. Their model of human potential is a civic one. These discussions aim to educate people on the arts of democratic dialogue, helping people discover how to collaborate in critical and creative efforts to develop common ground.
Step 1: Orientation
Usually 3 positions are presented in pre-meeting readings. The theme
of the discussion is presented, the various positions are outlined (usually
through a set of readings to be completed prior to other steps), and the rules
of the dialogue are shared.
Step 2: Understanding
The initial phase of the discussion is to review each position in an effort
to honestly understand and compare the strengths and weaknesses of all
positions. Participants are requested to not defend any particular
position (although they do not have to deny their preference). This
is also a stage in higher education where disciplinary knowledge is incorporated
to the dialogue.
Step 3: Common Ground
At the stage that all positions are well understood, the next phase begins.
Participants are now asked to find areas of common ground — ideas or positions
that representatives from each area is likely to support. The collection
of these new sets of ideas become the framework for common action. This
routine is a nice one for engaging topics where considerable irresolvable
difference of opinion is found. Again, disciplinary knowledge should
provide a basis for developing or evaluating the common ground ideas.
While not part of the NIF process, educators may consider a fourth step, one that devises action plans so that applications can test the validity of the new intellectual frameworks.
Adaptations for the internet
The initial phase may be delivered through traditional media. An email
contact to allow clarification on the process would be advisable. The
remaining steps would need to be conducted through a listserv or chat room using
a conference style moderator. Both steps 2 and 3 can involve a couple
hours in actual dialogue. Time must be allocated for participants to
engage in the lengthy exchange of questions. The instructor may use the
public forum as well as private messaging to oversee the process and work with
groups or individuals.