Empathy in Education: Engagement, values and achievement

Empathy in Education Also available from Continuum Anti- Discriminatory Practice, Rosalind Millam Meeting the Needs o...

Author: Bridget Cooper

158 downloads 2053 Views 1MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Empathy in Education

Also available from Continuum Anti- Discriminatory Practice, Rosalind Millam Meeting the Needs of Students with Diverse Backgrounds, Rosemary Sage Multiculturalism and Education, Richard Race Sociology, Gender and Educational Aspirations, Carol Fuller

Empathy in Education Engagement, Values and Achievement

Bridget Cooper

Continuum International Publishing Group The Tower Building 80 Maiden Lane 11 York Road Suite 704 London SE1 7NX New York NY 10038 www.continuumbooks.com © Bridget Cooper 2011 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Bridget Cooper has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. British Library Cataloguing- in- Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. EISBN: 978-1- 4411-2808 -9 Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Cooper, Bridget. Empathy in education: engagement, values and achievement / BridgetCooper. p. cm. Summary: “A thorough exploration of the role empathy plays in learning throughout all levels of education and its crucial relationship to motivation, values development and achievement”– Provided by publisher. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4411-0144-0 (hardback) 1. Affective education. 2. Motivation in education, 3. Academic achievement. I. Title. LB1072.C66 2011 370.15’4–dc23 2011016508

Typeset by Newgen Imaging Systems Pvt Ltd, Chennai, India Printed and bound in Great Britain

To my parents, Kathleen and James Carle, who taught my brothers and sisters and me how to love

Contents

List of Figures Acknowledgements Introduction Part 1:

ix xi 1

Empathy, Morality and Learning: An Historical Background

Chapter 1: Empathy: An Historical Perspective

7

Chapter 2: Empathy and Morality: The Relationship

16

Chapter 3: The Nature and Significance of Empathy in Education

27

Part 2:

New Understandings of Empathy in Learning Relationships and the Significance of Context

Chapter 4: A New Classification of Empathy in Learning Relationships

47

Chapter 5: The Benefits of Empathy in Teaching and Learning Relationships

102

Chapter 6: Constraints on Empathy in Learning Relationships

128

Chapter 7: Modelling Empathy and Values in the Classroom

159

Chapter 8: Empathy and Students with Particular Needs: Transformative Learning

176

Part 3:

Wider Implications: Empathy beyond the School

Chapter 9:

The Life-long Learner: Emotional Engagement as the Essence of Learning through the Life Course

191

Chapter 10: Affect, Technology and Learning

205

Chapter 11: Empathy in Management, Systems and Organizations

215

Chapter 12: Wider Values and Creativity

228

viii

Contents

Chapter 13: Issues in the Education and Training of Professionals

240

Chapter 14: Wider Implications and Future Work

249

Bibliography Appendix Index

259 273 275

List of Figures

Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3 Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2 Figure 6.1 Figure 8.1 Figure 8.2

Characteristics of fundamental empathy Characteristics of profound empathy Characteristics of functional empathy Effects of empathy How empathy supports values, engagement and achievement Constraints on empathy Profound empathy in interaction Interaction in larger groups

50 61 90 103 121 129 186 186

Acknowledgements

With great thanks, especially to all the excellent teachers, student teachers and students who gave of their precious time be interviewed and observed, and to the educational institutions that participated in the research referred to in this book. Great thanks also to my family and friends, who have been so tolerant, supportive and insightful throughout my research career, and to the staff and students in the institutions where I have worked, the Open University, Leeds Metropolitan University, the Universities of Leeds and Sunderland and beyond, who have supported and encouraged my endeavours.

Introduction

In an era when differences of race and religion, the extremes of wealth and poverty, and the dilemma of global warming dominate our news headlines, never has it been so necessary to develop the quality of empathy, to heal a fractured and fearful global society. Such healing requires understanding and empathy. Understanding comes with experience and education, and empathy can be part of that education. This book discusses the nature of empathy and its role in the learning process throughout all phases of education and its crucial relationship to motivation, and values development and achievement, impacting society from the micro to the macro. The area of affective or emotional issues in learning and its importance in moral development was often neglected by academics and policy-makers in the later twentieth century but became increasingly topical around the turn of the new millennium. This book combines evidence from neuroscience, psychology and other educational research, including substantial evidence from a doctoral thesis which considers the intrinsic nature of affect and empathic human relationships in learning. This thesis was conducted to address a gap in the research on moral development in schools. Though the book draws on research from around the world, much of the detailed primary research was based in the United Kingdom context between 1996 and 2010. The book is divided into three parts. Part One looks at the historical background to empathy as a concept and its relationship to morality and learning. Part Two looks at more recent understanding about empathy, is based largely on empirical research and considers the significance of context to the quality of empathy. It offers a detailed study of empathy in teaching and learning, which sheds light on the learning process. Part Three considers the significance of empathy beyond schools, as part of lifelong learning, its role in the design and use of technology, in management and organizations, its contribution to wider values and to creativity. Also considered is the role of empathy in teacher education and the continued training of professionals, and, finally, the wider implications for caring services, other organizations and possible future research.

2


This book will complement the many extant books on emotional intelligence in education and provide much-needed balance to the strong emphasis on mechanistic learning, curriculum and cognition that has dominated the understanding of learning theory. It considers affective issues in learning in compulsory, further and higher education and its relationship to the use of new technology and artificial intelligence in the learning process. Consequently, it has wider implications for the development of human understanding and values in a global society. Academics have often avoided research on affective issues because of its complex, intangible nature, despite its centrality to human functioning. Educational researchers have tended to cling to the less challenging research domains, the concrete, the measurable, the cognitive and the curriculum, which are more easily understood and funded by policy-makers and have consequently built steadily and profoundly on each other’s limitations. Ignorance about the value of qualitative research in education has compounded this distortion. Periodically, leading academics call for increased research into values and affect in education, but the response has been severely limited by the prevailing culture of the market and dominance of statistical analysis, combined with a reluctance to adequately challenge the nineteenth- century classroom model. Interestingly, affect and the interaction between cognition and affect was often more readily explored in artificial intelligence and technology and neuroscience than in traditional educational circles, and this book incorporates aspects of that research. This book is needed to divert educationalists from the prevailing focus of research and to enable affective aspects of education to be fully grounded and explored through the current and potential research base. Although practitioners and academics have recognized the dearth of emphasis on affect in education and begun to remedy it through publicising strategies to develop emotional and social intelligence, and managers have been encouraged to utilize affect in their organizations (Goleman, 1996; AlimoMetcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe, 2005), in education emotional education has become another add- on to the existing curriculum and to management strategies. The significance of the intrinsic nature of emotion in all human interaction is not fully considered and the area has not been adequately or profoundly theorized in terms of the teaching and learning process, and the constraints of existing systems. This book aims to fulfil that need. Politicians in the UK have called for personalization and pleasure in learning, as well as the promotion of good citizenship, but still advocate an intensive rigid curriculum in large, one- size- fitsall classes and lectures,

Introduction

3

which can only intensify as the post- banking crisis cuts take further bites out of education funding. The conservative- dominated coalition in 2010 promised to relieve teachers of some of the bureaucracy under which they had previously laboured, which stifled autonomy and creativity, but real funding for more humane classrooms through improved staff/ student ratios was not promised and funding for the arts, creativity and drama rapidly disappeared in schools and universities. The dichotomy between rhetoric and reality in education has been clearly exposed by researchers such as Alexander (2004) and, sadly, too many researchers collude and comply with government policy priorities and inconsistencies, in order to obtain favour for the scarce funding for educational research. This book highlights the inherent contradictions in rhetoric and practice, drawing together available research on affect in learning and teaching and uniting the complementary evidence from psychology and neuroscience. It provides both a historical base and incorporates current research, including significant original research by the author, which questions basic assumptions about our education systems and the nature of educational research. This research, in turn, will enable professional educators to have confidence in investigating affective issues in the future. The aim of the book is to extend profundity and breadth in educational thinking, not only by reviewing and discussing the literature but by developing theory through the voice and practice of expert practitioners, whose understanding about teaching and learning has enormous implications for educational theory, policy and practice. In this regard, the detailed research into teaching and learning in Part Two will be naturally understood by classroom teachers, for whenever it has been presented in part at conferences, it has been eagerly received, most especially by people who have daily contact with students and student teachers. One head teacher at a conference where I presented some of this research said, ‘Thank you for reminding us what teaching is all about.’ This book questions the Victorian and monetarist approaches to education, which we would argue restricts esteem and slows down the learning and moral development of students in every phase of education. There must be no misapprehension about the nature of empathy or emotion in learning. It does not represent a sentimental or woolly approach, but is fundamental to every aspect of how human beings relate to and learn from each other. In this sense, it should be a central focus of educational research in the coming years if we are to move human society forward both in learning and cohesion.

4


Some of the arguments are controversial and challenge some accepted wisdoms on issues around inclusion, secondary schools and university education. It naturally challenges approaches to education that consider the short-term financial issues before the significance of learning longer term and, therefore, society’s longer-term good. For the good of the planet, we must harness the potential of all of humanity, not just a small proportion of it. I sincerely hope that readers enjoy this book, as well as build upon its thinking.

Part One

Empathy, Morality and Learning: An Historical Background

Chapter 1

Empathy: An Historical Perspective

What Is Empathy? Dictionary definitions of empathy reveal the ambiguity that pervades the concept throughout the literature. The following definition is not atypical, stating that empathy comes from the German word Einfühlung and describes it as: ‘the power of mentally identifying oneself with (and so fully comprehending) a person or object of contemplation’ (Brown, 1993, 808). The associated adjectives are ‘empathic’ and ‘empathetic’, both of which are generally used by authors. This definition also explains that empathy implies feeling with someone rather than for them, and implies a subjective position rather than an objective one, an idea carefully articulated by Noddings (1986). This research specifically examines empathy shown for people, not objects, though the latter is occasionally touched upon when it illuminates the discussion about empathy shown for people. To a certain extent, some of the earliest discussions of empathy (Lipps, 1897; Vischer, 1872) were more interested in an ability to grasp the aesthetic rather than to understand the ‘other’ in human terms. The concept of ‘fully comprehending’ others immediately raises the question of how one could possibly know everything about a separate human being, with all the complexity that concept entails, and some research has specifically focused on the accuracy of empathy (Ickes, 1997). Nevertheless, there exists a well- documented and researched concept of empathy from the last century which describes a sense of understanding between people – an area of common ground, a sharing of feeling and emotion, an ability to feel and see things through the eyes of others – an understanding that, while it is hard to define and measure, is too important for human relationships to ignore (Aspy, 1972; Deutsch and Madle, 1975; Feschbach, 1975; Gladstein,1983; Rogers, 1975; Schantz, 1975). Psychologists frequently attempt to measure empathy, and do so in a variety of ways. Empathy is not a neat, concrete concept which necessarily

8


permits highly objective evaluation, but its complexity must be understood in as many diverse ways as possible because of its centrality to human interaction and to teaching and learning. Whatever the complexity of empathy some aspects of it are mathematical, in as much as deeper levels of empathy require individual attention, time, and frequency of interaction. Profound empathy, as identified in the research and explained in Part Two of this book, is dependent upon knowing the other person in some detail, which does not happen instantly; otherwise, as Carse (2005) points out, wrong motivations and beliefs may result. Hence, the immediate conditions in which people are able to interact, and the emotional capacity of individuals, both facilitate and constrain the development of empathy. Empathy may not be strictly a human quality. It is possible that other living creatures possess a certain degree of empathy (Goleman, 1996; Ickes, 1997). There are also different types and degrees of empathy, and empathy is often linked to emotional contagion, that is, the tendency to ‘catch’ the ‘emotions’ of others, in the literature. Hill et al. (2010) recently proposed a mathematical model for the spreading of emotion, which they compared to the spreading of an infectious disease, and Barsade (2002) considers the effect of emotional contagion on groups. According to scientific research, the possibility of a common universal atomic origin (Capra, 1997) may mean that our ability to feel at one with each other and with our environment may be more fundamental to our chemistry than we presently understand. The neurons in the human body transmit electrical signals, charged by our senses, to create feelings that are reinforced and strengthened by the brain. Anyone who has attended a cup final at Wembley Stadium or a concert at Royal Albert Hall will recognize the power and reality of shared and heightened emotions. When a football commentator describes the atmosphere as ‘electric’, perhaps he is nearer to the truth than we realize. When we sense the feelings of others, mirror neurons in the brain trigger off similar emotions within us, which is a possible mechanism for empathy (Preston and de Waal, 2002). Many thinkers have linked heightened awareness involved in empathy to spirituality and creativity (Fryer, 1996; Hay, 1997; Noddings, 1986; Nye, 1998). In contrast, the ‘group-think’ aspect of empathy, in which group members relate much more closely to their own group than to another, can also have negative effects for outsiders, as evidenced by the famous warders and guards experiment (Haney et al., 1973) , in which students participated in a role play experiment which had to be swiftly terminated because the ‘warders’ treated the ‘prisoners’ so cruelly and the terrifying outcomes brilliantly depicted in The Crucible (Miller, 1953), an allegory of McCarthyism, in which a group of young women in


9

the Salem witch trials, in a state of high emotion, contribute to the arrest of a man for witchcraft. However empathy is most often explained more directly in terms of its role in human relationships which is discussed in detail below. All major philosophers from Aristotle onward discuss the human capacity for other- centredness and the importance of one’s relationships with – and ability to understand the feelings of – fellow humans, and this capacity repeatedly recurs in discussions of ethics and morals. Aristotle included the emotions in his arguments about virtue and morality, explaining that one should take pleasure in virtue and that it should lead to happiness and well being (Benn, 1998). According to Karl Marx, man can reach his human potential not as an individual but only as a social being, in his relations with his fellow man and woman. At the heart of his critique of capitalism is the denunciation of individualism, and naked self- interest (Marx and Engels, 1888). This human relationship is not just rational or functional, but is sensual and personal and makes us complete. He wrote to his wife: ‘but love of the beloved, and more particularly of you my beloved, makes a man, a man again’ (Fischer, 1973, 26). Marx (in Fischer, 1973) writes of man acquiring the world through his senses, and Macmurray (1935) discusses the importance of emotions and sensitive awareness, of employing the senses for the sheer joy they deliver to us, rather than merely utilizing them for narrower intellectual or functional purposes. He sees the intellect as subordinate to the emotions, and self- centred rather than other- centred: ‘Intellectual awareness is egocentric. It uses the senses as its instrument. But the direct sensual awareness has its centre in the world outside, in the thing that is sensed and loved for its own sake’ (Macmurray, 1935, 43). The implication that intellectual awareness is more egocentric has interesting implications for morality and will be discussed later. However, Macmurray sees the application of sensual sensitivity, and awareness of other human beings, as the roots of human communion and religion, whereas Marx believed the supreme form of human integration and interaction was communism. The greater good is implicit in both concepts. Hay (1997) links Marx’s concept of the species- being to the idea of spiritual awareness, and both of these to a sense of heightened awareness and sensitivity. Hay also suggests that this awareness, which Noddings (1986) calls ‘receptivity’ and Watson and Ashton (1995) call ‘openness,’ is actually a physical state. These descriptions begin to portray this concept not just as a mental state, but also increasingly as a neurobiological state or process.

10


Sympathy or Empathy? At times, philosophers have used the word ‘sympathy’ in a sense similar to the first definition of empathy above, and Hume (1739), for example, particularly emphasizes the importance of sympathy to man’s moral development. The dictionary offers a range of definitions. The one below seems quite close to the empathy described by Aspy and Rogers later in this section: ‘Concordance or harmony of inclinations or temperament, making people congenial to one another, mutuality or community of feeling’ (Brown, 1993, 3185). This is not dissimilar to Hume’s description, which stated that we have a natural propensity: ‘to sympathise with others and to receive by communication their inclinations and sentiments’ (Hume, 1739, 316). However, all these definitions are open to interpretation, since the very personal and sensual interaction suggested in empathy is not easily defined or measured.

The Significance of Empathy Empathy as a concept was avidly researched and discussed in the 1960s and early 1970s and, given its intangible nature, has been differently described as a quality, an ability, a state and a concept . The influence of Rogers on the role of empathy in counselling and education was significant and widespread. His definition below seems to show a long-term and developmental understanding of empathy: The way of being with another person, which is termed empathic, has several facets. It means entering the private perceptual world of the other and becoming thoroughly at home in it. It involves being sensitive, moment by moment, to the changing felt meanings which flow in this other person, to the fear or rage or tenderness or confusion or whatever, that he/she is experiencing. It includes communicating your sensings of his/her world as you look with fresh unfrightened eyes at elements of which the individual is fearful. It means frequently checking with him/ her as to the accuracy of your sensings and being guided by the responses you receive. You are a confident companion to the person in his/her inner world. By pointing to the possible meanings in the flow of his/her experiencing you help the person to focus on this useful type of referent, to experience the meanings more fully, and to move forward in the experiencing. Perhaps this description makes clear that


11

being empathic is a complex, demanding, strong yet subtle way of being. (Rogers, 1975, 4) Summarizing some of the other research findings on empathy in therapy, he argued that empathy at an early stage in a relationship predicts later success in that relationship. Experience, but not brilliance, improves empathy, which is able to counteract feelings of ‘alienation,’ ensuring people value themselves and are able to open up to others (Rogers, 1975, 5–6). Rogers interchanges the term ‘empathy’ with ‘sensitive understanding’ and explains how this understanding enables even very disturbed patients to feel more normal and human, but adds that lack of understanding by a therapist can make the patient feel worse. He sums up by saying: ‘[A] finely tuned understanding by another person gives the recipient his person hood, his identity. Empathy gives that needed confirmation that one does exist as a separate, valued person with an identity’ (Rogers, 1975, 7). In the moment of interaction or contemplation, the empathic person has a real sense of accepting and understanding the other. This can be conveyed to the recipient of empathy, and some common area of feeling or understanding is reached, forming a ‘mutual bond’ (Dixon and Morse cited in Aspy, 1972). Absorption, what Noddings (1986) calls ‘engrossment,’ signifies this mutual bond. Listening attentively in conversation, receiving the messages the other wants to send, responding to them, and feeling for them evokes the empathy involved in a caring relationship: Caring is largely reactive and responsive. Perhaps it is even better characterised by receptive. The one- caring is sufficiently engrossed in the other to listen to him and to take pleasure or pain in what he recounts. Whatever she does for the cared-for is embedded in a relationship that reveals itself as engrossment and an attitude that warms and comforts the cared for. (Noddings, 1986, 19) For Rogers and Aspy, empathy is a common human quality, potentially developed and improved by training. Aspy developed training in empathy for student teachers (Rogers, 1975). Hargreaves (1972) called for empathy training in the UK to ensure ‘caring’ teachers. Empathy training has been conducted in Italy, for example (Francescato, 1998), and Black and Phillips (1982) showed the training to have some effect, although for the more empathic student teachers it did not, suggesting that teacher selection may be more important than training. In their study, empathy was also negatively correlated with an authoritarian approach, an implication of which could

12


be that the tough-minded approach often dominating the management of education and caring services could counteract an empathic approach by those who work directly with students and clients. This raises some interesting issues, which will be discussed in Chapter 13. If empathy develops in early family relationships, as Goleman (op. cit., 1996) suggests, can training really help to develop empathy or does training only create superficial changes? Could more emphasis on empathic interaction early in caring relationships enhance empathy in professional caring interactions? Other early research (Hogan, 1975; Feschbach, 1975; Shantz, 1975) posits different types and aspects of empathy, separating cognitive and affective aspects, for example, and using different measures. This research suggests that different aspects are affected by both genetics and early experience, and that only some aspects can be affected by training. However, other researchers felt that different aspects could not be measured in isolation (Iannotti, 1975). Hogan (1973) agreed with Rogers’s early contention that overuse of empathy could lead to identification with the other, which could be harmful rather than beneficial. There is some consensus that, on the whole, it is easier to empathize with someone similar to oneself. Consequently, in general, young people find it easier to empathize with other young people, boys with boys, girls with girls, and ethnic group with ethnic group (Rogers, 1975; Schantz, 1975). Children can learn prosocial behaviours but require empathy to enact them, especially boys (Roberts and Strayer, 1996). Goleman (1996) suggests that the receptivity needed for empathy cannot occur if the person trying to empathize is already too emotional. If one is angry, for example, one will not be receptive enough to receive, and mimic in their own body, the signals from someone else, which would help them to understand how the other is feeling. The flooding of the brain with one emotion can counter the ability to tune into other emotions. Psychologists such as Bowlby (1951) describe the problem with anger destroying receptivity. Damasio (1996) argues that emotions are vital to complex learning and decision-making. An inability to tune into appropriate emotions can impair this learning. This concept has some backing in research in artificial intelligence (Hase et al., 2001), where emotions in learning and decisionmaking have been a vibrant area of research (Belavkin, 2001; Davis, 2001; Frankel and Ray, 2001; Macas et al., 2001; Moffat, 2001; Moldt and von Scheve, 2001; Paiva, 2000; Picard, 1997; Sloman, 2001) and is discussed in Chapter 10. The influence of Rogers’s and others’ work on ‘empathy’ and its pertinence to teaching, learning, and human growth and development, whether


13

in the academic, personal or ‘moral’ sphere, has permeated educational thinking world wide (Brandes and Ginnis, 1990; Pike and Selby, 1988). It still holds great significance in the area of pastoral education, special needs and also multicultural education, where perhaps a higher degree of empathy is needed simply because of the diversity of pupils with particular needs, or for pupils from different regions, races and cultures. These issues are discussed in more detail in Chapter 8. Empathy can be accepting and understanding of difference, and perhaps is central to understanding values formation. In the last 20 years, however, research in neuroscience, in personal and social and values development, and in artificial intelligence, seems to be reaffirming the significance of the role of emotions in learning and development. Winkley (1996) discusses the ability of babies to respond to emotion in others, and how the neural networks in the brain grow when the baby feels accepted and loved. The works of Damasio (1996) and Goleman (op. cit., 1996) are typical summaries of research into brain development and link the emotional, the cognitive and physical as never before. They show how our abilities to make judgements and so called ‘rational’ decisions are inextricably linked to our inner feelings and physical processes, each feeding back to the other in different ways. This rejection of Cartesian dualism and revival of the significance of emotion recognizes the unified nature of mind and body, and of the intrinsic role of the emotions in the learning and decision-making process. Damasio (1999) explains the significance of intense interaction and engagement in learning, where the senses are focused on the object or person of interest. He emphasizes the role of the human’s own sense of body and self, in relation to the world he perceives and experiences. At each interaction, a human recreates his image of self (body and brain) in the mind. With each positive interaction, the sense of self is continually reinforced and updated, and the person is encouraged to open up more, explore more and learn more. Negative interaction causes the brain and body to retract and protect itself. With positive multisensory interaction, the brain and body absorb the feedback and information and become more engrossed and engaged, and better able to understand. This absorption and engagement applied to people resembles Noddings’s concept of ‘engrossment’ (Noddings, 1986) When one empathizes, one becomes engrossed in other people, absorbing and assessing feedback from others and responding to that feedback. Empathy appears to involve learning intensely about others in multiple respects and sharing both their cognitive and emotional responses, in turn creating an internal mental model of

14


them which relates closely to one’s own understanding and concept of self. Damasio (1999) explains that the universality of emotion in human beings significantly implies an ability of people world wide to relate to each other at these deep levels of understanding. Conversely, certain types of brain damage can reduce the links between emotional and rational thinking, and, in turn, reduce the ability to create an internal representation of the outer world. This can make it more difficult for people to experience the world as others do, hampering the ability to understand the effects of their actions on others, often resulting in less inhibited and more antisocial behaviour (Damasio, 1996, 1999; Goleman, op. cit., 1996; Sacks, 1985; 1996;. Even verbal aggression can seriously damage the brain and its capacity to learn because negative emotions create grooves in brain tissue which interrupt normal pathways (Maclean Hospital, 2001). This neurological research tends to reconfirm the importance of positive interaction and affect in the learning process and in the development of a sense of self, a concept advocated by Rogers and others many years previously. Watt (2000), like Damasio (1999), argues that emotion is central to consciousness. The work of authors like Goleman and neuroscientists like Damasio has resulted in a greater appreciation of the affective dimension generally and further research on empathy by a wide range of academics, from statistical measurement and testing through qualitative studies to purely philosophical discussions. Verducci (2000) explains her interpretation of the complexity and variety of empathy’s historical meanings and the scepticism of many regarding its nature. Lopez et al. (2001) examines empathy’s relationship to parental discipline, correlating it positively with females as do many other studies and negatively with strong parental corporal punishment. Eklund et al. (2009) show the effect of prior similar experience on the depth of empathy and, again, the increased empathy felt by women and by older participants. Cotton (2002) summarizes a range of attributes of empathy, along with advice for nurturing it, and also argues that higher empathy scores are associated with higher scores in critical higher- order thinking. Empathy involves paying close attention to non-verbal as well as verbal cues, and, according to Mehrabian (1971), non-verbal cues constitute more than 90 per cent of communication. A smile, for example, can be seen and can have an effect at seventy yards (Greenfield, 2002). This aspect of empathy and the ability to recognize facial expression, in particular, and early development of empathy in infants is an interesting area of research. Researchers have found, for example, that even at four months of age,


15

infants are able to respond to and discriminate between the emotional displays of others. A summary of this research can be found in Hutman and Geffen (2009). Empathy enables individuals to understand the emotions of others, and to assess and respond to others’ motivations, which is vital in effective teaching and learning. The current focus on research increasingly reveals the fundamental importance of emotions, as understood intuitively by Hume (1739) and recorded by Darwin (1872) in such detail, so long ago. According to Salovey et al. (2008): ‘there is wide agreement that emotions are the primary sources of motivations . . . they arouse, sustain and direct human action . . . and provide individuals with information which shapes their “ judgements, decisions, priorities and actions,”’ (534–535). Isen (2008) summarizes research into the effects of positive affect and argues that it promotes ‘flexibility, problem- solving, innovation and improved attention deployment’ (568). These and many other attributes influenced by positive affect are central to learning; emotions also have a powerful impact on memory. More recently, researchers and authors have favoured the term ‘emotional intelligence’, which perhaps encompasses a greater range of aspects than empathy, while others prefer the concept of ‘emotional literacy’. We must be wary of the term ‘intelligence’, however, because its history has often influenced people to believe that this feature is in some way fixed. Knowing about the plasticity of the brain, even after major trauma, we realize that the brain learns and develops dynamically, even when its functions seemed to have been drastically curtailed, by developing new blood vessels and neurons which help to regenerate damaged areas of the brain. Relevant aspects of neuroscience are discussed in relation to education and empathy later in Chapter 3. A very useful resource, referred to above, which summarizes much current research on affective issues and emotion, is The Handbook of Emotions, edited by Lewis et al. (2008). The book is regularly updated.

Chapter 2

Empathy and Morality: The Relationship

In addition to the importance of empathy in learning and interaction, it is also highly significant in the development of moral values. It is vital to understand this relationship, since, outside the family, young people spend the most time with teachers and lecturers, who have considerable opportunity to influence their values.

Moral Development and the Significance of Empathy There is a wealth of literature on moral development, the best known and most detailed being the works of Hoffman (1970; 2000; 2008), Hogan (1973; 1975), Kohlberg (1984), and Piaget (1932), and, more recently, in the feminist tradition, Gilligan (1982) and Noddings (1986). Understanding about moral development is also being illuminated by neuroscience, which is beginning to add weight to the significance of affect in learning and moral decision-making (Damasio, 1996, 1999, 2003; Goleman, 1995). Educationalists are increasingly making the connections between these ideas (Cooper, 2002, 2010; Narvaez and Vaydich, 2008). Although psychologists exhibit different approaches to studying the concept of moral development, similar understandings emerge. The literature on values education echo these understandings. Though the importance of rules, rewards and punishments, and the early formation of habits are widely acknowledged, many theorists describe the growth from the egocentric child, with unabashed self-interest, to the social being, who is able to see the world through the eyes of others. A child’s growing awareness of both the child’s own needs and the need of others leads to a sense of the greater good of family, friends, community and, ultimately, humankind. Empathy is most powerfully developed in infancy and early childhood (Leal, 2002) when moral values can also be internalized (Roe, 1980), although the ability to understand outside oneself is a gradual process. Piaget (1932) writes


17

of the small child: ‘his activity is unquestionably egocentric and egotistic. The social instinct in well- defined form develops late’ (cited in Wood, 1988, 26). Hoffman (1970; 2000; 2008) has conducted a lifetime’s work on empathy and strongly emphasizes the ability to understand the feelings and viewpoints of others as an important factor in moral development: A fourth process of moral development builds upon the child’s potential for prosocial affect, mainly the capacity for empathy. . . . Specifically, the taking of reciprocal roles, in which the person alternately affects others and is affected by them in similar ways, may heighten his sensitivity to the inner states aroused in others by his own behaviours, i.e. having been in the other person’s place helps him to know how the latter feels in response to his own behaviour. (Hoffman, 1970, 346–347) Kohlberg produced an elaborate representation of the developmental stages of moral judgement, a representation which required a person to put himself into the shoes of others sufficiently to come to moral judgements about increasingly complex ethical problems (Hersch et al., 1979). However, Kohlberg’s theory (1984) came under considerable criticism from feminists. His original studies, completed on males only, leave many questions on moral development unanswered. Gilligan (1982) criticized Kohlberg’s developmental stages because he only researched what individuals say about desirable behaviour, and not how they actually act. Kohlberg’s stages are of moral judgement or reasoning, not of moral action, and there can be a world of difference between the two. Kohlberg’s theory also suggested that women could not reach higher stages of moral reasoning. However, if men have higher levels of moral reasoning, as Kohlberg suggests, they appear not to be translated into moral conduct. The gender statistics of crime and imprisonment alone would suggest a divide between thinking and doing; for example, males represent some 92 to 94 per cent of British prisoners (Maguire et al., 2002). People might reason intellectually with extensive concern about the long-term implications for others, but the question is, do they actually conduct themselves with the same concern, and how can good conduct be encouraged? How do we encourage individuals to want to do good things, that is, encourage ‘the will of the individual to do right’ (SCAA, 1996b, 9)? Gilligan (1982) argues that women perceive moral issues differently than do men, due to having a very different psychological and emotional makeup. From an early age, men are governed by rules and principles, whereas women base their moral decisions on individual contexts and relationships.

18


This idea is explored in depth by Noddings (1986), whose feminist approach to ethics has considerable resonance for the research discussed in Part Two of this book. She argues that decisions should be based not on a principle but, rather, on the individual contextual nature of the moral issue. Rigid principles are not open to development, and in some circumstances may be inappropriate. Ultimately, moral judgements are made by individuals who take personal responsibility for their decision. This is arguably more difficult than simply abiding by rules, which can, in effect, deny personal responsibility. In order to achieve the most appropriate outcomes, the decisions that people make in their lives and relationships must be based on rich and specific information. This rich information can only be acquired through a deep understanding of one another’s perspective and the longterm implications of decisions. The concept of empathy is at the heart of Noddings’s concept of ethics (1986). Piaget’s developmental stages (1932) present a child increasingly aware of the effects of their actions on others, but people who commit violent acts seem not to have moved through these stages. In this respect, theories of attachment (Bowlby, 1951) or attunement and development of empathy, suggested by psychologists like Hoffman (2008), have considerable credence in relation to moral development. These theories suggest that empathy can be nurtured from birth, but, equally, children who are deprived of love and attachment with significant others could mature with less empathy and a greater potential to commit immoral acts. If it is true that such people are potentially redeemable later in life, as Rutter (1981) and Docker- Drysdale (1990) suggest, it is perhaps equally feasible for others to lose a previous ability to empathize. Perhaps people can become less moral through experience, perhaps in relationships, institutions, cultures, periods or in climates where concern for others is limited, or perhaps when peoples’ lives or families are under threat. The primary research shown later in Part Two suggests this is perhaps the case. Hogan explains the child’s need for rules and early socialization, but states that without an ability to understand the feelings of others, rule followers are likely to be stuffy rule- bound, pedantic prigs, like Piaget’s moral realists (Wood, 1988, 26) and that empathy is very important to morality: [T]hus when a person acts from a moral viewpoint, he tries to consider the implications of his actions for the welfare of others. The disposition to take the moral point of view is closely related to empathy or role taking. (Hogan, 1973, 222)


19

The problems with rules, emerge as part of the concept of functional empathy, which is used in most classrooms and is identified and discussed in Part Two. Hogan’s reasoning coincides with principles of moral reasoning devised by Haydon (1997b), in that a moral stance requires a determination to consider the implications of one’s actions on the well-being of others and that an individual also requires an empathetic disposition in order to consider the other’s perspective. This raises the question of how that disposition is acquired, and so we return to the question of developing, ‘the will to do good’. An empathic disposition appears to help motivate and control our actions and must, therefore, play a significant role in the development of morality. Hogan (1973) believes children must have experienced empathic treatment themselves if they are, in turn, to develop empathy. He also says that a comparative absence of repression or denial is necessary to develop empathy, with its openness to inner experience, intuition and a willingness to take note of non-verbal cues. Hoffman and Saltzstein (1967) link the process of induction in discipline to empathy. Understanding is developed more explicitly by explanations as to why actions are appropriate or not, as opposed to commands to ‘do’ or ‘don’t do’ this, without explanation. Telling a child he must not hit another because it will hurt or upset the other helps the child to see the other’s point of view and to understand the pain or sadness generated by his actions. If empathic treatment by others helps to develop empathy and this, in turn, supports moral decision-making, then the people who live and work with young people must demonstrate empathy if they are to promote moral attitudes and empathic behaviour in their young charges. Goleman (1995) argues for the importance of empathy in all walks of life and suggests that research shows that empathy is a particular strength of females. However, his concept of empathy does not fully explore different types or degrees of empathy. Does the empathy of a care worker, for example, differ from that of a car salesman? The link between empathy and morality is illuminated by considering children whose feelings for both themselves and others are not nurtured. These children are likely to develop into less morally aware adults. Recently, the illumination of the phenomenon of child abuse has exposed emotional cruelty towards children on a massive scale. The development of individuals with a history of maltreatment and, consequently, a limited ability to see the perspective of the other, is well documented, as can be seen in the child psychology research of people like Rutter (1981; 1992), and Winnicott (1984). Some of the most damaged young people have

20


suffered early deprivation, and without some later therapeutic relationship have great potential for violence. Docker-Drysdale (1990), a consultant psychologist, describes such children as ‘unintegrated’ and explains, ‘Most violence, apart from single isolated acts, springs from these unintegrated people’ (132). Carers can provide children with the primary experience they have been deprived of, often at a very young age, through forming close individual relationships: ‘[C]hild care workers can learn how to provide emotional experience, without which the deprived child remains an incomplete person’ (13). In a chapter on managing violence, DockerDrysdale points to communication as one of the key factors: ‘By helping them to communicate, by listening and responding in an appropriate way, we may enable them to contain their feelings by transposing them into the symbols we call words’ (Docker- Drysdale, 1990, 132). The significance of lack of empathy can also be seen in studies of criminals, and the families of criminals, who have committed acts which provoke moral outrage, such as violent attack, sexual abuse or murder. A study of parents and children suggested that a lack of empathy could be associated with the abuse of children (Rosenstein, 1995). Increasingly, neuroscience is also illuminating this issue. Goleman describes what he calls ‘life without empathy: the mind of the molester, the morals of the sociopath’ (1995, 106) and shows the links between both lack of empathy and violent crime and neural irregularity. For instance, when words fail to trigger emotional reactions in psychopaths, their brains do not show the distinctive patterns in response to emotional words, and they do not respond more quickly to them, suggesting a disruption in circuits between the verbal cortex and the limbic brain which attaches feeling to it. (Goleman, 1995, 109) Goleman discusses the work of Hare (1995), a psychologist, who suggests that since psychopaths do not show a fear response to predicted pain, they lack concern about punishment for what they do, ‘and because they themselves do not feel fear, they have no empathy – or compassion for the pain and fear of their victims’ (110). Goleman reflects less about what causes the damage in the brain circuits, but does not believe in concept of the ‘criminal gene’ (110). If violence is perceived by society as a key ‘moral’ problem, and extremely callous events trigger fears of moral crisis, then identifying and understanding such young people and adults and providing them with appropriate primary emotional experience should be high on the


21

political agenda. Schools might have a valuable role to play in addressing this problem. If emotional development is given more focus in educational policy and practice, it might support moral development, allowing people to understand their own feelings and those of others when conducting their lives. A number of organizations and initiatives emerged in the 1990s which attempted to support the emotional development of young people such as ‘Antidote’, ‘Re- membering Education’, ‘A Place To Be,’ and various mentoring and counselling schemes in schools. Goleman’s successful publication triggered off a plethora of research across many disciplines into emotional intelligence. More recently, for example, emotional literacy has been instituted as part of the curriculum in UK schools (DFES, 2005; 2006; 2007a) and has been evaluated (DCFS, 2008). This was an encouraging change of thinking, although the provision of resources to support this specialized area was limited, as was the time given to needy children. More appropriate provision such as smaller ‘nurture groups’, where children receive intensive personal support over longer periods of time, requires more extensive funding but can be extremely helpful for children with extensive social and emotional needs.

Empathy and Morality For Noddings (1986), the concept of empathy appears central to any discussion of ‘caring’. She explains why knowing how the other feels could lead to appropriate action being taken: Apprehending the other’s reality, feeling what he feels as nearly as possible, is the essential part of caring from the view of one caring. For if I take on the other’s reality as possibility and begin to feel as reality, I feel also that I must act accordingly. (Noddings, 1986, 16) The importance of the empathic approach is that it engenders what SCAA and other moral educators wanted to see – not just principles and rules but the will for action. Noddings again: We also have aroused in us the feeling ‘I must do something’. When we see the other’s reality as a possibility for us, we must act to eliminate the intolerable, to reduce pain, to fill the need, to actualise the dream. (Noddings, 1986, 16)

22


By consciously recognizing others’ sentiments and feeling for them, we are encouraged to act not for ourselves, but on their behalf. Unlike Goleman, who does not always clearly make distinctions about who benefits from empathy, Noddings clearly explains that the beneficiary of an empathic approach is ‘the other,’ and her approach is similar to that of Murdoch (1970), who believes that responding in a concerned way in the form of ‘loving attention’ is at the heart of morality. From Noddings (1986), we gain this idea of empathy as ‘receptivity’, to be open to someone’s feelings and feel ‘with’ someone, to share a feeling, an understanding. Empathy can occur even with people for whom we have had previously less feeling, and Noddings gives an example of sudden insight into a person’s emotions after having heard an account of an incident in his life. Hesten (1995) explains how Heathcote, an expert in drama in education, also emphasizes the important role of empathy, which she believes enables the sharing of common human experiences and emotions. Heathcote refers to what she calls the ‘Brotherhood’s code’, whereby simple experiences in our own lives have similar or parallel experiences in the lives of others, enabling us to understand them. She explained this code as: ‘Jumping sideways through time and across social strata, hanging on all the while to one constant element in the situation’. The predicament of Cinderella with her cruel sisters, for example, can represent at one level ‘all those who [suffer] at the hands of their siblings’ (Section 3.3.1). A similar internal feeling and significance of an experience can be felt by any individuals although in different contexts. Gilligan (1982) believes the male psyche tends to develop differently than does the female psyche. Because of the gender difference, boys tend to separate from mothers as people and role models, whereas for girls the relationship and role model is more likely to be continuous. As a consequence, relationships are viewed differently and girls are more likely than boys to emerge from childhood with more ‘empathy’ and a sense of connectedness built into their personality, the boys having been obliged to relinquish that connection. But the ability of boys to separate themselves from others more easily might also be an important survival mechanism. If empathy is closely related to receptivity, then our brains could not possibly ‘receive’ and feel about everyone we might interact with; we couldn’t possibly respond to each and every person without considerable stress. Equally, in times of emotional turmoil or threat, the separation mechanism could be vital to the protection and survival of our families and ourselves. Noddings (1986) urges that we try to remain open to our feelings, and through this to connect to the feelings of others, but suggests that if we


23

risk damage by others, we must withdraw and protect ourselves. The capacity to make good decisions about when and whether to open up or close down is important, but if we close down for too long, we may find ourselves unable to reopen the doors, even when we wish to do so. Trust lost is hard to retrieve. Young people who have been denied warmth, love and human contact for long periods at an early age might find it more difficult to connect to other human emotions at a later stage (Maclean Hospital, 2001). This is in part due to lack of development of connections in the brain and substantiates Winkley’s argument (1996) about nurture producing brain growth. Psychologically, if no sense of self has been created through positive interaction with others and no selfesteem has been nurtured, how then can a child reproduce that process with others? Habitual abuse, neglect, rejection, and negative or deceitful relationships may leave a child with no sense of self-worth, negative emotions, and a permanently defensive nature incapable of opening up to and seeing worth in others. The descriptions of empathic caring by Noddings, however, differs from the empathy described by Goleman (1995), who believes that emotional communication facilitates human relationships; this can be seen in animals as well as in humans. However, Goleman makes no real distinction between the empathy of a salesman and a teacher, though they might, in fact, be very different. A salesman might possess short-term empathy, consciously manipulating the other simply for his own monetary gain in a very functional manner, while the other may be empathizing over the long term, for the benefit of the other. Koseki and Berghammer (1992), whose work is discussed next, make this distinction, and the difference has moral significance, since they clearly distinguish different types of empathy, some of which are more closely related with morality than others. Goleman also describes abused individuals who may be particularly receptive to the emotions of others as a means of protecting themselves, ‘in what amounts to a post-traumatic vigilance to cues that have signalled threat’ (102).

Different Forms of Empathy The work of Koseki and Berghammer (1992) is important in this regard, for they identify different levels of empathy, which relate differently to moral development. They see empathy developing through different stages, with the most advanced stage being moral or adaptive empathy which is ‘characteristic of a responsible leader who considering the interest of his group is capable of self- denial’ (202). They believe this quality can be nurtured

24


and enhanced as young people mature. They call this quality ‘moral’ or ‘adaptive’ empathy and believe its strength lies in a long-term view of the other’s development: ‘Moral or adaptive empathy is always long-lasting, is directed towards some goals in the future and transforms the situation by finding and executing an adequate solution to it for the people concerned’ (Koseki and Berghammer, 1992, 202). They distinguish between this and less- advanced forms of empathy, in which people are aware of the other’s feelings when it suits them – for example, to beat an opponent or to close a sale. They describe this as ‘cognitive’ empathy, which is used with a specific goal in mind and is of a lesser order than moral empathy. Again, this has resonance with Macmurray’s previous description of the senses being used instrumentally for egocentric purposes. Koseki and Berghammer (1992) also describe a purely ‘affective’ empathy, an even more basic level, where the display of emotion by one person simply creates similar feelings in another; for example, a 2-year- old may cry when a playmate cries. Moral or adaptive empathy is of a higher order of emotions, where concern for and understanding of the other is a long-term phenomenon. The aim of empathy is to bring about a positive long-term result for the person being observed, to continue to be aware of their history and to envisage their future. This type of empathy is highly personal and involves a close attachment to the other (Koseki and Berghammer, 1992). This advanced attached level is more like the receptivity and engrossment described by Noddings, and seems to encompass the motivations of the person and, to some extent, the will to behave morally. The ability to envisage longterm consequences for another seems to involve combining the imagination with feeling, and encourages a person to act on behalf of the other, so creating the ‘will to do good’.

Morality and Empathy in Wider Society In a global society, people experience a much greater range of beliefs and values than their more isolated predecessors ever did, and they need to find common ground while accepting difference. When values conflict, moral dilemmas can occur. Haste (1997) considers different concepts of how one might influence moral development in education but points out the varying moral values and stances taken by different races and cultures: for instance, some cultures stress family loyalty and others family honour.


25

Davies et al. (1997) in a symposium looking at a multi-nation study of citizenship, suggest loyalty to one’s country might also be a more important aspect for people of some nationalities and groups. None of these, however, seem incompatible with the concept of empathy, but the empathy is reserved for a limited or particular group of people, and is similar to the description of the gangster mentality (Goleman, 1995), where great empathy can be shown to family while simultaneously evoking total callousness to others. It is possible that deeper empathy for one group may curtail the empathy for another, suggesting a more competitive empathy, like the lower cognitive level described by Koseki and Berghammer (1992). Compliance with genocide or mass murder and atrocities in periods of war reveals how usual levels of morality and empathy for others can dissolve, revealing fragility under pressure. The Good Person of Setzuan, a play by Brecht (1965), suggests that morals decline in alienating environments and the female heroine must, consequently, invent a tougher, male alter ego to survive in the harsh climate in which she lives, echoing Gilligan’s view of the differing male and female morality. However, Haste (1997) also describes examples of people with extraordinary moral courage during periods of war who were prepared to risk their own lives to save those of others, strangers as well as family. Their moral attitudes seem to be so strongly formed that adverse environments and personal threats do not affect them. Some people at least seem able to resist external effects when acting out their values. But, the question remains: could different climates, economic, social or educational, similarly alter the morality and empathy of human beings? According to Marx and Engels (1888), capitalism destroys human relationships and creates alienation, changing the relationships from one of person-to-person to one of exchange of commodities and produces the ‘I-it’ relationship described by Clark (1996), which destroys community. In money- driven climates, people must curtail their feelings and empathy from their fellow humans in order to maintain profit. According to Koseki and Berghammer (1992), the level of empathy shown in a competitive situation is manipulative and of a lesser order than that required for the highest moral development. The morals of the market place in society, and increasingly in education, may produce a competitive climate in schools in which the moral development of young people is poorer because the models of empathy and morality they experience are not sufficiently advanced. If empathy dissolves alienation, as Rogers suggested (1975), then nurturing empathy could counterbalance the negative effects of competition.

26


If life experiences and social and economic situations can affect moral attitudes and behaviour, understanding how to ensure positive moral experiences in positive moral climates seems all the more urgent. Perhaps the school experiences and environment, where young people spend so much of their early lives, have a powerful influence in this respect.

Chapter 3

The Nature and Significance of Empathy in Education

This chapter traces the theoretical understanding about emotion, empathy and morality in the learning process and in educational institutions and considers the significance of the role of emotional engagement, from birth onwards.

How Does Empathy Relate to Morality in Education? How does this understanding about empathy and morality relate to schools and their links to the wider community? Goleman (1995) clearly makes connections: Schools have a central role in cultivating character by inculcating selfdiscipline and empathy, which in turn enable true commitment to civic and moral values. In doing so, it is not enough to lecture children about values; they have to practice them, which happens as children build the essential emotional and social skills. In this sense, emotional literacy goes hand in hand with education for character, for moral development, and for citizenship. (286) In recent years, educators have increasingly expressed the importance of the emotions and the development of empathy as part of moral development in education. As head teacher of an inner- city primary school, Brown (1996) stressed the need for empathy when trying to understand parents, children and communities. Educational literature on special needs and on pastoral care has made evident the importance of emotional support and growth fostered by empathy (Lang et al., 1994; 1998). Cross (1995) writes: ‘The emotional development of children must continue to be a central concern for mainstream

28


education’ (7). Several educationalists who take pastoral development and the whole child seriously have continually stressed the need for affective education (Lang et al., 1998; Best, 2000), a concept supported by a long tradition of transformative and holistic personcentred education advocated by people such as Freire, Froebel and Montesorri. Best (1998) argues that emotions have been largely neglected in British mainstream education. In the United States, such ideas are encapsulated in the character and personcentred education developed from the work of Carl Rogers (1975). In Europe, attitudes towards affective education vary from country to country, but the search continues for common understanding (Lang et al., 1994). However the dominance of a mechanistic, curriculum-based approach to education in the eighties and nineties, both in the UK and more widely, which has generally continued into the new millennium, has largely ignored the whole-person approach (Priestley, 2000; McCarthy, 2000), which relates closely to an empathic approach. However, no one ever seems to discuss exactly how this quality of empathy can be utilized in teacher education and, subsequently, pupil development. Children are told they must value and understand and feel as others do, and raise others’ selfesteem, but how this is actually accomplished in the classroom and how those skills are fostered, both in teachers and in pupils in the system, is never clearly delineated. More traditional educationalists often doubt the value of increasing people’s selfesteem. Nicholas Tate, one-time leader of The Values Council in the UK, voices his perspective: ‘My initial reaction is often hostile, on the grounds that for a lot of the time what many of us need is a stronger sense of our own lack of self-worth’ (Tate, 1997). Woodhead (1997), then chief inspector of schools, voiced a similar view. However, Winnicott’s (1984) accounts of unintegrated children in treatment, that is, those deprived of good enough maternal care in their first year of life, cited below by Docker-Drysdale (1990), do not sit comfortably alongside such views. These young people, and others with little more hope, are eventually educated in schools. Are we to believe they need a stronger sense of lack of their own self-worth? In hostels B and C, where children lie about on the floor, cannot get up, refuse to eat, mess their pants, steal whenever they feel a loving impulse, torture cats, kill mice and bury them so as to have a cemetery where they can go and cry, in these hostels there should be a notice: visitors not admitted. The wardens of these hostels have the perpetual job of covering naked souls, and they see as much suffering as can be seen in a mental hospital for adults. (Docker- Drysdale, 1990, 132)


29

Promoting Values through Teaching Methodology and Curriculum The educational literature suggests ways in which teachers can foster selfworth and empathy in their pupils, through activities, resources, structures and methods of teaching. Heathcote uses drama as a medium in her teaching and encouraged and trained other teachers to use it, as well. Hesten’s thesis (1995) on Heathcote explains the centrality of empathy to Heathcote’s teaching method, quoting Heathcote: Drama is about man’s ability to identify. It doesn’t matter whether you are in the theatre or in your own sitting room. What you’re doing if you are dramatising is putting yourself in somebody’s shoes: Man’s ability with which we are born, of just putting ourselves instantly in somebody else’s shoes and having a total picture of how it must feel to be feeling like that person right now. We have as yet not done much about harnessing this to the education of our children but everybody uses this. We don’t know how young they are when they begin to use this. It is just about time we said to ourselves – ‘Can we use this in the classroom situation?’ (Hesten, 1995, 4) According to Brighouse and Tomlinson (1991), drama can address the understanding of difference in values which concerned Taylor (Bottery, 1987), and very recent research shows the powerful effects of drama (DICE, 2010). Similarly, the arts and humanities, story and narrative can develop empathy through engaging the emotions, which are universal (Vandenplas–Holper, 1998), and through those emotions explain the moral (Winston, 1998). Laurence (2005) also argues for the power of music in developing empathy. Techniques such as ‘circle time’ (Moseley, 1997) are increasingly used in UK primary schools, and research in Italy has shown the effectiveness of supporting the use of such techniques (Francescato, 1998). More recently, programmes such as ‘You Me Us’ (Rowe and Newton, 1995) and the ‘Moral Education in Secondary Schools Project’ (Rowe, 2000) have been devised, along with activities in the UK Citizenship Curriculum. One of the elements prescribed for teaching in the Citizenship curriculum is ‘the diversity of national, regional, religious and ethnic identities in the United Kingdom and the need for mutual respect and understanding’ (DFES, 2007b, 81), although this inevitably raises the question of how young people develop an ability to demonstrate mutual respect, particularly if they have never experienced it.

30


Some of these curricular activities are often based on a more rational or cognitive Kohlbergian or Piagetian model, and do not address the promotion of emotional development. It is debatable the extent to which curricular activities, carried out in classes of thirty with an over- stretched teacher, could support the basic moral development and caring interaction for the very needy young people present in most class groups. Considering affective education in Germany, Fess (1998) calls precisely for more consideration for such needy students. Extracurricular groups, where teachers and pupils interact on a more informal and personal level, can be very beneficial (Hirst, 1974; Straughan, 1988). Extracurricular programs often involve community activities, where pupils go out into the community and other community members come into school, in order to enable people to encounter other perspectives and learn from and about one another. Some see youth work as the best vehicle for open discussions (Brown et al., 1986). Others suggest the use of counsellors (Cross, 1995). Gardner (1993) suggests the approach of ‘masters’ and ‘apprentices’, although staff–student ratios in state schools never seem to be quite low enough for this quality of provision. Often, these suggestions approach relationships and understanding of self and others in a less formal way, typically taking place away from the formal curriculum, improving ratios of adults to pupils, changing power relationships, and increasing interaction time and understanding. Fielding (2004; 2007) makes a case for personcentred education and the importance of more equal relationships in school.

The ‘Hidden Curriculum’ and the Modelling of Empathy and Morality in Schools An important aspect of developing empathy and moral values is the modelling of values by way of the ‘hidden curriculum’. These are the more subtle messages that pupils receive about how they and others, the environment and learning are valued and understood through the human relationships in schools, the behaviour of teachers, and the systems and the structures which shape behaviours. Hersch et al., (1980) believe the hidden curriculum often has a more powerful effect on a child’s moral development than does the formal curriculum, and according to Kohlberg (1984), the hidden curriculum offered real opportunities for moral learning.


31

This is clearly acknowledged by the SCAA discussion documents in 1993: Values are inherent in teaching. Teachers are by the nature of their profession ‘moral agents’ who imply values by the way they address pupils and each other, the way they dress, the language they use and the effort they put into their work. Procedures for giving praise, appointing officers, rewarding and punishing all give messages about what qualities are valued. Policies about admissions, especially regarding children with special needs, are equally indicative of values. (SCAA, 1993, 8) Koseki and Berghammer (1992) suggest that empathy is innate and can be modelled and nurtured both at home and in school: ‘Parents and educators can by means of reinforcements and by giving good models, conserve, strengthen and increase in quality the child’s empathic concern, an innate ability’ (203). However, Noddings argues strongly that it takes time for real caring relationships to develop, not only through the taught curriculum but through the normal conversations and interactions which take place between people (1996). Sometimes these may be lengthy conversations, but other times they may be simple interactions that affirm and recognize pupils as valued people and their importance should not be underestimated: [A]ffirming a pupil is often a question simply of a nice, natural smile, a quick word of encouragement, a touch of humour, or an idea to think about, conveying the notion that we do care about the child for his or her own sake. (Watson and Ashton, 1995) According to Klein (1987), such ‘off-task’ interaction is more likely to enhance liking and feeling of community than would purely task-related engagement. Face-to-face interaction is more likely to produce positive sentiments between people. Relationships and a sense of community are destroyed by the ‘I-it relationship’, which reduces other people to the status of objects (Clark, 1996). Also, according to Klein, to maximize good relationships, interaction should be frequent. While schools have the potential for frequent interaction over long periods of time to develop positive relationships between teachers and pupils and parents, much of the time in school is ‘on-task’ and in formal classroom situations where large groups of students and the curriculum are being ‘managed’. This is potentially less conducive to nurturing good relationships.

32


Personal interaction appears to be central to the hidden curriculum and to the research needed on values: Tolerance and understanding will be achieved most effectively by personal contact, and in the absence of that, by a skilful use of literature and by the teacher’s encouragement of sensitive relationships within the classroom and the school. The fostering of these positive attitudes in the children will then extend, we hope, outside the school into the wider community. (Blackham, 1976, 55) The manner in which teachers treat each child sets an example to the others in the class. Rutter et al. (1979) and Bandura (1969) believe that pupils, like sons and daughters, tend to copy adult behaviour. A consequence is that they also adopt attitudes and values of adults they respect. Kyriacou (1986) explains the importance of modelling for how pupils approach learning generally. McPhail et al. (1978) consider the relationships modelled in the classroom to be of great importance and make the distinction between what is said and what is done and, as importantly, what is not done: What is said about moral education and what is practised may have little in common and the practice is everything for children. All communications verbal and non-verbal are value laden and even the voluntary absence of communication expresses a value position, tells other people how you value them. (1) It is the practice of doing good things, of actually taking another’s needs, feelings and interests into consideration as well as one’s own which concerns us first and foremost. (5) According to McPhail, we learn moral values through how significant people in our lives treat others and us: ‘morality is contagious – something we pick up from being around considerate others’ (56). In this sense, morality reproduces itself in others in a similar way to the emotional contagion described in chapter 1 and perhaps this speaks volumes for the emotional rather than rational nature of moral education. The personal, social and moral, and academic appear to be continually inter-linked. The work of people like Rogers (1975), which grew out of counselling, influenced, and was in turn influenced by, education and teacher education and led the drive to humanize education epitomized by people like Aspy in the United States. They recognized the affective aspect in human relationships, relating it to excellence in teaching and learning,


33

but also to the development of better human beings who felt valued, with higher levels of selfesteem, who could also value others. This linking of personal growth, including moral development, with the teaching and learning process produced fruitful insight for the detailed research outlined in Part Two. Human relationships, as in the work of Aspy (1972), seem to be central to moving students forward in a variety of ways, one success feeding off of and stimulating the other: The most important component of a humane classroom is the climate created by the teacher. Specifically, the classroom should have a supply of meaningful learning experiences and the teacher should maintain facilitative levels of empathy (understanding), congruence (genuineness) and positive regard (valuing toward her students). (118) In Aspy’s research (1972), such classrooms proved to be measurably more conducive to achievement. In relation to literacy development alone, Aspy said: And I am happy to say that many of the remedial reading teachers that I know are finding that their best results occur when they set aside the text book for a while and relate to their child as a human being. (2) Pring (1997) also voices this link between academic, personal and moral development, extolling the values of learning and how the drive towards knowledge and understanding embodied many of the virtues which we might seek as people: Education in this respect is essentially a transaction between the teacher on one hand, participating in a public though changing tradition of understanding and appreciation, and the learner, on the other, deliberating about conflicting values, struggling for answers to difficult questions. (Pring, 1997, 8) The idea that personal, emotional, moral and academic growth are all interlinked is frequently evident in the discourse on successful schools (Brighouse and Tomlinson, 1991; Gray, 1990; Hargreaves, 1972; Mortimore, 1988; Rutter et al., 1979). As McLaughlin (1994) explains, the contagious nature of values can involve a chain reaction embedded within the environment. If a child must feel valued to value, and must experience empathy to demonstrate

34


it themselves, there is also the suggestion that the transmission of values partially reflects how teachers themselves feel valued. Aspy (1972) agreed. Teacher morale in the UK, for example, has been a major concern since the 1980s, perhaps signified by the regular departure of 50 per cent of teachers from the profession within the first five years of their service. If teachers feel undervalued and misunderstood, how can they transmit a sense of value to students? Yet, the evidence cited by SCAA in Chapter 2 above suggests that many teachers are able to do just that. Perhaps their reserves of personal security are so great that they can overcome the adverse effects on their own esteem evoked by their working conditions. Perhaps they demonstrate in peacetime the extraordinary moral courage that Haste (1997) describes occurring in wartime, although interestingly, Chater’s (2006) analysis of the impact of inspection on teachers suggested that they actually felt they were, indeed, at war.

Systems and Structures Modelling Morality According to Bottery (1990), values are always embedded in the way of life of educational institutions and are central to the life of the school. Kohlberg believes that restructuring the school environment could allow for greater democratic participation in the school’s governing process by the students (1984, 135). Hersch et al. (1980) consider the structures and climate in schools to be very influential as part of the ‘hidden curriculum’: Even if the teacher introduced concepts like democracy, justice, respect for others, and human rights, if the classroom and school structures continued to model and enforce authoritarian social relations, no effective learning could take place. Children needed to live the moral ideals they were expected to master intellectually. (21) European research (Campos and Menezes, 1998) backs this theory. Structures such as school councils help students to take active part in decision-making. With moral education, engaging on a daily basis with teachers and other pupils in relationships and decision-making processes, which value and understand different points of view, is more essential to learning than being ‘told’ what to do in an arbitrary manner. Such moral opinions must be voiced, but in the course of events, where they have context and meaning, not in isolation, where they become one more set of facts to be memorized. Instruction can be rejected as easily as it is delivered,


35

and unrelated knowledge can be difficult to transfer (Gardner, 1993). In a sense, moral development is essentially no different from any other learning where existing schemata are assessed and amended through dialogue and interaction (Bennett and Dunne, 1994). However, the existing moral schemata of some students may be too disturbing for some teachers to explore and could make moral development in school exceedingly difficult to achieve. Management and leadership, therefore, are crucial to the creation of an environment where empathy and morality can flourish; senior staff are also role models for staff and students and they set up and control school structures and influence teaching practice and school policies. This idea is discussed in more detail in Chapter 11.

The Role of Empathy in Teaching and Learning The intense empathic relationships described by Rogers (1975) in Chapter 1 are those of counsellors in one- to- one relationships. However, though support teachers may spend periods of one- to- one time with pupils, most teachers do not. The possibility of deep personal relationships in classes of thirty is much less practicable. The concept of entering every private individual’s perceptual world is not realistic for anyone, much less for the class teacher in crowded state schools, who, though aiming to know individuals, will inevitably have to prioritize their time and energy while having to manage the whole class and deliver the prescribed curriculum. In addition, the role of the teacher is different from that of a counsellor. The counsellor may listen to and help clients explore their own understanding, but the counsellor’s role does not necessarily include advising clients what to do next. Though the teacher needs to assess students’ feelings and understanding, they also have a specific obligation to develop their students’ learning. Listening alone is not enough; they must also provide the ‘scaffolding’ (Wood, 1988) and a framework to allow students to extend their knowledge of elements beyond themselves. This involves giving and sharing, suggestion, interaction and communication on the part of the teacher about matters external to the students’ personal situation, while taking into account the students’ feelings and responses. Vygotsky (1986) makes clear the profound limitation in the psychology of learning by the long- standing separation of the affective and cognitive, which he believes were integrated.

36


Vygotsky’s ‘zone of proximal development’ (1978) combines both emotional and cognitive aspects, and they are interlinked. This makes the teacher’s task complex. If a teacher is unable to scaffold learning in this complex way, encompassing emotional as well as cognitive responses to learning, the pupil may flounder in internal confusion. A certain amount of intervention is vital to move students on at sufficient pace, to help motivate them in their tasks and thinking. Assessment must be both emotional and academic. Like the neuroscientists (Damasio, 1996), Dewey also rejected Cartesian dualism (Biesta and Vanderstraeten, 1997) and saw interaction as a transaction in which both the organism and the environment were implicitly involved. Aspy (1972) conducted considerable research into empathy in teaching, and utilized various scales which he believed identified empathy in classrooms, by noting characteristics visible in teacher/pupil interactions. The ability of teachers to ‘understand’ their pupils’ experiences was demonstrated by the teachers’ voice tone and the extent to which their responses acknowledged, echoed and elaborated students’ feelings. The stronger the feelings articulated, and the less controlled and subdued the teachers’ voice tone and comments, the more empathic they were considered to be. Teachers who gave mixed or inconsistent messages, for example saying one thing and doing another, could make students feel insecure. In conjunction with empathy, Aspy also identified other related factors to be significant in humane classrooms – authenticity, genuineness, respect for students and holding the students in positive regard. These additional characteristics resonate with the work of Koseki and Berghammer (1992) and add to the purely communicative aspects of empathy. It makes more explicit the affective context and the depth and authenticity of the empathy. Aspy’s scale, however, seems to assume no difference between the individual pupils and the class as a group. Judging a teacher’s empathy with one group may possibly be different from judging it with another. If the teacher has to spend much of the time on overt classroom management because of the nature of the group, or because of individuals within the group, would the teacher’s observed characteristics be the same? If one or more difficult pupils made the teacher angry, for example, then according to Goleman (1995), then the teacher would be less able to be receptive and empathic to their pupils. It is likely that empathy may be dependent on various factors involved in the context of the interaction, not just on the teacher themselves. Goleman also raises the issue of people who demonstrate empathy and strong relationships within their group and family, but can show no empathy to another individual or a rival group. Can teachers demonstrate different levels of empathy to different individuals or groups?


37

Rogers and Aspy became convinced of the importance of empathy in teaching and learning as well as in therapy, in both personal and academic development. They believe that just as the client in psychotherapy finds that empathy provides a climate for learning more about himself, so students in the classroom of an understanding teacher find themselves in a climate conducive to learning both about themselves, others and new subject matter. The literature on successful classroom practice often includes the importance of relationships and the concept of empathy (Kyriacou, 1986; McManus, 1989). Kyriacou (1986) considers eight key classroom qualities for effective teaching, and identifies the underlying importance of empathy for all of them: The third observation concerns the importance of teachers being able to see the progress of a lesson from the pupil’s perspective, and make the appropriate decisions and modifications to the lesson while it is happening. This quality of social sensitivity is an important contributory factor to all eight of the qualities considered in this study. (113) Empathy seems vital to assessment, as well. According to Drummond (1993), seeing things from the child’s perspective ensures thorough assessment, and if teachers are to meet the needs of their pupils effectively, then continuous formative assessment, both emotional and academic, is vital to future progress. Without it, inappropriate judgements could be made about what can be achieved, and inappropriate teaching may result. A child with low selfesteem, for example, may need extra support and structure. A teacher’s understanding of the emotional state of the child can be as important to learning as any other factor. Empathy is important in the development of the sense of self and positive human interaction, which seems to be vital in the educational process (Purkey, 1970). This psychological sense of self relates closely to the neurological sense of self described earlier (Damasio, 1999). Exploration and openness occur when the learner feels positive and safe in his interactions. Excellence in teaching and learning has often been associated with the quality of the teacher/pupil relationships and the school and classroom ambience (DES, 1989). According to Vygotsky (1978), the highest levels of cognitive development are embedded in social relations, and, according to Anning and Edwards (1999), these relations and the context in which they are embedded are vital to students feeling valued and making meaning. In preschools, Siraj- Blatchford and Sylva (2004) identify ‘sustained shared

38


thinking’ as a vital prerequisite for effective pedagogy, where adult and child engage in a co- constructive dialogue in which some extension of the child’s thinking takes place. In addition, they stress the importance of the positive relationships in the excellent pre- school provision they observed. Schertz (2005) argues for the role of dialogue and intersubjectivity in the development of engagement and empathy in education and the use of the community of inquiry approach, although he has concerns about successfully utilizing this within the current authoritarian structures and the factory education system in the United States. These different expressions of the significance of shared dialogue resemble the profoundly empathic conversations in the data below, and there appears to be considerable consensus and evidence that empathetic human relationships, as well as modelling moral behaviour, facilitate engagement and enable achievement. In higher education, the ideal formative assessment is considered to be the one-toone Oxbridge tutorial (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004), which again centres around human dialogue. In a detailed summary of research for the Academy of Education based in Brussels and Perth, Elias (2003) argues that academic and emotional intelligence are interlinked in education across the globe and that emotional intelligence can be taught and is essential if students are to grow up with knowledge that can be applied with a moral compass. One without the other, he argues, can be dangerous, as both local and global events reveal. He also argues that good social and emotional programmes increase academic achievement and the combination of both elements will provide the most effective education. He stresses the importance of relationships in learning and the need for warm but challenging learning environments and gives lots of practical advice for educationalists. He suggests skills can be taught and provides relevant readings on the topic. However there is still some debate about the success of teaching for qualities such as empathy. Much research suggests it is not clear- cut and that cognitive ‘knowing’ cannot always be equated with emotional feeling. If priests trained in the Christian teachings are able to detach their empathy in order to abuse children, or learned clerics in the Muslim religion can exhort young people to become suicide killers to destroy their fellow human beings, and these religious men have been highly trained in moral teaching and principles, then it is doubtful that once-a-week training in social and emotional skills as part of the school curriculum will impact on an individual’s moral behaviour. Could moral instruction conceivably transform students who have already learned not to care about their victims, either because of the treatment they have been subjected to at home or in institutions or through


39

intensive propaganda? This is not to say that schools should not seek to support social and emotional learning; of course, they should, but neither should we underestimate the true amount of support needed for some students to learn how to respect and care, first for themselves and then for others. Elias (2003) suggests counselling for more needy students but does not address the problem of alienating educational institutions, addressed in the research below, which can be counterproductive in efforts to improve social and emotional intelligence, because they are organized in a way that does not value individuals. Like Best (2000), Elias argues that experience of others’ perspectives is a key way to produce empathy through social interaction and service in the community or service learning, an argument made by Murphy (2008) and Lundy (2007), who found that community service increased empathy scores. Though such service may well support the appreciation of diverse perspectives in many students, empathic development may well be beyond the capabilities of some students who have rarely if ever had any sensitive attention paid to their own feelings. In this sense, the students who might most need to develop their social and emotional skills may need considerably more personal time, thought and attention focused on them, if they are to develop greater empathy. Other more recent research focuses on school structures and organization as it did in the seventies, while others (Haddon et al., 2005; Roffey, 2008) focus on the quality of interactions and climate within schools, which impacts on both staff and student self- concept and autonomy and well being. Emotional and social capital can be built by and impact on all parties in a school and positive and pleasurable relationships are a sign of care which is revealed through thoughtful awareness of young people’s pleasures and delights, their personal interests and strengths, which allows relationships to be built on positive, already developing areas of understanding and experience (Gibbs, 2006; Cooper, 2011). Given this considerable evidence of the significance of affect and empathy in learning and development, the key question which arises is whether teachers understand something of this process at work in classrooms, and how the benefits can be maximized in teaching and learning.

Conclusions and Issues Raised by the Literature and the Implications and Issues for Research Previous literature on empathy suggested that all humans have the potential for empathy and that this quality can be nurtured or repressed. Having

40


people around us who model this quality, including teachers, seems to support positive interaction and allows us to feel valued and enables us to value others. However, like the development of moral values, the concept of empathy is problematic. The literature suggests that empathy reveals itself in different forms and frequencies, and people show it to different extents and in varying degrees in different relationships. The importance of intonation and language, and presumably the accompanying gestures and facial expressions, mean cultural differences could be significant. Embedded values in the hidden curricula of different systems, institutions and contexts are likely to support or restrain the development of empathy. Moreover, young people who have experienced little empathy in their early lives may find it hard to show it themselves, however understanding their teacher might be. Given some of the complexities of empathy described above, there are many implications for research. If there is disagreement about what empathy is and how it is demonstrated and whether it can be seen at different levels, how useful can research be, and is it too complex to study in crowded classroom environments? If empathy is a key aspect in the creation of relationships, then the purpose of the relationship is also crucial because empathy could be used to take advantage of someone, for instance in the case of a child abuser who utilizes personal knowledge of a child and their interests in order to win trust. Empathy could be used deliberately to establish short-term connectivity, mainly for the benefit of only one person in the relationship, for example, to make career progression or to gain commission in a sale. At this level, empathic characteristics become just social, interpersonal skills used to facilitate interaction and can, in fact, be manipulative. The literature on empathy raises many questions about levels of empathy and moral modelling in teaching and learning. Crucial issues, therefore, for the research on empathy in learning relationships outlined in the next section were the long-term purpose and the beneficiary of interaction, as well as the importance of context. The literature strongly identified the need for empirical research into values promotion in schools and indicated the importance of understanding how we might encourage ‘the will to do right’ (SCAA, 1996b). We need to know how to encourage moral action rather than simply moral reasoning. We also need to understand differences in values, as well as how to establish common ground, and how the macro values in wider society influence the micro values in schools and classrooms, and what the role is of different environments in affecting the modelling of values. These


41

issues suggest that all research into moral values will be problematic, complex and situated. However, the literature on empathy leaves readers in no doubt that this is a crucial quality in the process of engagement, learning and achievement, and moral development, in particular. The manifestation of empathy in classroom relationships and in the conceptual understanding of teachers has not been sufficiently explored, thereby raising many questions which the research outlined in the next section sought to answer. Two central questions were:

What do teachers understand about the role of empathy in their relationships with pupils, and how do they demonstrate this in interactions? What is this relationship between empathy and morality, specifically in teaching and learning, and does empathy play a part in enabling teachers to act as moral models in schools?

Many more specific questions arose, for instance about the kind of morality teachers model.

Is it the more adaptive kind described by Koseki and Berghammer (1992), which has a moral dimension, and thereby model morality to pupils, or do they model some other kind of empathy and some other kind of morality? Do teachers have unlimited empathy, or are they partial and do they show it towards some pupils but not others? Do different times, different situations and different systems effect teacher empathy? If so which conditions support or restrict the use of empathy? Consequently, in relation to moral modelling, do the circumstances in which empathy is shown in teaching and learning affect the moral model provided by the teacher and if so which contexts provide better or worse opportunities to model morality? When teachers model values, which values are they and if values are implicit in the ‘hidden curriculum’, whose values are being modelled, how, and when? Are moral values in education ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ values – rhetoric or reality? Do schools and teachers ever send mixed messages about what is right and wrong to pupils? If empathy has observable characteristics, which we can develop, can we also pretend to be empathic and moral too?

42

Empathy in Education If we can show empathy to some and not others, does our morality also have limitations? In relation to students, do some students at certain ages, in certain situations or groups, need more empathy than others and are some individuals so difficult to empathize with that the teacher finds it almost impossible to form a relationship and model morality?

Additional Questions Emerging from the Literature The literature suggests, for example, that different teaching methodology and approaches such as role-play or practices like ‘circle time’, or involving students in decision-making, or extracurricular activities can increase pupils’ empathic understanding, but is this what empathic teachers believe and practice? If empathy is affected by different pupils in different contexts, then wider questions emerge. What are the values of the teachers and the school in relation to its community, and how easy is it to see each other’s perspective and, indeed, how do these values relate to values embedded in the education system and to society at large? Although the rich piece of qualitative research detailed in Part Two illuminates many of these issues, without doubt, much more research is needed. The intangible nature of empathy in the interaction between two people has obvious implications for data gathering. All data is open to interpretation, but this type of personal interaction perhaps even more so, necessitating some considerable reflexivity in interpretation of the data. The lack of educational research into these complex issues would suggest that research into empathy and values is likely to be problematic, even if the literatures suggest it is worthy of investigation and there was certainly some consensus. The attitudes of both children and adults are influenced by other people and the environment. These attitudes are particularly influenced by the people who nurture children from birth, usually parents, but other adults, siblings, other relatives and teachers can play a key part as role models in this regard. Moral development seems to be bound up in the models in these significant relationships. Teachers in schools, role models in the community and other significant individuals in a person’s life can promote positive attitudes, to both the self and others and can continue to nurture and sustain these attitudes throughout the lifetime of an individual. Rutter (1981) and Docker-Drysdale (1990) give us hope that the effects of negative early upbringing, though highly influential in a child’s development, can be improved by appropriate highquality support.


43

There is also some consensus that schools are moral places, and that the teacher and the school environment have a positive influence on young people’s moral development. However, the degree of influence on different individuals and the complex processes occurring in the classroom and the school are less certain. The systems within which teachers and pupils work can reflect a ‘valuing’ approach through the relationships and school ethos, but that can still vary for different students. Understanding and consideration for others can be allowed to flourish or can be repressed. Time is needed for caring relationships to develop through the normal interactions which take place between people, and the research in neuroscience links intense interaction to learning and to moral decision-making. Though the literature stresses the importance of moral modelling, there is little explanation about how this actually takes place, or how we select or develop teachers for this role of significant others in students’ lives. Nor are there suggestions as to which environments best support modelling behaviour. The question of how teachers and schools support students who have had minimal previous moral guidance is not really answered. Understanding of how teachers can promote moral values in school and how empathy and the intimacy of relationships plays a part in values development is often implicit in the literature but is rarely backed by specific research. In order to understand more deeply the relationships between pupils and teachers, where the sense of self and valuing of others is fostered by a good role model, the research outlined below sought to examine the teacher–student interactions and the thinking behind them, in real learning contexts. Consequently, a rich qualitative investigation was conducted which explored in considerable depth the nature of empathy in both primary and secondary classrooms in different contexts, observing and interviewing teachers and student teachers selected for their empathy. An acknowledged expert in the field of empathy and morality, Hoffman (2008) summarizes the research on empathy and prosocial behaviour and concludes by explaining how the legal arena has come to recognize the significant role of empathy in advancing morality in legal issues, in particular in the area of civil rights, desegregation and similar issues. Hoffman asks the psychologists to consider empathy more seriously as a topic for research, although he warns that empathy cannot override powerful economic and political forces. However, in a world challenged by the morals of greed, power and capitalism, one would hope that it might succeed. Rogers (1975) argues that empathy dissolves alienation, which according to Marx and Engels (1888) is created by capitalism. Perhaps developing high levels of

44


empathy may have some ameliorating effect on the impact and morals of the market. The research in the next chapters, therefore, illuminates the highly significant role of empathy in the development of values, engagement in learning and in raising achievement, and interestingly the contexts which can support it. These issues are highly significant for the future of our society.

Part Two

New Understandings of Empathy in Learning Relationships and the Significance of Context

The five chapters in Part Two present and discuss research findings from a qualitative study that explored in depth the nature of empathy in relationships between teachers and students and how that empathy related to the modelling of morality. Part Two includes the findings from preliminary investigations, the pilot study in a primary school and the main study in different learning contexts, from infant (4- 5 years old) to sixth form (16–18 years old) classrooms. Although the initial explorations included some quantitative data, they soon revealed that the complexity of empathy and its relationship to moral values meant that only an intensive qualitative study could provide the richness of insight into teacher thinking and practice, which was required to answer the many questions raised. The original research (Cooper, 2002) was carried out between 1996 and 2002, and was undertaken due to the lack of empirical research in this area. The context and stimulus for this research was provided by the political background, the events and the educational developments described below. The literature established that this area was significant, complex and under- explored. Although the research focused on the links between empathy and the modelling of morality, considerable links were also discovered in the analysis between empathy, engagement in learning and educational achievement.The context for this particular study was the United Kingdom from 1996–2002. The fear of ‘moral relativism’ in an age of cultural pluralism was frequently voiced at the time (Tate, 1996). The debate around values in education in the 1990s, in the UK in particular, highlighted many issues concerning values education in schools and there was a general shortage

46


of empirical research into the subject (Taylor, 1997), a fact which has not changed. The government believed that newly qualified teachers should be trained to promote values and to ensure that schools promote social, moral, spiritual and cultural values (DFE, 1992). The work of the Values Council, followed by the establishment of the Forum for Values Education, raised a number of issues. The reports of OFSTED, the UK government’s school inspectorate, provided some limited insight into the promotion of values in schools (Taylor, 1997). The main outcome of this debate at policy level was the Crick Report (1998), followed by the Citizenship Curriculum, compulsory from 2002. This represented more curricular development but, as Crick (1998) himself identified, had minimal advice about the significance of human relationships in the values development process. Keynote speeches at key educational research conferences (Broadfoot, 2000; Hargreaves, 2001) called for research into values and learning issues raised by research into neuroscience. Broadfoot explained the continued tendency to focus on the measurable in research and the curriculum has usually been a safe topic in this respect. However, Priestley (2000) points out that a focus on curriculum reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about how values are transmitted. The contexts, people and processes involved in values development, like the literature, are complex, messy and unattractive to researchers. Significantly, the study discussed below chose to address these messy human issues and focus on complex values issues in real educational contexts.

Chapter 4

A New Classification of Empathy in Learning Relationships

This extensive chapter, based on primary data, offers a detailed exposition of how different types of empathy exist in different learning situations. After a discussion of interesting preliminary investigations and an explanation of how the main study was conducted, the chapter falls into three substantial sections, which depict the different kinds of empathy identified in the main study. These are (1) fundamental empathy, (2) profound empathy and (3) functional empathy. To preserve confidentiality, all names are pseudonyms and any clearly identifying characteristics have been omitted. (Appendix I provides a list of pseudonyms, along with each person’s role at the school.)

Preliminary Investigations and Conduct of Study Preliminary investigations sought to establish whether experienced teachers considered empathy an important quality in teaching. More than twenty-four out of fifty- eight experienced teachers ranked empathy as the most important quality out of twelve typical teacher qualities, and thirtysix ranked it in the top five (Cooper, 1997). Clearly, empathy was worthy of investigation. The quality rated next in importance was good classroom management. The author then conducted a pilot study in a primary school. Semistructured interviews were conducted with four teachers and a non-teaching assistant, as well as a more structured interview with sixteen young students of varying ages and attainment. Empathetic behaviours were recorded during observations carried out in seven classrooms and four assemblies. Complex demonstrations of empathy were observed in five teachers’ classrooms, and much less in another two, one of which belonged to a student teacher. The observations of assemblies are discussed in Chapter 12.

48


The children revealed great sensitivity to non-verbal signals and identified empathic and inauthentic teachers. Most felt understood by their teachers, apart from two quiet girls. The data correlated well with the subsequent study, with students identifying the importance of body language and facial expression and voice tone, good humour, friendliness, and personal knowledge of and sensitivity to students; in other words, as one child put it, they, ‘behave more like ordinary people than teachers’. Both individuals and the context heavily influenced the quality of teacher empathy. Values issues are often discussed in traditional assemblies but, sadly, these afforded minimal opportunity to model empathy, caring or mutual respect. Conducted in a large hall, with two hundred young students ‘policed’ by grim-faced teachers, the atmosphere was very negative. However, smaller and more-participatory assemblies did show features of empathy. The non-teaching assistant, working with small groups, was able to show great sensitivity to students. Classroom teachers stressed the importance of personal relationships for learning and the need for more staff and more time with individuals. These tentative explorations influenced the main study described below. The whole area was fascinating, challenging and revolved around intense human interaction. Subsequently, the main study focused on the beliefs and practices of both experienced teachers and student teachers who, in the opinion of experienced colleagues (head teachers or tutors), demonstrated empathy at work. An operational definition of empathy, devised from the reading and previous investigations, was used for their selection: A quality shown by individuals which enables them to accept others for who they are, to feel and perceive situations from their perspective and to take a constructive and long-term attitude towards the advancement of their situation by searching for solutions to meet their needs. This was a purposive sample and the focus on empathic teachers provided a deeper understanding of the concepts involved. The mix of teachers and student teachers was designed to illuminate issues for teacher education. Theoretical saturation, when using a grounded theory approach, meant that only a final sample of sixteen participants was necessary. This included nine student teachers and seven experienced teachers, including one head teacher and two middle managers. In total, the researcher conducted sixteen extensive interviews and more than fi fty hours of observations. The sample included a mix of ages, teaching experience, gender, phases and

A New Classification of Empathy

49

subject areas, in different schools, to ensure that no one aspect overly influenced the data. The schools varied from city- centre to rural locations. The classes ranged from reception (age 4–5) to advanced-level (age 17–18), and from one-toone support of special needs and English as a second language, to mainstream classes of more than thirty. The group included generalist primary teachers and secondary specialists, including History, Science, Music, Geography, and Design Technology. There were seven secondary (11–18) teachers, four primary (4–11) classroom teachers, one primary head teacher and four support teachers (two special needs and two language and literacy). In the final group, there were ten women and six men. Thus, there was a mix of gender, subject area and phase, of classroom and support teachers, and of managerial and classroom teachers. All were chosen for their empathy in order to elicit a rich understanding of empathy from diverse perspectives, in different contexts. The interviews investigated staff perceptions of relationships with students, their understanding of the role of empathy in teaching and its relationship to modelling morality. They were recorded, transcribed and rigorously analyzed using computer software, producing around two hundred codes, which were gradually refined to create a conceptual framework directly from the data, an exposition of empathy in teaching and learning, its effects and constraints. Teachers were observed for around four hours, and those in secondary with different classes. Student teachers were observed for a maximum of three hours to avoid stress. Field notes were made before, during and after lessons, and lesson observations were categorized into three key types and then analyzed according to the features of empathy identified in the interviews. These are discussed in Chapter 7. The three detailed sections below consider the different characteristics of empathy in teaching and learning revealed in the interviews. The differences are significant for both values development and achievement. However, the boundaries of categories at times overlap, representing as they do complex interactions between unique individuals and diverse groups in unique contexts. Above all, these features of empathy are represented by whole people, who behave largely intuitively in interaction but who use different facets of empathy in any given lesson. Characteristics of teacher empathy fell into the three broad areas: (1) fundamental, (2) profound and (3) functional, and all three could be seen in classroom interactions. A diagram showing the details of each type of empathy will be shown before each section. Exemplar quotations from teachers are embedded throughout, or the teachers name is inserted in brackets to indicate the source.


50

Characteristics of Fundamental Empathy Fundamental empathy is needed to initiate empathic relationships and could be identified in the classroom observations. It is the type of social interaction that most people use to engage in conversations and relationships with others in daily life. It was subdivided into two main areas, initial characteristics and means of communication, each of which has sub- categories and are shown in the diagram below, followed by detailed descriptions.

Initial Characteristics The six categories shown in Figure 4.1 will be elaborated below. Because empathy is an interactive process the features listed below often created corresponding responses in students and this has been expressed where relevant, but is also explained in detail in Chapter 5.

Accepting/Open Acceptance and openness was a vital starting point in empathic relationships. Teachers accepted the children as encountered, with their current beliefs or understanding, and responded positively to develop them further. Teachers’ openness and ability to respond with sensitive language and voice tone encouraged pupils to speak, ask and learn, nurturing dialogue and understanding.

Fundamental Empathy

1. Initial characteristics

2. Means of communication

• • • • •

•

•

being accepting and open giving attention listening being interested taking a positive and affirmative approach showing enthusiasm

• • •

facial expression and interaction gestures, body language and movement height, and distance language and tone of voice

Figure 4.1 Characteristics of fundamental empathy


51

Acceptance involves suspending judgement and criticism in order to understand the student’s motivations: ‘Letting them be themselves with you and feeling comfortable with you and not putting any judgements on their actions’ (Claire). By being open themselves and sharing their own experiences, teachers learnt more about the child and related this to empathy (David). Openness involved a different voice tone and body language and different levels of language. Using complex language, for example, could belittle students (Geoff) and make them defensive. Equally, being overly strict closes down communication and discourages responses. The teacher’s role was to open students’ minds to new understanding and learning and to scaffold pupils emotionally and academically: ‘giving them time to open up and blossom; taking them on a step each time’ (Claire). Giving Attention Teachers associated empathy with giving attention and being attentive. You need to be: ‘very attentive, very attentive you know’ (Martin). Focused attention between teacher and pupil maximized engagement, communication and learning. Any distraction or problem reduced attention. Needy children required more attention and responded positively, although this was difficult to accomplish in large classes, as focusing on one child reduced the available attention for others and quiet students, especially, could lose out. Tanya argued that classroom teachers had to maintain whole group attention to ensure involvement and motivation. Martin argued that both teacher and students can give more attention if not self- absorbed or absorbed by other concerns and Mary argued that all children responded to individual attention. Classroom teachers often gave such individual attention in breaks and lunchtimes. Listening Empathic teachers listen and value individual students by hearing their perspective. They make time to listen in order to understand and support the whole child. Listening was a powerful feature of one-toone teaching and allowed pupils the opportunity to talk and to clarify their understanding, which enabled teachers to extend that clarification by responding appropriately. Listening enabled pupils to open up more: ‘If a child’s given time (and) patience in a one-toone situation they’ll open up, so what I tend to do is not talk as much but listen more’ (Claire). Listening teachers


52

could offer more equal relationships, and dialogue had to include both personal and academic issues if the relationship was to be an equal, valuing one. According to Fay, if teachers model listening and respond carefully, the child is more likely to accept their responses and suggestions, which supports both learning and the child’s ability to listen. Considerate listening was important for all relationships, whether in the school or elsewhere (Frances), and Fay explained the difficulty of listening in large classes with large numbers of needy children.

Being Interested Showing interest makes the child feel valued and worthy: ‘They can trust you and relate to you . . . you’ve got to sort of take an interest – you’re quite keen’ (Tanya). It was important to be interested in the child’s personal world and home life as well as their schoolwork (Charlotte). Bringing the children’s own interests into lessons gave them a stake in the learning and brought it to life. Interested teachers make students feel good: ‘if they know you’re the kind of a teacher that can understand them and is interested in them as well, I think that’s a good thing – it makes them happy’ (Frances).

Positive and Affirmative Approach A central attitude of all participants was the use of a positive and affirmative approach in their relationships, and towards their subject. Affirmation was closely linked to the ‘listening’ and ‘being interested’ described previously. All these teachers reflected this affirmative approach and felt it supported learning, but it was particularly emphasized by support teachers who needed to work hard to affirm their pupils and counteract the negative effects of the school environment: ‘I like to think that I say positive things for the majority of the time and I would love to think that I’m not very derogatory at all because they must get that so much throughout school’ (Anna). According to Charlotte, building esteem with needy pupils is vital because they see themselves as failures in many respects. This was a large section and was classified into four smaller elements for clarity.

Announcing and multiplying affirmation Personal validation Modelling and transferring affirmative feelings Building security and taking risks


53

Announcing and Multiplying Affirmation Direct praise was a key element of affirmation (Charlotte; David). Charlotte explained that for those who received little praise elsewhere in the system, this was particularly important. It might seem overdone to an outsider but this really helped children improve quickly. The support teachers also understood the importance of affirming the child to peers, support staff, other teachers, head teachers and parents (Anna). This gives others confidence in the child, thus increasing affirmation from other sources. Thus, good work in a support session would be shown to the class teacher, or even the head teacher, and celebrated in assembly in front of the whole school (Pete). Teachers would model affirmation and explain its importance to students. An affirmative approach was also used in marking, and Fay explained that both effort and achievement needed recognition. Communication in the child’s planner or at parents evenings could extend affirmation to the home environment (Sara).

Personal Validation Affirming means affirming children for themselves as people, not just in relation to the curriculum, according to Frances. Martin argued that affirmation includes understanding personal problems and helping to find solutions to them. Giving time to individuals also affirms them, as does positive physical contact, (a hug or a hand on the shoulder for example) unless a child is fearful. Affirmation also includes discipline, because insisting on appropriate behaviour and good work shows that the teacher cares enough about students to ensure they are socially and academically competent. Sara argued that in certain stages of adolescence, more personal affirmation is necessary.

Modelling and Transferring Affirmative Feelings Teachers felt that when they were positive about children and their work, the feeling transferred across and affirmed them: ‘I think I feel very positive – so whether that’s positive mentally and I would like to think that’s transferred across’ (Anna). Students imitate the teachers’ approach in their social interactions and then relate to others more easily, which increases the affirmative climate (Charlotte). Even in less successful lessons, being positive is important, because a negative attitude will be reflected in the mood and attitude of students, according to Fay. Anna explained that sometimes by being self- effacing

54


and acknowledging their own weaknesses, a teacher can also affirm students, making them feel less anxious and self- critical. Constructive criticism of behaviour or schoolwork is much more effective within a generally affirming relationship (Sara). Building Security and Taking Risks Positive relationships made students feel secure about the relationship with their teacher, so they could take risks with new and unknown ideas: ‘If they feel secure with somebody, they’re going to have an attempt at a word they can’t read or have a go’ (Charlotte), and Anna believed that minimizing emphasis on error helped to support risk taking. Positive attitudes affect the climate of the whole class or group, engendering rapport and high expectations (Janet). Special needs teachers, particularly, felt that being positive in front of others helped everyone to feel good about themselves and to grow in stature. This allowed pupils to accept problems and begin to resolve them and support each other, according to Anna. By understanding and addressing personal problems, teachers could relieve anxiety and improve the climate and concentration for learning (Martin). Cheery voices, smiles and humour support a positive climate and are central to profound empathy. Teachers should build on the positive and: ‘diminish the negative’, according to Tanya, including the need to avoid sarcasm (Anna). Enthusiasm The importance of enthusiasm was mentioned frequently and encompasses enthusiasm for both subject and the relationships with children. Tanya explained that struggling students need their enthusiasm and motivation developed, and Martin felt this could help to counteract the depressive low selfesteem that many young people exhibit in schools. Enthusiasm for the subject and teaching and learning is all bound up with the reactions and response to the pupils (Fay). Sara used provocative techniques such as temporarily abandoning parts of the curriculum or tearing up lesson plans, just to engage students or to generate new enthusiasm for drier topics (Sara). She felt enthusiasm was infectious, for both pupils and other teachers. It helped to build a positive team ethos: ‘Enthusiasm I think breeds enthusiasm . . . you know it generates itself. It’s having an effect on you because you’re enjoying doing it,


55

your colleagues and your friends who you are working with, the students who are coming in and out’. Means of Communication The empathic attitudes of teachers described above needed to be clearly communicated or they would have no effect. Classroom teachers commonly emphasized their facial and bodily expressions, and many recurring features were described in the four categories shown in Figure 4.1, which were continually interlinked. Facial Expression/Interaction The teachers frequently mentioned the importance of clear facial expression. Eye contact, smiles, and clear, supportive, positive communication allowed greater understanding to be transferred between teacher and pupil. According to Tanya, a good relationship involved looking students in the face. This ensured the attention and understanding of both teacher and child, and eye contact was especially significant because it led to immediate and meaningful communication: I like to look people in the eyes because I think that’s a very important part of contact . . . because I can tell so much, communicating with them as to whether they’re looking at me and are they sure about something, are they not sure about something. (Will) However, the positive or negative nature of eye contact makes a real difference (Geoff), and making eye contact was problematic in large classes, whereas in one-toone teaching, ‘we have eye contact the whole time’ (Claire). Another key feature was the smile: ‘I rely on smiles a heck of a lot’ (Anna). In addition, nods and forward inclination of the face or body demonstrate interest when listening and act as reassurance and encouragement to say more. Allowing a student time to speak before intervening was also important (Claire). The teacher’s face would be used expressively to emphasize both content and feeling during conversation, and in response to behaviour. This encourage sharing of understanding and further interaction. Martin described himself as a real ‘Basil Fawlty’ around the classroom, and he reflects the children’s manner of communication and mirrors

56


their unintelligible teenage grunt, for example, to make them laugh. He thought the face and body had to express friendliness, openness and good humour. This was easier with individuals rather than in front of the whole class. Several advocated using non-verbal emotional signals which emphasize the emotional element in the subject and engage pupils. Class teachers switched emotions very quickly, and after a reprimand would immediately revert to a positive attitude (Will). Teachers watched facial expressions carefully to gauge response and understanding. This feedback informed their next step, either in terms of building relationships or academic understanding. They looked for a hint of a smile, even a twitch that suggested something was happening inside the child. Frances described how she watched very withdrawn children gradually emerge from their shells during circle time.

Gestures/Body Language/Movement Many teachers talked about the importance of gesture, a natural complement to facial expression (Sara). This varied depending upon whether they were talking to the whole class or to individuals. They toned down ‘acting’ when working one to one. Several teachers explained the importance of moving around the classroom and interacting with individuals or groups. Will, Martin and Sara explained how they moved around to ‘physically bring kids into the lesson’, which helped to clarify concepts and involve them emotionally. Sara felt that movement enabled her to come closer to students and address them personally, engaging more reluctant pupils. She incorporated the students and classroom objects into her explanations and accounts; so for example, the television might become the Bastille, the different groups of students would constitute different countries and all this would involve gesticulation, emotion and drama, engaging students directly in historical events. She frequently engineered a physical representation, climbing onto desks to make her point or dividing the room in two, to demonstrate opposing sides to a historical figure’s character. She took delight in rearranging the room to increase excitement, although with new groups it was different, ‘because you can’t use very extravagant gestures on a new group because they’d just be like, “What’s going on, I don’t understand”’. As the teacher/pupil relationship develops, body language and movement become more relaxed and interactive, according to Pete. Despite using body language and facial expression naturally,


57

teachers had become highly aware of how it demonstrated significance and engaged students in learning (Frances).

Height/Distance Aspects of height and distance also sent messages about attitudes. Classroom teachers had to be flexible and adapt to larger numbers, at times using an up-front, traditional approach. However, real relationships and learning improved when teachers could get closer to students, both in terms of distance and height, according to Martin. Mary, a support teacher, explained how physical closeness led to greater understanding, ‘because you’re with that child and the child is bound to tell you things and you’re bound to learn about the child, sort of on a personal level and educationally’. The closeness facilitates interchange and learning. Claire explained that direction was linked to the closeness, too, ‘and we have a good chat and we always turn our chairs to each other by the table’. Physical closeness produced emotional closeness and promoted caring and sharing: I think when you’re being empathic – very much physically, so like you use your hands and your face and your whole body and leaning forward and showing that you’re concerned . . . and emotionally I do think you are starting to feel a bond with people as you’re sharing with them or they’re sharing with you. (Anna) Physical distance seemed to be symbolic of emotional distance. Martin felt he could weep for some students when other teachers treated them harshly, but recognized that by preserving distance, some teachers could survive more easily. Anna explained how earlier in her career she had believed there should be distance between teacher and pupils, but later realized that they could be much closer. Working (physically closer) in small groups had given her the confidence to know that a more familiar approach is effective. According to Janet, students with various problems could be helped by closeness, and Tanya explained how proximity enables the teacher to talk quietly with students, so that they will not be embarrassed about asking questions or resolving problems, describing herself as ‘a bit of a space invader’. However for a few, physical closeness was problematic and teachers had to be aware of this. Young people could be shy,

58


frightened through bad experiences or simply reluctant to share physical proximity.

Language/Voice Tone The teachers felt language and voice tone were central to an empathic approach, using appropriate language, which did not mystify or confuse and that involved being sensitive to the subtle messages of language: I try to speak their language – that’s important. Lots of times I find myself as a new teacher beginning a word and then sucking it back in because I know they wouldn’t understand the word and the effects of me saying that word can have lots of connotations. The effects of me saying to the child, ‘I’d like you to make a crescendo here’, – they could read that as me saying, ‘I know everything and you know nothing and I know you won’t understand what I’m saying and I’m trying to make you look small’. (Geoff) Several teachers talked about using an appropriate level of language and reflecting the child’s style of language before introducing new language and clearly explaining any complex vocabulary. Equally significant was how students were addressed, which involved eliciting understanding from them through open questioning and using an appropriate voice tone for the situation. It meant speaking sensitively if they were embarrassed, or responding in a lively, jocular way with extroverts. It meant mirroring quiet children by being gentle and thoughtful, especially when dealing issues that required privacy. It meant using a cheerful voice to raise children’s spirit and selfesteem, and modulating voice tone to make questions or comments varied and interesting, and to engender emotion and excitement. This happened more naturally when teachers were relaxed, but Fay argued the voice could become monotonous when a teacher is tense. Teachers using a dramatic approach would change their voice to represent different people or attitudes, and Pete used his voice and language as: ‘a sort of stimulus’. New groups needed a different approach from that for established groups. A non-threatening but authoritative tone helped until such a time as relationships could be built and more varied and more natural approaches could be used. Several teachers mentioned the vital use of the pupil’s name in interactions: ‘If you don’t know somebody’s name, how can


59

you ever make a connection to have any understanding of what’s behind the physical presence of the person’ (Sara). Fay explained that names could be a particular problem for secondary teachers, who teach hundreds of pupils each week.

Conclusions about Fundamental Empathy This section has set out the categories classified as fundamental empathy, that is, those features necessary to initiate empathic relationships. It has considered the attitudes and approaches, as well as the means, of communicating that empathy. The categories in this fi rst sub- section such as acceptance and listening and interest relate closely to the empathic approach in counselling described by Rogers (1975), the sensitivity and heightened awareness described by Hay (1997), the receptivity described by Noddings (1986), and the openness described by Watson and Ashton (1995). These characteristics initiate the focused interactive relationships that support engagement, interaction and learning, while simultaneously building a sense of self, as described by Damasio (1996; 1999). Psychologists stress the importance of a positive sense of self and personhood in learning (Purkey, 1970; Rogers, 1975). The listening, interest and enthusiasm of the empathic teacher begins this engagement with the other person, which over time can develop into emotional attachment and promote a moral sense of responsibility for others, as outlined in the following section. Hogan (1973) believes that openness and intuition and a willingness to take note of non- verbal cues are necessary for empathy. The enthusiasm of these teachers begins to engage pupils at an emotional level in learning, which increases focusing. This closely resembles the neurological processes of engagement described by Damasio (1999).

Characteristics of Profound Empathy in Teaching and Learning This section presents features of empathy which appear to be of a higher order and which have been classified as profound. They show deeper and broader levels of understanding which are associated with closer and longerlasting relationships. In combination with the features of fundamental empathy above, they present a rich and detailed exposition of the nature of

60


empathic relationships in teaching and learning. As before, although these clusters are classified as discrete entities, they function as an integrated whole. They are all inter-linked and relational, iterative and compounding, depending on the participants, the climate and the context. Profound empathy comprised of the following seven areas (Figure 4.2), most of which have further subdivisions. Developing Positive Emotions and Interactions This detailed section shows how teachers acted to create positive emotions and the vital part they play in empathic relationships. This builds on the positive and affirmative approach referred to in fundamental empathy.

Pleasure, Happiness, Fun and Humour These teachers took great pleasure in their subject, students and interactions, and knew the importance of this for learning. They sought to understand students enough to engender pleasure in learning: ‘Trying to put yourself in the positions the learner’s in and trying to see what would be difficult, daunting or enjoyable, I mean actually the enjoyment side of work is very important’ (Tanya). Though teachers enjoyed class teaching, the support teachers gained particular pleasure from smaller group teaching, because of the good relationships and transparent results. Their delight was immense: ‘Well, I get a superb sense of joy out of it’ (Anna). They took a playful approach to the curriculum, believing that humour, games, fun and enjoyment support learning. For reserved, anxious and needy students, it helped to break down barriers: ‘I take in all sorts of games . . . anything that makes them laugh really. And I really feel I’ve got to get them totally relaxed and not worried’ (Anna). Games motivated children and helped them to co- operate and to develop social skills of sharing and taking turns. They helped to dissipate anxiety and build relationships. The more natural the teacher could be, the more fun they could have, and then lessons and learning were enjoyable: ‘Because I think then it’s fun coming to school, it’s fun, learning, it’s fun being with me’ (Sara). Enjoyment was not in opposition work, it went along with it according to Will, and fun created relationships outside the classroom and influenced attitudes inside, as well. Sensitively handled humour helped to create confidence and safety in school by allowing teachers to laugh at themselves or at funny situations. Laughter was associated with feeling at ease, less formality, with the teacher being human.

PROFOUND EMPATHY 1. DEVELOPING POSITIVE EMOTIONS AND INTERACTIONS • pleasure, happiness, fun, humour • liking, loving, seeing the good • mask negative emotions • time-givers • sole attention • physical contact • relaxed, comfortable, informal climate

3. APPRECIATION OF ALL RELATIONSHIPS

2. UNDERSTANDING SELF, OTHERS AND EXPLAINING UNDERSTANDING • • • •

self-knowledge being me, being human get inside understanding, deeper knowledge • explain why

• • • • •

significance of relationship staff relationships teacher-parent relationships understand peer relations resources, environment, wider relationships

4. BREADTH AND DEPTH OF EMPATHY • • •

• • •

all children children who were easier to empathise with children who were more difficult to empathise with individual meeting needs difference

Figure 4.2

6. RICHLY ADAPTIVE AND INTEGRATED CONCEPT OF THEMSELVES AND OTHERS

• • • •

5. ACT AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY solution-seeking persistence, self-sacrifice protect perceive more deeply

Characteristics of profound empathy

• adapt to both individual and environment • high eventual expectations • personal, academic link • holistic view • bridging

7. MORAL ASPECTS • conceptions of morality • moral, empathic link - an interactive process • modelling morality

62


Consequently, it was harder to have as much fun with new groups with no developed relationship.

Being Liked, Loving and Seeing the Good When pupils were happy and enjoying lessons, they liked their teachers, and this was considered necessary to support learning: ‘Well, they’re not going to want to work for you if they don’t like you. . . . It’s vitally important that they do like you and respond to you’ (Charlotte). Liking led to respect, and trust. Students were more likely to listen, respond, learn and work hard for a teacher they liked. Interesting teaching gained favour, as did being sensitive to students’ needs and feelings. Treating students with respect and appreciating their problems and pleasures helped. Being liked in general, if not in every instant, was also a need of the teacher and is one reward of the empathetic process. Finding features to like about less- endearing students was central to empathy. Some teachers spoke about ‘loving’ their pupils. Will talked about one quite difficult group with great affection: ‘Aww, it’s a nightmare, it’s a nightmare, but I love ’em to bits, but it’s a nightmare – I come out of that lesson thinking – god!’ Teachers drew on their own experiences of learning and relationships to understand the power of closeness, and its affect on motivation: ‘I adored my elocution teacher . . . and I have a love of poetry because of her’ (Claire). This was reflected in their own relationships with students, which became loving and familial: ‘I mean I do love children when it comes down to it’ (Anna). Sara identified with a group from poor backgrounds, like her own. She empathized with them and linked empathy to love. These teachers preferred warm and friendly relationships to cooler, more formal ones. Warmth was linked with caring, communication and being valued, according to Frances, who, interestingly, separated the teacher role from being warm and caring. Warmth was a feature of empathy and was related to nurture, which supported academic development. It was associated with whole school climates as well as with individual care.

Mask Negative Emotions These teachers sometimes masked negative emotions for the child’s benefit. They did not interpret poor behaviour or attainment as fixed, but sought strategies to unleash potential. Not every child responds immediately, but a


63

persistent teacher overcomes that by hiding their own feelings of rejection, and working on the child positively: It’s a bit more forced, the smiling and everything in that situation, because that child isn’t automatically making you feel like that. You know that you’ll find some point of contact with the child and something the child’s interested in and then work from there, so it’s not always absolutely automatic and natural. (Mary) This involved looking interested even when they were not. Sometimes students’ behaviour generated feelings which were very negative, and teachers did not particularly feel like being understanding, but even then they controlled them and thought about how to improve the relationships and the learning. Masking negative emotions was all part of being professional, according to Pete, and according to Anna, minimizing and dissipating anxieties for future events was essential: ‘I wouldn’t like them to think I’m worried; I’d like them to think I’m really confident about the way that they are coping’. Describing a difficult lesson with a low-attaining group, Sara explained that it had been a good lesson for them. She hid her own feelings and her knowledge of other groups to build their confidence. Her comments to the students contrasted with her own inner feelings: ‘“You’re a really nice group today – talented lad – tremendous stuff” and you’re thinking, “Phheww, God! that was the hardest lesson I’ve had all week”’ Will tried not to show fear or embarrassment around controversial issues such as sex or violence, so that the pupils would not be afraid of discussing them.

Mutual Respect These teachers were very positive about valuing and respecting each individual and believed that that this was a two-way process and that respect had to be mutual. Only by treating young people with concern, respect and fairness can teachers get the best from them and this was linked to liking and trusting the teacher: The trust and respect is only built up by the way that you are with the child, by the way that you’re interested in the child, by the way that you try to show that: ‘I do want to help you’: so they should come in a better frame of mind to want to work and to please you really. (Charlotte)

64


Terry, the head teacher, felt mutual respect was a particularly strong feature in his primary school. Time-givers These teachers felt that positive, personal interaction needed individual quality time: ‘The most important thing is your time and giving them time to open up to you’ (Claire). Time was symbolic of care, made students feel valued, created more equal relationships and deeper understanding: ‘Well, you’d think that the most important thing that you can ever give anybody in life is time – is your time for them’ (Claire). Time giving had an emotional and symbolic effect. Lack of time in large classes could leave students feeling ignored, and teachers tried to counteract this, as Fay put it: ‘ just to spend enough time with them to see they’re on task and that they understand and that they realize that they’ve not been abandoned’. Class teachers worked to get everyone on task in order to make time with individuals and also made time before and after lessons, in break, dinner hour or after school. In primary school, reading time was a classic opportunity for individual exchange. Frances described it as ‘brilliant’ and ‘vital’ time. Sole Attention These teachers understood how giving sole attention makes students feel valued and important. Support teachers valued individuals by looking at them, being interested, focusing and responding very attentively: ‘so you’ve got to give that sole concentration . . . otherwise she’s not worthy’ (Claire). In large classes, giving the necessary attention to individuals was difficult. This required the teacher to focus on one child but leave background senses alert to the class: ‘and you’ve got these antennae haven’t you, flicking on and off’ (David). Claire queried whether the reason young people like computers is because ‘its one-toone – isn’t it . . . sole, undivided attention’ (Claire). Physical Contact Emotional closeness often led to and was supported by physical closeness and contact. This was particularly important with young children according to Charlotte. Terry, the head teacher, described an empathic approach as: ‘one global cuddle’. Cuddling was part of his school policy. Similarly,


65

David, a student teacher explained empathy as ‘to understand, to put that arm around them (although maybe not physically) and all- embracing, I think’. However, student teachers were wary of physical contact after training about child abuse, although they wanted to be physical. Physical contact was used for reassurance, for sharing pleasure and sorrow, and for raising esteem. It was particularly helpful for some students with special needs and the physical proximity of support teachers led naturally to more physical contact. Relaxed/Comfortable/Informal Climate These teachers felt that a relaxed, informal atmosphere supports communication and openness and helps people to understand each other. Such a climate makes teaching easier and learning more effective as the lessons just ‘flow along’ (Anna). It was particularly important for special needs pupils anxious about learning that the teacher coaxes rather than confronts. These teachers want to create this climate naturally but also influenced it consciously with jokes and personal exchange and non- academic conversation. It takes effort early in relationships to produce a relaxed climate, according to Will, and the formal, ‘teacher-like’ approach only needs to manifest itself occasionally. This informality was linked to more equal relationships and the teacher’s ability to be self- effacing. The relaxed attitude is infectious and creates rapport: I’m building a better relationship with this boy than I ever do in the class ’cause he won’t say anything, but in here, [in the withdrawal group] where he feels quite happy and relaxed and he’s saying a lot more and we’re having a giggle together, I feel as if we’re getting on, building up a lot better rapport. (Anna – reporting a teaching assistant’s comments) Teachers aimed to create a feeling of ownership and happiness, with enough structure for security and stimulus. The relaxed atmosphere did not equate with an ‘anything goes’ atmosphere, and both teacher and students needed to understand expectations.

Understanding of Self and Others, and Explaining Understanding In this section, various initial codes were clustered into the five themes shown on Figure 4.2. Teachers expressed the importance of knowing and

66


being themselves in the classroom, and of trying to get inside their pupils’ thinking and feelings and sharing their own understanding with pupils.

Self-knowledge The participants talked of being happy with themselves, of selfdiscipline and knowing their own strengths and weaknesses, ‘to get to know yourself and trying to be happy with yourself’ (Geoff). Claire talked of stepping outside of herself to look at herself as other people see her. They knew their strengths and limitations, which affected their planning, and continually evaluated their reactions and responses to children. They sought additional information about students from other staff and outside agencies. In combination with their rich knowledge of students, self-knowledge enabled them to make good emotional and academic decisions about both learning and teaching strategies. It enabled them to take risks and try new approaches. They saw themselves as adaptive, not fi xed, entities. Several teachers referred to their own childhoods when trying to understand the reactions and feelings of students: ‘I often think how I would feel. I put myself in that position. I’ve got a storming memory from my childhood of individual detail and I use a lot of my childhood experiences to analyse them’ (Martin). They had to both understand a child’s emotions and be able to detach from them to make supportive decisions. Knowing yourself meant understanding the effect of constraints and pressures. Experienced teachers, in particular, were more aware of these and had learned to work with them. Being Me, Being Human Many people mentioned the importance of being themselves in the classroom and how this helped their teaching: ‘I am very lucky in that I can be myself and it seems to work for me’ (Will). It was linked with being human, approachable, a real person, a three- dimensional being who had a life and loves outside the classroom as well as with in it (Sara). They also recognized this wider person in students, so it was a mutual recognition of their humanity, which is what Anna felt empathy was about. They spoke of their characters and their own life experiences. They were imperfect, used intuition and were natural. They talked openly about their own children and other personal information with pupils. They explained how their historical and social self was always in play in class. They threw


67

themselves back in time to understand the students’ position now. They remembered being labelled by teachers themselves and having low selfesteem and how seemingly minor issues could be very upsetting for children. They used memories of past interactions to make good decisions when weighing up how to react in different situations. Some teachers expressed the desire to release the potential for change in pupils, as had happened to them. They believed their own children’s experiences enabled them to be more empathic and flexible, treating students as they would treat their own children. Their high expectations and hopes for their own children gave rise to similar aspirations for students. Responses to their own children or closely known children increased their understanding and desire to support others (Martin). Being prepared to talk about anything and sharing more of yourself with young people, made them feel more adult and eased communication and learning. Empathy represented your attitude to other people and showed you valued them. It was the essence of society and community according to Pete. Being oneself was harder in large classes where a more formal role was needed to ensure security and order. Teachers switched between the up-front teacher role and a more empathic, more human role when dealing with individuals: ‘I try and change and tune in to what, who they are and their whole characteristic, their body language everything.’ (David)A facet of ‘being me’ was that of social class. Several teachers mentioned how their working class background helped them to understand young people. This helped to frame teaching styles and materials and to understand problems around school trips and uniforms, and the harshness and struggle of student’s lives. They also understood working class parents who were anxious about attending school events and the cycles of low esteem around education that can occur in families.

Get Inside Several teachers talked about getting inside their pupil’s mindset: ‘Just as a person, it’s just to kind of really get inside somebody else’s skin and see what their feelings and what their attitudes are like and what makes them tick’ (Claire). When children had relaxed enough, they opened up and allowed teachers inside their innermost thoughts and feelings. Getting inside the pupils’ understanding and looking at the world from their perspective helped to

68


solve problems, to build on what they already know and what they’re interested in to motivate them and raise selfesteem (Anna). With whole classes it involved throwing yourself into the class atmosphere; ‘you’ve got to get “in there” with the children’ (Frances).

Understanding/Deeper Knowledge This was a large category and the teachers felt that acquiring understanding of both academic and social aspects of pupils in teaching and learning was very significant: ‘I think it’s sort of assessing a child’s understanding, so you’ve to pitch your work at a level they’re going to understand . . . you’ve got to really know that child to work out how you’re going to deal with them’ (Charlotte). Tanya put herself in the place of the learners and considered their emotional and academic responses to tasks. She considered which skills they would need and the differences between students, which involved taking into account pupils’ outof- school interests or building on positive responses to lessons and taking them further. It also involved creating lessons which appeal to pupils, both in methodology and content, and allowing leeway when the pressure of curriculum becomes too much and then supporting them with extra skills when needed. Empathy meant understanding their thinking, their frustrations, and responding sensitively. Even the process of trying to be understanding (even if not completely successful) helps the child to feel valued. One-toone support enabled highquality understanding and teaching, which was not available in large classes, where some individuals simply could not flourish. Teachers described students who required deep personal understanding through long and involved conversation: ‘Now, that’s big time empathy, isn’t it? That’s sort of like one-toone. I understand your situation, I know lots of things about you’ (Sara). Empathy and deep understanding can involve gleaning information from different people and other sources: Well, you’d find out if they’d got any educational statements, statuary assessments as a first thing. Talk to members of staff who’ve had more dealings with them, like form tutor, if necessary speak to the parents and in severe cases, you have the educational welfare involved or the child psychologist. (Fay)


69

Events out of school must be understood, as they often have immediate consequences for learning. As an example, David explained how the arrival of new siblings affects children’s school work and behaviour. Explain Why These teachers were educators both in the personal and moral sphere and in the academic sphere. They do not just expect children to understand things, they explain them. They explained to groups why they were working on social skills as well as academic skills and they help students to understand other people’s point of view. In groups, this meant asking students to think carefully about the feelings of others and their own responsibilities. Several teachers explained that it was important to criticize the action, not the child. This could involve asking pupils to explain their actions, which made them think. Careful explanations showed that the teacher valued the child and wanted them to really understand. It showed they were not just imposing their ideas on the students but that they cared about them and their responses: Being able to understand, put yourself in the child’s place I think. So if they’re misbehaving for some reason, not to give them an excuse for the way they are behaving but to help them understand and come out the other side. (Fay) This sort of explanation and interaction involves approaching students from a sideways- on position, involving negotiation and learning rather than judgement, and produced a much better response, which was also rewarding for the teacher. Academic explanations also required empathy and catered for individual difference: ‘So I always try and explain in different ways, to different people, to different children’ (David).

Appreciation of All Relationships A theme that revealed a richness of empathy was the complex understanding of relationships shown by these teachers. They laid great stress on the importance of relationships in teaching and learning and on the need for more equal relationships, which went beyond the classroom door. They

70


valued staff relationships, knew the power of peer and parent relationships and the part played by context and wider relationships. There are five subsections as listed in Figure 4.2.

Significance of Relationship There was an overwhelming and dramatic agreement among these teachers about the importance of the teacher/pupil relationship in teaching and learning: ‘absolutely essential’ (Tanya); ‘integral to good teaching’ (Geoff); ‘it’s the focus of everything isn’t it’ (Terry). Class teachers felt relationships set secure boundaries and enabled good communication and interaction, which is at the heart of learning. Making lessons interesting and relevant also required understanding relationships: ‘With the best planning in the world, if you don’t relate it to them or can’t relate it to them or find ways in, it’s not gonna work, is it’ (Tanya). They remembered their own reactions and their children’s reactions to teachers and how important the relationship was to motivation and achievement. Relationships were personal, continually evolving and intrinsic to the teaching and learning process: I mean how you think of a child being one day it evolves to another day and how they feel and how you feel I suppose and it’s just a massive – well it’s the whole thing isn’t it – it’s the rapport and building up the relationship – otherwise you just couldn’t function. (Sylvia) They felt good relationships in schools could provide the consistency and stabilizing factors that many students lacked in their home lives and they made schools secure and positive places.

Staff Relationships These teachers generally felt positive staff relationships were important in schools and good relationships modelled by empathic teachers could enable other staff to improve their relationships. Anna explained that when she supported a class teacher who hardly acknowledged her existence, the students also refused to acknowledge her, but with another teacher who preferred team teaching, the students also related well to her.


71

Small but important signs indicated good teacher/student relationships. Several mentioned the significant ‘“hello” in the corridor’ (Anna), which indicated good human relationships. Will and his colleagues would laugh and joke with the pupils on the corridors or on the football field, which he felt helped in classrooms and motivated pupils. Managers and experienced teachers valued staff relationships for both staff and child development. One head of department opened up the department to students at lunchtimes, during which staff members would come and go and interact more informally, chatting and joking and general revealing more of their personal side. This was an opportunity for younger staff to realize that you can have informal, friendly, relaxed relationships with pupils. Some student teachers seemed less aware of the benefits of staff relationships, perhaps because they were new to teaching.

Teacher/Parent Relationships The support and primary teachers, especially, felt learning could be enhanced by the quality of teacher/parent relationships and that some schools were more welcoming and involved and valued parents more: ‘It’s crucial, it’s crucial. I mean that’s how it builds up the whole partnership thing isn’t it. It’s not just the parents, it’s not just the children, it’s the synergy of them all coming together’ (Sylvia). This could depend on the head teacher’s attitude towards parents and sometimes the middleclass culture of schools could be overly critical of working class parents. Claire felt parents needed to have expectations and a positive view of their child and that teachers should reassure parents, which would allow the child to grow: ‘You instil them with confidence and importance about their child’ (Claire). In secondary schools, teachers felt relationships with parents were most in focus straight after parents evening, and Will utilized them to reinforce his messages and to explain issues to students. This could sometimes have a transformative effect on a pupil’s attitude to school. By contrast, some secondary student teachers did not particularly see relationships with parents as their role, but as part of the role of a year head or form tutor. Generally, student teachers had little experience of parental contact, though some understood how good relationships with parents might be very important.

72


Understand Peer Relations These teachers showed a keen understanding of peer relationships and how, for example, they could lead boys to behave more antisocially, limiting their achievement: ‘They’re just frightened of being spot-balled [by their peers] – yes – peer pressure is big’ (Geoff). In secondary school, Will felt an anti- academic peer ethos was increased by streaming (a system where students are put into separate classes which are differentiated by general ability, not by ability in specific subjects), ‘because the peer groups that they get in, some of them, and the peer group pressure that is bound to work – it’s like a cancer, it spreads’ (Will). The head teacher thought a positive atmosphere among peers could be equally powerful and have very beneficial effects on disruptive pupils: ‘It’s almost like a peer group pressure, rather than teacher pressure. They do what the other children do’ (Terry).

Environment/Resources/ Wider Relationships These teachers believed that the whole context of learning, the environment, resources and the wider relationships could also serve to meet needs more effectively if the student’s perspective and other perspectives were taken into account: It involves everybody and not just the teachers, support staff that you’ve got, the dinner ladies. Everybody has to be made to feel that they are part of and responsible for the education of these children. If there’s a role for empathy anywhere it’s in building that relationship in the wider . . . well, within the bricks and mortar community and the wider community, as well. (Tanya) Well-maintained buildings and resources showed students that they were cared for. Valuing all students’ work in displays helped to raise esteem and motivation, especially with special needs students. Resources and displays from around the world and from different historical periods helped to encourage empathy. Drama and role-play was particularly helpful and using real materials, handling them or eating real food, helped children to experience new sensations. Empathy could be encouraged across the curriculum and helped students to really understand issues and then act and respond according to their inner beliefs. New and stimulating environments (e.g. on school trips) with better staff/student ratios and less formality allow teachers and students to relate in a friendlier way,


73

discover new things about each other and chat more personally. Engaging in extracurricular activities or encountering each other in more normal life situations supports more familial relationships and generates wider understanding. Breadth and Depth of Empathy This theme associated with profound empathy was represented by the collection of codes below. They reveal that these teachers have a propensity to empathize both deeply, by appreciating and responding to pupils’ individuality and by attempting to meet their needs, but also to accomplish this with a wide range of pupils. These codes seemed to represent the breadth and depth of their empathy. All Children These teachers felt they had to try and understand and form relationships with every student. They talked of ‘building up an encyclopaedia of all’ (Geoff) and, ‘all children are nice somewhere’ (Mary). One teacher set up individual lunchtime interviews with all her GCSE students, to recognize their achievements, spend time with them and to motivate them. They rarely encountered unresponsive students and they gained great pleasure from their students’ achievements at whatever level. However, there was a recurring theme of pleasure when lower-attaining students achieved improvements. Sara talked of raising lower- attaining students’ grades as being ‘powerful’ and ‘giving and potentially achieving more’. Only occasionally was a student beyond empathy in the classroom context, and even then, teachers explained how they understood quite deeply what made such students act in the way they do and how the education system fails them. Children With Whom It Was Easier To Empathize’ Both this and the following category were marked by a disparity of views that was not seen elsewhere in these findings. Different teachers found different students easier or harder to empathize with, though there was similarity in some cases. Those who were easier were often like the teacher, either in temperament or in social class, or teachers recognized similarities to how they had been at school. Some teachers warmed to the rougher, working class students, or to the naughtier, disaffected ones. Some liked the rascally, fun-

74


loving rogues, while others favoured openness. Some teachers warmed to the quieter students who lacked confidence and again recognized similarities to themselves. Others felt it was easier to empathize with well-behaved pupils who adhered to the rules or who really wanted to learn or made an effort. Others felt that the children who connect more easily were easiest to empathize with initially, but that every student represented a challenge at some point.

Children With Whom It Was More Difficult To Empathize’ There was similar variety in the students with whom teachers struggled to empathize. A common difficult feature, however, was being middleclass. Middle- class, teenage girls could be very aloof and superior. Some teachers felt they were never satisfied, despite all their privileges: ‘I feel like stopping them and saying, “You’re on the road to success, you’ve got very limited built- in failure here, stop moaning”’ (Sara). Some students from leafy- lane suburbs had priorities about appearance and could seem spoiled. Hard to motivate, low- achieving boys could conceal their emotions about school and often exhibited an outer ‘macho’ shell which restricted learning and made it harder to empathize with them. Persistent bad behaviour could make empathy difficult, as did students who showed little empathy themselves. Terry felt those with either little or lots of empathy were difficult to empathize with, but actually needed your empathy more. Will found he had problems with uncommunicative students. Some students seemed simply too needy for the system to cope. The two children with whom experienced teachers had struggled were an autistic child supported in mainstream classes, and a highly emotionally disturbed adolescent, also in a mainstream class. Students with tremendous learning difficulties and low selfesteem in large classes presented a real challenge, because their problems were complex and unfathomable in the time available, and their basic literacy and numeracy skills were ill-matched to those required by the curriculum. Generally, these teachers were successful with students whom others found difficult, but even they recognized their failures, especially in large classes, and the student teachers felt the short time period of teaching practice was a real constraint. Giving one-toone time was a key factor in supporting needy students and could transform them.


75

Seeing the Individual These teachers felt there were no blanket solutions and that individual response is vital to learning progress. Empathy with individuals involved considerable learning on the teacher’s part, followed by appropriate action: ‘It’s getting to know the whole child and his personality and how he responds to different situations, the observation, the assessment that comes over a period of time’ (Martin). Being empathic meant recognizing that multiple factors affect individuals and that they come to school with a very different perspective from the teacher’s. Teachers became acquainted with individuals over time. Class teachers worked with whole classes and groups and eventually reached the individual level: I introduce the topic and then we talk about the Spice Girls here, or talking about football over there, and it worked perfectly for the kids because you’re empathizing with a group in general, you find a common theme among these children and then you refine it down to particular children. (Pete)

Meeting Needs Linked closely with an awareness of individuals was a desire by these teachers to meet personal needs. They were aware of how difficult this is in a classroom and that one-toone support for some students is their only opportunity to flourish: ‘If a child’s in a big classroom and not thriving, it’s the one chance for that child, isn’t it [working with the support teacher], so you’ve really got to go for it’ (Mary). One-toone interaction was an effective way of meeting needs and building confidence. Teachers assessed students academically, but also emotionally and motivationally, and respond very flexibly: I mean he might be a child who finds reading absolutely totally boring and you need to go round it through Batman and Robin or whatever. So you’ve got to know your child pretty well, what makes them tick and what their likes and dislikes are, so you can just go forward, really. (Claire)

76


Meeting needs extends to sharing information and tactics with other teachers, and also involves using the right resources and meeting needs that are not being met at home. It might also involve focusing on one child at the expense of others and explaining to the others why you were doing it. Empathy was associated with meeting individual needs: It (empathy) is being sensitive towards the needs of the child – trying to, trying to treat each one of those as a little human being as opposed to a pupil. So they all have different needs, different attitudes, that I’ve got to be very much aware of. (Anna) Difference The teachers adapt themselves and their teaching. In the one-toone situation, this was easier to achieve and very child specific, with the child dictating the teacher’s approach: ‘Because with each child’s needs and personalities being so different, then you’ve to adjust your way of teaching to bring out the best in that child’ (Claire). Marking and assessment should be related to what the individual child is capable of, rather than comparing them to others: ‘Are they doing the best for themselves?’ (Mary). Catering for difference requires considerable time: I feel I’ve got to go back, right to the beginning and trace through and find out what bits of the jigsaw – are missing. And I feel . . . I can’t even begin to assess them, until I’ve known them for about six months. (Anna) Act and Take Responsibility Another feature of profound empathy is taking a proactive approach for the benefit of others. These teachers took responsibility for the wellbeing of pupils, as well as their academic development. This feature is classified into four areas. Solution Seeking The teachers wanted solutions for students and were prepared to push for them. Martin, a student teacher, argued against his forceful mentor who didn’t think being a form tutor was of much value: ‘I argued with (his mentor) that by solving kids’ problems, by doing all the things that tutors do,


77

yes, you are, because I say they are creating a good environment, solving a problem, removing their worries’ (Martin). Working empathically meant taking their learning seriously, reflecting on it and looking for improved solutions. They want to get through to children and to enable them to develop and learn. They understood how anxiety constrained relationships, learning and development, and how the solution often lay in opening up deeper worries and anxieties. Heads of department could encourage solution- seeking by helping staff to reflect on their teaching.

Persistence/Self-sacrifice Linked closely with solution- seeking was the quality of persistence and being determined to probe to the bottom of a problem, to persevere until a breakthrough is made. This persistence was linked to empathy, ‘but I think the more empathic teachers can find positive things. You know obviously they’ve really got to work at it, to find something positive ‘(Mary). It could mean sacrificing their own image with other staff or their own needs for the sake of a student (Geoff). Claire argued: ‘Love others as yourself, but if you put others before you, then that’s even better! That’s sacrifice, that’s sacrifice and that’s what you should do, shouldn’t you’ (Claire). Empathy even involved taking the trouble to form relationships with students who a teacher had not yet taught, because they were potential students.

Protect The self- sacrificial nature led to a desire to protect children from the negative effects of the system or less-understanding teachers. They often took issue on behalf of students who were being given a hard time. In one-toone situations, support teachers could shut out the unhelpful demands of curriculum and large classes and concentrate on the individual’s needs. Classroom teachers tried to create a nurturing atmosphere in their own classrooms, whatever the outside environment.

Perceive More Deeply Profound empathy led teachers to notice signs and to look below the surface and respond accordingly, and this improved over time. This might involve being more watchful or listening more carefully to the child, taking close note of non-verbal signals or missing details which signalled some

78


hidden issue, and then reacting appropriately: ‘They can be signs in what people say to you, not always obvious signs, like things that people don’t tell you, things that people miss out’ (Claire). Body language often tells an educational story: ‘I can tell they’ve come from Mrs. So-and- so by the way they’ve walked in the door’ (Anna).

Richly Integrated and Adaptive Concept of Themselves and Others These teachers have a complex, evolving, integrated and adaptive concept of how people interact with each other and their environments. This concept was classified into the five subsections below.

Adapt to Both Individual and Environment These teachers were highly adaptive and aware of the different roles they adopted with different students and the effect they could have on them: How they view me is just as important in a relationship as how I feel they tick, because I could maybe change to suit that relationship in a better way . . . I can be as they want me to be really . . . I can be the chameleon. (Claire) This chameleon nature also applied to adult interactions while class teachers continually switched roles from the up- front, in- control persona to a friendlier role. Additionally, these teachers respond to students according to their nature, reflect their style, their language and personality, and take into account the context. They also adapt to different groups and classes.

High Eventual Expectations Relationships were frequently linked to high expectations. However, the expectations were appropriate to the current state of attainment. These teachers could demand higher standards and greater effort and be constructive, precisely because of their good relationships. They start from the students’ level but build rapidly and expect them to go on achieving. They expect progress and do not have a ‘fixed’ view of attainment. Support teachers dealing with students with learning difficulties also had optimistic expectations. However, current expectations had to be related to a child’s


79

actual attainment levels; they were critical of teachers whose expectations were unfair: For instance knowing that children are on statements and have literacy problems (he) would just set the same test without giving any extra time, without asking somebody else to be a scribe and then put that child in detention for not doing well. (Anna)

Personal/Academic Link The link between the personal and the academic was a recurring theme and was interwoven in lessons, one nourishing the other. In one-toone support, this was even more intensive: ‘You’re bound to learn about the child . . . on a personal level and educationally that perhaps you miss in the classroom ‘(Mary). Home life, culture and history influences classroom interactions: ‘It’s important to keep that (background/culture) on board otherwise you can’t really understand a lot of the things that happen within the lesson’ (Mary). Personal interest was often an opener, a relaxed way of moving into more academic issues. Support teachers often used this approach and started lessons eliciting stories from home. Humour, academic learning and personal conversation were all entangled (Sara). Talking openly to young people about issues that concerned them, such as questions about puberty and sex, were vitally important. Equally, talking about interests such as fashion, cartoons or football helped relationships, engagement and learning. Learning targets could be social as well as academic, and the two were closely intertwined – it was hard to achieve one without the other. Mental, emotional and bodily maturity all varied enormously and had a huge impact on learning in schools. Understanding the worries of teenagers helped students to develop as people and build their selfesteem. The head teacher explained the importance of personal understanding and how this could immediately change teachers’ responses. Holistic View These teachers explained that they responded to students as a whole person, not simply as a pupil in a particular class: ‘So you’ve to look at the whole thing, haven’t you, the whole [strongly emphasized ] child’ (Claire). They build

80


extremely rich mental models of their pupils. The whole child, past, present and future, must be understood and imagined to support them most effectively: ‘You’ve got a combination of what’s happened in the past, what’s happening now and perhaps, yes, how the future’s going to be for them’ (Frances). This rich model understands something of an individual’s life experiences, social emotional and academic make-up, loves, interests and aspirations. Sometimes teachers key into one element to connect with a student, but over time this model grows richer, evolves with the child and relates directly to learning. It was hard to plan for learning without a concept of past, present and future. Geoff explained that empathy in teaching understands the historical child and inspires an adaptation of teacher behaviour. Sharing positive visions of their futures with students and their parents could fill them all with expectations: ‘There’s a world out there! Fill them with ideas and fantasies and dreams and hopes and aspirations . . . then they’ll be able to themselves, won’t they’ (Claire). By addressing students’ problems, teachers were automatically trying to raise their future prospects. They could carry selfesteem, skills, and friendship forward with them. Students’ past and possible future experiences were integrated into lessons, reinforcing their historical sense of self and validating it as well. Language and relationships evolve with the students because teachers have to keep up with them as they change and offer different scaffolding. Home circumstances changed and young people could become much happier, or vice versa, in school, with the consequent effects on their attitude to learning. Teachers adapted their behaviour towards bereaved students to try and rebuild their lost sense of self through relationships and engagement in school.

Bridging Empathic teachers performed a bridging role between different perspectives, and empathy was the means to achieving this (Mary). A teacher could form a bridge between parents and school in cultural and language issues, for example, while support teachers could bridge the gap between the class teacher and a child, and could transform the child’s experience both in class and elsewhere in school: We spend a lot of time now taking him down to his old class teacher, not to rub it in but for her to say, ‘Ooooh, have you done that?’ [amazed voice] ‘Do you know I can’t believe it . . . you’re a different lad, aren’t you?’ (Anna)


81

Sara bridged the gap between students and new staff by modelling relaxed and informal relationships, supporting adolescents across their own bridge from childhood to adulthood.

Moral Aspects of Profound Empathy The interviews were rich with moral issues. These were raised naturally by teachers, but also when asked about connections between empathy and morality, whether they considered themselves to be moral and what morality meant for them. Three themes emerged on these issues, which are described in detail below.

Conceptions of Morality Teachers’ conceptions of morality were rich and complex and often closely linked to the characteristics of empathy described above. Although there was individual variation, there were also recurring themes, both of which are outlined here. A central theme was the considerate treatment of other people: being unselfish, being caring, kind and pleasant and how this behaviour engenders similar behaviour in others and affects your own personal development: Like your own personal development depends on how you treat other people. . . . If I’m nice and approachable, if I’m willing to put in a bit of extra time with kids at lunchtime to get their projects finished or same sort of situation in the studios, they know, they appreciate it, they’ll respond well to you and sometimes they’ll do things back for you, which I just think are wonderful. So that’s my moral framework really. (Tanya) Teachers tried to be good people, do the right thing and support others. They should try to create happiness, share, be generous, and give others time and attention. They should be positive about peoples’ strengths, put others’ feelings before their own, offer friendship, and be approachable and available. The teachers referred to many behaviours and attitudes: respect, do not judge people, value difference, be tolerant about race, gender, different opinions, listen carefully to people, bring people on, encourage, give praise, do the best for students and have high expectations, encourage independence when appropriate, value and recognize people, recognize and

82


dissipate fear and anxiety. Moreover this morality was enacted rather than taught: ‘You’re acting in a moral way there, because you’re teaching tolerance without preaching tolerance, without turning it into a lesson’ (Sara). Many of these behaviours come under a banner of care, which was frequently mentioned and was related to empathy and morality: If your doctor feels that his ultimate care is for you. If a teacher feels that, yes, they are caring about you. Yes, you feel trusted, then it’s reciprocated, it’s morality, it’s really thinking that the other person is more important or as important, as yourself. (Claire) Caring means sharing joy and pleasure as well as problems and was also defined by what it was not. A teacher who was too easy- going did not show care. An approach that allows students to be unpleasant to others is not caring, because as well as upsetting others, insensitive individuals will reap the rewards in poor future relationships. Caring seriously for students, therefore, included helping them to care about other people. However, the classroom teacher role included conflict in terms of care: ‘I try to be kind and caring and warm as well as the teacher. I’m not there to be a friend. I’m there to be a teacher, but, if I can, be a friend. If they need me I am there’ (Frances). The needs of everyone in the class must be considered and their learning and group behaviour managed, which sometimes caused conflict for the teacher. Morality generally involved taking their role as a teacher and their students seriously. Several referred to the importance of honesty or authenticity in relationships that engendered respect and trust. Empathy required honesty in communication in order to succeed in connecting emotionally: I mean if you are showing empathy for a child, you’re trying to be honest, aren’t you, and straightforward. . . . You know if you create a false impression a child soon sees through that and I suppose somebody who is immoral really is showing a falseness. (Charlotte) Self-knowledge and values were deemed important, as were knowing personal boundaries, guidelines and moral code and good manners. Teachers needed to show fairness and to balance different needs carefully. Morality involved communication and learning and being open to people and ideas. Moral realism involved trying to understand pupils’ moral boundaries as well as one’s own. Morality was linked to personal growth, which was achieved by recognizing that students have different skills and


83

interests, then responding to them accordingly. Teachers had to be more than just moral authority figures if they wanted to influence children. They needed to give more and understand, rather than condemn or punish, and students’ feelings needed to be expressed to enable long-term personal development. Two teachers had more pronounced views on right and wrong and the extent of their empathy had been clearly tested by individuals. Will had encountered a very disturbed boy who had committed a particularly violent crime and although he knew schools had failed this student, he had little time for him. Equally, Terry, the head teacher, was convinced that some people were born with more potential for evil.

Moral /Empathic Link – An Interactive Process The overwhelming message was that moral development occurs through positive relationships and is a two-way process closely linked with empathy. Empathy allows teachers to understand both moral and intellectual development. Geoff talked about the morals of teachers and students having to meet for moral development: I do like to go to as near to the line as possible, because if you believe that morally, teachers have to be to the left of the line, which is high ground and pupils, because they don’t know where the line is, are always a bit on the right hand side of it. It’s really to get hold of those kids by the scruff of the neck. You’ve got to go as near to their line as possible and pupils have different lines. Considering other people’s cultures and value systems face- to-face led teachers to reflect more deeply on their own values and beliefs. Empathy and morality were closely linked by Pete: Yes, I think deep down it’s your attitude towards humans but I think we do have some sort of empathy, yes I think everyone deep down . . . has a sort of moral code of right and wrong, I think that . . . deep down can empathize, otherwise that would mean the sort of essence of like community or society couldn’t exist. Making oneself vulnerable to students by inviting their opinions equalizes power relationships and empowers students. This increases mutual

84


feelings of self-worth and many teachers consciously help students to form their own moral concepts in an ongoing two-way process. Mary described one empathic colleague like this: They’ve developed their own code of discipline in the classroom . . . and he’s not saying you do this because I’m bigger than you and I can shout at you and intimidate you. He’s trying to help them to understand to be decent caring people. (Mary) Many participants argued that the moral behaviour of the teacher is naturally mirrored by students, as well as being deliberately encouraged, and this can have a multiplying effect, such as encouraging pupils to help each other. Teachers are subsequently rewarded by the improved attitudes of pupils to each other and also towards themselves. Fay explained that deep human understanding is more related to empathy than religious instruction and deeper levels of emotional understanding and attachment led to guilt feelings and to action, according to Terry. To be aware of others, and to empathize with them, results in consideration, guilt and self- sacrifice. Deep understanding seemed to link empathy with morality and lack of empathy with prejudice and fi xed views, so tolerance was determined by empathy. Profound empathy, morality and honesty are bound up with the building of relationships of care and trust between people. Terry, however, distinguished between empathy and morality, and argued that empathy is more powerful when it is also moral. Moral empathy involves matching words and deeds, fulfilling promises, living up to expectations and building trust and believability. However feelings of care and moral responsibility towards others often felt instinctive. Frances felt that just seeing small children triggered moral feelings. These teachers made moral issues explicit, but sensitively, using both verbal and non-verbal communication. Empathy did not ignore bad behaviour, the child needed to understand what was and was not acceptable and why. The physical, facial and verbal signs of empathy inform students that teachers care about them and teachers explain issues in the personal and moral sphere, which students might not yet understand. Inviting people to explain the reasons for their actions, helps them understand whether they were appropriate and in classrooms can improve other students’ understanding.


85

Modelling Morality This section had three subsections. Moral Climate In larger social groups, the general climate affected behaviour and attitudes. The moral climate of the school could be influenced strongly by the head teacher, but required effort at every level, and positive policies had to be both articulated and practiced. Within the classroom, the teacher could create a micro- climate, but ideally a whole school approach was needed. Schools in which great concern was shown for individuals and the school environment, and which encouraged interaction both within school and outside of it, created a positive model of development and care. However, the teachers felt school had a limited effect on morality, in comparison with parents. Problems occurred when the value systems of school and home clashed, when students got mixed messages about right and wrong. Consequently, relationships with parents were very important to achieve consistency and understanding and shared goals for the child. However, they understood that some parents struggle to offer a moral example to their children. Where teacher/parent relationships were good, they could have a potent effect on the child and supported teaching and learning. Sharing The whole two-way process involved in teacher/pupil relationships and moral learning continually involved the sharing of tasks. Listening as well as talking produces a shared dialogue in which both parties contribute. This makes students feel valued and important, and more likely to listen to others and able to work together in a secure, cooperative environment. Teachers sharing their own experiences in circle time, for example, encouraged children to open up and communicate their feelings, too. Secondary teachers saw relationships becoming more cooperative with maturity, especially in the sixth form. Sharing tasks allows young people to see each other’s perspective, strengths and weaknesses, and develops helping behaviour. Shared goals encourage teamwork and cooperation, either in the classroom or between staff members, or between parents and teachers or other agencies and schools. This offers powerful role models for students when they see adults working

86


jointly for everyone’s benefit which can become familial: ‘I think teamwork is vital – yes, of course it is. We were almost family like’ (Frances). Multiple Moral Models These teachers talked about a range of influential models in students’ lives and learning, which they took into account when working with individuals. They were aware of the powerful influence of family, peers and teachers. They all clearly understood their own influence as a model in the classroom: ‘I’m the role model for that child so I’ve got to behave in an exemplary fashion almost, haven’t I’ (Claire). Importantly, if a teacher encourages all students, then peers are more likely to respect all fellow students, as well, creating an inclusive atmosphere in class. Even the most unlikely of students could take their cue from the teacher and then model appropriate behaviour to their peers. Pupils also mirrored teachers’ emotional sensitivity in voice tone and body language, when addressing fellow pupils who were upset or excited, for example. Teachers knew children observed them closely in class, and that their style, attitudes, and quality of teaching sent moral messages. Both Sara and Geoff felt that giving time to needy children was seen and appreciated by classmates who were very perceptive. In contrast, student teachers worried about the fairness of the model they presented and the consequences if they gave more time to needy pupils. They spoke frequently about the importance of equality. These participants were also aware of the influence of the head teacher as a model, setting the tone for the whole school. This affected attitudes to parents. Heads of departments and other staff could also be models for younger staff. Some felt that the modelling process was contagious and that everyone’s final outcomes were dependent on whom they rubbed up against in life.

Conclusions about Profound Empathy This section on profound empathy represents a detailed exposition of the complex factors involved in empathic classroom relationships, and interactions between teachers and children. The holistic nature of empathy ensures that all these factors interact and compound with each other and this is how the teachers understand them as interrelated and dynamic, not as discrete entities. This category was named profound empathy because


87

the quality of the relationship was of a different order. Such empathy seems to be based on having a long-term view of individuals and recognizes worth and value in each individual, valuing difference and promoting tolerance. Taylor (1997) and others felt these were important issues in values education. Profound empathy requires a highly developed individual mental model, born of rich understanding and incorporates features of the other’s historical and future self in its internal representations. This mental model evolves and fluctuates on a momentary and daily basis, revising its understanding and responses alongside the student’s experience and responses. It resembles the empathy needed for counselling described by Rogers (1975), and can be seen in the close relationships of support teachers to pupils in the observations (Chapter 7). Profound empathy generates deep emotional attachment and the generation of personal and positive emotions in classrooms. Interactions are increasingly enjoyable, personal, emotional and intellectual in nature. They often involve physical contact, are more equal and involve mutual respect. Empathic teachers aimed to have fun and use humour in lessons, which did not replace work but was in conjunction with it, enhancing learning and motivating both teachers and students. This powerful affective aspect of learning relates strongly to Vygotsky’s (1986) understanding of the interrelatedness of the intellect and the emotions. Teachers wanted to like, even love, their pupils and needed to be liked in return, which relates closely to the work of Hay (1997) and Marx, cited in Fischer (1973); both propound the importance of love and sensual awareness in human communion and fulfilment. In order to facilitate positive and closer relationships, these empathic teachers sought opportunities for personal interaction and attention wherever they could within the constraints of their working situation. Sole- attention made pupils feel worthy and involved a total focus between teacher and child. This resembles the ‘engrossment’ in the other described by Noddings (1986), which engenders a caring attitude and the ‘loving attention’ that promotes moral development, described by Murdoch (1970). With increasing contact, positive emotions and interactions grew, creating greater empathy and developing mutual respect, something noted by Aspy (1972). In profound empathy, a moral approach to other human beings is visible, which relates closely to Ormell’s definition of hard values (1993); when we really value something seriously, we therefore we give it

88


‘time, attention, effort, money/resources, praise/admiration, risk personal credibility, endure pain/strain/discomfort’ (Ormell, 1993, 37). Positive interactions involved teachers knowing themselves and their capabilities and bringing their historical understanding of people and relationships to bear in their intense interactions in the classrooms. In this way, empathy supports morality by creating the will to implement the ‘golden rule’, as suggested by Haydon (1997a) and Rodger (1996). Teachers felt happiest when they could be themselves in the classroom, only resorting to the more formal teacher-role when necessary. Aspy (1972) found children prefer and learn more with authentic teachers, and a child in the pilot explained that understanding teachers ‘behave more like ordinary people than teachers’. Sharing understanding involved taking time to explain issues to the individual rather than criticize them. This concurs with emphasis by Hoffman and Saltzstein (1967) on induction in discipline and its relationship to empathy. Explanations help to enlarge understanding and offer different perspectives about the consequences of interactions. Hargreaves (1972) also emphasizes pupils’ preference of teachers who explain properly. By understanding pupils deeply teachers develop the urge to meet their needs more effectively, as Noddings argued (1986, 16). Profound empathy appears to create the will to act on behalf of all pupils. This desire to value all children as unique individuals with developmental potential reveals the moral nature of such empathy. As profound empathy develops, we see it resembles more closely the dictionary definition of ‘fully comprehending’ the other person (Brown, 1993). The teachers advocate not only modelling morality in daily activity (SCAA, 1993; 1996b; Koseki and Berghammer, 1992) but also articulating the reasons for moral behaviour, as does the literature (Hoffman and Saltzstein, 1967). This richer, more lead- taking aspect of empathy connects closely with the moral and adaptive empathy described by Koseki and Berghammer (1992). Both fundamental and profound empathy have positive benefits for relationships, behaviour and learning; this is discussed in Chapter 5.

Characteristics of Functional Empathy in Teaching This section considers functional empathy, a phenomenon demonstrated when teachers create a mental model of a group of students, during classroom teaching. Empathy adapts to meet group needs in specific contexts,


89

which is why this is termed ‘functional’ empathy. Teachers display many of the characteristics described in the previous two sections, but the mental and emotional interaction is largely with the class as a whole. The categories in functional empathy cluster into the three areas shown in Figure 4.3.

Group Empathy and Whole Class Relationships Most of these teachers felt that they employed group empathy when interacting with whole classes or smaller groups: ‘If you’re talking to the whole class, you’re empathetic to the class as a whole, aren’t you, or to that group or to an individual, so it’s never thirty individuals’ (Sylvia). Geoff was aware of how his actions and comments evoked common feelings in the classroom and described it as ‘the ability to touch more than one person at once.’ Charlotte had learned to get into the mindset of groups she taught, while David said that group empathy meant children could ‘share collectively their feelings’. It was impossible to empathize with many individuals at once, so the whole group or subsets of the group were the focus of interaction. Secondary teachers felt they particularly employed group empathy when groups had features in common, for example low-attainment or deprivation. Group empathy involved having a rich social, emotional, as well as academic, understanding of a whole group of pupils and was, therefore, easier with more homogenous groups. As teachers became increasingly conscious of making deliberate connections to facilitate learning, empathy became a tool. Teachers utilized common topics that interested many students in a group, such as fashion, music or football, and used shared humour to create a bond with the group. Speaking of a popular topic, football, Will called it ‘the universal lever of football’, and described it as ‘a tool that you can use to your advantage’. Martin said of group empathy: ‘You can use it as a tool’. Sara described her adaptations as ‘techniques’. Group empathy led directly into pedagogical decisions and enabled the teacher to understand emotions and get groups functioning together. Without group empathy: you wouldn’t be able to get things working as groups would you, especially if they’re like, well any groups really – say if they’re differentiated for a particular Maths activity or whatever – then you’re going in at their level, aren’t you. (Sylvia).


90

FUNCTIONAL EMPATHY

1. GROUP EMPATHY AND WHOLE CLASS RELATIONSHIPS

2. ENCOURAGING THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE OTHER IN GROUPS • • • • • •

Figure 4.3

boundary setting, rules, codes control discipline fairness manners empathic structures

3. MENTAL GROUPINGS • • • •

child-type cultural difference teaching groups differently gender

Characteristics of functional empathy

Claire explained how children could react and respond as a group. Terry believed having empathy with a group led to a desire to take action on behalf it, and Will felt that the nature of the group and one’s empathy with the group affected one’s perception of individuals within that group: ‘You might think, I’m not getting on well with this group, and an individual who is quite nice within that group might incur your wrath, whereas in another group you might think she’s a very nice person.’ Encouraging the Perspective of the ‘Other’ in Groups In group situations, teachers also encouraged cooperative frameworks, to promote empathy between children as well as between teacher and children. Teachers helped them by modelling and explaining courtesy and consideration in the group, and by defining boundaries and guidelines to create a secure climate of mutual respect and high expectation. These issues were linked with concepts of classroom management, discipline and control, and also with any empathic structures built into school systems such as school councils or in the curriculum, such as circle time. This section is subdivided into the six categories shown in Figure 4.3.


91

Boundary Setting, Rules and Codes This topic was raised most noticeably by student teachers, although also by others. Establishing empathy with groups seems to require the establishment of group ground rules, or agreement to support considerate behaviour, and involved a recognition that groups behave differently. Student teachers were probably highly aware of the new skill of boundary- setting for groups from their recent training. However, they always envisaged boundaries going hand in hand with good relationships, fairness and approachability. They felt boundaries had to be established with groups early in the relationship, both in terms of behaviour and standards of work. Teachers tended to be stricter initially and the boundary- setting stage was often accompanied by a cooler approach. Once established, clear boundaries enabled a relaxed atmosphere to develop between teacher and students. As individuals became known and relationships were formed, interactions became friendlier. Firm boundaries helped to create trust but this went alongside a willingness to value pupils, take an interest in them, listen to them, treat them equally, and respect their ideas and opinions. The boundaries, in combination with the positive valuing relationships, created a secure atmosphere conducive to learning. Many teachers mentioned rules that were necessary to support moral behaviour and a sense of security in school. Students did not want the teacher to be so easy- going that chaos ruled. Rules embodied values, were particularly vital in secondary school and in large classes, but were also useful in small groups of needy children. However, rules needed to be useful, justifiable and explained. Teachers sometimes felt frustrated by the need to enforce petty rules about uniform or pupil’s movement in school. However, there was a need for basic rules to be explained and enforced, for courtesy and considerate behaviour to prevail. These were not fi xed, but continually explained and adapted for different contexts, and their success was dependent on them being reasonable and on good relationships. Teachers stressed that their explaining rules helped pupils to adhere to them, but it was also important to explain the impact of students’ behaviour on others. Flexibility was important when dealing with minor transgressions. Pupils needed to understand that some rules were more significant than others, but that the breaking of rules invoked consequences. Primary teachers and support teachers expressed the importance of children developing their own codes of discipline for the benefit of group. Rules should not be imposed by the teacher through simple fear of reprisal.

92


By contrast, Terry, the head teacher, preferred not to have rules but to promote values, understanding and awareness, which implicitly suggested forms of behaviour: ‘If we are always aware of others and how our behaviour can affect others then that controls our behaviour, and makes it sensible and considerate.’ Cross- school consistency was also important. However, lower secondary classes tended to have more rules and formality than did senior classes, which were more relaxed and where relationships and expectations were historical. With children with severe discipline problems, teachers had to be sensitive to their problems but also take firm action at some point or run the risk of the whole class’s behaviour sliding. Anti- social behaviour was dealt with swiftly. Teachers needed to be understanding, but expected children to be likewise. They were aware that excluding a student from the classroom could be damaging, both to the student and their relationship with them, and this had to be weighed against the effect on the rest of the group. Interestingly, teachers who worked one-toone mainly referred to rules and codes when they discussed other teachers’ classrooms. Control Like the other aspects of functional empathy, control was mainly discussed in relation to groups. Large groups needed security, which required teachers to manage classroom behaviour and exercise more control. Different techniques are used and teachers respond in different ways to different groups. Within the constraints of the classroom, the empathic teacher tries to respond to the needs of the group as a whole. A class teacher has more concern about losing control with a large group than does a support teacher, and may take fewer risks with both materials and approach. At the start of a lesson, the teacher might address the whole group to focus and maintain attention and build enthusiasm. After a period of students working individually or in small groups, the teachers often address the whole group to sum up or offer praise but also to maintain control and cohesion of the group. Height and distance were linked to control, and different groups and situations required different tactics – some a more authoritarian stance, others more relaxed. Although teachers needed control of the class for safety’s sake, they were aware that students were usually on the receiving end of control. These teachers were concerned to cede more control and to make relationships more equal. Pete felt children should make more of their own decisions in the classroom and he gave his primary children ‘in’ trays and ‘out’ trays. A sensitively designed environment, in which students can access


93

what they need when they need it, can also give them a feeling of ownership and autonomy making them feel more comfortable and relaxed.

Discipline Discipline was a bigger issue for class teachers than for support teachers. Mary explained that the nature of classrooms meant they usually involved more distant relationships and really empathic relationships were rare. Janet explained how empathy produces a fair and reasonable discipline, even for incidents outside the classroom, when there may be different perspectives to weigh up, and considered responses are needed.

Fairness Teachers frequently mentioned the importance of being fair but this was usually an issue when there were numbers of children. The firm but fair approach meant children respected and trusted teachers. Teachers would listen, try to be fair in their judgements and avoid leaping to quick conclusions. Fairness went hand in hand with honesty in relationships, trying to take both individual and group needs into account. This involved making allowances for students with particular problems and treating them differently. Student teachers were beginning to realize that being fair in large classes was difficult. Fairness led to trust, respect and a liking for the teacher, which also led to higher quality education, as students give their best for teachers they like. Fairness meant not prejudging students, giving adequate warnings before punishing them and not penalizing all students for the behaviour of one individual.

Manners Basic courtesy was an outward sign, at least, that students took other people’s views and needs into consideration, and teachers felt that both to model and expect this was particularly important: I always try and treat anybody else the way I would like to be treated and it doesn’t matter if you’re eleven or eighteen or fi fty odd, as some of the people who come to my lessons here are. I think you owe, or I feel anyway, you owe people a basic courtesy. (Tanya)

94


It was important for teachers to model good manners, both with students and other members of staff, and these were linked with caring, kindness and friendliness, and indicated mutual respect. Teachers took time to explain the concept of good manners because they realized some students rarely had good manners modelled to them at home. Conversely, some quiet or special needs students could be overly polite and well behaved, which could restrict interaction and learning in large classes.

Empathic Structures and Systems Teachers felt that some structures such as school councils in which students’ opinions are validated can help to promote empathy and help to soften the hierarchical nature of schools. For younger children, thoughtfully structured days helped them to feel secure and they learn to predict and understand what happens, in what is a potentially more threatening environment than home. Trusting relationships and child-friendly systems can combine to create a happier, more caring environment in classrooms. Several primary teachers mentioned circle time, which supports the expression of personal emotion within a structured method, although, as Anna explained, circle time has probably replaced the time teachers once had to listen to individuals, anyway.

Mental Groupings The teachers frequently categorized both students and adults into different types and groups. This enabled them to express an understanding of this type of student, or group of students, in order to assess them and cater appropriately for needs. However, this categorization, as well as being used positively, could also give negative messages to groups. There are four subdivisions in this category, as shown in Figure 4.3.

Child-type Teachers referred to types of students and the features that they understood to be common to them. Special needs children were most often cited and, in particular, were understood to have low selfesteem, especially in the school context: ‘You’re trying to bolster that [esteem] all the time with the special needs children’ (Charlotte). Teachers tried to


95

respond more personally to these students, identifying their problems and seeking to find solutions and build confidence. They often required more empathy. Teachers sought to appreciate their interests and extracurricular activities, which they often viewed more positively than schoolwork. Teachers took an approachable, persuasive attitude to groups of special needs children, whom they perceived as having some common social, as well as academic needs, which produced good responses. However, if students with poor esteem are always in groups with similar children with negative attitudes towards school, for example within a streaming system, then they never experienced alternative models of behaviour according to Will. Needy students also generated more mental and emotional involvement, which meant teachers often took worries about them home at night. Schools and teachers who overstressed exam results and league tables could give negative messages to such students generally and made it more difficult for empathic teachers to support them. Sara described this problem in her own school as ‘institutional empathy removal’. Teachers also referred to other groups or types of children, such as those from ethnic minorities, high attaining children and quiet children. They also made distinctions between year groups and sexes, understanding and responding to whole groups differently. Keeping in mind the huge range of individual mental, physical, emotional and social development in large groups was very difficult. It was easier to categorize them into smaller groups in order to provide for their needs.

Cultural Difference Teachers also referred to cultural groups and often mentioned them in relation to empathy. Mary felt that it could be more difficult for the teacher to initiate close relationships with students from more traditionally reserved cultures. She felt that lack of empathy between cultures was the main cause of racism and that students should be encouraged to think about their own and other young people’s feelings. Lack of understanding about cultural difference could lead to misinterpretation of events in the classroom. Schools and parents of ethnic minority cultures had contrasting views about education, which could lead to misunderstanding and negative attitudes. Lack of shared language between cultural groups could also reduce empathy.

96


Several teachers referred to the different cultures of social class and how this affected empathy in schools. Several expressed antipathies to elitist middleclass attitudes, which labelled students from more working class backgrounds. Even individual teachers’ classrooms had different cultures to which students adapted.

Teaching Groups Differently As well as cultural differences, there were differences of attainment and social and emotional development that applied to groups, to which teachers responded with forms of differentiation. They used a variety of approaches, changes of pace and different materials for different attainment levels. Although teachers talked about teaching at different levels, they also maintained a mental model of the National Curriculum, whose demands clashed at times with the needs of individual students (see Chapter 6). Teachers believed some subjects and teaching methods helped to support group empathy. Drama and role-play required more teacher empathy, but it also helped students to understand others and help them to gel as a group. Discussions and group work could help students to empathize with each other. Gender Teachers adapted the curriculum and teaching approaches to account for gender factors. Peer pressure, even for high-attaining boys, was very strong and usually not pro- academic. Tanya, for example, deliberately created mixed- sex groupings, which helped the situation. She also adapted the curriculum to suit boys’ interests, made learning more active and practical at an early stage in lessons, and chose more adventurous themes. Some female teachers could find ‘rough diamond’ boys difficult to deal with because they demanded a lot of attention. Experienced teachers targeted these boys in corridors and outof- classroom times to chat with them and establish a relationship as an ‘investment for better behaviour in the classroom’ (Sara). David explained that he found a class of nearly all girls much easier to teach. However, sometimes, pastoral issues were more problematic because of gender, with girls reluctant to talk to male teachers about periods, for example, but, equally, the ‘macho’ role adopted by some boys made discussion about personal or emotional issues more problematic.


97

Teachers used different topics of conversation to form relationships with different sexes.

Conclusions about Functional Empathy This section has considered the phenomenon of ‘functional’ or ‘relative’ empathy, which manifested itself when teachers had to find ways to understand and handle large numbers of students in groups. The teachers believed that an empathic relationship can be established with whole classes or groups within the class and provides cohesion and security and creates common understanding. Various factors supported this, including structures in school, rules and boundary- setting. In order to understand and cater to pupils’ needs in large classes, teachers created mental groupings of pupils and responded to them at a generic level. These include groupings by types of student, attainment levels, social and emotional aspects, social class, ethnic groupings and gender grouping, and helped teachers to plan to meet needs. However, narrowly defined mental preconceptions could reduce empathy for some students. Functional empathy can have both positive and negative effects on teaching and learning, and has implications for the modelling of moral values in the classroom, which will be discussed in Chapter 6 when we consider the constraints on empathic behaviour in schools. Taylor makes the point that in schools, ‘provision for moral and social development is good’ (Taylor, 1997, 5). This would indeed be the case if teachers were able to demonstrate profound empathy, especially to pupils who more desperately need it, because their natural tendency to understand and care for children is clearly evident. However, the nature of the education system and its requirement to use functional empathy counteracts Taylor’s view. We might agree with Fullan (1993) that teachers have a moral purpose, but whether the system allows them to enact this moral purpose for all students is less apparent. Functional empathy enabled groups to ‘gel’ but became a tool of the teacher for dealing with groups. This resembles a lower cognitive form of empathy described by Koseki and Berghammer (1992). It enabled the teacher to make decisions about teaching and learning but could adversely affect a teacher’s perception of a child. If a student the teacher liked was in a group which they did not like, the teachers’ perception could be changed. Here we see the problems of stereotyping and partiality emerging from what is a more limited and less specific form of empathy, which overrides individual difference in order to cope with the

98


numbers teachers face in classes. A teacher using only functional empathy does not cater to the needs of individuals who do not conform to the group stereotype. Two quiet girls in the pilot study, who felt their teacher did not always understand them, could be the type of student who loses out in group empathy. Will pointed out that quiet, polite students who do not interact much find it hard to establish relationships with teachers. Similarly, those with special needs or students with language difficulties may feel quite alienated in lessons targeted at the more average. There was considerable evidence from the pilot, the interviews and the observations to suggest that this was an important issue. This data correlates well with preliminary data discussed earlier, where, alongside empathy, experienced teachers believed classroom management was a very important skill and the young students in the pilot also felt that an understanding teacher managed classrooms and behaviour. Although there is little evidence of a concept of empathy in this functional form in the literature, teacher training has always emphasized classroom management (Kyriacou, 1986) and the literature on moral development includes boundary- setting (Hogan, 1973). Students in larger groups were less secure and needed rules establishing for the group. They needed to be able to predict people and events to some extent to have consistency and clarity. Teachers explained that these features are more effective when combined with highquality positive caring relationships with the teacher. These features are also well articulated in literature on teaching and learning (Kyriacou, 1986; Hargreaves, 1982; Moon and Shelton- Mayes, 1994). However, it is easy in large classes to slip into controlling rather than motivating, a point made well by a teacher in the pilot study (Cooper, 1997). In a fragmented curriculum with fragmented relationships in secondary schools, teachers can over- dominate the class and begin to be more negative than positive, reducing interaction. This shifts the focus to unempathic teachers and the literature on alienating environments, power and control typified by Foucault (1977), Freire (1970), Goffman (1961), Illich (1971) and Hargreaves (1982). More recently, Noguera (2007) compared some schools in the United States with prisons, where the monitoring, surveillance and searching of young people has become a dominant feature of school life. More authoritarian approaches to teaching and a competitive approach in schools, combined with a strong emphasis on curriculum, has been encouraged in the UK and elsewhere since the eighties (Ball, 1990; 2000; Cooper, 2010; Fielding, 2007). In the Reith lectures, Sandel (2009) criticized the intrusion of market values into education and health,


99

advocating more collaborative rather than competitive approaches. An emphasis on excellence and enjoyment (DFES, 2003) and smaller classes for the youngest students under the labour administration gave teachers in the UK hope, if only temporarily, that education policy was becoming more enlightened, but this still sat alongside testing, large classes for older students and a normative curriculum. Even in the first few months of a new government, testing has been extended to 6-year- olds. One reason that teachers struggle to escape traditional teaching methods is because time is such a scare resource in large classrooms. Teachers blame themselves for not getting everything right or for spending too much time with one student over another, but, in truth, there is just not sufficient time to model fairness at all. Here we see conflicting values at work. Fairness and sharing in large groups actually resembles rationing and students have to compete for limited human resources. This competitive atmosphere can involve cutting off your feelings for fellow pupils, rather than recognizing them. This encourages a more cognitive empathy used in competitive situations and is a lower form of empathy according to Koseki and Berghammer (1992). This imbalance in numbers depersonalizes interactions, encourages a more transmissive form of education and shifts the relationships from an interpersonal to the I-it relationship described by Clark (1996), which can destroy community. It is an educational version of the effect capitalism has on human relationships, according to Marx and Engels (1888). When we treat people as numbers as opposed to unique human beings, the emotions become more detached. Therefore, these teachers try, whenever possible, in moments in corridors and exits and entrances to lessons, in breaks and lunchtimes, to recreate the human touch with pupils in order to counteract this detachment which large classes create. Empathy destroys alienation, according to Rogers (1975), and perhaps in these fleeting moments of individual time, teachers are attempting to counter the alienating effects of the school system. Student teachers, new to the classroom, were realizing that being a classroom teacher is different from being warm and caring. In functional empathy, the powerful effects of the hidden curriculum are revealed, and the systems within which teachers teach affect how they think and speak and how their words are interpreted. SCAA (1993) insisted that teachers’ conduct makes them moral agents. Teachers here recognized that all day, every day, they try to model positive behaviour, tolerance, kindness and sharing. Yet, as well as observing the teacher’s positive behaviour towards some students or in groups, pupils also experience the negative, the lack

100


of time and attention and resources and individual attention. Indeed, they may receive no attention at all while others do. Their acceptance of this is assumed from the outset at school, but its familiarity does not make it moral, or fair or honest in its enactment. As McPhail et al. comment: what is said about moral education and what is practiced may have little in common and the practice is everything for children (1978, 1). Functional empathy, which is necessarily used in large classes, may, therefore, create a less moral climate. If the teacher has to focus on the group to manage the class, they will have little time to target individuals. Large classes ensure a compromise in moral modelling, favouring group over personal interaction. If teachers model treating people as groups, perhaps pupils will also learn to think of others as groups rather than as individuals, which may perpetuate stereotyping and labelling. Though these teachers might use mental groupings to try and support pupils, they can also be used to label and denigrate groups, which is a feature of unempathic teachers (see Chapter 6) who tend not to mitigate the negative effects of group empathy with individual positive attention. The overall impression we gain from functional empathy is that teachers cannot model Ormell’s hard values (1993) towards pupils as individuals. The constraints of time and ratio mean they may demonstrate different values, as Straughan (1993) argues. Functional empathy demands more from students than it returns and appears to strengthen rules and structures to support their compliance. Large classes are essentially unfair in terms of teacher/pupil interaction, as teacher time is shared between thirty. This, in effect, creates a mixed message. The teacher tries to model profound empathy, but the system does not allow it. In practice, each individual classroom teacher models lack of time, lack of attention, lack of affirmation for each child. Though students who enjoy positive personal interaction at home may be able to cope within this rationed system, needy individuals cannot. Hence, they vote with their feet or compete for attention in lessons. The lower quality of empathy and the moral model here is concealed and subtle, though its effects are not. They are probably seen in the problems of discipline, absence and exclusions in schools every day of the week, in the lower levels of behaviour and learning of some pupils, perhaps of all pupils, since profound empathy improves learning. The difference between the desire to act morally and the ability to fulfil that desire, within the constraints of the system, is further discussed in Chapter 6, which also considers findings in the data related to unempathic teachers and shallow or feigned empathy.


101

Overall Discussion Chapter Four This extensive chapter has discussed teachers’ perceptions of the complex nature of empathy in teaching and learning and its relationship to the literature. The literature on both empathy and moral development relates closely to these findings about the nature of fundamental and profound empathy. Requirements for initial teacher education, although they do not always refer to empathy explicitly, articulate many of the multiple features of empathy outlined and discussed in this study. These include features such as high expectations, good relationships, positive attitudes, reflective teaching and taking responsibility, respect for pupils and staff and tolerance of difference, and the use of continuous and personalized formative assessment. The literature does not specifically identify functional empathy or distinguish between empathy shown towards individuals and that shown towards groups. However, the lower levels of cognitive empathy described by Koseki and Berghammer (1992) are more typical of a competitive or manipulative situation and seem distinctly related to aspects of context, which is discussed in Chapter 6. This study, therefore, produced some original theoretical development in the study of empathy, especially in relation to teaching and learning, the implications of which are significant for education, especially in terms of the weaker moral model teachers offer in large classes. For students with inadequate moral models at home, schools may never be able to offer any substitute model. In addition, by modelling stereotyping and teaching in a competitive environment, schools seem to be offering a weaker moral model to all students.

Chapter 5

The Benefits of Empathy in Teaching and Learning Relationships

This chapter gives a detailed exposition of what teachers perceived as the effects of empathic relationships on learners. According to the teachers, an empathic approach has immediate effects, but over time, as empathy becomes more profound, these effects multiply. They fall into three main categories as shown in Figure 5.1.

Immediate Effects The immediate effects of teachers displaying attributes such as acceptance, openness, giving attention, listening, positive and affirmative approach, being interested, are outlined below. They are classified into five categories shown in Figure 5.1.

Talk and Communication Empathic teachers were fantastic facilitators of communication. The various features of empathic teaching led to more conversation and better communication. Conversation was frequently mentioned as being central to learning and relationships: ‘Yes, because it’s by talking to people that you learn things about them personally and educationally and then obviously that’s how a relationship develops’ (Mary). Students’ voices are heard more often, they gain greater success and feel more confident, especially with the sole attention of a teacher. Small- group work or specific activities like hearing individual reading, or circle time in primary schools, also encouraged conversation, as did collaborative and project work. For example, Sara found time during group work for boys from broken homes who needed to talk about their problems.

Effects of Empathy 1. TALK AND COMMUNICATION

IMMEDIATE 2. PERSONAL EXCHANGE

4. ON CONTEXT/CLIMATE

DEEPER

3. ESTEEM BUILDING

4. FRIENDSHIP

CONSOLIDATED

5. EMOTIONAL LINKS AND UNDERSTANDING • 2. OTHERS' PERSPECTIVE

• •

1. ON STUDENTS builds greater esteem/self-worth security and trust emulation of empathy

1. SEEING THE HIDDEN

3. ON TEACHING AND LEARNING • • •

optimising learning teaching methodology assessment

3. SIGNIFICANCE OF EMPATHY

2. ON TEACHERS • • •

Figure 5.1 Effects of empathy

learning about learning wider departmental learning personal effects on teachers

104


Often, time had to be found between lessons. Martin explained how one boy, his mother ill with cancer, frequently wanted to chat after lessons. The boy was able to express and share his problems, and this improved his behaviour during lessons. Several experienced teachers explained that ‘corridor talk’ was important and had positive consequences for classroom behaviour. Relaxed casual and personal exchange supported human relationships. Pete found the relaxed, more personal conversations on a school trip very helpful to relationships. Personal and lengthy conversations, when teachers listen as well as talk, creates an atmosphere of warmth and care and gives the student a sense of value. In addition, rapid communication among staff concerned with a student led to early intervention and parental involvement, which could really help with emotional and academic progress.

Personal Exchange Personal exchange was obviously linked to conversation and was considered to be extremely important. Personal knowledge was central to the formation of positive relationships, allowing students to share likes and dislikes and finding amusement and interest in their own eccentricities and differences. Teachers found common popular topics to open up debate. Tanya explained how she encouraged pupils to bring in music for registration period and how they would discuss each other’s preferences. Sara deliberately wore clothes to provoke comment and Will talked at length about the power of football for opening conversations. He used it to break the ice, joke or have a passionate discussion to lighten the classroom atmosphere. Pete also referred to topics such as cartoons, music and the World Cup. Sara describes how she begins this process: It’s very important first of all that you show them some of your personality . . . it sparks off an immediate relationship, and I mean that in the sense that showing them a bit of fun, a sense of humour to start with, is one of the tools and I think that does help to form a relationship. Personal exchange builds over time, and as it expands, trust is built. Personal exchange outside of the classroom was significant. These outof- school relationships are more parental, more familiar, less distant, less tainted by the negative emotional baggage of classrooms. Relaxed relationships between staff supported such exchange, demystifying teachers and

The Benefits of Empathy

105

enabling students to feel more equal and adult. As more personal issues were revealed, both parties were trusted not to abuse that knowledge. By sharing themselves, teachers become more human: ‘So what you’re giving is a little bit more of yourself’ (Sara). For support teachers, personal exchange was significant and more individual and was judged moment-by-moment, creating a continual reciprocal exchange of personal information which linked more directly into the teaching and learning process: It’s just a case of giving her that time and me sitting back and responding just appropriately, to just – if something awful’s happened, then we’ll just go through it at great length or if she’s been I don’t know . . . I just let it flood. Sometimes or other times, she’s not much to say and I’ll tell her something or I’ll take my photographs. (Claire) This is a tenuous and flexing process. There are no rules and the students’ comments must be picked up and worked with whenever they occur: ‘It’s trying to latch on to the little bits they tell you’ (Charlotte).

Self- esteem Building Building selfesteem was both an immediate and a longer-term result of empathy, and empathic managers similarly increased staff esteem. The starting point for building selfesteem was often the personal exchange described above, which begins by valuing the student, and the teacher builds up from there. Empathy plays a crucial part in this: [Empathy] makes the child feel he has something to offer, something that he can do. Very often if you are a support teacher and you are seeing one child it’s because that child has partly problems and can’t perhaps cope as well as they might in the classroom, it can build their selfconfidence. (Mary) Geoff talked about giving non- academic students opportunities to shine in practical lessons, and others spoke about building selfesteem after traumatic events in children’s personal lives. Some students had lower selfesteem than others. Students and teachers with higher selfesteem responded positively and instantly to small amounts of empathy. Just a few words had an instant effect on their body language. Sarah deliberately

106


spoke individually to her higher- attaining students, who usually got minimal personal time, and could see the difference immediately: ‘I’m not kidding you can see – this is amazing [she demonstrates] improved body language, raised shoulders . . . smile’. She also thought individual time had a particularly beneficial effect on low-achieving girls. Listening, attentive teachers made pupils feel worthy when they gave individual time. Time is symbolic of care and concern, and makes the child feel valued and develops their attitudes to others: ‘You’re giving people time because you feel everybody is important and, as such, they then should feel that others are worthy’ (Claire). Sharing a child’s success with others helped to multiply the effect of the success, so teachers informed parents, class teachers, head teachers and peers, all to make their student’s new ‘bigness’ noticeable in the wider world. Self- esteem was particularly important to special needs students, who are often desperately self- critical, a problem aggravated by the normative school system. Empathy counteracts this negativity. Classroom teachers also built selfesteem. They aimed to ‘motivate, build enthusiasm and get rid of that very, very bad, in many cases, low, low selfesteem’ (Martin). They also built group esteem, which helped to set a positive climate in which individual growth and learning could flourish. A positive sense of self was directly related to the pleasure and enjoyment of the subject, and could improve the interaction with others in a nurturing environment. Once his confidence increased, this boy enjoyed small group work: If it’s something he’s not very keen on, you can see him close in [shoulders/head down] but if the others are in the small group because I work with him by himself and in the group he bounces in and its ‘Shall I get that out? Shall I do this?’ and he just wants to participate, which is great, really. (Anna) Self- confidence was linked repeatedly to learning, good behaviour, cooperation and a positive school experience: ‘On a sort of crude level, it’s an investment for good behaviour, a nice working environment. You can get on with your teaching because you’re answering certain needs and you’re eliminating certain confrontations’ (Sara).

Friendship Friendship was a product of an empathic relationship: ‘You’re giving them, at a small level, friendship’ (Sara). Friendship was associated with loyalty,


107

trust and truthfulness and was demonstrated by body language, voice tone and facial expressions. It involved the personal exchange described above and various kinds of rapport described below in ‘emotional links’. Both the relationship with the teacher and the climate of the classroom must be friendly and cooperative, and was linked to caring, politeness and helpfulness, creating a positive shared experience of learning, ‘so I suppose it becomes a more friendly basis of our experience within the classroom together’ (Will). However, this friendship must be reciprocal and cannot be open to abuse. Teachers expect respectful behaviour. When the relationship is friendly, students put more effort into their work. They want to work hard for both for themselves and the teacher: ‘They’ve done really well and they can take some pride in themselves, but I think they like doing it for you’ (Will).

Emotional Links and Understanding These teachers searched for and made emotional connections with both groups of students and individuals, whether through topics like fashion, football and music, or through shared understanding about a personal matter or the curriculum area. These contacts created an emotional link between teacher and pupil, which allowed a shared understanding and response. Janet explained her reaction to a child struggling with his schoolwork: ‘It’s just knowing that I felt for him’. Similarly, Martin spoke about a child whose mother was terminally ill: ‘Yes, yes, I do feel – if you thought about it hard enough you’d just sit down and weep, perhaps not quite that, but I’m that sort of person.’ They were sensitive to children’s pleasures, pains and frustrations, and this helped them to respond appropriately and support personal and academic learning, and allowances were made for upsetting circumstances. Tanya was very understanding about frustration in design work, and recognizing the feelings of the child allowed her to support them. However, although it was important make emotional links, emotions should not take control of the teacher. Teachers have to think ahead to strategies to support that person which involves mental juggling: All sorts of emotions – all sorts of things . . . but then you have to have some sort of professional attitude that ‘OK yes I empathize’ but you’ve all sorts of things buzzing round your mind at the time. ‘I am here to do a job and while I’m listening to you tell me all the terrible details and all

108


these horrible things, at the same time I am thinking of strategies that will help me, help you, to move on. (David) Support teachers developed close emotional links: ‘What happens between us? . . . It’s like a bonding almost isn’t it. I suppose it’s like a bit of a bonding situation goes on where they can entrust you with their innermost feelings and thoughts sometimes’ (Claire). As they established closer connections, these teachers increasingly shared emotions and experiences with students, laughing when they laughed, recognizing and sharing their sadness, but then trying to turn problems into something more positive: So you’re having similar emotions aren’t you – oh yes – your joy is their joy . . . Just to understand themselves, understand if they’re having problems with something that it’s ok because we all have problems, but this is how we go on and make them not problems any more (Claire) Many expressions were used to explain the commonality of emotional and mental understanding when close links were formed such as: ‘to tune into’ ‘on the same wavelength as’ ‘put yourself in their shoes’ ‘from their perspective’ ‘feel for him’ ‘children who you click with’. Being this way supported learning because teachers were able to: ‘hit the right chords.’ The emotional link was reciprocal and students mirrored teachers’ emotions and moods. If the teacher is relaxed, positive and confident the students mirror this and in such an atmosphere teaching and communication are more effective. They model positive emotions and their moods transfer to their charges: ‘you know they can sense your moods incredibly well. It makes a big difference as to how the teaching goes’ (Martin). Consequently, teachers masked negative moods and although they showed disappointment or annoyance on occasions in order to set boundaries, they knew this did not motivate learning. They wanted to promote and transfer positive emotions: ‘I think I feel very positive – so whether that’s positive mentally and I would like to think that’s transferred across’ (Anna). Emotional bonding benefited teachers as well as children: ‘Well, I get a superb of sense of joy out of it’ (Anna); ‘My enthusiasm delights in the kids’ (Peter). Emotional links enabled people to feel understood. The head teacher saw this as vital to parents, teachers and children: ‘I’d like to think that the only cues of empathy that are given away, are interpreted by a child, are interpreted by an adult, (as) . . . these people inside the school understand, by what was said, by the way they responded’ (Terry). Such


109

understanding and emotional closeness were repeatedly linked to trust, lack of fear, predictability and open communication. Teacher empathy resembled familial attachment rather than the traditional teacher/pupil relationship and was more instinctive. Several teachers described themselves as being a person rather than the teacher. Janet responded immediately and physically to a child with low selfesteem to reassure him: ‘When he was crying about [a reading scheme], I remember holding his hand – which is an instinctive response with me. But I understood how he felt, because I’ve felt like that even as an adult.’ Emotional states are both underlying and momentary, grouped and individual, and these teachers adapted to their pupils’ emotional states moment by moment during the day as well as to the long- term emotional make-up of individuals. This involved checking with them frequently, watching faces and body language in case they were struggling or bored, and intervening where necessary. This emotional assessment and response was central to effective teaching and to understanding worries which originated beyond the classroom but which impinged on learning. Frances discovered a child who was being terribly bullied in his home environment. She recognized the feelings he was going through: ‘he must feel very alien in this classroom,’ and this helped her to solve the problem. Student teachers became emotionally involved and could take children’s comments and behaviour personally, but gradually learned to accept that it is often pupils’ own personal problems or contextual issues which caused their frustrations. However, the more emotional needs there are, the more they can impinge on a teacher’s home life. Teachers noticed consequences of emotional responsiveness in other teachers, too, and knew how exhausting emotional attachment and concern is, especially if it invades a teacher’s sleep.

Deeper Outcomes The deeper outcomes emerge as empathic relationships develop and teachers are able to demonstrate features of profound empathy. Through their continuous actions, they develop a strong sense of responsibility for students, engendered by a sense of personal warmth, liking, feeling and respect. They develop an even greater understanding of each other and teachers appreciate the significance of these highquality relationships. The deeper outcomes were categorized under the three headings shown in Figure 5.1.

110


Seeing the Hidden Getting close to students emotionally gave teachers a deeper insight into their inner lives, and allowed them to notice subtle body language and facial expressions and ‘missing’ elements in their conversation. It gave them an ability to perceive beyond surface appearances to the hidden aspects of children’s lives and feelings, which affect their attitudes to learning in school. Support teachers had more time and opportunity to notice and respond to these signs, and appearances could be deceptive. They responded to visible and audible signs, which denoted aspects of the child’s home, school or emotional life. This information enhanced their understanding, their approach and their teaching: You can tell by the way a child is dressed, . . . that they might need a little bit more help than someone else, the vocabulary, the accent, and I’m not patronising at all, but I want to get the best out of them. (Geoff) Teachers were also aware of how others might feel inside despite defences: if someone’s disabled, if someone’s extremely obese, if someone’s of a different colour, all of these things require empathy and they all need you to have to be sensitive to people’s inner feelings and their outer looks – really important. (Geoff) Empathic teachers could help students release hidden worries and anxieties: ‘If something’s very painful and coming out, then it needs to be coaxed slowly and gently in a relaxed situation’ (Claire). Once painful feelings emerge, then the problems can begin to be solved. Some students had greater defences, but teachers saw through them to the more vulnerable person beneath. Empathic peers could do the same. Anna’s 12-year- old daughter already understood such things; talking about a disruptive fellow pupil, she said: ‘He’s always messing about and clowning but it’s only because he can’t do the work, so he just messes about so nobody knows how poor his work is’ (Anna). Gathering additional information could help teachers understand students more deeply and create even greater empathy, such as looking at files, conversing with colleagues, parents, friends, educational welfare officers, psychologists. Terry, the head teacher, was only too aware of the need to understand the ‘hidden’ in the learning process:


111

I think it’s important to be empathic, not so much to understand what these children are learning inside the classroom, but trying to understand why some of these children respond and react in some of the ways they do, and see it in the light of some of the experiences that they have that we don’t see . . . because things happen behind some of these lace curtains, in these lovely houses, that we don’t know about. (Terry)

Others Perspective A key outcome of increasing empathy is a truer perspective of other people. These teachers thought themselves into their pupils’ shoes. This was revealed by their use of the fi rst person when talking about their pupils’ thoughts or by the detailed understanding they revealed of individuals, which had emerged through close interaction. Typically, they talked about their pupils’ feelings, about selfesteem in relation to academic work or peers: ‘You know, for a lot of them, it’s, “I can’t do it”, and they’re switched off and don’t value themselves very much’ (Charlotte). There’re students who just don’t want to be there . . . and there’s an example, split family on school-meals hasn’t even got the one pound fifty for the trip. Has got to own up to not having the one pound fifty for the trip, what a harsh environment to start with! Fifty thousand comments in his diary, scuddy uniform, you know, how long has he had that shirt on? (Sara) This teacher sharply contrasted this understanding with what seemed to her almost irrelevant attempts to engage these boys in the National Curriculum. She felt that one of her many tasks was to understand that students came to lessons with a quite different perspective than hers. Some students could interpret empathy as weakness (Geoff) or as the precursor to cruelty or ridicule perhaps, if they have previously experienced feigned empathy (see Chapter 6). Getting to know past life experiences and envisaging future experience and emotion formed a part of understanding the child’s perspective and often led the teacher to share the same feelings. These teachers were also aware of other adults’ perspectives and that their own actions could be interpreted quite differently by different staff, for example.

112


Significance of Empathy Closer interactions with pupils led teachers to understand the significance of empathy in their work. Profound empathy means understanding the constraints on relationships in different contexts, with different individuals and it rejects blanket philosophies. It involves understanding one’s own limitations and the limitations of the system in which one is working and living, both for oneself and others, and being immersed in an interrelational world. For these teachers, empathy is essential to creating positive relationships in teaching and learning: It’s about being thought about, being cared for – I don’t know whether that’s too strong, I mean I think it’s a basic human factor that we should all be aware of and it’s very much a two way thing. If you show that you actually are concerned about that child then the majority of them are going to show some sort of concern and respect for you really. Where as if you treat them as a blob that’s just sat there and you are trying to pump information at them, I don’t think you can have anywhere near as much success. (Anna) They realized the centrality of empathy to good relationships and learning: ‘[You] have to have empathy for it to be productive relationship’ (Sylvia); ‘It’s a big, big thing (Geoff); ‘essential to effective teaching’; ‘vitally important’ (Charlotte); ‘the most important thing in life’ (Claire). Empathy grows over time: ‘Empathy between two people becomes more sensitive and finely tuned the more they know each other and the more they understand each other’ (Geoff). Sylvia believes people would not be admitted to a teacher-training course without empathy and that this would be assessed at interview. These teachers were aware that people have rich emotional and cognitive inner worlds, which require a sensitive response. Empathy produced a vital awareness of the fragility of students: ‘I’m thinking, largely with young people, that you’re working with, to acknowledge or to have an awareness that they’re vulnerable and they’re a bit fragile sometimes and that they need their confidence building’ (Sara). The external focus of empathy prevents self- absorption and makes teachers open and flexible, less inclined to form stereotypes, and was particularly significant for raising selfesteem. Deeper understanding led to individual requirements being catered to. Empathy allowed teachers to assess and motivate, to build enthusiasm, reflect students’ attitudes and characteristics and influence and develop them, evoking similar responses.


113

Consolidated Effects of Empathy High levels of empathy over time had positive and wide-ranging effects on both students and teachers, on teaching and learning, and on the climate and context of learning. The changes incurred are part of a dynamic, evolutionary process and form the constraints and contexts for future interactions. These categories build on the immediate and deeper outcomes above and occur when various positive factors occur in conjunction with each other over time and with frequency, that is, when the constraints are minimal or overcome and the teachers and pupils have more opportunity to interact according to need. These consolidated effects have been grouped under four headings, shown in Figure 5.1, which roughly parallel the following chapter on constraints.

On Students This category has three subdivisions, shown in Figure 5.1.

Builds Greater Self-Esteem /Self-Worth Though the immediate effects of concentrated empathic support was powerful on students, ‘and at the end of that time she was all smiles’ (Anna), in the case of special needs pupils, building up very low selfesteem took much longer. Anna described how she had to work gradually to dissipate anxiety and understand students’ learning needs and emotions. As the teacher becomes familiar with students, by valuing their opinions, they feel increasingly understood, less alien and their selfesteem grows, along with interest and enthusiasm. The students realize that the teacher is trying to understand them, but other experience at home or elsewhere in school may continually reduce the budding selfesteem. The teacher minimizes occasions where selfesteem can be damaged and senses if tasks are too difficult and gives extra support or changes the activity. As a teacher knows a student more deeply, even the most disaffected individuals can be motivated to succeed. Those teachers who could identify a skill or interest of a disinterested student and value it, for example fishing, could transform selfesteem and behaviour. In classrooms, this also has a beneficial effect on others, whose learning was then less disrupted and who also regarded the disruptive student more positively. In small groups or one-toone work where empathy can be maximized, the effects are visible and spread out beyond the immediate relationship. The children become

114


more confident, animated, and outgoing. They become bigger, physically, emotionally and mentally, which shows in their posture, manner and voice. This then supports other relationships and the positive interaction and sense of self that students gain makes them happier.

Security and Trust The teacher’s continual attempts, over time, to understand the children, to meet their needs, to encourage and reassure them, results in the students trusting the teacher and feeling secure and confident. The teacher’s encouragement and understanding dissipates anxiety and fear of failure. Students are more likely to try new or more difficult tasks when they are not being criticized by the teacher or compared with others. Relationships build security and trust builds confidence and selfesteem. Security comes from knowing boundaries, but also through positive relationships and use of humour. Trust comes from security, and vice versa, when students know what to expect and that they will be accepted and consistently valued by their teacher. Teachers who take a personal interest and help to solve personal problems for students make them feel special, more secure and able to learn. Pupils want to feel safe academically (i.e. the teacher is competent), personally (clear boundaries for behaviour), and in terms of confidence and self-worth. This includes being able to understand and laugh at themselves, accept they are not perfect and that they still have more to learn. The teacher sets the example in this respect. In classes, both the group and individuals must feel safe, which is why the teacher must try to build individual as well as group relationships. Students and groups can feel all right about themselves if they like the teacher and the teacher likes them. Teachers have to manage the behaviour of disaffected students so that everyone in the class feels secure enough to learn. Explaining this helps students’ understanding and helps them to be supportive in return. Feeling secure, feeling all right about oneself, just feeling valued in the lesson supports learning. Security was linked to happiness, enjoyment, growth and friendship. Opening up departments at lunchtimes can provide a haven of security for those who find the corridors and playing field threatening.

Emulation of Empathy Given the findings on moral modelling in Chapter 4, the teacher attributes demonstrated in these findings are likely to be emulated by many pupils


115

since these teachers are trying to understand and empathize with all pupils. If empathy links closely with morality, then pupils will emulate moral behaviour, too. Peter felt privileged to see a job- share situation with two very different teachers invoking two quite different responses from pupils: This teacher is very relaxed and very calm and I think this difference between the teachers is reflected in the classroom atmosphere, the children are very relaxed in here, and the [other] teacher is very nice but very uptight and quite nervous, and the kids are quite on edge the first half of the week. So their teacher attitude and almost their personality is reflected very strongly in the kids. (Pete) Over time, even pupils with multiple problems can respond well to positive interaction with empathic teachers and emulate their behaviour. When students in groups and classes model these attributes, they also demonstrate them towards other pupils and, thus, create a more holistic empathic climate, so further encouraging positive interaction, learning and personal development: [B]ut I do say, ‘Don’t you think they did really well on that?’ [very enthusiastic] and a child who has maybe thumped somebody in the playground would say, ‘Ahh, yes, that’s good in it, really,’ and I think it’s lovely to see this other child actually passing some positive comments on the others. (Anna) Terry argued that with very good preconditions created by parents, it is possible to achieve a very positive, supportive climate. This had a powerful, positive effect on a child who had been deemed violent and disruptive in another school, but who had changed behaviour in the new school. In other words, empathy towards all pupils from all teachers can beget empathy from pupils and between pupils, especially if the majority of pupils already come with positive behaviour models from home. This can create a very accepting and nurturing climate, which can have positive outcomes for needy individuals both inside and outside school.

On Teachers This section was classified into three categories, shown in Figure 5.1.

116


Learning about Learning The empathic teacher is a natural learner and is, consequently, knowledgeable about learning. Learning is an immersion for teacher and student, which is why relationships are all bound up in the process. The empathic teachers make themselves vulnerable and open to students to learn about them, but through that encourage the child to learn and take the initiative. Because we’re learning all the time really. Sometimes a child throws light onto something and you think – mmm, I never realized that – or they make a particular mistake, which lets you see how they’re looking at something. You develop your teaching skills, really. (Mary) Empathic relationships give the teacher constant verbal and non-verbal feedback, which makes them adapt what and how they teach: You’ve got to know that child and I can tell sometimes by an expression on the face or a look of they’re thinking, ‘Oh gosh, are we doing . . . ?’ – knowing that child helps you plan and helps you carry a lesson through. I think that without that you’d be completely baffled. (Frances) Empathic teachers tend to take memories of lessons and interactions home and mull them over to improve for the next encounter. They learn more about themselves and their own attitudes in the process, which helps to support students more effectively. They develop deeper understanding of cultural, moral and gender issues. They begin with a rough idea of the student’s perspective (drawn from all their experiences), and then gradually build up a deeper understanding, monitoring and asking for pupils’ responses and adapting accordingly. A teacher gradually ‘unravels’ their understanding of the child: ‘because you’re finding out all the time – you know – different factors that are affecting that child – sort of more unravels about their history or their background’ (Charlotte). Empathic teaching is a continually developing skill, which produces reflective teaching, ‘so you’re trying to analyze yourself as well’ (Charlotte).This learning process for the teacher is increased automatically in one-toone situations, which allow very intensive interaction between teacher and student. Deep understanding of students in school also enlightens teachers’ interactions and relationships with other people. Empathic teachers knew their whole life experience of relationships informed their teaching


117

relationships, and vice versa, and they had to keep on learning. Martin saw himself as a perpetual learner who wanted to share his learning with others. Empathic student teachers continually reflected on their teaching, but because they are trainees, just as they become familiar with their pupils, the practice finishes. They make mistakes on teaching practice, feel very guilty and have to learn from them. This leads them to reflect carefully on all aspects of their teaching. They realized they learned extensively by trying to understand things from students’ perspectives: ‘You can learn so much from children – I’ve learned so much [emphasized ] – to begin to understand how children think and the way they think and how they progress’ (David).

Department/Wider Learning Empathic teachers also learn about and from other teachers, which supports their understanding of students. Support teachers help classroom teachers to learn about students, so they are supported most effectively. In team-teaching situations, empathic teachers can support colleagues learning and involve other agencies and parents. Empathic climates in departments help teachers to learn from each other, which is especially helpful for new teachers or student teachers. Open teachers learn more easily from each other and continually change and improve their practice. Colleagues can share different perspectives on students’ needs, which they can combine for the students’ benefit. Empathy in teaching grows from natural awareness and through experience and effort and by seeing other teachers modelling it and making the issues significant. Sara felt this can be accomplished through the relationships and guidance in a positive departmental environment: ‘I think it probably [plays] a key part – you seeing someone else having time and energy for young people in a variety of ways – but again – it’s this, almost pointing it out, isn’t it’ (Sara). David felt that the entire education system must adopt a more empathic approach if it is to progress.

Personal Effects on Teacher Merely the appearance of a student can provoke an emotional reaction of caring in the teacher and desire to help them. Students with special needs prompt this emotion even more strongly. The teacher feels great responsibility for them and feels better for understanding and meeting their needs,

118


despite any difficulty. Special needs teachers get wrapped up in individuals and become anxious if they make slow progress. Teachers experience great emotion on behalf of their pupils. Anna’s angry reaction to a class teacher who accused a student of carelessness was murderous but made her determined to effect change: Well, I could have got the bloke by the throat and strangled him, because this boy’s never careless. This boy puts a 110 per cent in. So I’m trying to collar this chap now to say . . . we’re going to have to get together about this, because one comment like that to a child who has given his all, is going to wipe away all that good work. Experienced teachers, although generally supportive of colleagues, felt obliged to explain when the student was not at fault, which could lead to conflict. Student teachers felt similarly, but felt less able to voice their opinions as novices on teaching practice. Empathy can be helpful for the teacher. Rather than dwelling on internal feelings or personal, physical or domestic issues, they focus on others: ‘It can be quite therapeutic in so much as you forget about yourself and physically it’s really good not to think about yourself, [but] to think about others’ (Claire). Sometimes, involvement with children could really lift a teacher’s mood and helped them to forget other problems. Teachers found successful relationships with both individuals and groups very pleasurable. Sara felt she deliberately developed empathy in her teaching because it gave her pleasure and understanding. Intensive support work can be very rewarding, because teachers see obvious results. However this sharing of emotion can be draining and tiring, especially in large classrooms. It is ‘very, very exhausting’ (Frances), and physically demanding. It is much easier to ignore people’s problems than take time to solve them, and when class teachers simply deliver whole class instruction, they are less involved with individuals. Teachers can feel good about being trusted with personal information and enjoy helping pupils with personal issues but feel simultaneously weighed down by the emotional expenditure. This can be especially difficult if teachers feel powerless, for example, because of a student’s tragic home circumstances. Even minor issues plagued teachers at night because they want to get it right for the child’s sake. Needy students prompt this even more: ‘You just can’t be detached from them’ (Pete). Their sense of responsibility means teachers to take their role very seriously, adopting a closer role, more like a concerned parent. Even highly


119

successful head teachers: ‘sometimes still lie awake’ thinking through interactions with people (Terry). This was even more usual when working in more demanding schools because ‘there were more things to consider’ (Terry). Large classes of needy pupils where teachers make a great effort to be positive but where needs are too great and resources insufficient are very demanding because of the intensity of the interaction and effort. Here, teachers may resort to being less empathic to survive.

On Teaching and Learning Empathic teachers have powerful effects on teaching and learning; this applies to learning in both academic and interpersonal spheres and these are highly interrelated. Empathic teachers try to optimize learning by adapting their teaching methodology to different groups and individuals. This is accomplished through continuous formative assessment. This data fell into the three categories, shown in Figure 5.1.

Optimizing Learning Emotional links and understanding are central to successful teaching and learning. Getting inside the child’s thinking enabled much better assessment and scaffolding, and enabled a teacher to judge the amount of effort and emotional capital invested in work, which might be at variance with the academic outcome. This enabled them to value a student’s effort even if their achievements in relation to others were not so high. Through individual contact, through dialogue and close observation in a secure and trusting climate, both teacher and student understand the learning process more specifically, which helps teachers support individuals more appropriately. Even in large classes, empathic teachers try and interact with and understand each child. This individual understanding is used directly in teaching and allows the teacher to accurately assess the child’s understanding, interests and concentration span, so the work level and motivation can be pitched exactly right. This can work with groups and with individuals, and only by knowing the child well can the teacher assess whether the work is high quality or not for each individual, and then expect appropriate development. Empathic teachers, even in large classrooms, can value students’ existing knowledge and build on it through relationships and dialogue rather than just trying to teach content. They recognize students’ understanding, effort

120


and personal interests, which leads to better and more appropriate planning. The whole child must be understood to make effective progression in school: ‘You’ve got to really know a child to get it right’ (Charlotte). Empathy understands the child’s point of view, working from their known to the unknown, from the concrete to the abstract, and helps teachers to realize that everyone has different understandings, so they explain in different ways. Empathy involves using different language, responding to body-language, breaking explanations into single syllables, if necessary, pitching at different levels and then building from there to provide a suitable level of challenge. Empathy allows a teacher to adapt the learning content to the child’s interests, which improves motivation, which, in turn, produces a higher standard of work and success, which encourages more motivation, a virtuous circle. This is especially evident in one-toone relationships where student’s real feelings are more likely to be voiced, rather than in the inhibiting atmosphere of large groups. The personal tutor has more flexibility to adapt the activity and materials to the individual and has time to value their student’s opinions. If a student’s attitude to a task has changed, they can respond rapidly. Teachers are able to drastically raise levels of achievement and encourage struggling students to feel better privately and publicly about themselves. Spending individual time with a student can reveal a different, more likeable nature which can be built on, and the student appreciates the attention. Knowing them well leads to appreciating their effort, and responding to this to further motivate them. This enables teachers to have realistic but increasingly high expectations. A one-toone relationship is less threatening and extra support encourages the child, who succeeds more, motivating them to try harder and experiment more. Students are happier and more secure. One-toone or small- group work is much more interactive, equal and human. There is much more joint construction of knowledge rather than the classroom transmission model, and this supports and motivates learning. More time in one-toone situations allows the teacher to meet needs more effectively, be more flexible, spontaneous and versatile, so the child progresses most effectively. The student opens up and speaks more, has more success. The teacher can identify and resolve learning issues more effectively. Teachers dig into the child’s past to identify the missing pieces of the learning jigsaw and any emotional barriers. More understanding of the child’s emotions leads to a better ability to mask negative and promote positive emotions. These teachers realize that some students have extreme emotions in relation to their learning: ‘How can I find out about what they don’t know


121

when they’re petrified about letting anybody know anything about them and usually they are because they’re the ones who are failing?’ (Anna). Empathy recognizes feelings of failure and alienation that can be generated in school and tries to compensate for that by building trust, security and enthusiasm. Empathy both drives the teacher and enables them ‘to get the best out of the child’ (Charlotte). Close interaction allows students to experience the best of the teacher and appreciate their qualities; it is mutually uplifting. Such good relationships and thoughtful treatment can turn disruptive students into exceptionally keen learners. Support teachers saw students behaving very badly in class but then become transformed when working in smaller groups. Success could later allow them to return more confidently to the class, which could then improve the relationship with the class teacher. Commitment and involvement by the teacher has a mirror effect on the children; they will give the best to someone who models the same. The teacher’s pleasure in their achievement and success and growing selfconfidence also has a mirror effect. Students respect and value the teacher if the teacher respects and values them. Crucially, if students and teacher like each other, learning is optimized. This encourages mutual response, engagement and shared enthusiasm leading to learning. Even a little one-toone time in secondary school can improve selfesteem and learning. Pastoral problems require trusting relationships with tutors who address problems to support learning: ‘An unhappy kid is a kid that won’t learn’ (Martin). Problems disturb concentration and learning: ‘I tried to understand the anxieties that that little lass was feeling, if she’s constantly worried you’re preventing her learning’ (Martin). With empathic teachers, students feel confident, valued and competent, and problems are minimized or solvable. These teachers recognize what

Profound Empathy

Feeling valued & supported

Engaged & Self-esteem raised

Opening up

Figure 5.2 How empathy supports values, engagement and achievement

Learning/ achievement & able to value others

122


students can do and try not to compare them with others, building on their current attainment and creating success. Empathy improves classroom teaching and functional empathy partly compensates for the constraints like time, ratio and curriculum (see Chapter 6). It creates good relationships which ‘makes for much better teaching’ (Sara). Reflective teaching allows teachers to improve learning and relationships creating a drive to find solutions and do their best for students, whatever their attainment level. Empathic teachers are approachable and trustworthy, which allows students to ask questions without fear of failure or ridicule. Teachers’ enthusiasm and energy for what they do is infectious and triggers a mirrored response in students. A positive relationship between teacher and child can promote the love of a subject: ‘I adored her. I wanted to be like her [] and I have a love of poetry because of her’ (Claire). Empathy makes teaching easier, more pleasant and effective. Teachers and students communicate better, are more relaxed and are better learners, making teaching and learning much more straightforward. Empathy answers needs and eliminates confrontations. Empathy with parents and colleagues supports learning. Empathizing with students enabled them to emulate empathy and using varied techniques like role-play helped them to see very different perspectives, which could also have wider consequences. Empathy made teachers sensitive to what happens at lunchtimes, playtimes and outside of school, which leads them to thoughtful assessment of behaviour, fair discipline and ensures any demands on students are reasonable. All empathic understanding is interrelated; it is not just understanding school or home or peer relationships, teachers linked them together throughout their interviews. Empathic teachers realize that the whole package in education is more important than the individual parts, and that both students and staff are complex, sensitive beings, not assembly line parts. The emotional involvement of consolidated empathy creates great concern for the best development of students in every respect, which ensures opportunity for moral learning is embedded in all lessons.

Teaching Methodology Empathy affects the way that teachers behave. Speaking of her pupils, Sylvia said:


123

but it’s the whole part of – how you smile at them when they come in the morning right through to how you say goodbye to them a night – or whatever – how you respond if you see them in the supermarket. These teachers adapt to different classes, to different numbers, to individual students and they try and make the best of any situation. They use more formal methods when necessary to create a secure environment. They employ ‘massively adaptive behaviour’ and they make mistakes but their adaptive behaviour tends to continually search for new solutions and improvements. They watch students’ responses carefully and adapt accordingly and have lesson plans, which they evaluate and adapt to the personality and confidence of each child or group. They try to minimize negative comments and to raise selfesteem notch by notch. Decisions are made constantly as feedback from the student influences the teacher’s responses and time is spent on the most needed topics. Empathic teachers recognize that students at both ends of the attainment spectrum have individual needs. They use all the senses and a multimedia approach to support learning. They understand individuals learn in different ways and use voice, visual, kinaesthetic and spatial approaches. Continuous formative assessment informs their teaching. Eye contact is especially important for assessing understanding, and the ability to make eye contact improves over time. Physical contact also helped at times to engage students and draw them in. Appropriate controlled emotions help to set boundaries, and after reprimands, teachers switch rapidly to positive encouragement and support. Empathy leads to more adventurous and creative as well as more appropriate teaching because the security of the strong relationship enables teachers to be open and take risks. Profound empathy allows more understanding of emotional response to activities and subjects and therefore better, more adaptive tutoring. Teachers can be more versatile, spontaneous and inventive, trying more interesting activities such as drama, role-play and practical work. As relationships develop with students, language changes, learning changes and the teacher scaffolds them appropriately as they mature. The outcomes of one lesson influence the subsequent lesson. These teachers showed responsive, contingent teaching beginning with a suitable idea and adapting it by considering the students’ perspective and responses. Empathy affects what you ‘throw out or put in’ to a lesson (Sara).

124


These teachers were in favour of early intervention with learning difficulties and were sometimes shocked that problems had not been addressed earlier. Though aware of addressing all students’ needs, they tended to support those with the most need more frequently or first. This could feel subversive but addressing these needs first eliminated other group management issues and improved the classroom climate. Empathic teachers try to work in positive, enjoyable ways relying on human relationships and an element of fun. They adapt to the interests of individuals, gender and age groups. They recognize particular difficulties in practical skills and support them and link language, practical work and motivation understanding how one influences another. They adapt their persona, mannerisms and language to individuals while keeping a weather eye on the group and can demonstrate a different persona when required. Empathic teachers know their own strengths and weaknesses, enabling them to use them to best effect in teaching and planning. They value practical as well as academic skills and use the appropriate language and voice tone to build up selfesteem or trust or to engage a disaffected child. They are emotional but control their emotional reactions for the good of students. For classroom teachers, empathy involves a greater element of performance and humour, using both audio-visual techniques, whether with equipment or with body language and movement. They use all their resources to explain things well to students in a variety of ways and use group work to assess abilities. Knowing students well allows the teacher to create better groupings. They move around the class deliberately, asking questions and probing individual understanding while simultaneously responding to testing and setting of boundaries. Teachers try every strategy they can to win difficult students over and to understand what does and doesn’t motivate them, both in terms of restrictions and encouragement. Making sure they value students and their work was a key strategy. Teachers generated enthusiasm through using different techniques or by surprising students. In mixed attainment groups, teachers explained some aspects of their classroom management openly so that what might seem difficult initially (i.e. coping with a very disaffected student) might have longer terms benefits for everybody. Teachers adapted work and interaction very specifically for students with special needs so that they could gain success and selfesteem, learn social- skills, behave more maturely within the group and feel less alienated. Much of what teachers did empathically was a combination of intuitive reactions fed by reflection and experience which built up over time. For


125

student teachers, making appropriate decisions was more difficult, especially in such short time scales and with the wide range of attainment in classes. Assessment One of the strongest features of empathy is that it supports detailed and accurate assessment and supports ongoing formative assessment in the moment-by-moment interactions in the classroom, as students and teachers work together. Learning becomes a shared interactive process between teacher and child. Formative assessment has a moral purpose because its aim is to improve and understand not to judge. All difficulties in learning are seen as soluble problems: ‘[Work] they’ve got wrong – I go back to the child with that and we talk about it – and we go through it – I don’t just leave it and then cross it out again next time’ (Frances). These teachers could assess students rigorously in an academic way but realized this ignored the human factors involved in their progress, which could be significant, an absent parent, for example. Empathic teachers assess the whole child in a wider, more useful way than does testing alone. They consider what motivates the child, what effort they have put into their work, and what pleasures and anxieties school or specific subjects create. Empathy helps to understand the real achievements and the real problems students face. It assesses understanding more fully so teaching can be pitched at precisely the right level. Empathic teachers have a long-term view of a student’s achievement. They understand young people as developing individuals with potential, rather than as fi xed entities. They perceive changes occurring and adapt to them to provide continual challenge and appropriate support. They take the time and trouble to find out the special differences between students and recognize the damaging effect if they do not. Empathy can create conflict for the teacher who is supposed to be objective in assessment, because they know activities are much easier for some than others. Confronted with many students of varying abilities in large classes, empathic teachers recognize that comparison can be very demotivating. They prefer to make assessment more ipsative in nature, assessing students in relation to their own development. However, school and national systems militate against this. Empathy helps teachers to see behind defensive behaviours and understand real feelings and motivations and they draw on all their experience to understand individuals. The teacher’s ability to move in and out of the child’s subjective feelings and then return to their own perspective helps

126


them to assess and solve problems, rather than just getting lost in them. These teachers also appreciate the value of specialist support, for example SEN teachers or psychologists, and how they can inform the teacher’s assessment. Empathic teachers make continual very rapid, audio-visual assessments of both emotional and academic responses. Students’ clothes, body language, voice tone and accent can reveal a lot about a student and what the teacher needs to do to start to help them. It can be a delicate operation if students have low selfesteem, and teachers watch for growing signs of selfesteem on which to build. Sensitive questioning and answering ensures teachers assess but avoid belittling students in front of their peers. This gives students the courage to ask questions and to grow. Empathic teachers see the marking process as important and another way of valuing the child and cementing relationships, while optimizing learning. Good marking is individualized and thorough and values the good, as well as suggesting constructive improvements and takes time. Empathic teachers know the value of sharing their positive assessments with other staff and parents. On Climate/Context Many of the facets of profound empathy described in this section involve the idea of creating a relaxed and positive climate for learning, both in classrooms and in the whole school. Empathy rubs off and around creating a better climate between students as well as between teacher and child and between staff. Empathy has a powerful effect on hidden curriculum, gives the message of value, care and concern. It appears to be created as much by non-verbal as verbal communication and in the stolen moments of time between lessons. It is not always visible but often felt: ‘The actual feeling when you walk into the school is one of warmth and care’ (Frances). It seems to emerge through natural but intense positive human interaction. A whole school empathic climate can be powerfully beneficial for students with behaviour problems but to some extent is dependent on the prerequisite of caring parents. A good empathic climate in a classroom involves less classroom management, less correcting and drawing to attention, because the students are generally positively engaged in learning. Functional empathy can help to create a positive group climate, in which members of the groups have common emotional connections. Empathic teachers try to supplement this with profound empathy for individuals. Teacher and pupils know each


127

other and get on well together, needs are being met and the atmosphere is conducive to learning. Some indicators of an empathic climate, smiling faces, engagement, minimal confrontation and good humour can be seen, but the creation of the climate is partly hidden, because good classroom atmosphere is less noticeable than bad and is often dependent on previous teacher behaviour. An existing climate creates the context for future interactions; therefore, it may have been created by empathy but, in turn, facilitates it, which is a factor in subsequent episodes of teaching and learning.

Summary Chapter Five This last section had outlined the immediate, deeper and consolidated effects of empathy on children, teachers, teaching, and learning and climate, where teachers use different levels of empathy with individuals and groups to meet needs within differing contexts. Empathy has both immediate and more powerful consolidated effects on learning, teaching methodology, on staff and students, and on the climate for learning. Many of these benefits are mentioned in the literature but are not so thoroughly assessed and discussed in relation to different learning contexts and timeframes. Affective issues appear to be central to high quality teaching and learning and shape the whole way teachers work with students.

Chapter 6

Constraints on Empathy in Learning Relationships

Though aspiring to be empathic, these teachers were aware of how multiple constraints altered their practice. Sara makes the general point below, describing the impossibility of the teachers’ many roles and the compounding constraints of system and time: You can’t empathize with all situations, but you’ve got to be open enough to be willing to accept that there will be many, many factors that will make up an individual and many, many constraints and positives and experiences that are gonna play on that individual. That individual is coming to you for one sixty-minute lesson, maybe twice a week, if you’re lucky, and in that time you playing several roles upon them; the teacher of the subject, the teacher of the undercurrent of the social skills, there’s a health and safety role that you play with them, there’s the schools ethos and rules that you’re living out – you’ve already got all those. But then if you’re gonna try and be a teacher with empathy that you’ve got to be aware that this person may not be coming to a history lesson in the same way that you’re coming to the history lesson. (Sara) This chapter first sets out factors under four headings, shown in Figure 6.1, which these teachers felt constrain their ability to display empathy. Finally in Shallow, partial and feigned empathy we consider some data on lower levels of empathy in individual teachers, which also emerged in the data. Though divided for clarity of understanding, all these factors influence each other and interrelate in a dynamic process.

Student Factors This section reveals how teachers explained that the nature of both individual students and groups affect their ability to be empathic in teaching and learning.

1. THE NATURE OF INDIVIDUAL CHILDREN

2. GROUPS OF CHILDREN AND PEER RELATIONS

1. Environment

Constraints on empathy

2. Management CONTEXT FACTORS

STUDENT FACTORS

3. Teaching ratios 4.Time

TEACHER FACTORS

Figure 6.1 Constraints on empathy

TEACHING AND LEARNING FACTORS

5. Education system

130


The Nature of Individual Children The nature of the child, their history and the effect of the education system on them can make it more or less difficult for the teacher to empathize with a student. Students with low levels of empathy were usually harder to empathize with and, having low selfesteem, they found it hard to be sensitive to others and struggled in groups: So if they have a low self- opinion of themselves saying, ‘he’s useless’, might make them feel better. To criticize somebody else – it might take the pressure off them. I think they have to feel really positive about themselves to be understanding about others. (Anna) Teachers believed low levels of empathy were usually caused by the home background and this makes a great difference as to how they relate to staff and peers and cope in classrooms. Long-term home problems could make a child introverted and uncommunicative or attention seeking. Reserved students were generally harder to relate with. Poor communication skills and lack of trust can make it hard for young people to connect with others. In situations when teachers cannot make connections with pupils, investigations could reveal some problem at home. A teacher’s friendliness might be rejected because a child may have previously experienced feigned empathy (see last section below), ‘and their interpretation of me being empathic to them is the first step on something which they’ve experienced which has not been very nice’ (Geoff). Insecure students find it harder to open up and they defend themselves from further hurt by withdrawing and showing less empathy towards others. Teachers must find something to like about individuals in order to empathize with them, although this can be more difficult depending on the needs and behaviour of the class they belong to. The powerful beneficial effects of good parenting on empathy made it easier for teachers to continue the process in school. Students with very special needs, which are hard to fathom and meet within the constraints of whole class lessons, restrict the teacher’s ability to empathize and form relationships. Fay explained that uncooperative students in a group made her less relaxed and the lesson went less well in general. Temporary students and those with very basic skills problems or conceptual problems are harder to understand in the context of large classes, and those who seem not to want to learn at all can make giving really hard. Often these children have terrible home problems. Teachers must work much harder with such children. The ‘macho’ type male was


131

also considered difficult and the gender of the child in relation to the teacher’s gender can make communication over some issues harder. Younger children in primary schools were generally more egocentric and less able to respond appropriately to the needs of others. Tiredness, hunger or boredom rendered students less able to listen and respond appropriately to others. Rainy and windy days with wet breaks could change pupils’ behaviour for the worse. Events in other lessons could affect their mood and state of mind. Particular events that might seem quite minor to adults could upset and disturb students temporarily and special events or interruptions reduce concentration. Teenagers struggling with identity issues can be more vulnerable or less amenable.

Groups of Students and Peer Relations Difficulties with individuals could be multiplied up in groups. Large classes with many children with individual education plans can increase stress and reduce empathy, because time is spent on behaviour management, leaving no time for the individual: I’ve got one year seven class with eight children with IEPs, statements – they’re all vying for attention and within the course of a lesson if you are going to deliver the facts, try and assess everybody and then check at the end that it’s all gone in, the time for actual individual . . . that time is reduced because you’re spending time with other stuff. (Fay) Groups or individuals with learning, behavioural and emotional difficulties are very demanding and these students demand and need attention, but so do others. This can be very difficult in a large class. Even one disruptive pupil can raise stress levels, reducing empathy because teachers become emotional. Such pupils can spoil the climate for others and affect a teacher’s other lessons. The wide range of physical and academic development in groups has a tremendous effect on how students function and perceive themselves among their peers. They are often wary of showing emotion in front of fellow students. This prevents them from speaking out or getting close to teachers, for fear of ridicule. Several teachers mentioned the problem with macho boys and their reluctance to open up and learn in groups, sometimes frightened of failure or of their peers. Bullied students also had reduced selfesteem.

132


Groups with several disaffected students could have a powerful negative effect on other students in the class and can lead to teachers having to contain groups rather than teach them. Will believed that the streaming of pupils exacerbated both positive and negative effects of group climate. However, a good work ethic spreads in classes and in schools, just as a bad one does. Some high- attaining groups could also be quite distant, but if teachers could break down the barriers, they could form strong relationships. Some classes are easier to teach than others, they gel better and are more homogenous or simply smaller. Sometimes, teachers have historical relationships with students or have taught siblings, which can help. Older pupils often had more relaxed and equal relationships. Sixth formers (16–18 years) were particularly good in this respect.

Teacher Factors The level of empathy of the teacher in the classroom, as described previously, affects the students and the context in a complex way. Specific data on unempathic teachers at the end of this chapter suggests that some teachers have much lower levels of empathy. In addition, other factors constrain the teacher’s ability to empathize, and these are explained below. Though teachers might be more or less empathic, they all were aware of the multiple personal issues that reduced people’s ability to empathize at particular times. Empathy involves giving one’s full attention to an interaction and if one’s brain is otherwise engaged, whether emotionally or cognitively, this becomes more difficult; ‘something else is at the forefront of our minds’ (Mary). Family life with all its problems can impinge on empathy. Employment worries, ageing or sick parents, stress, lost sleep, sick children or marital worries can all affect one’s ability to focus on others. Personal stress before coming to school makes it harder to cope with students’ problems. Societal and school worries concerning physical contact and child abuse can cause anxiety and prevent a display of empathy. This was especially difficult for teachers who are parents. They know students need physical comforting but feel powerless to respond: ‘If a child’s crying, I would instinctively put my arm around them but you’ve got to be very careful now – I realize that’ (Janet). Stress makes teachers react in unusual ways. Sometimes the class creates the stress, sometimes problems at home, or both. Sometimes, teachers need


133

support. If they feel disillusioned with their career, for example, they might have little to give to students. Will suggests that colleagues in this position try and see their pupils’ points of view. Sometimes, teachers under stress give students work they cannot do, but differentiation requires enormous amounts of time and effort, which causes more stress. If a teacher makes a huge effort and uses all their inventiveness to engage a class without success, then the situation becomes exceptionally traumatic and they resort to less empathic ways of dealing with students in order to survive. Teachers can have good days and bad days, when they are more or less amenable, and energy levels can play a part. Chance events in the day, for example, conflict with senior staff, can affect attitudes to students and make teachers less relaxed, less able to laugh things off. Memories of a previous bad lesson can make a teacher jaded for the next. Anticipated problems can make a person tense, knowing they will be fully engaged just to keep the class under control. Rushing around and time limitations create stress and fewer opportunities to meet the students’ needs. Given the emotional involvement in teaching, it is hard to keep personal and professional life separate. As a manager trying hard to lead by example, it can be stressful if colleagues do not voluntarily share workloads. School pressures can seep into personal life, which can create more stress. Using control and management techniques as advised by teacher trainers, such as not smiling, made empathy difficult for one student teacher and the short placements of teaching practice prevent student teachers from getting to know their charges sufficiently. Also, during appraisal on teaching practice, it is harder to focus on students because one’s mind is self-absorbed: ‘When I am being appraised, my mind is elsewhere – if your mind is taken up with other things – it’s very difficult to keep focused’ (Janet). Bodily needs also affected empathy, and many teachers mentioned tiredness, which makes them less aware of students, forcing them to just try to get through the lesson. Tiredness makes it harder to stay balanced emotionally, harder to deal with bad behaviour or noise. Premenstrual tension, hunger, deadlines, a mind absorbed with other issues, trying to improve teaching and thinking about home and children could all take focus away. Financial stress, marital pressures and studying pressures for teacher training could all affect the teacher’s empathic signals: ‘The first thing it will affect are these fine tuning relationships . . . these very fine minute innuendoes and inflexions in your voice and the raising of the eyebrow’ (Geoff). Though these teachers always tried to lay aside personal issues, it was not always possible and then they felt guilty when they failed. However, the mere presence of the children prompted empathy and could be therapeutic.

134


Martin finds that throwing himself into teaching distracts him from personal issues, though it can also cause them because he has less space for his family. In contrast, Charlotte felt that external factors did not impinge on her ability to be empathic. Some student teachers suggested age and length of time in teaching might reduce empathy. Alternatively, some thought one becomes more experienced and professional. Sara associates young teachers with greater empathy, though several felt lack of empathy could be a problem for any age group. Qualifications were not an indicator of empathy, according to the head teacher, who was highly critical of moves towards only accepting student teachers with very good degrees. He believed that teachers must be good communicators. One of his non-teaching assistants is one of the best ‘teachers’ he has ever seen, and he thought should be paid for it: ‘She knows what to do and when best to do it . . . she is magical – I’ve come across people with damn good degrees who can’t teach at all’ (Terry).

Teaching and Learning Curriculum and assessment were the key issues mentioned that constrained empathy in relation to teaching and learning.. Many of these teachers suggested that an overemphasis on curriculum and assessment could limit empathy: ‘Well, things do impinge – like the National Curriculum’ (Sylvia). When teachers are overly influenced by curriculum, they can stop seeing and valuing students who do not succeed in relation to the norm, and might even condemn them for their attainment levels. Focusing on the curriculum seems to reduce their ability to empathize: Well, I don’t think they are showing that it’s important to value different sorts of people, for instance . . . [and] that the only people that are important are the people that can do well in tests or do well in lessons. And those who are struggling at the bottom, we don’t have any sympathy towards them and we don’t see any strengths because they can’t answer this question and so they must be down there and they must be punished for being down there. And she’s not showing any sort of sympathy or understanding of other people’s brain patterns. (Anna) The curriculum and assessment regime contrasts sharply with how these teachers feel they should assess and motivate students. They feel they


135

should recognize effort and support students according to need, making less of the outcome and more of personal progress. Hence, normative assessment produced conflicts, especially for student teachers who, aware of the pressure to be objective, instinctively knew when this was demotivating for the individual: You could tell the effort was screaming at you off the page. And you immediately feel sympathy for that child because you want to mark him much more kindly than someone who’s very able and has maybe just blown this down in about twenty minutes so . . . they need the recognition that they’ve spent hours on it and they’ve really tried so it’s important to encourage them, otherwise you’ll switch them off. (Fay) Fay felt that the league tables and curriculum pressure were reducing time for empathy and personal and social education. However, pupils wanted teachers to teach their subject effectively and to help them to do well in exams. For experienced teachers, the conflict between students’ needs and the curriculum were more apparent. Conversations about personal and family life are vital for relationships, but the busy curriculum has to be taught, which creates a time conflict. After listening to some students talk about their broken families, Sara says: ‘[B]ut you’re in a dilemma where you could say “National Curriculum – I’ve got to get on with it” but you couldn’t . . . [pleading] I’ve got no relationships with these boys, since September’ (Sara). Sometimes, schoolwork seems less relevant and understanding social reality was as important. Will felt that the National Curriculum was totally inappropriate for some students: I think the National Curriculum, although it is good in many ways, is a disaster for the lower kids. . . . Yes, I think it’s very difficult for them in school anyway because what they’re required to do at the end, is satisfy an examiner, with a pen and paper, who doesn’t know them, that they know skills at a certain level and that’s the very thing that they find the most difficult to do and we’re not helping them on their way at all. Teachers tried to link the National Curriculum with what their students already knew, because this enabled them to plan the next steps in learning. Support teachers felt their empathy enabled the National Curriculum to work, and some said they protected the child from it. The fragmented,

136


subject- dominated nature of the secondary curriculum, coupled with large classes, could have a negative effect on classroom relationships. Will argued that because of the effects on their selfesteem within the school system, some lower-achieving students were obliged to find different ways of achieving success and esteem outside of school. Educational policy or over- prescriptive edicts from management leave teachers less flexibility to deal with issues appropriately. Policy can involve putting duty before well- honed instinct. Teachers often saw themselves as mediators between the curriculum and the students, and between prescriptive policies and the curriculum. Teachers can change policy, but it depends on their approach, the other people involved and the degree of flexibility of colleagues. Inflexible policies prevent progress. Support teachers were reluctant to plan lessons far in advance, because teaching adapted and built on each lesson’s progress. With a rigid, overfilled curriculum, the teaching is fixed and has to be ploughed through, and this was demotivating. Sometimes, they needed to give priority to individuals, not to the curriculum, to be most effective. Classroom teachers expressed similar views and that it was important to discuss issues that concerned students, not just the National Curriculum regulations. The sheer quantity of curriculum content meant less time and less flexibility for teachers to involve and engage students in learning, creating more pressure: The quantity of NC plays a part in what you’re doing. [ ] Some lessons there’s so much going on . . . there isn’t time – it’s not that it’s going on in a negative way . . .it’s very positive what’s going on. . . but there isn’t the time (to stop and talk to students). (Sara) These factors, combined with large classes and students with multiple needs, leaves no time for individuals, and quiet individuals get missed. Heavy curriculum content and testing leaves little time for empathy and pleasure in teaching and learning.

Context Factors Teachers felt several factors in the immediate and broader context in which they worked could significantly influence the level of empathy in teaching


137

and learning. There were five categories under the umbrella of context, as shown in Figure 6.1. Environment Different working environments made empathic teaching more or less easy. The rigidity and unsuitability of some environments can restrict teachers’ ability to work empathically, as they need to offer appropriate resources and be able to meet needs. Formal teaching in classrooms often tends towards isolated, individual work, and it is not conducive to interaction. Equally, a very noisy classroom is not good for concentration, either. Such environments can be distracting for both teachers and students, and in large classes (in music for example), some activities can be very difficult and teachers can spend more time dealing with classroom management rather than with teaching and learning. Teaching in non- subject- specific rooms might create considerable constraints for secondary teachers. Without all the extra subject resources, pictures, maps or projectors, teaching becomes less interesting and is confined to textbooks. This can restrict understanding and enjoyment. Will also felt that the physical buildings are nearly always inappropriate because student numbers change annually and never match the subject rooms, making it difficult to plan for quality teaching and learning: Some kids in some geography classes never get in a geography classroom. Now, if you’re talking about the bottom per cent in particular, but also the top per cent of kids, I mean how are you supposed to make a subject interesting when you have not got at your fingertips maps and resources, no videos and things? (Will) For class teachers, the curriculum and limited resources could make it harder to respond to individual needs. Tanya gave an example of trying to encourage creative design but only being able to offer just one material and one colour in terms of resource. Claire thought the one-toone interaction offered by a computer might improve empathy, whereas Sara thought sessions in a computer room would not. Some teachers felt that traditional schools with more formal relationships restrain empathy and that it is difficult for teachers to avoid the effects. Mixed messages from schools, saying one thing and doing another, can destroy security, trust and empathy. Awkward colleagues or depart-

138


ments could reduce teachers’ empathy, and colleagues with fixed views can influence others. The environment also includes the nature of the group – some are more difficult to be empathetic with than others. For needy students, the teachers’ sole attention in the right environment is very important. Sometimes, support teachers cannot even make themselves heard in a noisy classroom.

Management Unempathic management was a key constraint on empathy being shown in school, while empathic management facilitated it. Managers could demonstrate similar features to empathic teachers, or to the unempathic teachers described towards the end of this chapter. Management issues are discussed in more detail in Chapter 11.

Teaching Ratios Poor teacher/pupil ratios were closely and repeatedly linked to less time and empathy for individuals. Many interviewees expressed the close relationship of time to understanding and relationships. They believed teachers could still achieve a rapport with large numbers but that it takes longer. Large classes immediately affected the nature of the teacher and the teaching. Control became dominant with larger groups, and led the teacher to be less friendly, less warm and less close to the students: ‘I think I’m quite serious with a whole class but I am a bit more warm or a bit more liable to joke or whatever with smaller groups or individuals’ (Tanya). Large classes reduce eye contact because teachers address the whole class rather than individuals, and when they speak to individuals they can only make eye contact for a short time, which means they miss feedback that smaller groups would permit. Young people cannot speak in an open and honest way in class as they can with a support teacher: ‘When the child knows you well enough to say: “I hate doing this” . . . but I mean they would never say that to their class teacher’ (Mary). If students do hate an activity, they are unlikely to learn. Classroom teachers are less likely to be ‘warm and cuddly’ (Mary) and yet must try and empathize with everyone. A class teacher is less likely to know students as well as a support teacher and more likely to make inappropriate or damaging remarks.


139

One classroom with thirty pupils is often just inappropriate for learning, for example learning music. Much more time is spent on classroom management rather than supporting pupils’ learning: I mean working conditions in the winter, for example in here, you’ve got thirty children with a glockenspiel each having to work in a room and you’ve got individuals who are determined to knock seven bells out of them. Then you’re spending all your time dealing with classroom management and behaviour issues, rather than getting to know the children or even help them to get anything from the educational point of view. (Fay) Empathic teaching and trying to differentiate subtly for thirty is no simple task: ‘You have to cut yourself into thirty-four different pieces’ (Janet). Primary and support teachers worried particularly about ratios and the fragmented curriculum in secondary school provision, which fragmented human relationships. The sheer volume of information about individuals is daunting in secondary school. Even the most basic recognition of pupils is a major task, let alone in depth understanding ‘if you’ve suddenly got a couple of hundred new names and faces to put together with them’ (Fay). Secondary school teachers cannot reach out to each child, although they try hard: ‘Some days, I have 180 kids go through my hands. I don’t win over all 180 – but I try for a majority approach’ (Sara). The sheer numbers are overwhelming and militate against an empathic approach. Although this comment is obviously exaggerated – ‘I speak to a million children outside the classroom’ (Sara) – it reveals the burden the teacher feels. She knows that every child of the fifteen hundred in school will pass through her department and feels the need to become acquainted with them, at least. The sheer quantity of students can lead to huge information overload, especially when individual needs should be assessed quickly to have maximum positive effect. Trying to understand and be positive with a difficult child can lead to other classmates behaving badly, and the teacher must find the right balance in larger groups. One negative comment to a child with low selfesteem can lose their trust, which is then hard to regain. Independent or less- demanding students tend to lose out on teacher time in large classes. The sheer numbers mean that it takes a long time to know students, especially those who are harder to get to know: ‘[I’m] over-faced with hundreds of faces who all can look the same on the first sort of appearances. It takes a long time to get to know them, so then it’s harder to break down those inaccessible groups’ (Sara). Though these teachers extend themselves

140


at every opportunity and try to interact with all students in lessons, they don’t succeed: you don’t do that, because there’s too many, too much’ (Sara). In classrooms, in addition to using functional empathy when teaching the whole class, empathic primary teachers at least try to show empathy to everyone: As I say you’ve got thirty individuals, so therefore you have thirty, almost, lots of empathy for the child . . . which you bring out or you meet that for each child, determined by their backgrounds, their interests or whatever – your own personal thing, personal attitude towards the kids and their response to me. (Pete) Teachers try to maintain and develop individual representations because it was important to make each child feel special. But even while trying to get inside one child’s mind, teachers are simultaneously keeping an eye on everyone else and it is hard to find individual time. When classroom teachers contemplate an interaction with one child, they have to consider the impact on others. Consequently, they may have to compromise on meeting all needs. Though class teachers knew the importance of spending individual time with students, they never had enough time, and the sheer volume of the curriculum was problematic: ‘It’s hard at times to be on an individual level with the children – there’s so much to get through in a week’ (Frances). This is even more difficult in the secondary system and the multiplication of needs in large classes with low achievers can lead to a compounding of problems and poor working atmosphere where the teachers, however experienced, feel stretched to their limits: You’ve got a 45-minute lesson, what am I expected to spend, on average, two minutes with a kid. They need more than two minutes. If you take that throughout the day, they’ve got six lessons, we’re talking about twelve minutes of teacher contact time and it’s no wonder we don’t get anything done with them. (Will) Student teachers also try to meet needs of all students, ‘but it’s very difficult’ (Janet). Larger groups are not impossible to get to know, ‘it just takes you longer’ (Janet). Teachers try to manage their teaching to release time for individuals and this leads to conflict over time allocation, and students with particular problems are often unable to cope well in large classrooms. Teachers have insufficient time to build their selfconfidence. The classroom environment can make it difficult even for inclass support teachers


141

to be empathic. The environment can impede the teacher/student relationship because the assistant cannot converse openly with students. Inclass support can be problematic in secondary schools because of the more formal regimes required in those classrooms. Students whose needs are not met and who have low selfesteem register their unhappiness with their feet, perhaps only attending lessons where they feel valued. However good the teacher, there is a mathematical and contextual problem with empathy in large ratios. The large ratios produce competition for the usually one human adult resource. Martin could see this even with his own two children at home, and this would be much more acute in classes where many students compete for attention, especially the younger ones. The one adult resource has insufficient time to address every need and problem. Giving individuals time must be done subtly or it can make others jealous, and it is exceptionally difficult to give equal treatment in large classes. Student teachers particularly struggled with this conflict of numbers and equal treatment, and though their instincts led them to meet needs, their working conditions forced them to choose between different needs. In this situation, when there are not enough resources to meet needs, often students and other staff get blamed. The classroom becomes pressurized and teachers can lose their temper. When they are calm, they try to meet the child’s needs properly; however, some students still need more personal time than can ever be given in a classroom. Demonstrating empathy for individuals is challenging in a class of thirty, although experienced teachers learn coping strategies: Somebody stands out like a sore thumb that they need something and you’ve got to direct and give them something by balancing out the rest of the class, balancing whatever’s in your head or your own personal emotions but somehow reach out to them. (Sara) Individual conversation can lead to higher achievement and the effect on selfesteem is visible, but these must be conducted in the teachers’ time. Conversely, smaller and more homogeneous classes support much more empathic teaching. Time Lack of time is a major factor closely related to ratio, and limited time limits teacher empathy. Developing empathic relationships with students

142


simply takes time. This is particularly difficult for student-teachers on teaching practice with no historical relationships. High- quality preparation and marking, which provides encouraging and constructive feedback to individuals, also takes time. Classroom teachers repeatedly expressed the problems of lack of time for forming relationships and the conflicts they felt when needy students in their classes required more attention. This was a common concern for student-teachers, who use techniques such as tick lists in order to create time for relating to and assessing individuals but it is not easy. Ends of lessons were used for finding private time to talk to individuals; however, this produces stress because there is always a next lesson to go to or a break to be missed. Additionally, much personal time was spent worrying about these students. Other factors which stole teachers’ time were workload, bureaucracy, and the requirements to teach new curriculum and subjects other than their specialisms in secondary schools, and student teachers found the bureaucracy involved in teacher training time consuming and stressful. Two of the experienced teachers, Will and Sara, as heads of department, also had multiple additional responsibilities on top of heavy teaching timetables, which consumed large amounts of their time. Providing a stimulating environment, with thoughtful displays to stimulate and raise selfesteem, also takes extra time and effort. For secondary teachers particularly, time with groups, and inevitably with individuals within those groups, was extremely small. Music was a particular problem because often students in years 7 to 9 had only 1 hour per week. With around thirty students per class, this meant a miniscule amount of individual interaction but with literally hundreds of students. Consequently, it took the teacher much longer to get to know individuals, their capabilities and problems. Time was required to read case notes and individual education plans, and to try and get round the class several times each lesson. However, with many students vying for attention, some lost out. Fay’s conclusion was, ‘an hour’s never enough’. Though Fay believed empathy should be central to school life, she felt that the fast pace, the pursuit of league table positions, and lack of time in schools today meant that it was not possible. Relationships improved in GCSE groups, where students had several hours of contact per week and groups were often smaller. A-level students study voluntarily, achieve more highly in school and have often been taught previously by teachers or know them through reputation, so relationships are already more established. Therefore, the length of time in school, as well as frequency of interaction, can help relationships.


143

Experienced teachers, although very aware of time difficulties, did not show as much conflict over allocating time to needy students. However, no matter how expertly they relate to students, their time with individuals in each class is still insufficient. Time factors also prevented teachers from getting close to and supporting more able students. Teachers also expressed the importance of striking up relationships with students on their terms. Sometimes this occurred as a chance meeting in a corridor, but sometimes the opportunity never arose within the constraints of time and context: ‘There’s not enough time – not enough hours in the day’ (Will). Primary classroom teachers had the benefit of whole days, weeks and years with their students, in which warmer relationships could be formed. The time spent with primary school children had a powerful influence on them, and teachers tried to cater for the individual. Nevertheless, younger students need more one-toone time, and primary as well as secondary teachers expressed a shortage of time especially with such a full curriculum. The outcome of teachers trying to cater for so many students so thoughtfully can be sheer exhaustion, and some students inevitably lose out. Opportunities in primary classrooms for better- quality interactions in small groups or one-toone situations are rare, but the importance of these interactions was understood, for instance in reading time. Frances explained that it is a time to chat with individuals and get to know them personally. She related personal knowledge to achievement and tried to set aside time to talk. For student teachers, time contributed to the conflict between meeting needs and fairness and lack of time puts everyone under pressure, whereas empathy needs a relatively relaxed environment. The inevitable outcome of lack of time is that issues are missed. Few students did not want to form relationships, and the only barrier to this was lack of time. David felt that time was the only real factor that prevented him from being empathic. He felt that a little one-toone time away from the classroom helped tremendously with some students, but for class teachers such time is elusive. Being fair about time required considerable effort. If teachers left the lower-attaining students to work independently, they achieved little. Janet’s mentor told her to extend the higher-level students as well, but this created more anxiety and conflict due to shortage of time and her mentor acknowledged that she allocated more time to lower attainers herself, despite her advice to Janet. Teachers try to spread their time around, but it is not easy. Support teachers working in classrooms get less time than they need with their targeted student, because of the demands made by other students or the class teacher.

144


By contrast, one-toone time outside the classroom facilitated empathy and was perceived by support teachers as providing quality time and was more important than the relationships with other teachers. They could adapt sensitively to each child’s personality and needs, giving them time to open up and begin to trust the teacher. This time- giving was seen as highly significant for staff as well as pupils. Sometimes, a child might just need to talk and this may take half an hour. Sometimes in a small group, the teacher would decide to allocate more time to one child in a particular session, and results justified their decisions. More time in one-toone situations allows the teacher to be more effective, flexible, spontaneous and versatile. Relationships with parents were considered to be important by these teachers, especially for those who need extra support, yet no time was allocated to meeting with parents in the support teacher’s timetables. Support teachers were only paid by the hour for their time with students. When parents offered to help their own children with secondary school subjects, teachers had no time to discuss with them what they might do. Neither was time really allocated for discussion between classroom teachers and support teachers. Many classroom teachers give up their lunchtimes to give extra support, but if students make progress, they may then lose the additional support from the specialist SEN teacher. Some class teachers do not make time for special needs students and that inhibits their development. Education System Teachers criticized the education system as a whole for failing to appreciate and meet individual needs. The effects of limited time and poor teacher/ pupil ratio are embedded in the system: ‘I don’t feel that a school of any size and the working constraints that you are under in terms of time, allows you to spend that much time as a classroom teacher with an individual, and it’s sad to say that that’s a failure of the system’ (Will). Bureaucracy and a very full curriculum increase stress and reduce time. Changes to teacher training also create stress for student-teachers and the institutions that train them. The wider values currently embedded in the education system such as competition, league tables and value for money can restrict empathy. Sara felt that the values and attitudes of unempathic teachers combined with competitive policies also affected how students perceived more caring teachers, who try to compensate for that: ‘It’s giving a bad [impression] that teachers are miserable or mean, (and) unfortunately can be


145

translated across and you’re working twice as hard to actually get rid of that myth’ (Sara). There are not many teachers who can remain really empathic within the confines of the system. Mary described such a teacher as ‘rare’. Some teachers survive in the system with many large classes by distancing themselves. The pressures created by trying to meet need within the existing system are tiring, and can wear teachers down and reduce empathy: I think most teachers have quite a degree of – an empathy skill or gene or vocation or something. They have that – I do think most do. I think all probably did, but I’m thinking teaching is a harsh job for a variety of reasons, that you can have a bit of it knocked out of you here, there and everywhere. (Sara) Empathy should be embedded in the running of schools and play a much greater part in the education system, but the pressure from league tables, curriculum and workload do not allow it. Frances was aware of being influenced by a prevailing unempathic ethos, even though she did not agree with it. Then her more empathic behaviour felt subversive: ‘It’s a case of sneaking the little bits of time when you were on your own with a child or in small groups again’ (Frances). Some teachers felt that their personality and care could defend the students against any unpleasantness of the system. The education system is unempathic for some students, while others just ‘swan along’ (Anna). Some students have more rights than others in the system and some students have greater needs, which should be met. Some aspects of the system are more naturally empathic than others; for example, the primary school phase was deemed generally more empathic than secondary and also than Higher Education: A university lecturer isn’t too concerned about the pastoral side of a student because the student is adult and grown up and they just stand at the front and very articulately deliver a lecture using lots of technical words and vocabulary. If students don’t understand the vocabulary, it’s their job to go to the library and look it up. Whereas a primary school teacher is more empathic, they’re more parental, they care more about the whole person. (Geoff) The longer contact time between primary teachers and their students and the closer connection with parents helped them to understand students

146


more fully. Where teachers could build individual time into the system in primary schools, this naturally supported empathy, as did close contact with children. However, the many comments in the sections above on time and ratio reveal that the primary classroom still produces competition for teacher time and attention, which does not particularly encourage empathic behaviour. More traditional, formal primary teaching was considered less empathic. Support teachers know how hard primary school can be for lowerattaining students, but that the transition to secondary can be even more difficult. The secondary system is not designed to support their needs: ‘It seems too much to expect of them really’ (Anna). They like to know the same teacher is there who knows and understands them, which does not happen as much in secondary school. There are fewer opportunities for close relationships. The comments made by teachers about the difficulty even of learning names was echoed by Anna’s daughter, who said after her first term at secondary: ‘Oh it does drive you mad – nobody knows our names – they just say, “er – you, thingummy”’. And as Anna pointed out, this is so different from the last year of primary, where each child is extremely well known, through historical relationships with teachers and with younger children. Will felt the school system further damaged difficult and disturbed students. In order to cope with all their other charges, teachers sometimes disassociate themselves from such students. He felt that the exclusion and rejection, which almost inevitably ensued from putting disturbed students in large classes, created more rejection and made them feel more alienated from society, engendering even more alienated behaviour: I think also that it makes the problem worse, because you disassociate yourself from them in a relationship sense, and that’s the one thing that they don’t want, because it just reinforces the thing that they’re separate from the rest of the group or the rest of society in many ways. And then, the one thing they’ve got, is something they get off on, that makes them feel a person, makes them feel good, whatever it is – whether it’s violence or whatever. It’s not the right way to go but we haven’t got the coping strategies in school to deal with that. (Will) Sometimes such students received extra support in smaller specialist centres, but then returned to mainstream school, with no apparent development. This could make teachers and schools feel even more alienated from them (Will), but probably indicates the enormity of their need. Lack of


147

success, both in and out of school, can really demotivate young people and lower their selfesteem, leaving them unsympathetic to others. Experienced teachers felt strongly that schools often contribute to this lack of success and selfesteem, and that the whole system failed lower achieving students. Will was particularly critical of streaming. Lower- stream students continually worked in a negative atmosphere. He felt students should be in a variety of groups so they saw alternative and positive attitudes to school. However, he recognized that mixed attainment groups present different problems. The secondary system was generally considered problematic as far as empathy was concerned. Large schools, a fragmented curriculum, fragmented day and fragmented roles of teachers, combined with an ‘overloaded curriculum’ (Sara) and normative assessment procedures, did not support empathic teaching and learning. For example, a problem might be discovered through a good relationship with a teacher, but then passed to a pastoral head in charge of five hundred students who might not have that relationship. Personal and social education in a one-hour slot with a class of thirty also seems inappropriate. The sheer numbers of students passing through teachers’ hands in secondary meant fewer opportunities for knowing individuals properly. Large schools might not facilitate empathy, either, and league tables distract from issues like relationships and personal and social education. Though teachers criticized lack of resources, large classes, lack of time and government policy, they did not relate this particularly to wider world systems and values. Terry, the head teacher, was the only person who discussed the impact of the world outside school on his thinking, and even then it was mainly educational policy. He felt underpaid, thought his teachers were underpaid and he tried to ensure they received responsibility points when they deserved them rather than increasing his own salary. His fee for an inspection completed during half-term holiday was given to the school. He was weary of reading about what head teachers do and do not do in the newspapers. Sometimes he resented the pay and conditions, and many policies that he believed were wrong. However, he did refer to politics and morals and believed people should act on their beliefs and stand up for what they thought was right.

Shallow, Partial and Feigned Empathy This section presents the teachers, views about shallow, partial or feigned empathy. Unlike the specific categories of empathy described in

148


Chapter 4, there were no observations of unempathic teachers in the main study. However, the findings correlate well with two observations and the children’s views from the pilot study discussed in Chapter 4. There is considerable consistency between the interviews, rendering the findings interesting and valuable, particularly because it explains the problems caused in relationships and the teaching and learning process when less empathy is present, and it illuminates other findings. However, lower levels of empathy are not always a direct reversal of the features of empathy explained previously, because lower levels of empathy can be in part related to the constraints of context and feigned empathy, as its name suggests, can demonstrate overtly many features of fundamental and profound empathy but can conceal ulterior motives and is sustained only for a limited period. For explanation, this section is subdivided into four parts. However, as in the empathic characteristics, they are all inter-linked. The first group contains more visible features of shallow empathy which are more likely to be directly observed, the second are more abstract and reflect deeper attitudes and the third shows quite extreme features which are particularly concerning. The fourth part shows the negative effects of low levels of empathy.

concrete /visible features of shallow empathy in teaching personal attitudes shown in lack of empathy in teaching highly unempathic features in teaching – feigned empathy the negative effects of low levels of empathy

Concrete/Visible Features of Shallow Empathy in Teaching Vivid and closely correlated pictures emerged of colleagues and childhood teachers who were less empathic in their teaching. Generally, they were likely to show minimal or negative emotions on their faces and in their body language, and they would be tense rather than relaxed: ‘They’d be more jerky movements I suppose. They wouldn’t flow, tense shoulders – well there wouldn’t be much smiling going on would there, quite an expressionless face I think really, shutting things out’ (Fay). Such teachers would keep a straight face and be less animated or physical: ‘They’re definitely not tactile at all . . . – sucked lemons – it’s that sort of expression isn’t it – . . . and I am thinking of three people and I have seen them teach so I wouldn’t think they were particularly animated or vivacious’ (Sara).


149

There would be less individual eye contact and their eyes would be more likely to be ‘glazing over’ (Mary). Martin described one such teacher as ‘quite brassy, hard-faced, very little expression . . . – she was very aloof.. . . I got this impression that if you didn’t live in [village name], in suburbia you weren’t in with the social niche – really. She didn’t tolerate SEN kids – that was obvious’ (Martin). Such teachers could also show partial empathy, that is, for some students and not others. On the whole, they were likely to be colder, more distant and tense, uncomfortable and hard to talk to, their speech more abrupt or sarcastic, with both staff members and students. They are more likely to look grim and serious, and would behave in a more traditional ‘teacherlike’ way, authoritative and didactic: ‘They looked, overbearing – they’re the teacher, they’re the authority what they say goes – which is fine – you’ve got to set discipline in a sense but they were on a kind of power trip . . . very stand- offish and very authoritarian’ (Sylvia). They are more likely to make teaching difficult, raise their voices, repeat instructions and be very directive in their speech, labelling children and not having positive individual relationships with them. Mary felt that they: make life a lot harder for themselves – they’re the teachers who seem to have to be saying the same thing over and over again to their classes. They seem to be the ones that raise their voices more and they don’t seem to have . . . individual relationships with children. You know they lump children into certain groups, the no-hopers, the troublemakers and the clever ones and that sort of thing. They are prepared to bawl kids down, use bully- boy tactics and could be confrontational. Students they found difficult would be sent out of the class at the first opportunity, possibly for the entire lesson. They tend to instruct rather than elicit from the students, using chalk and talk and possibly using illegible handwriting. They expect more silence, stand at the front and talk a lot, and often reject students, reinforcing the students’ sense of alienation. They would be more interested in their subject and factual data than in the students themselves: I can see the teachers who pride themselves on the type of teaching technique that is very cut and dried, cold, and they’ve not got it [empathy]. ‘I’m here to teach you, I’m not here to do the individual, I’m here to teach you this subject’. . . . I think their sort of empathy buttons been turned

150


off and their sort of professional, actor, button of teaching a subject has been probably been turned on, has become more dominant. (Sara) They are more likely to offend people without necessarily realizing it. Student teachers believed they would be older teachers. Experienced teachers felt age was immaterial, although some thought the demanding regime of schools might reduce empathy. They believed unempathic teachers are either unaware of other people’s needs or they compete with their own needs. They cannot necessarily interpret other people’s thinking, do not like students particularly, and are more negative and intolerant. They avoid the effort involved in supporting more challenging students and do not offer enjoyable activities or talk about enjoyable or personal matters. They do not relate well to students and do not try to understand them or even learn their names. All in all, there was considerable cohesion in this picture, with interviewees often using similar words and phrases to describe such teachers and, for the most part, their view appears to conform to a stereotypical view of a traditional, formal, classroom subject teacher, particularly from a secondary school. David mentioned the infamous Gradgrind in Dickens’s Hard Times. However, thankfully, many of the interviewees thought that there were few such teachers around these days and that they often had particular circumstances, both personal or related to constraints of the educational system, which produced their behaviour.

Personal Attitudes Shown in Lack of Empathy in Teaching The external characteristics of low levels of empathy discussed above were just the outward symbols of deeper aspects to their characters. This picture was reasonably cohesive but decidedly sad. The idea that unempathic people have something ‘alien’ about them is a recurring feature in these conversations: ‘Somebody that is Martianlike, someone that has no feelings themselves and don’t take an awful lot of pride in what they do’ (Geoff). They appear to be overbearing, thickskinned and unaware of interactions with others. They have little concern for other people and their perspective involves less effort and makes life easier for them. They see themselves as a separate entity and nothing touches them and they shut the external world out and carry on their own task, regardless of its effects:


151

Children have to do what the teacher wants to do regardless of whether the children need it, want it. Wide cares and considerations, you carry on regardless. You’ve got a syllabus that goes for 365 days and you do it. (Claire) Externally, they appear inscrutable and are characterless, unimaginative and uninteresting. Unempathetic people are uncomfortable to talk to and in themselves, acting out a part rather than being themselves. They can appear to be intelligent but are unlikely to have much common sense. Fay believed they had no ‘flow’. Others described them as self–centred. Such teachers are not patient but inflexible and closed to new ideas. They find it hard to bend, to accept contradiction or to listen or accept what they hear and therefore cannot move forward and change very easily and, moreover, do not believe they can change. Phrases were used such as ‘rigid as a nail’ (Martin) and ‘a total control freak “I want it doing my way” – nobody else’s way is half as good’ (Claire). There was a very common feeling that unempathic teachers are strong on authority, treating others with disdain. They have strong prejudiced mental stereotypes. These characteristics impinge directly on the task of teaching. They do not value difference and tend to value high achievement, with little understanding of low- achieving pupils. They do not feel responsible for some students’ problems: and if ever a difficult situation came up they’d find it hard to deal with and probably dismiss it and be quite abrupt and reflect that in their movements . . . to get away from the problem as quickly as possible rather than wanting to tackle it and find out what’s behind it. (Fay) They do not take a personal pride in their work and have a very functional attitude. Work is to be done, not enjoyed. They do not manage behaviour and deal with problems; they get rid of them, for example excluding students. They make life difficult for themselves because of their attitudes to others, creating insecurity and reducing communication and fail to realize their impact: hard, abrupt, lacking time to listen to people, lacking understanding when they do listen, unable to accept that some of the things that they’re hearing have been exacerbated by themselves and the way that they have treated youngsters, basically, a total lack of understanding of how people operate other than themselves. (Terry)

152


Claire felt these teachers would be better working with things rather than people and would more likely to be found in a commercial, competitive, more war-like environment (Claire). Unempathic teachers clearly roused strong emotions because of their effects on students. Their lack of empathy had a strong negative effect on the quality of their teaching. Several references were also made to unempathic managers who exhibited similar characteristics; these are discussed in Chapter 11.

Highly Unempathic Features in Teaching – Feigned Empathy This final category was more concerning because it can involve deliberate deceit. These individuals can create an illusion of caring behaviour which is at odds with reality. This is a particular problem in caring roles like teaching because of the responsibility for others, which the profession assumes. These qualities differ from the previous ones because they can be extremely unempathic but often adopt the mantle of empathy to achieve their ends. There was only one reference to an actual teacher in the extreme features in this section, so one hopes that such attributes are rare in the profession. However, there were references to managers and to other individuals who had worked in schools and, as examples of lack of empathy, they are useful to understand. This category ranged from a sort of benign role-play in relationships to extreme deception. At the more benign level, there was a concept of relationships which were ‘a bit false’(Fay) and could occur just because a teacher and a group were new to each other or did not see each other very often, but tried to relate as if they did. Of a more serious nature was the repeated failure to carry out promises in a relationship, however small, which destroys trust. There were also teachers who appear calm and gentle on the surface, but are not so in their dealings with individuals. At a midlevel, there was a manipulative approach to the decision-making process, for example when people pretend to listen but then ignore suggestions. Other characteristics included blatant lying and stealing, which often involve pretence and abuse of other people’s trust. Terry believed these lower levels of empathy came without morality, although we might question whether they are actually empathy. Finally, there was the alarming concept of feigned empathy. Terry had only experienced this with parents and nonteaching staff: Parents come in and say, ‘You know little Jennifer or Harriet’s fallen down the steps yesterday and they’ve got the bruises all the way down


153

her back – sad – and if they complain about being unwell will you get in touch with me – straight away?’ And it’s very simple. Those bruises have actually been caused by those people who have been in – that’s pretend empathy. Such people feign empathy, mask their negative emotions towards others for their own benefit but later and in private, reveal negative emotions in violence and abuse. The Negative Effects of Low Levels of Empathy in Teaching and Learning Low levels of empathy can have various negative effects. Some teachers using functional empathy to work with groups may not enhance it with individual empathy; thus, students are only understood as class members, not as individuals. Some teachers might choose to interact empathically with certain pupils and not with others. This may have a very negative effect on those not favoured in class groups. This section has the following five divisions:

Relationships to students and consequences for learning Effects on teacher Effects on other teachers Effects of feigned empathy Rhetoric and reality

Relationships to Students and Consequences for Learning There was considerable consensus on this topic, and the only real conflict was whether such teachers were aware or unaware of their own problems. The attributes of unempathic teachers had dramatic effects on the relationships with the students they taught and the quality of their teaching. Their own limitations make it much harder to understand others. Consequently, they find it hard to make any emotional bond or contact and can be either patronising or even very negative. Their inability to communicate means they cannot develop students socially or spiritually, they cannot nurture them or have a concern for the whole person and they become focused on the curriculum. Therefore, less- empathic teachers did not have individual relationships with students and tended to teach them as a class and lump them into predetermined and fixed groups using functional empathy.

154


Such teachers were unaware or unconcerned about peer relationships and the effect of those on individuals and their learning. Their relationship was a teaching relationship not a personal, accessible one. Students could not respond to them and share problems, whether to do with learning, home or personal issues. The classroom was not familial but detached and the teacher had minimal interest in the student as a person. Some participants believed some unempathic teachers simply did not care about students and deliberately ignored their problems because it was easier. Others felt that such teachers were simply unaware or affected by personal or system constraints. Unempathic teachers only teach the current lesson and do not expect to play the role of psychologist or social worker with a long-term interest in individual development. This made them weak at supporting learning because they were unaware of individuals’ understanding or problems and the effort they were making, and were therefore unable to cater for individual requirements. Several teachers made this point. As a result, they tend to blame the student for any problems rather than their own teaching, often rejecting students. Poor relationships produced labelling and rigidity. Such teachers spread negative labels around to other staff, giving the students wider problems in school. They do not accept students’ limitations and blame lack of effort. Therefore, they do not attempt alternative teaching strategies and are less likely to accept advice. Their lack of any detailed understanding leads them to set inappropriate tasks, which inhibit learning, and they make inappropriate remarks, which can destroy selfesteem. This can have a domino effect in other lessons and can destroy other teachers’ extensive efforts to develop students. Their lack of care could be shown by two extremes, either criticising students heavily and inappropriately or, alternatively, by being too laissez-faire and not showing care about the quality of work or behaviour. One wider effect is that such teachers can come to symbolize all teachers and the system, giving the profession a bad name. Colleagues then have to work twice as hard to dispel the myth that all teachers are the same. Particular types of students seemed to be at risk from such teachers. Exceptionally able students were not tolerated for their ability to challenge, but also students with special needs and difficult students were particularly susceptible to their fixed attitudes. Such teachers could be intolerant, insensitive and prejudiced against students with multiple needs, and even believed that ‘SEN are “down there” and must be punished for it’ (Anna). Such teachers were prepared to teach the curriculum and syllabus every day in a blanket way ‘regardless’ of needs, not helped by the ‘one- size-fitsall’ approach of the national curriculum. Teachers who stuck rigidly to the


155

curriculum without catering for individual needs were considered to be very unempathic. Such teachers separate the child and teacher into very distinct roles and are less bothered about marking constructively or individually; it is more of a routine procedure. If the syllabus is inflexible, their teaching becomes restricted and, conversely, those who did not value the National Curriculum at all showed similar inflexibility. Their self- centred approach leads them to organize the classroom for their own convenience and there is little room for dialogue and negotiation. The classroom atmosphere is more likely to be cold and unhappy, and the students reflect the attitude of the teacher, making them unhappy, too. There can also be an atmosphere of: ‘low-level fear’ (Tanya). The students can be scared of showing emotion and of asking questions for fear of reprimand or ridicule. They keep a low profile and do just enough to survive, mirroring the teacher’s own behaviour. Cold, distant, uncommunicative teachers make students feel insecure, and then they lack confidence to speak about academic or social issues. This atmosphere really inhibits the SEN child, who perhaps already has low selfesteem. The teacher, giving inappropriate tasks, can make the students feel anxious and insecure or even bored and frustrated. Consequently, students lack security or pleasure and stimulus and are inhibited from learning. The uncommunicative, unlearning, indifferent teacher who will not deal with problems or tackle issues sets a bad example to students in all these respects for human interaction and learning. Consequently, such teachers are very ineffective. They cannot differentiate or personalize learning or value the student’s understanding and do not reflect on and evaluate their own teaching. Their inappropriate use of high-level language can make the subject matter incomprehensible and, consequently, they lower selfesteem and inhibit learning. Their use of the same materials and tests for all abilities ensures repeated failure for some students and the unavoidable low results are often followed by punishment for the lower- achieving pupils. Several teachers suggested that they have persistent levels of bad behaviour in lessons because students are insecure and unhappy. The general conclusion was that unempathic teachers are unable to assess pupils adequately and are therefore unable to stimulate and scaffold learning appropriately. Terry angrily described them as ‘useless’ teachers. Teachers who were not understanding and adaptive were considered less moral. Several believed this lack of empathy was linked with racism and prejudice because preformed beliefs were fi xed and unchangeable with experience. Some interviewees recognized that some teachers found deep

156


emotional understanding very difficult and that they probably only survived by keeping their distance. As has become apparent through these findings, however, low levels of empathy can be caused by many factors in combination, and ineffective learning is the result. Empathy appears to be, to some extent, context dependent. Therefore, a teacher in a large class, with many needy pupils, cannot effectively model what they would like but only what they are able. Such conditions may also limit the emulation of the teacher model. The class teacher, with many students to support, has to check superficially that they are learning, but cannot scaffold them consistently. Classroom teachers often have insufficient time to form the very supportive relationships needed by students with greater need. Delayed communication and response could mean problems multiply through lack of understanding. Large classrooms and the resulting lack of empathy result in some students not thriving. The teacher’s encouragement and understanding should prevent fear of failure, but this is harder to achieve sufficiently for needy students in large classes. For student teachers, also, their limited time in school naturally restricts the amount of understanding they can have of individuals and they realize that. A very authoritarian teacher who creates too much fear and anxiety, who shows dislike for students and who creates dislike in them will prevent learning and neither educational or personal issues can be resolved which has implications for moral modelling. Interestingly, some teachers, although struggling to empathize with some students themselves, understood that other teachers were able to teach them more effectively. Anna’s head of department gave her the most difficult individuals because she knew that if she herself had them, ‘they would just spend half the lesson outside the door’ (Anna). However, the head of department was also making her own life easier by passing difficult students on. There could also be much longer-term effects of low levels of empathy in the school system. Students who felt they had failed in school or who felt anxious or valueless could help to recreate the fear of failure in the next generation, in addition to being deprived of life chances and fulfilment themselves. They might be reluctant to speak to their own children or their teachers about their schooling, perpetuating cycles of under-achievement.

Effects on Teacher Teaching is likely to be less rewarding and more stressful for unempathic teachers, and this unhappiness and stress may affect their home lives. When teaching is difficult, it can be easier to be less empathic, as


157

protection against situations that are upsetting or damaging. If their relationships with students are poor, then they are likely to feel less happy and they struggle to like students or enjoy their job.

Effects on Other Teachers and Relationships Responses about unempathic teachers tended to produce strong negative emotions in the teachers interviewed, despite understanding the reasons for their behaviour. Martin and Terry expressed great anger at the effect of these teachers on students and other colleagues, and another found that such teachers left her speechless. Unempathic staff do not help younger teachers. If they have decided they have nothing left to learn, they will not help others. Just as they saw students as members of a class rather than individual people, they also saw other adults as teachers, not people with lives.

Effects of Feigned Empathy Though no one referred to teachers when they talked about feigned empathy, it is a phenomenon that does occur in education. A relationship that is deceitfully cultivated for the adults’ rather than the students’ benefit can have damaging effects. Terry described the shock of discovering fraud by a very likeable, plausible member of his administrative staff. He also described how people feign positive emotions and hide their real feelings and motives.

Rhetoric and Reality No one in the main project showed features of feigned empathy. However, the effect of mixed messages and lower levels of empathy on young students in the pilot study was to make them feel uneasy and insecure. People referred to managers using feigned empathy to manipulate staff, which left staff cynical and lacking trust. A more subtle effect was when the system, structure or management gave one message and the teacher gave another; for example, the teacher valued the SEN child but the system did not, and this left both teacher and child frustrated and confused. It can produce what Sara referred to previously as ‘institutional empathy removal’ for some students in particular; even though individual teachers might support them, frustrated students often truant and only appear for lessons where they are valued. Teachers might feel unhappy at work but

158


cannot always identify quite why, often blaming themselves. Students probably blame themselves or see themselves as alien or abnormal, as a result. Teachers might want to be more empathic but their actions are bound by the many constraints outlined earlier in this chapter. Sara blames herself for not having enough time for individuals, when there is actually little time for any individual empathy in the fragmented secondary system. Student teachers, particularly, felt this conflict and unhappiness. When it was impossible to meet all needs, they questioned their own ability. Here the effects of lower levels of empathy become the next set of constraints and when teachers are embedded in a well- established system, it is hard for them to distinguish which problems are caused by the system and which by themselves. Many authors have discussed the problems of education systems, and large classes have hardly changed since the early days of state systems, whereas private schools typically have much smaller classes. In the UK and in many other countries, rigid curricula and normative testing are embedded in the system. The features of unempathic teachers closely resemble more traditional ways of teaching, anyway. It would seem from these findings that unless we make radical changes, we are perpetuating systems that limit the development of empathy and, therefore, engagement, moral values, high quality teaching and development of the whole person. Hargreaves (2001a) explains the constraints of education systems, the impact on teachers’ emotions, and the differences between primary and secondary, as well as the problems with unwanted, imposed reforms. Nias (1996) explains how teachers struggle when values in schools differ from their personal values. The many constraints on empathy and values in schools limit both learning and the moral models they offer students, more of which will be discussed in the following chapter, which looks at the observation data and interactions between staff and students.

Chapter 7

Modelling Empathy and Values in the Classroom

First, it is clear from Chapter 4 that these teachers believe that profound empathy in higher- quality relationships is closely associated with a moral approach. In all their thoughts and interactions with students, teachers aim to demonstrate a deep sense of care and concern for the student, combined with a desire to optimize the students’ growth and development. Equally clear is that functional empathy, the adaptation for large classes, although described by the same teachers with the same intentions, has profound limitations for modelling morality because in large classes the individual can only momentarily feel valued through personalized interaction with the teachers, due to the 1:30 ratio. Unintentionally and unavoidably, these teachers, treating people in large classes as groups, model stereotyping. Moreover, schools and educational systems, by organizing teaching in large groups and using standardized normative assessment systems, can leave needy students and those at the lower end of the spectrum in terms of assessments feeling particularly unvalued. This chapter looks at the classroom observations which confirmed much of the interview data, aspects of which have also been revealed in other research. Approximately fi fty hours of lessons were observed and field notes made of other activities and conversations. A detailed explanation of the range of sessions is given in Chapter 4. This section discusses a selection of observation data to illustrate the different ways empathy could be seen at work in practice. The observation data correlates well with the interview data and the behaviours and attitudes teachers talked about in the interviews were visible in classrooms. The observations also revealed issues which were less apparent in the interview data, including the sheer skill, energy and work rate of these teachers, whom it was a privilege to observe. The lesson observations were classified into three different categories shown below:

160


Personalized Interaction Focused group interaction Less focused group interaction

After the preliminary descriptions of the three lesson types, there follows a discussion to highlight the key issues revealed in relation to the interview data shown in Chapter 4. In order to illuminate the analysis of empathy at work in the classroom, three typical extracts have been chosen from the analysis of classroom observations, to demonstrate the main types of empathic classroom practice seen in this research and to illuminate the similarities and differences between them. At no time was any very poor behaviour observed, a testament to the high quality of lessons taught, by both experienced and student teachers. However, the quality and nature of the interaction and engagement varied considerably between these three categories. In addition, several significant incidents and vignettes are discussed which further illuminate the analysis of empathy. The head teacher observed did not teach, but examples of his interactions in school were analyzed and revealed empathy in action.

Personalized Intensive Interaction One-toone and small group lessons with support teachers were very alike in quality, despite the four very different personalities and situations observed. In these lessons, positive behaviour and continuous high levels of engagement and interaction with individuals were seen, even in the lesson with the needy boy discussed later in, ‘The Grimace’. These lessons showed high levels of both fundamental and profound empathy. Approximately fi fteen hours of teaching fell into this category. The lessons varied from between one and four students per group. This first example is of a support teacher who interacts mainly in one-to-one situations. The extracts from the narrative account, written in a creative style to expose the emotion, first give a flavour of her highly adaptive behaviour in which she uses functional empathy in the staff room. This is followed by her one-to-one lesson, which is a typical example of profound empathy at work.

Focused Group Interaction All experienced classroom teacher lessons and many student classroom teacher lessons had considerable similarities. These were noticeable for


161

their use of empathy at multiple levels. They used mainly functional empathy, both for whole classes and small groups, but enriched it with moments of fundamental and profound empathy for individuals. Approximately thirty-four hours of teaching fell into this category. The example shown is an experienced teacher working with a full class. One can see fundamental, functional and profound empathy at work here in the annotated extract. The students are engaged and involved, with many of them participating in the discussion sections, either as part of the whole class or in pairs.

Less Focused Group Interaction A few student teacher lessons were noticeable for the teacher’s more restricted use of functional empathy, which had implications for the cohesion of the lesson. Approximately three hours of teaching fell into this category. The example here is a student teacher on final teaching practice, taking time with individuals in the style of fundamental and profound empathy. However, she seems to interact less intensively with the group as a whole, which in classroom teaching is important for group cohesion and engagement. However, she does use functional empathy effectively at times. Though she knows this group, she has had few lessons with them over the course of the teaching practice.

Discussion of Observation Data The observation data will now be related back to the classification and features of empathy from the interviews, and the three different types of lesson will be compared (for more detail, see Cooper, 2002). The purpose here is to support understanding of the kinds of empathy being used. The lesson observations were written up as narrative accounts, from which extracts have been taken. Categories of empathy from the interviews, listed in the various diagrams in Chapter 4, are shown in brackets when they occur in the lesson, using the opening phrase of the category. By way of an introduction, the extract below, which was written in more dramatic style to highlight this excellent example of adaptive behaviour, shows Claire’s relationships with staff, followed by the start of her individual lesson with student Lin Wey. In her role as staff room joker, she employs functional empathy, and all the staff share emotions, as they fall into fits of laughter. Her verbal and bodily movements are exaggerated and ‘performed’ for the group. One would imagine that this put them in a

162


good mood for their first lesson of the day. However, we see a total transformation in Claire when she begins her session with Lin Wey, a shy Chinese pupil, to whom Claire teaches English on a peripatetic basis. Here features of profound empathy and its impact can be seen throughout. Claire hit the staff room like a force-ten gale, sweeping though the tranquil twin- set and pearls ambience with the gusto and majesty of a giant, eighteenth- century Boulton and Watt steam engine. It was as if they had been waiting for her and they resisted momentarily, attempting to assert their independence before this towering storm. Undaunted, Claire powered her way to the sink, attacked the kettle as if it were some wild beast awaiting her taming force and flicked the ‘on’ switch as though to release some long-pent up power. The stories of the breakdown, the car-pushing episode and wild run to the garage in her high-heeled shoes erupted from her with the style and humour of a latter- day music hall comedienne. They were at her mercy and capitulated completely, hugging their sides, bent over with mirth and for the first time that day enjoying themselves. The transition from staff room joker to personal tutor was as significant to the research as Claire’s staff room performance. I went into the library to set up the tape recorder while Claire went to fetch Lin Wey. As they entered the library, Claire appeared quite transformed. They both peeped round the side of the door at me, smiling as if to say, ‘Here we are’, in unison. Lin Wey was a small Chinese girl with inquiring eyes, and a listening, slightly apprehensive face. Claire seemed suddenly reduced to half her previous size and personality. She was bent down to bring herself down to the level of the child, looked into her eyes and was totally focused on Lin Wey when she whispered to her. Already, she had turned the session into a game and fun in our introduction. They went over to the desk and sat down. Faces and bodies turned together, a mere two inches apart and scanning each other like lovers, they began their dialogue of the day.

Personalized Intensive Interaction Example Claire went on to teach a lesson in English as a second language with 9-year- old Lin Wey, sharing a variety of activities with her. It was typical


163

example of personalized intensive interaction and the analysis shows many features of profound empathy in teaching and learning. The tasks are targeted specifically at the child’s needs and support rapid development of spelling, reading, speaking and listening (needs meeting). The activity also linked into Lin Wey’s work with the classroom teacher, which shows Claire adapting to the situation (adapt) and being aware of maintaining relationships with other staff (staff relationships) and she is also performing a bridging role here by linking up the relationships between all three of them (bridging). Though the first spelling task itself is simple by nature, Claire makes it fun (pleasure), for example teasing Lin Wey about being in the staff room and asking if she is a teacher. Then she teases her about sneaking a glimpse of the words on her spelling list and then motivates her when she moves to the next task: ‘Now for a lovely bit! Do you want to have a look inside this envelope?’ Here Claire is promising more fun, empowering Lin Wey by letting her choose, and simultaneously inviting her curiosity and her imagination (pleasure). She asks her many open questions within a minute or two (accepting/open). By dint of the one-toone situation, she is giving her time (time- givers) and personal attention (sole- attention). The climate is very relaxed and informal (relaxed climate). Throughout, she affirms her and praises her, beginning with ‘you did that one quickly!’ (positive and affirmative approach), and also gives her personal validation (positive and affirmative approach) by allowing her to talk about personal events, for example an incident in the staff room. Claire shows a lot of the initial characteristics of fundamental empathy (listening, being interested, giving attention) and showing (enthusiasm). She makes the session very human, joking about the teachers and the class teacher forgetting his word list and Lin Wey peeping (being me, being human). She asks about Lin Wey’s pierced ears and her experiences in the staff room (personal/academic link). Claire builds up a complex personal picture of Lin Wey, and vice versa, through the conversation (exchange information, talk and communication). Later, she – Lin Wey – talks about her family and her baby brother whom she frequently has to look after. The teacher is warm and they share jokes and laughter (friendship, emotional links). Lin Wey’s eagerness to participate, combined with her success in the activity and Claire’s praise, ‘ten out of ten first time – ten out of ten – that’s lovely’, raise her selfesteem and sense of achievement (positive and affirmative approach, builds greater esteem, optimizes learning). This pleasurable, highly individualized learning with choice and fun and

164


sharing involves constant formative assessment, which aids achievement (optimizes learning). In terms of the moral aspects of rich empathy, Claire shows many other features (consideration and care, politeness and sensitivity, praise, valuing, good humour and understanding). One gets the sense of a joint endeavour by the shared nature of the interaction and some of the words are even spoken in unison or echoed, one by the other. The work is shared with the classroom teacher, as well. Lin Wey’s behaviour echoes the teacher’s (emulating empathy). She makes her own jokes about the classroom being too noisy and her teacher usually forgetting his word list. She works hard and enjoys her work. Claire uses no reprimands or threats because the atmosphere is positive and tailored to Lin Wey’s needs. The continuous support and sensitivity mean she will have no fear of failure or threat, demonstrating various benefits of empathy (success, security and trust). Although we cannot see every category at work in this account, we can get a good flavour of how the interview data marries with practice and how Claire models a total approach of valuing and care in her interactions.

Focused Group Interaction Example In the second lesson type, an experienced teacher worked with an entire class. She is teaching history with a class of twenty-four 13-year- olds. She mainly interacts with the whole group, for much of the lesson treating them as one entity, using functional empathy but at times incorporating features of fundamental and profound empathy. There are too many examples of the complex features of empathy at work here to show every one, so I have tried to show a range in this extract. Her classroom is designed to stimulate learning but also to meet students’ needs, and she must have spent time creating the resources around the room (time- giving, environment/resources wider relationships). However, the textual support on the wall is designed to support a targeted group of students, those with literacy problems, so she is demonstrating functional empathy (mental groupings). She could not possibly cater to every individual’s literacy needs. Another display, ‘Why study history’, is targeted at yet another group of older students looking towards their careers, probably 16-, 17- and 18-year- olds. As pupils arrive, Sara takes the time, albeit briefly, to address them all individually. Here she is displaying facets of profound empathy by


165

treating them individually (seeing the individual) and taking the time to do this (time- givers). She is offering fundamental empathy (attention giving), even if in only minute amounts. Sara then goes into a period where she uses group empathy and interacts in a very focused way with the class as a whole. She uses features of fundamental empathy (means of communication), body language, movement, role-play gesture, and dramatic voice tone and emotive speech to revisit Thomas Becket’s murder. She uses many of the categories of fundamental empathy, but in an interaction with the group as a whole (enthusiastic, listens, elicits responses, positive and affirmative). She addresses individuals and groups at a rapid pace, but the entire delivery is done so that the group as a whole can understand and engage with the topic and have a clear idea of the task in hand. She laughs at herself and makes another joke (pleasure, fun, humour). The pace is rapid; we must remember we are delivering English national curriculum history here and the curriculum is packed. The class is going to create an electronic newspaper account of Becket’s murder, so they have to move to the computer room. Unfortunately, it turns out to be double-booked. Sara apologizes openly (being human) and returns to the History classroom. Many teachers being observed might have struggled at this point, but not Sara. The new topic is well prepared in advance, so she can move swiftly on without any hesitation. The ‘restoration of the monarchy’ is the next topic and again she moves into an ‘up-front’ dramatic persona orchestrating the group, using gesture and voices as before (facial expression, movement and gesture). She makes sure the session is interactive, sharing the dialogue (empathic/ moral link), and gives one student superlative praise for his reading: ‘Excellent – well-read’ (positive and affirmative approach). She engages in questions and answers, ‘working’ the class, trying to involve everybody (all children). She echoes and elaborates students’ responses so the rest of the class can hear (positive and affirmative), but also extends understanding (explain why). She gets close to individuals (height and distance), and asks questions to make them think (accepting/open). She gives a visual reprimand to one errant student, which reasserts a boundary (boundary- setting), re-invoking the more distant relationship used in the setting up of groups. The students volunteer readily for questions (talk and communication), while the remainder of the class remain quiet and listen (emulation of empathy). After some more intensive whole class interaction (group empathy), she organizes some pair work and she moves around the room at a very

166


fast pace, working with the pairs. This gives her more opportunity to work with individuals (seeing the individual) and them more opportunity to share (sharing) and speak (talk and communication). Nevertheless, she cannot get to every pair and they have worked as a pair, so even this has an element of group rather than individual empathy. Finally, she reiterates their points and make the key ones significant (explain why). They have a joke as a class (pleasure, fun, humour and group empathy). Sarah goes to work closely with a group (height and distance) and gives them very detailed positive support for a few minutes (time- givers), but it is a group not an individual (group empathy). She does the same with other groups. Nearly all students are on task discussing avidly (talk and communication), and they model her approach (emulation of empathy) and she arouses their emotions (group empathy) using strong facial expressions (facial expression). She moves to pupils who request help or she notices who needs help (needs meeting). She encourages them to listen (manners) in order to engage their attention (giving attention). She uses a verbal cloze procedure to support their interaction, which creates a shared dialogue (moral/empathic link). Then she has a very equal and grown-up dialogue with them, asking their opinions (mutual respect). The complexity of what this excellent teacher is doing starts to emerge in this extract and is a good example of all the different ways she is working and interacting, just within one lesson. It reveals exactly how complex an empathic approach is in teaching and learning. Many categories of empathy are seen being used, but most interactions are with the whole group or small groups, demonstrating functional empathy. She demonstrates care but at a distance and not often individually. To show profound empathy with all individuals in large classes seems impossible. Less- Focused Group Interaction Example In the final lesson type, less-focused group interaction, Fay, a student teacher, uses all kinds of empathy, like Sara, but less functional empathy. She takes twenty-nine 11-year- old pupils for music on a hot day in a mobile classroom. Both because of the noise and the heat, she eventually disperses the group onto the grass. The room had been carefully prepared with all the instruments/work laid out, which shows an attention to resources (resources/environment). Fay uses a piano chord as an initial communication symbol for the whole


167

class (means of communication). She bends down (height and distance) to speak to individuals and models courteous behaviour (manners). She uses hand gestures (gestures). She gives positive assessment of their homework (assessment). She uses her face and voice to communicate clearly (facial expression, voice tone). She is watching the whole class (all children) and is very positive (positive and affirmative). She insists on rules of politeness for discussion (boundaries and manners) and questions and guides a pupil who has no pen (explain why). She is using sufficient fundamental empathy in her means of communication to engage the whole class when she addresses them and her individual conversations are very personal (adapts to individual and environment). The students are doing a task that involves distinguishing between notes on the piano, an activity addressed to the whole class, showing group empathy. As they begin to work, she moves around the class from table to table (teaching methodology), bending down and supporting with advice (height and distance; explain why). She has provided a suitable task because they all seem engaged and she seems relaxed and calm (relaxed climate). One group begins to get noisy. Fay addresses pupils by name (language). She is bent over a table at the other side of the room (height and distance). She addresses the whole class to make a point (group empathy), switches sides of the room to this group (movement), explains a point (explain why), and then makes a positive comment (positive and affirmative approach). She speaks to many individuals, albeit briefly (time- giver, sole-attention), and uses a child’s name to return her to task (language; boundary setting). A group is beginning to play around but she does not notice; then she does and uses a name again, sharply to make clear her dissatisfaction (language; boundary setting). Fay is trying to concentrate on the learning of individuals (time- giver, sole- attention). Eventually, she moves to the table where girls were being silly (height/distance; boundary setting). She gives extra questions to some that have finished (teaching groups differently). This student teacher has also shown many types of empathy in this short extract and had an extremely busy lesson, working very hard to make this class work.

Comparison of Lessons All the lessons show considerable features of empathy, but are different. Claire is able to show continuous aspects of fundamental and profound

168


empathy because she is working one-toone and the reciprocal nature of the close relationship is evident. Very quickly, the personal and positive nature of the learning relationship is also evident. Claire knows in minute and precise detail the level of Lin Wey’s understanding and responds moment by moment to scaffold her learning, ensuring success and creating meaning for her by probing her understanding through her personal experience. The whole process is shared, enjoyable and fun, and Lin Wey is totally engaged and learning rapidly throughout, building literacy and language skills. Learning and personal interaction are continuous and pleasurable. The dialogue is shared and involves non- stop focused interaction, centred on one child’s learning and development, a model of care. Lin Wey receives non- stop sole-attention, feedback, personal validation and praise. Sara’s lesson has many similar features, even though she teaches an entire class. The continuous focused interaction is there, the humour and pleasure, and sense of being engaged in a shared, rapidly interacting, learning dialogue. The same sense of urgency and involvement in the work is there. Only rarely does she have to set boundaries and then tends to use a look, which does not intrude on atmosphere with the rest of the class. She motivates and engages the class by her communication skills, enthusiasm and positive approach. The pupils engage in whole class, pair and small group dialogue, so have a few opportunities to be heard as well as listening. They are thrown into roles and encouraged to consider different perspectives. The main difference between these two lessons is the personalized approach, which Claire is able to adopt. Lin Wey is made to feel understood, special, successful and valued for the entire one-hour lesson. None of her problems, pleasures, understanding or lack of it can escape Claire’s attention. In Sara’s lesson, the general climate is very positive but the class acts and functions as a whole unit. Sara knows the general level of understanding and probes to find it and extend it, but the nature of large classrooms is that her attention, though appearing to be omnipresent, cannot be focused on each individual all of the time. She can only take rare opportunities to make individual students feel special and get to grips with their understanding and problems. She makes entrances and exits a time for momentary personal interaction. Though that moment in itself may be important symbolically for students, she only gets small moments of interaction with small groups or individuals as she moves at speed around the room. There could be innumerable hidden learning issues in Sara’s classroom which would never be revealed because there is no opportunity to reveal it and, anyway, revelation in front of peers is not always advisable. The hidden


169

issues are masked by the need for whole class interaction. In terms of dialogue, whereas it moves in turn between Claire and Lin Wey in the first lesson, in the class it moves between Sara and one of twenty- four pupils. In very positive whole class interaction, though engaged, the student has only a small slice of the dialogue cake, expressing themselves and their understanding less frequently, receiving less feedback and validation. The praise given to individuals in class must be shared among them all, whereas Lin Wey gets constant positive and personal affirmation. In large classes, there are likely to be several Lin Weys struggling with literacy, and several others struggling with emotional and personal problems which impinge on their learning. Few of these can be explored and addressed in the context of the lesson. Sara was only able to spend a few individual minutes with one child in this lesson. Yet, in the interviews, Sara understood only too well the effectiveness of ‘big-time empathy’. Fays’ lesson was different again. She was a student teacher and showed many aspects of empathy in her teaching. For much of the lesson, pupils were engaged and Fay took several opportunities to work with and speak to individuals to sort out and understand issues about their work and behaviour, naturally wanting to show profound empathy. However, the lesson never had the continuous focused intensity of Sara or Claire’s lesson. There may have been several constraints causing this. The group was very disparate and very young, and she only had them one lesson a week, so perhaps did not know them very well. They were year seven and several of them were already on report for some reason, because Fay had to sign report slips at the end of the lesson. They were a large group in a small hot classroom, so conditions were not ideal for either the theoretical or practical aspects of the lesson. Though Fay was able to successfully use group empathy when she chose to, she could have used it more to engage students positively in the lesson. When she made her feelings clear, the group responded, but sometimes she was vague or engaged for long spells with individuals, at the expense of the positive interaction with the group. Then, as the group attention drifted, she was obliged to set boundaries frequently, making the atmosphere much less positive. She used the various control mechanisms more than her enthusiasm and positive emotion to unite the class. Again, because it was a large class with a number of needy students, there were many hidden issues here. One little boy was not engaged at all, and he was never drawn in to the lesson. He probably needed considerable personal time with the teacher to understand, assess and motivate him, which was simply not feasible. Keeping the group together and positively focused

170


is hard work, and Sara exhausted herself doing this, but it is the advantage of group empathy with large classes. Fay perhaps worked too much with individuals, rather than motivating the group as a coherent whole. Her lesser interaction with the whole group led to a less-intensely focused and less-positive atmosphere, though she adapted well to the problems she encountered and, on the whole, the lesson went well. The key message coming out of these three lessons is that class lessons require and use more focused group empathy, although teachers use aspects of all types. Profound empathy is only shown in tiny pockets in large classes. Teachers struggle to support individual learning in large classes because if they focus on individuals, the group may drift and some students could be lost. Conversely, smooth-running large classes gloss over the hidden differences between pupils. For the most part, teachers must imagine that all students think the same way. The amount of personal validation, motivation and precisely scaffolded learning going on in large groups cannot really compare at all in quality or quantity with one-toone sessions, where profound empathy and its more powerful effects are the norm. In order to ‘work’ a group most effectively, therefore, it seems classroom teachers must make less of individuals and categorize students into groups, thus modelling a less moral approach to individuals (as explained in Chapter 4, Conclusions about Functional Empathy), though maintaining a group sense of goodness. Teachers realize the importance of understanding and interacting with individuals, but this usually happens in the stolen moments at the beginning and end of lessons or in the teachers’ own time. The moral model offered in groups is less personal, more competitive, less individualized. The time and sole attention crucial to feeling ‘worthy’ and which will allow students to feel others are also worthy, are just not available in any quantity for anyone.

Discussion of Critical Incidents To further illuminate the understanding of empathy in practice, several critical incidents will be briefly discussed.

The Salmon Joke A disaffected student comes in late into a geography lesson (15-year- old students), last lesson of the day. He has been at a meeting with social workers and members of staff, reviewing his behaviour and problems. He comes


171

in, the teacher welcomes him, he settles to work and presently, during some banter with the teacher, he tells a witty joke with a pun on the word ‘salmon’ and makes everyone laugh. This appeared to be good example of a pocket of profound empathy taking place within a classroom lesson. Its existence is highly dependent on previous conversations and understanding developed between teacher and pupil, and its significance only emerged in the conversation after the lesson. The friendly affection shown for all pupils in the lesson with their friendly or shortened names like ‘Jonesy’ and ‘Smithy’ or ‘Han’ for Hannah and ‘Bar’ for Barry, and the emotional links made through discussions of fishing and sweets were a prime example of the closeness and affection that can exist in mature, empathic classroom relationships. Will revealed after the lesson that the boy who made the salmon joke had a range of problems and was regularly excluded from other lessons, but had never been a problem in his lessons. Here is a difficult student, though late, welcomed into the room with affection and understanding. His situation and his problems are known, his hobbies appreciated and his jokes. In this instance, the teacher is aware that the student likes fishing, which allows him to make his pun, building on the humour initiated by the teacher within the class group. Here the boy is accepted, understood and liked, and his interests and wit appreciated. The teacher is the model for this. The boy seems happy in himself and happy to engage with learning in this situation. Significantly, this boy’s engagement in this lesson has no connection with the teaching of National Curriculum; it has to do with the fact that the teacher likes, knows and values him as a person. The Coming of the Giant The emotional engagement engendered by the drama in this lesson was a joy to watch. The teacher staged a ‘break-in’ into the classroom, complete with giant footprints and missing sunflower seeds and allowed the children to discover it and work out what had happened. The children (twenty- five) all had to search for clues around the school and grounds, to discover who could have taken them. These 5-, 6- and 7-year- old children would not forget this lesson and it would have left their imaginations considerably extended. It was a brave lesson for a student teacher, because creating whole group excitement with little children can result in chaos. The lesson showed features and effects of group and profound empathy. They all appeared touched as a group by the emotions of this lesson (group empathy). Sylvia seemed to have got inside the mindset (get inside) of her pupils. It was like a story from children’s literature and yet it involved

172


them quite personally, because their seed packets had been stolen and their classroom had been invaded (personal/academic link). The children were able to share this powerful experience together (sharing). Empathic teachers support teaching methodologies such as drama and role-play and they are more adventurous in their teaching (optimizing learning). The excitement it engendered was a powerful motivator for literacy (developing positive emotions and interactions). The children could not wait to write their newspaper report. A Teacher Touches One’s Life Forever This extract takes its title from a picture in the office of Terry, the head teacher. His narrative account was quite unique because he was not teaching lessons. He was observed interacting with a parent, students, staff and the whole school in assembly. Nevertheless, the different aspects of empathy could still be seen in his interactions, which suggests that this analysis of empathy goes beyond an understanding of teacher/pupil interactions. Terry explained that he had donated his inspection fees to the school, showing an ability to put his empathy into action, understanding and giving priority to his staff’s financial needs (persistence/self- sacrifice). His educational philosophy put care above all else in his dealings with children, staff and parents, and this care was strong and responsible in its outlook (conceptions of morality) and valued physical contact with students (physical contact). When he interacted with a parent, his attitude was adult, understanding, reasonable and facilitating (adapt to individual and environment). When he interacted with the man’s 4-year- old child, he bent down to her level (height and distance), reassured her about starting school and said that they were looking forward to having her there, and entered her world of holidays and sticks of rock, empowering her as a tiny child by asking a favour of her (adapted to person and environment: get inside). His delighted facial and bodily gestures when she agreed were incredibly child-like, mirroring an infant’s way of communicating (means of communication). When Terry led the assembly, we could see the adaptive teacher behaviour click into gear and the immediate ability to take responsibility for a group and use strong means of communication to signal intentions and responses to the group in a performance style (adapting to environment). It probably looked more effortless than it was (relaxed climate), but he could switch from serious to humorous in a moment, and from imperial commander to joker at the turn of a phrase (switch emotions). Here, he


173

used group empathy and was able to touch the shared emotions of children, from pleasure in a story about pancakes to sadness at the thought of bullies, with seemingly little effort (group empathy). Later, he and a visitor share their thinking (sharing). We hear his view of the importance of care above training when dealing with special needs students (conceptions of morality). We hear how highly valued he is by parents and the community from this visitor (teacher/parent relationships), who is delighted by his attitude. The Grimace The following incident is interesting because it gives a flavour of one of the constraints, the nature of individual children, that even teachers working one-toone are faced with. The teacher is working one-toone on literacy and numeracy with this emotionally disturbed child, whose classroom behaviour is usually disruptive. Dean smiles and behaves normally most of the session, but in between happier, more child-like expressions, a tired, sad face appears and once, when they are playing a game, the teachers says ‘no’ to him and he makes an incredibly aggressive almost psychopathic grimace at the teacher. Dean’s fluctuating moods and demeanour contrast with Lin Wey’s positive appearance in the first extract. With this emotionally needy child, the teacher’s constant empathy appears to keep him engaged and relatively happy and offers him an alternative way of being, but he continually lapses, perhaps because historical or home influences are so strong. Charlotte was pleased when such children modelled her positive behaviour, but some of this boy’s expressions were disturbing and raised questions as to where he had learned his very aggressive behaviour and in what circumstances. If Charlotte was masking her negative emotions in order to maintain a positive atmosphere with such students regularly, no wonder she found working one-toone so emotionally demanding. There would be a constant conflict between what she felt and what she showed. He would clearly have struggled to control his emotions and learn in a classroom. The Exam Results This final incident also represents a constraint, the effect of the education system on students and teachers, which affect empathy in teaching and learning. This was voiced by many of the teachers in the interviews. The class was large and very diverse in terms of attainment. After conducting a stimulating and vibrant lesson, the teacher finished the lesson by

174


reading out the exam results, which included a range of marks from A–E. The teacher’s comment to the group, ‘very positive overall’, rang somewhat hollow when one tried to imagine how those with the E’s were feeling, especially if they had probably tried as hard or even harder than some of those with A’s. Here, the positive tone used to the whole group seems contradictory, in a system which judges students competitively against each other and offers very little in the way of incentive and motivation to those achieving at the lower end of the attainment spectrum. It was disappointing, but not surprising, that a very traditional emphasis on normative grades and attainment seemed so alive and kicking in this large, city comprehensive school.

Conclusions Chapter Seven This chapter has discussed data from the three different types of lesson found in the observation data, in relation to the features of empathy shown in Chapter 4. They all show empathic teaching but of a different nature, in different contexts. We have considered other critical incidents to further illuminate different aspects of empathy in interactions and some of the constraints. The highly complex features teachers discuss in their interviews can be seen at work in classrooms. However, though the interviews explain teachers’ deeper understanding, the classroom observations only take a snapshot of interactions in the classroom and cannot reveal the depth of historical relationships between pupils and teachers, which may go back over years. Some relationships, like in the salmon joke, give glimpses of this, however, by referring to conversations and events outside of classrooms, where greater understanding of contributing factors can be understood. The constraints of classrooms affect both research and real understanding about teaching and learning, as much as they do empathy in teaching and learning. However, they do reveal clearly the shortage of time and large ratios in classrooms, which teachers emphasized. They also show exactly how hard classroom teachers work to try and meet needs in almost impossible circumstances. They reveal the high quality of interaction, relationships and learning which can be seen in one-toone teaching and which the classroom teacher rarely experiences. One has to conclude that the quality of learning and engagement, as well as the moral model offered by teachers, could be of a much higher standard if classes were smaller and more time could be found for individual support. In one-toone interaction, we


175

can see the links between empathy and morality, engagement and achievement. In the classrooms, we can see excellent classroom teaching and engagement, but it is clear that some needs go unmet, assumptions must be made about levels of understanding, and individuals are subsumed into whole class interaction and curriculum. Teachers simply cannot model the same highquality individual care. If class teachers try to focus too much on individuals at the expense of whole class interaction, they lose the cohesion of the class and must use control, rules and boundary- setting, making the classroom atmosphere more negative. One of the most famous and elaborate studies of the impact of class size, the Tennessee study (Mosteller, 1995), showed significant improvements in both the achievement and behaviour of students when class sizes were reduced by about a third, from kindergarten and for the next 3 years. The achievement in literacy and maths was significantly more than in normal classes and more than in classes where the teacher had an assistant. Interestingly, the children who had made gains in the smaller classes maintained those gains when they later went into larger classes, so the benefits of smaller classes was long lasting. The small classes were particularly beneficial for students in minority groups. Blatchford (2009) conducted another more naturalistic study and also found gains in literacy and maths, and struggling students did better, as well. Smaller classes allowed teachers to spend more time with individuals, which improved relationships and achievement. These findings are particularly interesting when compared with the data considered here, which explains in subtle detail why smaller classes create better motivation and higher achievement. However, this entire area undoubtedly requires further research, not least to understand the possible negative impact that large classes might be having on both the morality and achievement of students from nursery school to higher education.

Chapter 8

Empathy and Students with Particular Needs: Transformative Learning

The research study described in the previous chapters contained particularly interesting data on the teaching of students with particular needs and has considerable implications for the inclusion debate and has resonances with the Tennessee study, discussed in Chapter 7, which showed that struggling students and ethnic minority students benefited most from smaller classes. Some of the preliminary investigations in this research were conducted with special needs (SEN) and English as an additional language (EAL) support teachers, and at least four of the participants in the main study taught either students with special needs or EAL or both. Though these two categories of students are extremely different and both contain a wide range of students with the same label, they have some features in common. Both groups have very particular needs that require extra support and understanding, and both groups can struggle to access the curriculum in mainstream classrooms. From both the teachers’ interviews and the classroom observations above, when profound empathy is at work, the quality of learning and interaction in one-toone or small group sessions is of a different order, as shown in Chapter 7. Although personal tuition could be transformative for any student and is the key to highquality learning, without doubt it has the greatest significance for students with a range of very particular needs, who without it would be left at the mercy of a normative system and blanket curriculum, which is always likely to place them at the lower end of the achievement spectrum and compound their problems. The meaning of transformative learning in this instance is when a student’s confidence, achievement or behaviour undergoes considerable change and, often, all three aspects effect each other and change together. This change can be highly visible in terms of body language and demeanour, and can be accompanied by a leap in standing in the school community. Suddenly, because of their improvement, the student feels good about themselves and the rest of the world begin to see them as a valued person.

Empathy and Students with Particular Needs

177

The teacher either becomes familiar enough with the child to know their existing skills, which transform their own and other people’s perceptions or alternatively, through high quality teaching, some low levels skills are really improved rapidly, again surprising and impressing other students and staff. In this study, there were several clear examples of teachers identifying students who changed quite dramatically when given one to one support. In addition, I have added to the discussion other examples from my teaching and other research and the literature to promote further understanding of the impact of empathy on students with particular needs.

Students with Special Needs One example from the study above was a little boy with literacy and numeracy difficulties who behaved terribly in class, but once established in a small group became much happier and more confident as he began to make progress in his learning. According to Anna, he was ‘totally different’. It is hard to imagine how some of these students feel in classrooms when they really struggle with the work or the relationships with their peers and they cannot get sufficient help to make any progress. Typically, they tend to either withdraw into themselves or act out. Mary argued that, for a child who is struggling in large classrooms, a little one-toone support is a student’s one chance to ‘thrive’. David, a student teacher, spoke about an aggressive child who changed when he received some personal time and attention, ‘he’ll talk and he’s a different child’. Several teachers, during the interviews acted out the improved body language that students showed when they gained confidence. They became physically bigger, their heads and shoulders were raised and they smiled. They simply looked more confident and happy. Even less-needy students did the same. Sara described the change in body language of students who she chatted to about their work as ‘amazing’. The difficulties that students experience are not only personal but contextual. They will worry about how they feel internally when facing a problem, but also how other students or teachers see them and how parents or other friends or relatives might react and how they might be compared with peers or siblings. In large classes, they feel inadequate compared with their peers. Their anxiety affects their selfesteem and progress, both academically and socially. When selfesteem is at stake and anxiety blocks the capacity to learn, profound empathy through personal tuition can

178


understand and solve the complexity of the problem. Through a process of continuous formative assessment of both an emotional and academic nature, a trusting relationship is established which builds both competence and selfesteem, which are naturally interrelated. Chapter 4 discussed how the nature of profound empathy enables teachers to know the student, personally, emotionally and academically. This enables them to understand and dissipate fears, historical and current, which can inhibit learning and to build selfesteem through sensitive and positive interaction and, also importantly, to know the needs of students. Empathy was essential to the work of the support teachers. Sensitized to the needs of individuals, they were highly critical of teachers who chose to belittle students or labelled them because of low levels of achievement. They were highly alert to the problems in the educational system, which deny special needs students the opportunity to flourish and aggravate their low selfesteem. They used the student’s interests to shape their lessons and modified each lesson based on the previous. They demonstrated extreme patience, they used multisensory learning, jokes and humour to allay anxiety, and carefully supported activities to build confidence and skills. Their relationships were very warm and friendly, less formal than in the larger classroom. In their lessons, profound empathy could be seen throughout the lesson, not just in isolated pockets, making the quality of teaching and learning very high and learning rapid. For such students, the features of ‘the bridging role ‘ and ‘understanding all relationships’ found in profound empathy is especially important because the teacher not only forms a bridge between different levels of understanding in an academic and emotional sense for the student but also with other people. For example, they talk to the class teacher, head teacher, parents, peers and other staff, all of which can have an impact on the student. They are able to change both these people’s perception of the student and the students own image of themselves, which produces a virtuous circle of more positive interactions. The greater the needs of the student, the more empathy is required and students must cope not only with their situation and their unique reaction to it, but with other people’s reaction to it and the school systems response to it. These all add layers, which the empathic teacher tries to unravel and change. This sort of human scaffolding is central to Vygotsky’s theory of the ‘zone of proximal development’ (1978). Students have concepts they understand and others with which they need support, and when they climb from one


179

academic level to another, they require a scaffolder who knows them sufficiently to extend their progress. Confidence begets independence, reducing fear of other new challenges. The emotional element is extremely important because even students who have the potential to progress might actually feel they cannot, and part of a tutor’s role is to support them with both emotional and academic scaffolding. Students with low selfesteem are particularly vulnerable to thinking that they cannot make progress, but the same could apply to any learner who feels threatened in a new situation. This is why transitions from one phase of education to another are so problematic, and why students at every stage struggle or drop out, from home to nursery or school, from primary to secondary, from compulsory to post- compulsory schooling, from school to university. At each step, previous emotional and academic support is replaced by something unknown, something new and often less personal; for example, when peer and tutor interaction is massively reduced in the leap to doctoral level, there are particularly high dropout rates. However, students with particular needs are more vulnerable throughout the schooling process and, in fact, we may be considering any student who either permanently or for a limited period of time requires some special attention. It could be a student with severe autism, or a student who finds reading difficult, or a child whose parents have just split up or a young person who has just suffered bereavement. Emotional traumas can have a profound effect on learning at any point in time. One particular special need is autism. Ranging on a spectrum from severe to mild, or high-functioning, autism, these young people can struggle terribly with the social and interactive skills that the rest of society takes for granted. There is much speculation about the causes of autism and considerable research has been carried out on the condition (Baron- Cohen, 2008), which reveals differences in brain function and impairments in communicative functions and the ability to recognize emotion and process other people’s verbal and non-verbal signals. Autism is increasingly identified and supported in both mainstream classrooms and special units. The severely autistic child could find any normal kind of social interaction extremely difficult, which makes learning and teaching, as well as parenting, exceptionally challenging. They can struggle to show empathy for others due to lack of a social imagination, and yet some autistic individuals also possess fantastic mathematical, musical or artistic skills (Sacks, 1985). One recent and challenging piece of research with severely autistic students (Elzouki, 2011) demonstrates clearly how if enough familiarity is gained with a child in an empathic relationship and their interests and

180


needs are sensitively understood and catered to and their learning personalized, even young people with severe autism can both participate in complex research and show progress in the understanding of emotions. In this study, experimental research methods had to be abandoned and the researcher had to spend considerable time familiarizing herself with the classroom and the students unusual behaviour before addressing each child’s needs and interests individually and forming relationships with them in order to conduct her research. A more qualitative, empathic approach to research with these students proved much more fruitful and this study demonstrates a possible path for future research and the education of students with severe special needs. Students with profound and multiple learning difficulties (PMLD) also need great empathy, in order for teachers even to begin to understand their lived experience. Again the highly sensitive observation and response provided by profound empathy is one of the only ways of supporting small steps in learning and development with these students. One established way of working with both these students and students with autism is through a method called intensive interaction (Hewett and Nind, 1998) or augmented mothering (Ephraim, 1986). The high degree of attention, interaction and response aims to make those neural connections develop more quickly to enable them to improve all aspects of their brain and body development. This intensive interaction resembles the profoundly empathic teaching outlined in this book. Learning is truly personalized and is an educational version of the intensive care seen in hospitals, when an individual’s vital signs and responses are monitored closely and their conditions and treatment adapted, often to preserve their very existence. Similarly, young people with social and emotional problems often need to build a close, trusting relationship with an adult in order to have a basis of selfesteem, before they can make progress in their learning. Special needs teachers realize this and work deliberately to build selfesteem: ‘You’re trying to bolster that [esteem] all the time with the special needs children’ (Charlotte). If the school does not understand their needs and reduces selfesteem even further, students simply do not attend. The teachers know that the students may have no trusting relationships at home and that they are desperate to feel known and valued. However, fragile selfesteem requires careful building and often moment- by-moment support. Special needs teachers praise students constantly and always try to be very positive, not because they are sentimental but because they know that in every other aspect of their life this student feels worthless, and that the slightest criticism can halt their progress. Seeing such children destroy


181

their own work is a common sight and is an indicator of how they feel about themselves. Although parenting may cause some of their problems, some of it is also caused by the educational system in which they have to struggle with insufficient support. Such children present a real challenge in large classes because their needs are complex and unfathomable in the time available. Arguments of ‘well, that’s life’ proclaimed by more-fortunate people or thoughtless politicians who have succeeded in the system are totally unempathic and short sighted. We need to ensure there are no uneducated people with low selfesteem and that everyone has a sense of value and can lead a meaningful life. There is no advantage in an uneducated underclass, who have to turn to crime for survival and who act out their low sense of self-worth on others and create victims and unhappiness. Our prisons are full of people failed by the education system rather than by teachers. Uneducated criminals and their victims require extensive and expensive support from all the social and health services over a life time. Intervention to address both academic and moral development, so intimately interlinked, at an early stage should be a win-win strategy for both individuals and society. Self- esteem goes down on average as young people move into school. The fear of failure or of being inadequate in aspects of your ability or character is damaging. In one study (Cooper and Brna, 2003), 5-year- olds were shown to have relatively high selfesteem and, wonderfully, most of them consider themselves the prettiest or most handsome in the class when asked. However, 2 years later, hardly any child still believed this and selfesteem scores had reduced. The only 6-year- old child, whose selfesteem really improved in a group of fifty- six young students over a 2 year span, had received substantial one-toone inclass support. The child came into school mimicking his violent and bullying father, but after 2 years of excellent individual support in a normal classroom, his behaviour and social skills were vastly improved, along with his selfesteem and achievement. One-toone support produces profound empathy and increases affective and cognitive development. A similar phenomenon, but in terms of literacy development, is described in a paper by Long et al. (2007), who describe an emotional model of literacy for supporting dyslexic students. Once teachers were made aware of how an increasingly disruptive and underachieving student felt about his dyslexia, and how he felt alone and uncared for in school, they were able to adopt a whole raft of measures to remedy his problems, rapidly reversing his decline and making him feel much more positive about himself and school. This reconfirms the work of Aspy

182


(1972) on the relationships between empathy and reading development. This increased awareness of one student’s emotions benefits other students, too, because when teachers learn how to meet one set of special needs, it has positive implications for their teaching in general. This kind of transformative understanding contrasts sharply with policies which, for example, advocate the blanket teaching of phonics to classes with widely diverse attainment levels.

Students with English as Another Language Empathic teaching is vital for students with a non-native language in large classes. Not least, in terms of emotion, is the embarrassment of suddenly feeling inadequate after having being competent in school in their native country and finding communication impossible, both for social and academic purpose, because the entire curriculum is taught in this new, inaccessible language. Having personal help can be embarrassing and being bombarded by a new culture, while your own is ignored or misunderstood, is demoralizing. Many students newly arriving from abroad have lost their friends and extended family, and this new existence may be radically different from their previous life. Additionally, some families move abroad precisely because they have had traumatic experiences and may need specialist psychological support. Students can feel isolated, lonely, deskilled, and unloved and extremely frustrated. To overcome all of this and make progress in learning, the amount of sensitivity an empathic teacher must show is enormous, and all of their effort can be quickly undone by unhelpful comments from less- sensitive staff. Physical contact and great care are important issues in the teaching of children from different cultures (Lang, 2008), and are part of an empathic teacher’s understanding. Additionally, the teacher has to inform other students and staff of the individual situation and find ways of raising the child’s status by highlighting their skills and qualities and valuing their culture and history. A good example from my own teaching was a 7-year- old Chinese girl, Pey, who was new to the country and struggling in her first term in the UK, especially with the language. However, because she was an excellent mathematician, it was possible for her demonstrate to the class how to do some complex maths without much English, and she became much admired by the class teacher and fellow students, as a result. This simple strategy had a tremendous effect on her selfesteem and helped her to integrate within the class, which then enabled her to make strides in other learning.


183

Empathy can produce creativity in teaching and learning, which has a transformative effect on individuals, both in their skills and selfesteem and supports the appreciation of human qualities as well as cultural differences. As Goleman (1995) argued, the effects of empathy are vital to well-being and peace in a diverse global society: Empathy leads to caring, altruism and compassion. Seeing things from another’s perspective breaks down biased stereotypes, and so breeds tolerance and acceptance of differences. These capacities are ever more called on in our increasingly pluralistic society, allowing people to live together in mutual respect. (286)

Conclusions Chapter Eight The link between selfesteem and achievement is clear, and for any person who develops special needs, even for a small period in their life, a person offering profound empathy can both support the affective and cognitive self and remove barriers of fear and doubt to enable some change or development to be made. This is much more likely to happen with sensitive teaching in small groups and one-toone than as members of large classes. In large classes, a teacher is always managing individual and group behaviour, always supporting someone else. Many good teachers work incredibly hard to maintain a positive atmosphere and to avoid dampening spirits and learning with heavy-handed management, but the more diverse and needy the class, the harder this is. If fear and control begin to dominate, learning is inhibited. Empathic teachers teaching large classes try to focus on needy students by giving them extra time, extra moments in their busy days, often at their own or their family’s expense. The downside of this ability to self- efface and give of themselves, replicated in many other professions, can also mean that they do not always demand such moral behaviour from senior staff, that is, they do not insist that managers or governments provide enough resources. Employing profound empathy, we should cultivate the longestterm view of our responsibilities and envisage the future for our students. That may require us to expect more of leaders, politicians and financiers. If managers and teachers themselves believe everything is achievable with personal sacrifice, they may not realize quite how great that sacrifice has been until people burn out, go off sick or simply leave. Moreover, if the

184


issues of overwork or inadequate resources are never properly addressed, then stress and inadequate provision are perpetuated for future generations. Profound empathy for students with particular needs goes beyond the personal commitment of individual teachers, to envisaging better policies and resourcing for the long-term good of students and society. There are many implications, both for individual students but also for policies, as a result of this research. For example, the understanding of the highquality learning, selfesteem and development available in oneto- one situations and the poorer quality found in classrooms has profound implications for the inclusion debate. For too long, teachers and researchers have made the assumptions that students with a range of needs are best served by being included in mainstream classrooms, without knowing sufficiently the disadvantages of mainstream classrooms and the advantages of one-toone support. Of course, these assumptions are made for the best of intentions and for ideological and equity reasons. Understandably, teachers do not want these students to be stigmatized, to feel ‘different’ or left out. They recognize the long-term benefits of inclusion, because when diverse students intermingle, they are more likely to understand each other’s perspectives. However, in very large classrooms, in normative assessment regimes, is this likely to be the case? Too often, students do not receive the resources or teaching they deserve and can be stigmatized within the classroom and treated dismissively by other students and some teachers. All teachers are obliged to model these attitudes to some extent, because there is insufficient time in the working day and within a competitive system to properly meet their student needs. In addition, inclusion has a financial motivation, and perhaps classroom teachers and teacher educators need to consider that by arguing for allout inclusion in large classes, they are serving the interests of the policymakers and financiers. Inclusion is much cheaper for short-term political ends because it requires fewer teaching staff, but in the long term is much more expensive for individuals and society because other services inevitably have to support neglected individuals at a later stage. Many educational researchers are ex-teachers with similar dangerous assumptions, who spend large amounts of time critiquing teacher practice and looking to improve classroom strategies, in the impossible task of effectively meeting the needs of the diverse students within one class. One good example is literacy. In a typical reception class with some children with EAL and some with special needs and a range of other abilities, there can be 8 years difference in reading levels alone, equivalent to having infants and secondary school students in the same class. This gap is


185

likely to increase with age as some students become validated and valued for their high levels of attainment, while others lose selfesteem because of their relatively low achievement in relation to their peers. It is almost ridiculous, therefore, to expect any solo teacher to service this range of literacy abilities successfully, on top of all other skills and aptitudes they are trying to improve, which vary with each child and each class. Yet, because historically a class of around thirty is usual, researchers tend to assume that this is unchangeable and attempt to find solutions for all students within this environment. In reality, it is an unhelpful environment for the development of learning and positive affect, which even Skinner (1956) recognized more than half a century ago. Of course, it is important for students with special needs to integrate socially and academically with a whole range of children, for at least part of the curriculum; however, it does not follow that a class of thirty (or often many more) is the appropriate environment for them or, indeed, any student. The research in Chapters 4–7 shows clearly that teachers in that environment will always struggle to support highquality learning for all students. It would make total sense to reduce class size generally to facilitate positive classroom interaction, but also to ensure that students have some degree of one-toone support to meet their specific learning needs quickly and effectively. Parents who have their children home schooled or educated privately know the value of much smaller group sizes, and that is why they are prepared to pay for it. Similarly, when parents encourage their offspring to apply for Oxbridge or very well-funded universities, they understand that smaller group sizes, personal tuition and fewer needy students supports the quality of both teaching and research. Naturally, if available more widely, such conditions could support much faster progress for all students.

Conclusions Part Two The research outlined in Part Two above explains the very nature and power of empathy in teaching and learning. There was immense correlation between the data in the interviews and observations, both in the pilot and the main study, and from the outset the commonality of views was surprising, even at times the congruence of language used. There were some interesting differences between the experienced teacher and student teacher’s data on a number of issues, though their feelings about and understanding of the role of empathy in teaching and learning were very similar. It must be reiterated that, despite the separation of the data into


186

Profound empathy in one to one interaction allows greater understanding between people

Large overlap of understanding encompasses both affective and cognitive

Person one

Person two

Figure 8.1 Profound empathy in interaction

The larger the group the more limited is any individual interaction with the teacher

Member 7

Member 1

Member 6

Only small shared areas of understanding

Teacher Member 5

Member 4

Member 2

Member 3

Figure 8.2 Interaction in larger groups

categories in the analysis, these teachers understood all these categories as interrelated and compounding. The personal, the social, the academic, the cognitive and the affective, the teacher, the child and peers were all interacting together. These were complex whole people functioning together in intense historical, social and emotional contexts. Real empathy had three main types, fundamental, profound and functional, and was revealed to be a highly complex phenomenon, which adapted to different pupils and contexts and developed in intensity over


187

time and with frequency in relationships. Empathy appears to be situated and embedded, and teachers show pupils that they value them by giving time and attention positively. This study reveals empathy in teaching and learning to be even more complex and crucial to learning and the modelling of morality than the previous literature suggests and at the same time more holistic in its nature. The category of functional empathy, its uses and problems, in the form revealed by this study, seems not to be distinctly identified in previous literature. Empathy involves creating a mental model of other people, which facilitates interaction between them. By learning about and understanding the emotions and thinking of students, teachers can engage them more easily and extend and elaborate their development. Both participants have a rich emotional and cognitive, historical self, which they bring to bear on any interaction. The more a teacher can appreciate a pupil’s self in its entirety, the more they can understand how to develop that self. The historical, emotional and cognitive self is revealed, and hidden, in many ways, through verbal interaction naturally, but also through non-verbal interaction, appearance, body language, accent and voice tone, facial expression and responses to others. Empathic teachers become experts in reading and interpreting all this information and through constant communication they form an increasingly rich mental model of their students. The exchange of both personal and academic information is reciprocal. This facilitates positive learning relationships in which both parties are focused on and engaged with each other and as profound empathy develops it leads to mutual respect and valuing. Students emulate their teachers’ behaviour, which supports moral as well as academic development. Such empathy enables teachers to assess and meet pupils’ needs more precisely in the teaching and learning process. The contexts in which these interactions take place and the nature and number of the participants appear to have a direct bearing on the nature and quality of empathic interaction, as shown in Figures 8.1 and 8.2.

Part Three

Wider Implications: Empathy beyond the School

This final section, which consists of six chapters, considers some of the wider implications of the role of empathy and emotion in human interaction. As well as considering additional data from the study, it connects it to other research and thinking which goes beyond the intimate relationships of teacher and student as described above, to other phases of education, to learning with technology, to management, systems and organization, and to teacher and professional education. It considers values beyond the moral, such as spiritual, creative and aesthetic values and the longer-term implications for wider society and future research.

Chapter 9

The Life-long Learner: Emotional Engagement as the Essence of Learning through the Life Course

From the research described in Part Two, the literature outlined in this book and beyond, we realize that human lives are a constant process of learning and development, from infancy to learning in retirement. It becomes clear that people do not learn in isolation but through interacting intensively with other human beings, and with the natural and man-made phenomena around them. Everyone can remember learning experiences which were or were not enjoyable, and which engaged us or not with subjects or skills. These can be extremely powerful experiences which can affect people’s confidence for life, our ability to write, to read, to do maths, to sing, to draw, to cook, for example. A few kind words from a teacher about our writing may be remembered forever and leave us with a lasting sense of achievement or pleasure in that area. Conversely, negative emotions associated with subjects, although sometimes recoverable later by a sensitive tutor or partner, can remain a barrier for life. The power of emotion to take us to the highest levels of achievement or to literally stop us in our tracks needs considerably more acknowledgement. It is relatively easy to engender panic and anxiety, less easy to rebuild lost confidence at a later date and to counteract the fear and loss of selfesteem which failure has created.

The Significance of Emotion in Early Learning and Development It is vital, therefore, in order to break cycles of negativity about learning, that we raise awareness about the power of positive and intensive interaction from the earliest days of life onwards, and the one place where there can be more opportunity for such intensive interaction is in the home.

192


People who have experienced positive nurturing and interaction as children themselves are more likely to replicate it with their own children, providing the warm and stimulating environment for growth and learning. For those deprived of good parenting, we need systems in place to support them with their children from the earliest days, right on into their maturity. Caring, educated parenting supports a child for life throughout the entirety of their education and beyond (Deforges and Abouchaar, 2003; Elias, 2003), as well as the people they come into contact with and their own offspring. Many young people who achieve most highly have been taught to learn, to read, write and count by their parents before even entering the nursery gate. The strong emotional ties of family relationships provide the most fertile ground for early learning. Positive and life- enhancing social and economic conditions also support parents in their role as carers and teachers of their children. Comfortable living conditions and wages support positive family relationships. Parents under financial and social pressure, living and working in poor housing and deprived areas, where work opportunities and social infrastructure are poor, will naturally find it more difficult to support their children. Raising awareness of the importance of positive interaction, however, regardless of material wealth, might offer some positive benefits for families in difficult situations. Many parents in areas of social and economic deprivation do understand the significance of their relationship with their child and want the best for their children; however, many others need support themselves. Leal (2002) explains how a baby’s sense of personhood develops through responding to social and emotional interaction with others, and Winkley (1996) explains how the neural networks in the brain grow when the baby feels accepted and cared for. Greer (2010), in a keynote lecture, stresses the natural teaching ability of mothers as they converse continuously with their infant children. Bowlby (1951) explains the importance of early attachment and therapists like Docker- Drysdale (1990) explain that children who have been denied this highquality parenting in their early lives need to convey their feelings later to other adults if they are to move forward and develop integrated personalities. Emotion care and attachment are central to human development, without it we struggle to survive. The natural learning strategy of childhood is play, and research shows its significance for learning (Moyles, 2005; Broadhead, 2006). Play and the social joy is common to many creatures, even rats, when tickled, produce ‘ancestral laughter’ (Panksepp, 2008). Young rats also prefer the company of older rats who enjoy this playful approach. Play develops the

The Life-long Learner

193

brain and the ability to engage, through positive affect in those complex social and emotional relationships, which are required for flourishing and integrating into community. Laughter, interaction, a relaxed environment, creativity and risk- taking, and a playful approach are all features associated with empathic teachers, who understand the significance of positive affect for learning and interaction. In addition, Broadhead (2011) stresses the importance of children’s ownership of play, especially when it is imaginative and unstructured, producing high levels of interaction and thinking skills. She also considers how we might extend opportunities for relaxed interaction and deep thinking at all levels of learning, including with adults. We have an affective response to thinking, and cognitive stimulation produces excitement and pleasure. However, the atmosphere for learning changes when play is replaced by formal learning in schools. In large classes, with a formal and rigid curriculum, joy can quickly dissipate. Unlike in play, the curriculum is no longer owned by the children, and unlike in play, the conversation and the choice of activity is increasingly dominated by adults, whose activities are in turn dominated by managers and policy-makers.

Affect and Learning in Schools It is clear from the data described in Part II that learning in schools is more to do with the quality of relationships than with the particular curriculum being taught, and yet the two are linked. We know that a rigid and inflexible curriculum aimed at some imaginary middle is a hindrance to developing empathic relationships. Empathy has much more to do with the way the curriculum is devised and taught rather than the pure content of it. What we know is that students learn better if the curriculum is meaningful and relevant, if they are involved in its design, and have choice and agency within it. All this implies that teachers should be alert to pupils’ interests and pleasures and worries, that they should know something of their backgrounds and their aspirations, and demonstrate that they value them by trying to understand their perspective, their needs and wants by empowering them and making them active participants in the learning process. Of course, this may be more time consuming than traditional methods and may involve an equalization of power, with students taking greater control of their learning and teachers becoming guides and facilitators rather than purveyors of knowledge.

194


These issues, however, have been discussed throughout the educational literature over generations. Less deeply considered is the adherence to Victorian- style classrooms and rigid curricula, when something much more conducive to pleasurable and effective learning could be devised. The reason, of course, is a focus on short-term financial efficiency rather than on educational efficiency. If you can teach thirty-five students with one teacher, it is obviously much cheaper than teaching fi fteen pupils with one teacher, and certainly a lot cheaper than small group or one-toone tuition, a more usual occurrence among the wealthy elite. This short-term financial model seems to drive out joy and pleasure from learning and instate a regime of ‘work’ in its place. If positive affect in learning relationships creates achievement, then we must be drastically limiting achievement in our education systems. Teachers intuitively work to counteract the joylessness of institutional learning through subversion and through the quality of pleasurable relationships. As one year- one teacher explained, [T]hey’ve got to enjoy it – they’re at school – so many years . . . so many years . . . and I sometimes say to them [secretively], ‘You know when the government have got all this work ready for us to do and we’ve got to do this and we’ve got to do that – I said, “They don’t think that we’re having fun while we’re doing it” – and they’re all sat there beaming you know and I say “we are having fun aren’t we?”’ – ‘Yes’ (Cooper and Brna, 2003, 11) The limitations of current educational systems are rarely discussed in term of the appropriateness of systems and structures which facilitate highquality learning, but usually in terms of the performance of teachers and schools, attaching blame to those who appear less successful on the basis of dubious measures, which, in turn, removes further joy from both teaching and learning, substituting yet more grim work and competition. Very often, research on curriculum innovation does not even account for group sizes and yet the data in Part Two above makes clear that the whole nature of learning and learning relationships changes when group sizes are larger. Both academic and moral development seem to be curtailed in large classes and, moreover, the pressure of league tables, standards and exam results ensure that some students are simply not valued in competitive education systems. Another complicating factor is the nature of the group or students. Diverse groups are harder to teach than are homogenous groups because it is much harder to create an effective mental model of the whole group, and fewer students needs are met, ensuring


195

less progress and less pleasure. Diverse groups and more needy students require more empathy. So in deprived areas, where there are larger numbers of needy students sometimes with multiple and complex needs, teachers are bound to struggle with providing sufficient degrees of empathy to meet needs. If needs could be assessed more precisely and resources allocated accordingly, the system would be much fairer and more effective but most attempts at this are token gestures in comparison with the real amount of need. The mathematics of need are much more complex than the simple formulas used, and detailed research into this would be a welcome alternative to government-funded investigations into inappropriate issues. One example was an expensive government-funded research project, which investigated whether the nature of teacher training makes a difference to the retention of teachers in the light of the fact that 50 per cent of UK teachers exit the profession within the fi rst five years. Everyone involved deeply in education knows that stressful working conditions are the key factor in motivating teachers to leave the profession, and even this research concluded significantly that teachers went into the profession expecting good relationships (Hobson et al., 2006). Clearly, they do not always find them. Given the general pressures on educators and the findings in this book, it is not hard to understand why positive relationships and pleasure are hard to come by in schools. The money for the research into teacher retention, for example, could have been better spent on smaller classes. Obviously, researchers need contracts, but surely the main aim of research into education is to improve it (Griffeths, 1996). Governments should listen to teachers’ voices and researchers should be looking more seriously at which factors have a big impact on the quality of education. Unfortunately, the morals of the market are as potent in research as they are in education.

Further Education Compared to research into school education and higher education, further education has always been the poor relation. Additionally, staff in Further Education colleges, have had lower pay than sixth form staff in mainstream schools, for example, and the colleges have had a more managerial approach to both staff and students. However, these institutions do accommodate many students failed by the traditional school system, some of who have moved to college in search of more practical training and a different approach to learning. Practical subjects have tended to

196


have better staff student ratios than traditional academic subjects, partly because of the need for the teacher to work alongside students, demonstrating and guiding in practical tasks but also because of health and safety legislation, which requires better staff student ratios around practical equipment. Some college students gain a new lease on life when they enter college. They feel valued and supported and prefer the more informal relationships and better staff–student ratios. They find the ‘working’ atmosphere more culturally comfortable than the strangeness of uniformed secondary schools, which are obsessed with conformity and regimentation. The benefits of a more relaxed college atmosphere are articulated by students in one research project (Cooper and Baynham, 2005), and staff also were very aware of the emotional baggage students brought with them from their secondary schools and, consequently, adapted the curriculum to minimize the negative emotional impact of subjects where many had developed a sense of failure and low selfesteem: ‘But I can still remember that [negative school experience] and I can empathize with these lads – they’ve gone through school and come out with nothing and . . . see [this particular trade] as a chance’ (Pete, tutor). I want to know what motivates a student – what their anxieties are – where they’d like to go to – where, if they can choose it, where they see themselves going to – because I want to know what’s going on with them – what’s happening in their head because if you don’t know that you can’t know what’s interfering with what’s happening on paper. (Jean, tutor) In this study, the traditional subjects of Maths and English, rather than being taught in large class groups using traditional, transmissive teaching methods, were often embedded in smaller vocational classes, with vocational tutors working alongside literacy and numeracy tutors to integrate the skills they needed around the practical aspects of their course. Thus, there would often be two tutors working together to meet the needs of perhaps twelve to sixteen students, and the data clearly showed how much the students appreciated and profited from the effects. Although staff were aware of the importance of empathy, emotion and relationships to learning in both this study and the one described in Part Two, the whole area seems to be very underplayed in much academic research, apart from some notable exceptions, for


197

example in the works of authors like Fielding, Gibbs, Best and Lang, referred to elsewhere in this book.

Higher Education Higher Education was considered the least empathic phase of education, according to the teachers in the research discussed in Part Two. One chose a lecturer as her example of lack of empathy: I had a lecturer at college who said – I’ve been doing the same stuff for twenty years . . . I can do it standing on my head . . . and he probably did . . . and there must have been students who understood, [or]didn’t understand,[or]came from different backgrounds . . . [or]wanted it delivering in a slightly different way, . . . plus the things that must have been found out in psychology in that twenty-year period which would have interested us [laughs]. (Claire) It would be fair to say emotion has never figured strongly in the higher education mission, even if many individual teachers and students have been passionate about their subjects. A focus on emotions has been virtually absent from most contemporary analyses of the college classroom, according to Hargreaves (1998) and Owen- Smith (2008). However, some lecturers and researchers have seen and researched its significance, (Beard, 2005; Beard, Clegg and Smith, 2007). Although there is an increasing emphasis on teacher skills in Higher Education, much of this concerns techniques to maintain the attention of large classes or to remember the names of hundreds of students, for example. If students were in appropriately sized groups, names would never have to be remembered because lecturers would know them both academically and emotionally, through familiarity brought about by more frequent and intensive interaction. Not knowing names is problematic for learning, values and relationships and is voiced throughout the data in Part Two. In terms of values, treating people like numbers is a technique that has been used in war and periods of ethnic cleansing to denigrate individual personhood. However, learning hundreds of names by some technique is almost as senseless, because names are just the starting point for relationships and highquality teaching requires much more than merely knowing a name.

198


In Higher Education, many modules now involve a once-a-week meeting for ten or more weeks. If this is a lecture, knowing students becomes pretty impossible. Seminars have also grown in size and can be bigger than the average secondary school class. In this case, what is the quality of learning like in universities, given that time and frequency are the mathematical constraints on affect and empathy in learning relationships, (Cooper, 2010)? The mathematics of university learning environments are worse than those in secondary schools, and there are few historical relationships. A lecturer may teach a group in year one but often not again or much later. The relentless march of market morals into higher education ensures the fragmentation of highquality human interaction. Only the passion and commitment of the average lecturer lies beneath the rhetoric of ‘the student experience’, ‘enhanced teaching and learning’ and ‘wider participation’. Universities are not funding the staffing ratios that could turn any of this into reality; only the surface policies exist, and down below lie the deep waters of exhaustion, stress and burnout (THES, 2010), which are perhaps the true indicators of the threats to quality of teaching and learning in the university sector. The current focus on techniques which enable mass teaching and feedback (Nicol and McFarlane-Dick, 2006) may obscure the need to seriously query other pressing factors which restrict pleasure and progress in learning, such as group size, staff shortages, discontinuity of relationships and curricular fragmentation, all of which limit empathic exchange. Moreover, the use of functional empathy will be continually presenting a weak moral model to students in universities. This may further deteriorate, since funds for higher education were drastically reduced in the UK in 2011, after the banking crisis, although, interestingly, other countries have seen this as an important time to invest in education and their futures. Providing mass rapid feedback using online quizzes and classic secondary school exam preparation techniques, which forewarn students of potential errors, may have a role to play in higher education, but these are mechanistic and bear no relation to the highquality teaching and interaction revealed in Part Two, which is holistic, complex and transformative (Freire, 1970). Though powerful dialogic assessment and exchange may be seen in some dissertation and doctoral tutorials, its use is largely restricted. However, the demands of university students for more tutor contact (Rogerson, 2008) suggest that students would prefer more interaction with their tutors. These are issues in university education which need addressing and which, as in secondary education, a focus on teacher professional development is unlikely solve.


199

Formative assessment has also become a buzz word in universities, and if we assume like Black and Wiliam (2003) that formative assessment is central to teaching and learning, that existing schemata are assessed and amended through dialogue and interaction (Bennett and Dunne, 1994), and also that teachers have to provide the ‘scaffolding’ (Wood, 1988), then the conditions must be created that enable that quality of interaction to take place. As explained in Part Two, empathic teaching naturally involves much more detailed formative assessment, which is perceived as a driver to higher standards and increased learning (Sadler, 1998). However, teaching and learning is highly influenced by context (Lave and Wenge, 1991) and, given the nature of context needed for high levels of empathy, most universities simply do not provide the necessary conditions and staff–student ratios. If power and identity are significant to formative assessment (Pryor and Crossouard, 2007), then the transmissive model common to most universities leaves the lecturer in the position of power and the student lacking identity in large lecture halls or seminars. Only if ratios improve can power be equalized, identity bolstered and genuine formative assessment enabled. The issue of diversity and special need is also an issue. When Higher Education purports to be widening participation and improving quality, and which university in the UK was not purporting to do this before the banking crisis, it is difficult to understand how universities can develop highquality teaching as the staff–student ratio continually worsens. Some education institutions focus more on supporting needy students than do others, and so it is with higher education; that is, of course, if you can probe beyond the rhetoric of ‘the student experience’ into what actual provision exists. Higher- quality relationships would probably be very effective in improving these students’ experiences and, indeed, quality for all students. However, quality assurance in higher education increasingly focuses on standardized documentation, formulaic learning objectives and marking grids to ensure consistency of approach, and relatively lone voices challenge such procedures (Hussey and Smith, 2002). Pleasure and delight in learning and teaching are unlikely to increase with the extensive university investment into such ‘quality enhancement’ processes. In Part One, the literature suggests that it is easier to empathize with people who resemble oneself, and this indicates one problem in relation to widening participation universities. Traditionally, many academics originate from middle- and upper- class families, who often adopt an approach towards students which is based around their own experience of self-reliant, independent learning. In fact, the concept of increased

200


‘independent learning’ has become a byword in universities and was one reason given for the introduction of virtual learning environments, though one suspects for ‘independent’ one might substitute ‘less expensive’, since tutor interaction is costly. However, if learning happens through human relationships (Vygotsky, 1978), to assert that it happens independently is to misunderstand the process. Of course, students are expected to read and to motivate themselves to write, think, analyze and critique but it is discussion, dialogue and debate that support internalization and produce long-lasting interest and development in a subject. Oxbridge tutors use one-toone sessions and small seminars; this is seen as a form of exemplary assessment and teaching in Higher Education (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004). Most universities are obliged to use a severely watered down version where group sizes severely limit dialogue with the expert other. Although provision can be found in universities for severely disadvantaged students, for example those with considerable physical disabilities or specifically identified conditions, the increasingly poor staff–student ratios mean that problems occur for most other students. Those who require just a little extra support, perhaps with their writing or trying to accustom themselves to university life or because they come from less-privileged backgrounds, or have less emotional capital (Reay, 2000) to sustain them through loss of previous support systems, may not find their lecturers available for assistance. Some students switch universities in the search for more sympathetic tutors, and others drop out or simply underachieve, often blaming themselves. In newer universities, there are more lecturers from working class backgrounds, who can perhaps empathize a little more with such students, but ultimately institutions with worse ratios rely on the hidden extra effort provided by staff to support needy students. This support occurs in untimetabled tutorials or by email or at the ends of lessons, where tutors try to respond to need, taking into account the personal circumstances of students. This hidden time, which is already keeping systems afloat, is crucial but as budgets shrink and class sizes grow, is likely to become unsustainable. Given the high levels of stress in higher education, it is likely that these conditions will only worsen as recession pressures bite and the market infiltrates more deeply into higher education. We can conclude that affective issues are not paramount in higher education and that as a consequence learning is relatively slow and superficial at this level compared with its potential. However, it is testament to the power of education that students want to learn and lecturers want to teach, it is their personal passion and commitment that ensures the provision maintains the standards that it


201

does. League tables in higher education are also problematic in terms of improving quality. Teacher education in the UK, for example, is judged partly by the grades that students bring into the courses, rather than on improvements made during the time of the course, despite research that suggests that incoming grades are not indicators of final degree outcomes (Boyle et al., 2002). Neither is allowance made for those universities who have much less income. Only elite universities can succeed in this situation and the system is designed to ensure they do.

Adult Education Another area to consider is adult education, which in the UK has seen drastic cuts in funding in recent years. Despite the rhetoric of life-long learning and the impetus to continually update knowledge and skills throughout the life span, for both work and leisure, and despite warnings about the need for the elderly to maintain brain plasticity and development, governments have not valued the massive amounts of learning traditionally provided by adult education. These courses support people in both career and life changes, and in training for voluntary or leisure activities or for social and intellectual stimulation post-retirement. A wide range of benefits from successful learning has been identified beyond the widely accepted benefit of prosperity. These include effects on selfesteem, achievement, identity, self-understanding, independent thought, tolerance, health, social and communication skills, social integration, competence, efficacy, ability to cope, to overcome adversity, hope, opportunity and ability to participate in further learning. Adult learning is often transformative for individuals (Schuller et al., 2004). Ultimately, all these benefits are likely to benefit families, communities and society, and produce positive affect and increased happiness for the individual. Increasingly, however, people have had to fund their own learning as central budgets have declined, leaving financial support only for more basic courses. Lack of funding has consequences for who can and who cannot participate, and in most forms of post- compulsory education, higher social class is a determinant of participation (Schuller and Watson, 2009), as is being employed. The indirect results of esteem-building and pleasure in more creative or leisure classes are not sufficiently recognized. Often, the transformative learning which takes place in one adult class can release someone’s potential to learn way beyond the specific course they first encountered. Again, these classes are often smaller than traditional sizes in institutions, and

202


many have a more practical aspect. This means the tutor can get to know the student better, and in more practical classes they can move around the students guiding and demonstrating and chatting in a much less controlling way than in traditional schooling. This can improve relationships and learning, building confidence and greater esteem, which can be carried forward into other activities. Where adult education classes mimic formal schooling such as GCSE classes with large numbers, they are less likely to have this positive impact. Though we have not sufficient time to consider work- based learning in any depth here, this does form a large part of adult learning and has many benefits. Employers invest large sums of money in maintaining skills in the workforce. Although much of this relates to immediate business needs and is not necessarily intellectually stimulating, it can have both immediate and longer-term benefits for employees both within the company and beyond. Some enlightened companies also understand the benefit of wider learning and offer funding for university courses and other development, which extend beyond immediate needs because they realize the wider benefits of a fulfilled and educated work force.

Conclusion Chapter Nine So far then we have considered empathy and affect, and its consequences in a range of settings and times throughout the life course. Clearly, if brain function is highly dependent on emotional response and all interaction affects our sense of self and we process more effectively if we are emotionally engaged and learning is meaningful (Bruner, 1990), we must be alert to the conditions that support emotional engagement in learning, because that produces successful learning. It also becomes clear that when we talk about learning we are probably talking about any kind of interaction in which people learn something, either about other human beings or the environment they inhabit. This tends to suggest that the same quality – profound empathy – is required for highquality interaction of any kind throughout life. If we are working in organizations with other people, we must form good relationships and understand them in order to learn about them or the jobs they do. If we are working with books or internet resources, we will need to engage with them deeply to understand them properly. If we want to understand another’s world fully, we will need to observe closely and become so engaged and focused that we absorb and remember every detail.


203

The same is likely then to apply to nurses and doctors learning about their patients, to social workers supporting and caring for needy families, to shop owners who want to improve their customer base by meeting customer needs, to transport operators who want to provide an excellent service, to researchers trying to understand their subject, or who want to work effectively with other researchers. Learning is a non- stop activity which pervades everything we do. No surprise then that, in general, empathy increases with age because we need it to learn and by the time we get old we have learned so much and had so many different experiences that we have become better able to empathize with a wide variety of people and situations. More research is also needed into informal learning. Informal learning often naturally creates the conditions of learning and relationships associated with profound empathy. It is more relaxed, and the learner has more choice and autonomy. The interactions are more positive and less stressful, such as learning to ride a horse or to play cards or to sing, and often the environment in which this happens is less formal and more relaxed and the learning more fun. Often there is a much better expert/student ratio and the learning can be more game-like and playful. There is more intrinsic motivation and natural support, whether it is a parent reading a story with child or playing football with them, or a grandchild showing a grandparent how to surf the net. Learners will not be as likely to bring to the interaction, all that emotional baggage of the school environment, of control, of pressure, rigid curricula. Learning happens in their own time, at their own pace without having to keep up with the group. In conclusion, we naturally orientate to learning, which we enjoy and informal learning can provide that throughout the life course. However, we spend a large proportion of our life in educational institutions and it is essential that a more empathetic approach is taken and that conditions are created which enable people of all ages to learn at pace and enjoyably. Empathetic teachers do their best to subvert the dullness of the curriculum and the deadening rituals of government policy, perhaps as a profession we need to assert ourselves and challenge the conditions in which we are obliged to try and educate future generations. Having considered the various phases and stage of learning, therefore, it is not surprising that in terms of learning; developing countries are frequently left way behind in almost every phase. Education is expensive and in the developed world educators are in a luxurious position of considering what will improve existing learning. Many developing countries have limited educational provision or, when they do, often have enormous class

204


sizes, and sheer necessity and the urge to survive motivates parents and students to walk miles to institutions to learn. Repeated wars, social and economic disruption and poverty, lack of health care and parental education, climate change and natural disaster ensure that millions of children are threatened, in terms of their learning and development from conception onwards. Developing nations need education to create the many advantages that the developed world takes for granted, and for many the need for hope is especially vital. However the world economy is changing and many previously under-privileged countries are growing at a much faster pace. High- quality education will be crucial to their further development and it may be even more important, therefore, to know how to provide quality education and in what contexts, if people in developing countries are to have opportunities that will substantially increase their life chances and their happiness. Technology will doubtless play a crucial part in their progress, as we have seen in the recent Egyptian revolution of 2011, and its significance to learning and the role of affect will be discussed in the following chapter.

Chapter 10

Affect, Technology and Learning

When a 6-year- old Portuguese student told me he loved the computer, he meant it. Although he was struggling to speak the native language in his new school in England, he was thrilled with learning on the computer, which for someone learning a new language was full of pictures, sound, animation and music, was highly interactive, and made the words much easier to learn and understand. Moreover, it was fun and consisted of lots of interactive games which made him laugh, engaged him and used lots of non-verbal cues to develop his learning, all the while adapting to his level and responding immediately to his every key press.

Computers, Interaction and Empathy Paulo did love his computer but the term love is not so frequently used in theories of learning with Information and Communication Technology (ICT), though doubtless academics ‘love’ of subject must be the key reason for their pursuit of it with such intensity. However, in the philosophy of education, the concept of love has a long history and at its greatest depth, profound empathy probably equates to love, as some of the teachers argued in Part Two. Our sense of self is confirmed and expanded through the unconditional love of others. Though Rogers (1975) calls it ‘unconditional regard’, others specifically describe love. Even Marx attests that the power of romantic relationships makes him who he is (Fischer, 1973). Best (2003) explained that spirituality at the heart of education is in effect ‘love’ and that if in our interactions we ‘love’ each other, then we support mutually respectful interaction, learning and development. Damasio (2003), as the neuroscientist exploring these ideas in relation to Spinoza’s writings, would concur with this view, linking spirituality to a sense of harmony and serene joy. He argues that positive emotion makes us function better and feel more generously disposed towards others. In this sense,

206


highly interactive, supportive software and learning environments can produce positive emotions, a sense of selfesteem and worth and a ‘love’ of learning and people. Students and teachers can lose themselves on the computer, as they can in their relationships with others, delighting in the engagement with playful learning. Sometimes students really want to focus on their subject and need to work alone, other times they need support, contingent teaching and human interest and interaction. Either way technology works more effectively in education as part of warm and caring human environments. The emotions involved in the use of high quality learning with ICT are often strongly positive and these can relate closely to ‘love’ and ‘happiness’. Once the narcotic effect of positive emotion is experienced, we desire more (Damasio, 2003) and it is sometimes hard to detach students from intense and enjoyable computer experience, as many concerned parents find. However, when computers or software fail, the desired interaction and outcome are not achieved and when students experience negative feelings, they may be reluctant to explore further. Extreme emotions are remembered strongly and relived rapidly in memory, according to Damasio (2003). When something or someone has always been associated with pain or negative emotion, for example school, it can be very hard to enable people to overcome their fear of further pain. However, if pleasure is absent, pain is better than nothing at all. A negative response at least confirms one exists as a person, being ignored makes one feel as if one do not exist at all (Aspy, 1972). In large classes, being ignored or hearing messages which are not really meant for one is the norm (Cooper, 2002). However, thoughtfully designed computers and software incorporated into humane classrooms can add to student sense of self-worth and make school classrooms more pleasurable for both students and teachers (Cooper and Brna, 2002; 2003). Intensive positive experience can act like an immunizing injection against occasional bad experience, helping us to weather emotional storms. Certain attributes of interaction with computers can mimic some of the features of empathy outlined in Chapter 4, and even teachers mentioned this unprompted in their interviews. Of course, Paulo was also surrounded by loving human beings and had adults working with him to share his delight and excitement, but, nevertheless, many aspects of multimedia interactive learning can be an excellent complement to human interaction in the teaching and learning process. Computers can offer sole attention, responsiveness, and non-verbal and multisensory communication. They can be more patient, less judgemental, more helpful, decidedly amusing, offer both cognitive and emotional scaffolding, raising learning


207

step by step and tailored to the individual learner. They can offer multiple cues not just textual ones, enable research, offer celebrations for success, praise, rewards, even certificates. They convert messy handwriting into professional and moreover legible text, improve erratic spelling and grammar, facilitate highquality reproduction, and allow students to absorb and embed research, pictures, animation, video and film in their work, from all around the world. Students can be thrilled with the quality of what they produce, it is instantly visible and the computer responds to their every keystroke, providing that intensive interaction on which their brains thrive. It would be wonderful if all humans could be as responsive, or if teachers had the opportunity to respond so contingently to learning. Computers engage the brain deeply. Their multisensory input and response mechanism on that very discrete screen focuses the mind, which Damasio (1999) argued, we need for learning. The continual input and response, when successful, continually reinforces our sense of self, creating positive affect. As importantly, the improved achievement that computers can facilitate is highly visible to teachers, parents and peers. When students produce higher- quality work, their status rises in the eyes of those around them and they receive the important affirmation from a variety of human sources, again creating that virtuous circle of value and support which uplifts individuals, raises selfesteem and confidence and facilitates new learning. Computers can be helpful to learning for all students at all ages but most especially for students with special needs (Baron- Cohen, 2008; Elzouki, 2011Moore, 1998; Underwood and Pitard, 2009) something they have in common with empathic teachers and smaller classes. They can also support the use of higher order skills, by-passing bottlenecks of writing or formatting or by enabling virtual experiments and modelling unavailable in the average classroom. The large interactive whiteboards now commonplace in many schools and universities make especial use of non-verbal cues, and small children are excited by the hugeness of the multisensory experience and sensory nature of the interaction with their fingers on touchscreens. They may worry when asked to complete a task on the big board, but the sense of achievement when they do is obvious. They gain confidence and autonomy when working at computers, and for many students, now the experts in the technological world, a great sense of efficacy and power. Using computers can improve the power relationships in classrooms and can reduce the talk and domination of the teacher, making learning more active, although, importantly, this is dependent on students having access to machines themselves.

208


In one project (Cooper and Brna, 2003), both teachers and students were able to voice some of the advantages of technology. One little boy when asked his opinion about working on the computer said, ‘Oooh – fun!’ He laughed with delight, was very animated and gesticulated and continued, ‘’cause there’s loads of fun on it and I play on it and play on it and ooh I’m crying when it ended – not really [jokes]’. Computer-based learning was engaging and highly motivating for this 5-year- old girl: God, but I just hate my brother pushing me off the chair when I’m working and then I press the wrong buttons to get percentages and stuff – when I’m six my mum’s going to put it on hard level on the computer and she’s going to show me which level [and] how you do it because it’s going to be hard [she was clearly looking forward to this challenge]. Brenda, a teacher was highly aware of the affective dimension to learning and the impact of computers on children with special needs, ‘because you have to home in on something they find exciting in order for them to feel good about themselves and I think the computer has a lot to offer there.’ She also said: but particularly for your low achievers it’s absolutely . . . it seems to stimulate them . . . . And I have a special needs child in my class who has a very, very small concentration span but on the computer he’d be there all – well, not all the time, but as much as possible. Not that learning with computers is unproblematic, and this is articulated in the literature although not as frequently stressed. Computer suites, for example, are much less useful for teaching and learning. They organize students into serried ranks or facing the walls in isolation rather than into collaborative groups, where human and computer interaction can complement each other. Additionally, organizing large groups of students into computer suites can be logistically difficult and time- consuming for teachers, and rather than having access to machines as and when needed in the course of a normal lesson, a whole lesson must be devoted to their use in a manner detached from the community of learning in the classroom. This is a particular logistical problem in primary schools, where young children have perhaps an hour a week in the suite and have to be managed all the way to the computer room and back, which all takes away any precious time. This is a less effective way of learning; it is not frequent enough or contingent enough for high quality learning. A tricky menu navigated one week will be almost as tricky a week later when frequency of practice is all. When the rest of the adult world has a computer at their


209

desk 24/ 7, then one hour a week or even three for learning is a poor substitute. Students must be able to find and see information as they need it, move to group discussions, then return to the computers. Computers should be available continually as a tool. Some rooms in some institutions, but not nearly enough, do allow for a better quality of design, with round tables which facilitate interaction and a use a combination of computer desks and more normal desks for discussion, or have lap tops available for any lesson. The main alternative to suites in many primary schools is a whiteboard for whole class sessions and a couple of computers at the back of the room, which is not sufficient, either. If we offered students two pens between thirty there would be an outcry. No teacher can consistently develop students ICT skills or their ability to use them widely in learning when two must be shared between thirty, so access has always been a key issue in the successful use of ICT and its greatest strength in learning is as a complement to human interaction. It is inevitable that some teachers do not value ICT because they have never had sufficient resources to realize and value its potential; but when they do get the resources, their opinion can change quite dramatically (Cooper and Brna, 2003). ICT is increasingly robust and as powerful devices get cheaper and smaller, no doubt students will all have their own, but state-funded education has always had limited resources. Equipment and software requires substantial updating and maintenance and, moreover, periodic renewal. This makes it very expensive and technical support is also needed. In institutions where the technical support is insufficient or where the hardware and software is out of date, ICT can merely create frustration and erect barriers to learning.

Online Learning The integration of ICT into education, work, home, social and leisure settings has been a global phenomenon of the last twenty years. In 1990, there were limited numbers of computers in schools, homes and universities, and even in offices, yet only 20 years later, there are millions of machines, and with their connection to the internet, transformations have been worked in the way we communicate and interact. Developments in bio and nanotechnology may eventually produce total interaction, in which everyone will become part of the ‘infosphere’ (Floridi, 2007), with every person and object communicating with each other.

210


Technology can provide opportunities for global empathy, through rapid communication and intensive interaction with individuals and groups across the world. Internet access enables people to enter the worlds of other individuals, thousands of miles distant, through synchronous or asynchronous conversation, through Skype or by reading their thoughts on blogs or wikis. Increasing bandwidth means people can create and share vast libraries of video, film and photography with real-time debate and discussion, utilizing a vast range of data capture and communication applications. These multi-modal tools (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2001) enable the exchange of non-verbal as well as verbal information, which is at the heart of profound empathy. We can begin to know distant human beings quite intimately, and to share pleasure and understanding. However, not all software and not all communication systems can enable profound empathy, and this is because the quality of the design and the software is not sufficiently high. I have argued elsewhere (Cooper, 2009) that the quality of software needed for highquality learning has ultimately to provide us with communication as close to face- to-face interaction as possible. Human beings are highly sophisticated creatures who have reached incredible heights of complex communication. When interacting with each other, they process masses of sensual information in parallel, reading body language, voice tone, facial expression, word order, word meaning and much more. One inflexion of the eyebrow, one turn of the cheek one, one cough at a particular moment can reveal or hide crucial information about how the person feels or thinks. We are experts both in communication and deception, and only when our software enables peoples to read each other to this extent at a distance will we be truly able to experience profound empathy across the internet. Computer systems that do not understand and value these high levels of human sophistication will struggle to succeed, and many systems which have tried to enhance the complex social and financial organization of our sophisticated networks fail and fail again, at huge cost (Guardian , 2001). Even slight delays in transmission using video conferencing, for example, can be exceptionally frustrating for users, such is the high quality of normal human interaction. Additionally, the natural strength of the web in terms of communication has ensured that it has also gained a terrible reputation for conveying feigned empathy. Child abusers groom young people assiduously online before exploiting them and fraudsters relieve trusting individuals of their hard- earned wages in a thousand different ways. Like any media or communication tool, the web can be used for immoral as well as moral purposes


211

and can be a vehicle for greed, propaganda and corruption as well as learning, empowerment and emancipation. Using computers via the web to support distance learning is now commonplace, although only fi fteen years ago it was considered highly innovatory. Though initially an additional tool in the teaching repertoire of higher education, the virtual learning environment (VLE) has become commonplace in secondary schools and colleges, and many primary schools also have learning platforms of some kind or another now. The phenomenon of virtual learning is particularly interesting and many contrasting views have been voiced about it over the years. Whereas it has been very successful in some contexts, it has been an abject failure in others, and researchers often fall into one camp or the other in terms of appreciating or deprecating its value. As one would expect, something in-between is more likely to resemble the truth and just like the development of empathy, the specific context in which it is used and the manner of its use is all important. The early days of online learning showed some real advantages as well as some real problems and these have not changed substantially, except that the software has become more diverse and sophisticated and the hardware more reliable. Where online learning is thoughtfully designed and supported with sufficient time and some faceto-face support, it can work very well, where it is assumed it will work and no real understanding of the learning process is embedded in the design, it can work very badly. Many of the huge virtual learning environments are designed around a transmissive model of learning which has never worked well in human settings, let alone computer-based ones, and replicates traditional teaching where the lecturer provides the material and the students absorb it, reproducing the lack of dialogue, the power of the lecturer and the alienation of the student. If in highquality, face-to-face education, dialogue and the characteristics of profound empathy are significant, the same can be said of online learning. Though many of these VLEs have chat rooms and discussion forums to facilitate interaction, the way they have been designed makes discussion a secondary tool and the central aim seems to be to deposit learning materials online, which are of variable quality because preparing highquality materials for distance learning requires time and expertise and materials need updating regularly if they are to remain useful. In blended learning (and most courses do offer a variety of methods of interaction now), a VLE can be useful but students are often mainly thankful that if they miss a lecture or seminar they can still retrieve the materials. Though the discussions can work well in discrete groups where

212


the tutor can know and respond to students and support the learning, in large groups many students simply do not participate. Managers in universities have taken a long time to realize some of the problems with virtual learning and, anyway, it was often expected to be another way of reducing costs. Managers often blame tutors who are slow or reluctant to use the online tools, although many senior managers have never tried to use them substantially themselves. But for the full-time tutor, trying to support large groups or multiple groups via the web can be more difficult than face-to-face teaching. Teachers and lecturers are pragmatic people with a large and difficult task to fulfil, if their ICT resources are adequate and seen as helpful to their task, they will make the effort; if not, they see their effort quite rightly as wasted. Their attitudes are quite rightly time precious. We need to ensure that both equipment and software enhance provision, and support teachers and the learning process, if we expect it to be taken up enthusiastically. Additionally, VLEs can create negative emotions for tutors, who find all their natural skills of multisensory communication subordinated to a mechanistic route through an unforgiving computer system, which turns their highly honed interpersonal skills into apparent disability. Spontaneity can be lost in a circuitous route through labyrinths of mouse clicks as frustrating to highquality communicators as is a speech impediment or dyslexia. For some of these reasons, students and, increasingly, many tutors now use a whole range of freely available, more empathetic web 2.0 tools for learning, social interaction and networking, which are being continually updated, in order to communicate with each other for a range of purposes. Social networking software such as ‘Facebook’ and visual media such as ‘You Tube’ and virtual worlds like ‘Second Life’ do appeal to the affective, via picture, video, animation or facility of interaction. All of these tools have their own advantages and disadvantages, and new ones appear daily leaving many institutions managed by older generations ill- equipped to make decisions about what is best for e-learning and what is best value for money. To some extent they are at the mercy of the hyperbole of commercial providers, although increasingly in hard times, they are turning from the monolithic VLES to open- source software, to provide similar functions. VLEs, originally mainly text-based, mirroring the pens and paper used in traditional learning now with increased bandwith, have integrated multimedia resources. Many of the designs have also been extremely ‘clunky’ and have not allowed ease of communication. Of course, even when multimedia stimuli are used and have converged into one device, offering all


213

interaction via that medium, a computer screen can ensure eventual boredom. As human beings, we also need variety in our learning methods and contexts.

Design for Learning Design for learning needs a multidisciplinary approach with educationalists at the heart of it. Programmers tend to design in order to get applications working, often with limited understanding of the learning process. Many applications are designed initially for business and then transferred to education, frequently inappropriately. Consequently, business values and techniques or programmers perceptions of learning are inbuilt into design and tutors struggle to apply them in educational settings. Worse still, some programs and systems are simply designed for quick profit, with little real thought as to their long-term success or their real scalability. Educationalists could create a more human approach to education and technology, but the values of a wider society are embedded into culture, thinking and practice of technological design. Educationalists need to demand quality experiences, engage in the design process and not allow market values to dominate learning and technology (Sandel, 2009).

Good Technology Affirms and Enhances Humanity Some research pursues more empathic, user- centred design from infant classrooms to artificial intelligence. The European Union encouraged a raft of research with young children in the 1990s (Siraj-Blatchford, 2004), which emphasized affective issues and arguments have been made for including children in the design process for hardware and software (Druin, 1999; 2009). Empathetic projects have focused on supporting and developing students with profound and multiple-learning difficulties or with autism (Ellis, 1997; Elzouki, 2011). Perhaps even more than in traditional education, the significance of the affective has long been recognized in human computer interaction and in artificial intelligence in education (Cooper, 2003; Paiva, 2000; Picard, 1997; Self, 1999; Sloman, 2001; Sloman and Chrisley, 2003). To really design artificial intelligence that responds to affect, however, we need to design computers and software which recognize and respond in a sensory fashion, and this is a major challenge. Empathic agents will need to model the many of

214


the sorts of behaviours that empathetic teachers do if they are to prove successful in supporting learning. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is a leader in research into affective issues in the design of technology. Neural networks have been a major development in computing and mimic the multisensory, parallel processing and impressionistic approach which the human brain uses, in contrast to the serial model of traditional machine processing. The successful future development of affective computing combined with the recognition of the affective in learning could form the basis of another revolution in global learning.

Chapter 11

Empathy in Management, Systems and Organizations

Even before the recent emphasis on emotional intelligence in leadership, some of the literature on management, both in business and education, discusses the embedded nature of values and expresses the desire to create ethical, more humane organizations, which authors believe are ultimately more effective too (Bell and Harrison, 1988; Bottery, 1992; Dobson and White, 1995; Martin, 1993; Solberg et al., 1995). However, the centralization of educational policy also affects the climate of values in school, reducing a sense of participation and increasing imposition and control, and head teachers are not immune to the effects of this culture and even sometimes even model it themselves. The education system has often been criticized for creating negative responses in pupils and for emphasizing power and control rather than learning, for alienating and subjugating rather than developing (Freire, 1970; Garratt, 1996; Hargreaves, 1967; Rabinov, 1984). These problems have not been reduced by the pressure of market policies, a culture of performativity and competition between schools, and the increasingly prescriptive and fragmented curriculum (Apple, 2005; Ball, 1990; 2000; Fielding, 2007; Keat, 1996, Sandel, 2009). Staff and students feel both the concrete and hidden impact of such policies, which are reinforced in the UK by the inspectorate, OFSTED, producing a climate of embattled struggle (Chater, 2006). Some managers take a subversive approach to the culture of market values, while others embrace it. However those heads who adopt a controlling hierarchical model, who remain aloof or work apart from staff or always expect staff to come to them will model disinterest and create alienation (Brighouse and Tomlinson, 1991). Governors appointing senior people must be aware of the qualities and values a good head needs in education, and these go beyond balancing the books and running a ‘tight’ ship. The values of senior managers appointed are likely to be replicated in appointments throughout the school, perpetuating more or less empathic cultures. Increasingly, the

216


need to work across agencies also requires managers who can bridge disciplines and understand alternative organizational cultures. This also requires highquality communication skills, supported by empathy. Goleman’s book on emotional intelligence (1995) prompted further work and a plethora of courses and literature on emotional intelligence in management and leadership, highlighting the need for managers to understand and value their staff (Goleman et al., 2002; Neale et al., 2009; Nadler, 2011). Leaders at all levels are central to creating cultures of care and creativity, of supporting risk taking, as well as maintaining attention to quality and detail. There has been a major shift from the charismatic, heroic leader to more reflective ethical leaders with greater awareness of their staff, who can demonstrate softer skills but develop stronger organizations, which appreciate, nurture and harness the diversity of skills in their workforce (AlimoMetcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe, 2005). This thinking may not have an impact in every organization, but more enlightened companies have made an effort to take a more humane approach to management. In education at every phase, if managers cannot model empathy themselves, they are unlikely to see its value or encourage it in staff for the benefit of students. Like teachers, both head teachers and middle managers have been increasingly caught up in competitive systems, in a climate where market values prevail, despite the fact that a different set of cooperative and empowering values are an essential aspect of educational contexts. According to Bottery (1990), values are always embedded in the way of life of educational institutions: The values behind any choice concerning the curriculum, management strategies or discipline procedures will necessarily affect the way people think and behave. They are meant to. Education is precisely about the choice of future thought and behaviour. Moral concerns therefore are central to the school. And this is why the problem of morality is not a simple curricular subject but permeates all levels of the institution. (Bottery, 1990, 2) Kohlberg (1984) argues that restructuring the school environment allows for greater democratic participation by the students in the school’s governing process. The structures and the climate in schools are also considered to be very influential as part of the ‘hidden curriculum’ and are shaped and moulded by diverse managers. European research (Campos and Menezes, 1998) shows that structures such as school councils help students to take active part in decision-making.


217

Head teachers can lead and influence with such inbuilt empathic structures but must model empathic behaviour themselves, creating positive affect among staff and students. According to MacGilchrist et al. (2004), intelligent schools recognize the power of positive emotion and the impact on learning of negative emotions. Research shows the power of positive affect on sports performance (Lane et al., 2008), which has also recently been related to academic performance in university (Soos, 2011), yet many head teachers and leaders in universities simply do not recognize the importance of positive affect, either for student or staff achievement. In the research discussed in Part Two, the teachers certainly understood the importance of good management, of both people and policies. An empathic head shows he values everyone and sets that example to his staff, pupils and parents and in the wider community encouraging communication and interaction (David). Charlotte, with wide experience as a mature peripatetic teacher, felt the best heads were very empathic: Yes, yes . . . I think a good head’s one that’s got empathy. It isn’t just his or her children, he’s got to understand his staff. Yes, it’s got to go right across the board. Some of the best heads that I know are very empathetic. (Charlotte) Such heads involve their staff in the running of the school and understand their qualities and how they can be best utilized (Charlotte). Empathic managers support staff and: ‘give people time at the right time’ (Claire). They understand personal problems as well as school issues, and are able to value, respond to and motivate staff. In return, they were appreciated, especially those who did make time for staff and students. Teachers frequently linked time to understanding for empathic managers as well as teachers: ‘He understands people, he’s got time for them and he’s appreciative of what’s done’ (Claire). Neither were large amounts of time necessary: ‘A head’s just got to say, “How’s so and so doing?”’ (Charlotte). They are ‘feeling’ people who acknowledge and take an interest in everyone. They are not self- absorbed, hurrying around, ‘being important’. They make people feel known, valued and appreciated (Charlotte). Unfortunately, even tiny amounts of interaction time and concern were too much for busy heads, ‘and some just don’t show much of an interest’ (Charlotte).

218


Empathic heads are aware of people’s moods and feelings (Anna). Even as newcomers to the system, student teachers also understood how empathic managers could motivate individuals and support teamwork (Janet). Empathic managers have high standards and high expectations of their staff, according to Terry, who, as a head, greatly appreciated the quality of relationships in schools, but knew this has to be complemented with rigor and the drawing of staff together to a greater collective understanding of what they were doing and why, which required leadership and management experience. This could only work with good social relations. Terry once refused to take a headship in a school where the relationships were very poor and where children were all labelled as low achievers. Managers need to sit down with staff, work out current achievements and future goals and how to achieve them. Equally, Terry’s understanding of children’s needs, led him to want to give them the best opportunity possible, echoing empathic teachers attitudes in their teaching, which meant for him, that the educational process had to be effective, consistently: I do have a strong belief that that education is a one- off and for a lot of children in a number of schools – school is the only stabilising factor, . . . and if schools can’t provide consistency on a day-today basis – ‘it was right yesterday, so it’s right today, it’s gonna be right tomorrow’, then these kids haven’t got much chance, have they? All the peripatetic staff, working in many different schools, noticed the different approaches and levels of interest of different heads. Some knew the names of visiting staff and took an interest in the progress of special needs children, for example, while others did not (Anna). The empathic managers in these interviews knew themselves in relation to their staff and how the complex interrelationship of staff members could affect student’s learning and development. Sara, as head of department, dealt with pupils’ behaviour problems by encouraging staff to analyze their teaching in order to improve the attitudes and achievements of students. Department heads who knew their own strengths and weaknesses recognized the qualities of their staff and used and developed them appropriately, consequently they met the needs of both staff and students more effectively (Anna). In contrast, unempathic managers can have a very negative and demoralizing effect on staff, and can constitute a considerable constraint on the ability of staff to be empathic and to work as a team. Managerial staff who took no interest in colleagues and their feelings, either personally or


219

professionally, consciously or unconsciously, had powerful demotivating effects: If you don’t know the needs and personalities of your staff, then you can’t create a workforce that will gel as a good team, really. And, vice versa, if you’re working with a head who’s not empathic, she will just do things regardless of your own feelings and you’ll feel, well – ‘Why do I bother? What’s the point of it all?’ Your opinion’s not sought and ‘no feelings for me. So I’ll just do my job and go back home again.’ And you’ll be the one in the staff room looking at your bloody watch won’t you, trying to get out at night because you don’t feel, ‘Well, she doesn’t give a toss about me, so she doesn’t take my feelings into account,’ – whether knowingly or not. (Claire) Such managers can be very distant from both students and staff. Heads who espouse values and policies and practices which focus on ideology rather than on being aware of the feedback from the people involved (Anna) were considered unempathic. If heads aren’t aware of children and staff’s emotional responses then it can have a powerful negative effect on the school generally (Anna). Teachers felt that senior management do not always appreciate the stresses of staff, which makes their working lives harder. Being removed from the chalk-face and being more distant from classroom teachers can be a condition of management: ‘You’re removed and you’re removed and you’re removed a bit further – the further up you go the less contact you have’ (Sara). More frequent interaction with staff in their departments instigated by management could help them to better appreciate and understand the realities of their work rather than always meeting them in their offices. Sara believed you could not empathize with someone unless you interact with them and get to know them. Two teachers believed that because managers were more removed, they did not value a personal approach. Consequently, empathic staff could feel undervalued and disadvantaged in their careers when assessed by such people. Sara also felt that a male- dominated system was less understanding of the role played by women and the additional burden of home and work commitments some women faced. Expressing this burden could be considered unprofessional, but effectively denied the different outof-work lives of women (Sara). Heads who feign empathy, purporting to listen but in reality simply making their own decisions anyway, can be damaging to relationships because staff understand the pretence. Anna referred to them ironically

220


as ‘wonderfully diplomatic’ (Anna). The consultative process is a façade in this situation, manipulative rather than genuine. Interestingly, managers, when they acted like this were the only educational staff in the data accused of showing feigned empathy. Specific policies implemented by management can reduce empathy for children, for example a refusal to withdraw SEN pupils from classrooms when needed (Anna). An empathic teacher tries to meet a student’s needs as a human being and rigid policies, superficially treating everyone equally, can produce animal-like, instinctive behaviour in students, forced to compete for the inadequate human resources in an inappropriate environment: I mean at one school there was no withdrawal policy, so you’d got to struggle with another support teacher and a class teacher in a room that was too small to begin with, and with the other children saying, ‘Want to do that. Can I do that? Can I join in? Can I do that?’ And it’s like somebody else eating off your plate. I mean this is your dinner and they’re licking bits – so no – it wasn’t nice. (Claire) The data above has profound implications for understanding the negative effects of inclusion policies in the inappropriate environment of large classes of needy students. Conversely, some heads produced policies which were brave and supported empathy; for example, Terry insisted on a cuddling policy in his school, informing new parents from the outset. Teachers were vehement about the effect of management on staff motivation. Empathic heads motivated staff and supported team work, while unempathic managers did the opposite. The National Commission on Education (1996) expressed similar views. Even the smallest words of understanding and appreciation could be enough to motivate staff. One successful head interviewed all her staff personally and provided the motivation, not unlike that in the short one-toone interviews with higher- attaining children described by Sara. This was a practice suggested by Brighouse (1996) when he was Chief Education Officer for Oxfordshire and resonates with emphasis on the value of simple positive interactions by Watson and Ashton (1995). In the observations in the study in Part Two, Terry showed appreciation of one member of staff and offered her time to do an extra task. She said she would complete the task in her own time and use the free time for something else, suggesting that recognition and understanding can invoke further commitment. It was also clear from comments of


221

visitors to the school that parents appreciated his approach and responded with their support. Unempathic managers could lead staff to treat the job with less enthusiasm and commitment but inevitably the ever-increasing workloads of heads and middle managers must exacerbate this situation and make it difficult for heads to create time for everyone. Yet, as a consequence, grim self- absorbed heads and demotivated staff will struggle to make time and space for students. If teachers adopt their sense of value from their authority figures, then we need to be sure that heads, administrators and policy makers make teachers feel valued, a point argued by Aspy (1972) many years ago. Sadly, a macho controlling style of management has been seen increasingly in schools and universities, where well-thought- out educational values become subservient to those of performativity, monitoring and control, driven forward by the same tendency in government policy. These policies and their unpalatable values have implications for the happiness of teachers in schools and pleasure in teaching and learning which is needed to create positive climates for students. Nias (1996) argues that teachers display selfesteem when acting according to their own values, but display very negative emotions when the processes and management of schools run counter to their values. She was concerned that humanity was not being valued over a mechanistic approach in education. Both Terry as head and Sara as departmental head talked about sitting down with their staff, eliciting their opinions and working out common approaches to further improve their teaching. They had very high expectations and sought continuous improvement. Interaction between managers and staff increased empathy, according to Sara. Many teachers referred to empathy as developing understanding and Rogers’s (1975) alternative phrase for empathy was ‘sensitive understanding’. Terry insisted that teachers and managers had to make a real effort to meet and communicate clearly with parents, and that he had to reach out to both staff and parents, rather than make them come to him in search of understanding, a point made previously by Sara. Empathic leadership must understand the importance of a caring ethos, and the way that profound empathy multiplied throughout the myriad human interactions in institutions can create a positive overall climate, which supports learning and further facilitates relationships. All the observed lessons seen in the research in Part Two had this generally positive climate, with the exception of few student teachers lessons which were at times slightly less positive. Terry’s school seemed to manifest this very positive climate everywhere, including in assembly. The climate seems to

222


be created by multiple positive interactions of both a verbal and non-verbal nature and is almost ‘felt’ as opposed to being seen, though overt signs such as smiles and pleasant interaction can be seen. These interactions occur between staff and pupils, but also between staff and managers, and are caring and, therefore, moral in nature. They create highquality relationships which were established by early effort and time- giving. However, as Terry points out, climate is also dependent on the attitudes that children bring to school and the role parents have played. Schools cannot create a positive climate alone, although they can have powerful effects. The climate creates part of the context for future interactions, and at its best can have a profound positive effect on incoming pupils with a previous history of difficulties in other schools. This concept of climate relates strongly to Aspy (1972) and Rogers’s (1975) work on humane classrooms and can still be seen in the Rogerian- based work on climate and personcentred education in the United States (Stringfield, 1998), and previously in the Elton report in the UK (DES, 1989), on the significance of good relationships in schools. Heads are the key role models for nurturing and facilitating such climates.

Opportunities for Change Until now, we have considered leadership and empathy within the constraints of the current system. However, if heads were to deliberately build in more interpersonal time, for example, one-toone conversations, at the start and end of every term between teacher and students, and more time between teachers and parents and between teachers and between teachers and head, we might see all kinds of positive benefits. Heads and staff must work together creatively to find strategies for nurturing human relationships and consciously think about how that time can be created. Similarly, policy-makers must support schools in doing this. If some of the constraints on empathy in the system were lessened and class sizes were reduced and teachers had more opportunity to support individuals on a daily basis and to recognizetheir real needs and interests, whole new creative ways of working could open up. If more time was allowed for social and extracurricular interaction in smaller groups, even better relationships could be established. Empathy demands space and time for highquality interaction and thinking. Good leaders realize that time is also required for staff development, as well as for student development. Encouraging staff to learn and share


223

their learning within school, perhaps through action research projects, or to develop their own learning on good quality courses or intellectual development through masters courses in education is a sure way to enhance the quality of education. According to Stenhouse (1981), teachers must develop a challenging, critical approach to understanding their own schools and they will need to read and think more widely to do this, but they also need support from government policy and funding. Educational organizations are often so absorbed in activity and driven by endless government initiatives that teachers, lecturers and leaders feel guilty if they take time out of ‘activity’ to stop and think deeply or to read the latest research in their area. Hence, the extension of deeper knowledge about pedagogy is currently a very slow process. A proliferation of quick fix courses on the latest educational fads is unlikely to support the deep learning required for professional development. Teachers have to be ‘busy’ by dint of the conditions in which they work, and this can become a habit of being and intellectual activity becomes seen as an unobtainable luxury. When staff are able to take time for intellectual development, they really value it, and it has powerful implications for their sense of self and their practice (Cooper and Barber, 2009). Head teachers who realize this can be powerful change agents within their own establishments. For teachers, thinking, reading and talking openly and creatively with others in a relaxed atmosphere can be seen as pleasurable, therefore, not ‘work’ and also a bit subversive, just as Frances saw taking individual time with her students as subversive, yet if teachers are to be the inspirational educators for students that we would hope them to be, able to take future students to new heights of understanding, they must learn and develop themselves and model a passion for learning. If they are empathetic teachers, they will be keen to learn about their students and this is extremely important, but if they are to be of greatest use to their students, they must also be able to show that degree of interest in new knowledge, which inspires students to new heights. Leaders need to understand this modelling process and nurture enthusiasm for learning in their staff and model a desire to continue learning themselves. Immersing themselves in their office with bureaucracy or financial issues will not help them move their schools forward; they must focus on the development of a dynamic learning organization. The concept of school-based research could be extensively developed if time was built into teachers’ contracts for this continual evidence-based improvement, and schools could attain new heights in engagement, achievement and behaviour. At times, there have been movements towards more

224


school-based research, but unless it is properly facilitated and funded on a consistent basis, it will have a limited impact. Moreover, students should be a part of this process to help develop metacognition in learning and to develop their own research and evaluation skills at earlier ages, working alongside their teachers. When the student voice is heard, it can be very powerful and creative and full of ideas to improve education and society (Burke and Grosvenor, 2003). Again, in all of this, heads should be the leaders. They should stand by their values and request the resources and policy changes to make these kinds of strategies possible.

Leadership in Higher Education As universities have become more business oriented and increasingly self-funded, in the UK at least, the competitive business ethos is likely to strengthen and prevail. This may have benefits for economic efficiency but there is a balance needed between being aware of the changing market demands and improving provision through staff empowerment and development, which needs to be carefully maintained. For many new universities, where there has been greater emphasis on teaching than on research, the managerial ethos has often failed to understand research or how to invest in it to nurture new ideas, understandably because managers do not have the research experience. Again, this is a delicate balance, because the quality of teaching in universities, as in schools is dependent on the quality of understanding and enthusiasm gained through learning. Lecturers who are not inducted into the world of research or not encouraged to engage deeply in intellectual development, may remain locked in forms of thinking which will further damage the institutions ability to compete, both in teaching and research. Such staff will not be able to model research skills and attitudes to their students. Some managers and, indeed, researchers seem more interested in the financial gain from research funding than in the longer- term gain of new knowledge. In the long term, research really must involve the sharing and creation of new knowledge across the globe. Increasingly, with the development of the World Wide Web, researchers in both science and the arts and humanities should have easy access to the latest research. However, competition and market values in the form of charging slow down the speed of progress by limiting access, when we could advance knowledge much more effectively and creatively through sharing and cooperation. Currently, staff in the wealthiest institutions have the greatest access to new knowledge.


225

The data from the study shown earlier in this book shows the importance of highquality relationships for learning, communication and development. If universities want this sort of achievement, their leaders must also understand the importance of time, highquality relationships and dialogic, pleasurable and challenging learning, and the higher quality this brings to both teaching and research. If lecturers have no space to develop students in increasingly large classes, and they have not time to develop themselves in terms of research, overall quality will inevitably reduce. As universities have become more managerial, there has tended to be a focus on lower-level training for functional/ bureaucratic issues, rather than higher-level intellectual development, and if universities are meant to be the pinnacle of global intellectual development, then their leaders must understand what conditions are needed to create that. Apart from anything else, if leaders in universities do not understand how to develop their staff intellectually, the intellectuals who do understand their own needs will undoubtedly depart for institutions that do. Universities are full of our most educated and developed people, their talents must be utilized more fully and their knowledge shared more widely. People must be employed to think rather than to focus continually on functional tasks, systems and bureaucracy. Surprisingly, readers and professors in universities are often not required at all to support strategic thinking about teaching and research, but are excluded from decision-making processes. Leaders with educational values should be seeking to remedy this.

Beyond Educational Institutions Other organizations may have different missions from educational organizations, but they still need to function as learning organizations in order to achieve the highest quality provision, and part of this is to value and empower their employees. Other caring services such as health and social services, and also many charities, must consider how to improve an empathic approach towards clients and how that can be embedded and modelled in their organizations at every level, in a similar way to education. Their common aim with education is to understand and support human beings, albeit providing different services. Developing and getting the best from their staff through continuous learning must be a key part of their strategy. That does not mean simply training them how to use a new ICT system, for example, or how to implement new regulations, but by allowing them free and creative imagination in the process of deeper and strategic

226


thinking, which will further improve them, the organization and above all the service to clients. In addition, much more has been made in recent years about the communication and interaction between the services especially, in order to meet the needs of the most vulnerable clients. Inter-agency working and communications has formed a key part of the policy to increase the quality of provision and especially to target complex early intervention for vulnerable children, for example, and to work with families to break into the cycle of deprivation at an early stage and have impact from birth-to-five as well as at later stages of life. But this communication and understanding between services also requires highquality relationships, if that understanding is ever to reach more than a superficial level and if all children are to be both protected and nurtured. It has been increasingly argued (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe, 2005) that highquality management with higher levels of emotional intelligence is needed in all organizations. This is more challenging in business because the competitive ethos, embedded firmly in business organizations to make them competitive in the global environment, can counteract the more collaborative, emotionally intelligent climate needed for empowering and supporting communications, sharing and learning within organizations. Businesses may not be so focused on caring directly for people, however they all produce goods for people and are kept running by people. If the leadership of industry want to encourage employee participation and learning, they will have to empower and liberate their employees to learn, develop and enjoy and gain fulfilment from their work as well as receiving wages. This means creating a culture where people are encouraged to be critical, to challenge, to bring forward new ideas and change, which requires emotionally strong managers, who can cope with challenging ideas around them and who are less concerned with their own authority and control than with moving forward at a pace. Managers must be less interested in insisting on ‘work’ for its own sake and more interested in creating a working and learning environment where employee potential is valued and nurtured. As a student, I once worked in a factory where on Friday, if the week’s orders had all been met, we were required to process and pack additional goods and then unpack them, just to keep us busy. This seemed like the ultimate useless activity and, apart from making the workforce frustrated and angry, was a terrible waste of everybody’s time. It could have been much more productive and motivating to get us all together to think about how to improve the company and working practices. Many of the tasks


227

required in organizations seem to involve keeping people doing things, rather than engaging their wonderful intellects in more worthwhile tasks, which means that our societies and organizations often progress very slowly. Good leaders are aware of these issues and seek to minimize pure functionality and maximize potential. Humane organizations and governments who have the vision to speed up the learning process through encouraging pleasurable and stimulating human interaction and learning will ultimately succeed more rapidly and will sustain themselves over the longer term (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe, 2005).

Chapter 12

Wider Values and Creativity

If profound empathy is central to the development of moral values, it is also worth considering its relationship with other kinds of values, such as spiritual, personal, social, and aesthetic values, and also its relationship to creativity, as these concepts are frequently linked in the literature. Although these wider values were not the focus of the research described earlier, they emerged periodically in the discussions. The concepts and divisions in this area are riddled with complexity and uncertainty, both in terms of the definition of the various terms and the perspectives of the various protagonists. Both religious and secular groups struggle to agree on the meanings of words such as ‘spiritual’ and ‘values’. They also disagree about the way values could or should be developed. Given these disagreements, these issues are worth some discussion, especially in relation to the data above.

Personal and Social Values Separating moral from personal and social values is a probably a false dichotomy, since the moral appears to be embedded in all values. Moreover, it was clear from the study in Part Two that the modelling and the development of empathy relate strongly to personal and social values. First, the sense of self and worth created by empathy allows a person to develop and grow and, in so doing, they develop their unique personhood, and alongside that their particular values, through social interaction with signifi cant others. Values vary tremendously in individuals; so, for example, for some, art may become a personal concern, for others science, or for others a skill or craft, or for others, social or interpersonal issues or, indeed, a mixture of any or all of these. Remembering the definition of hard values by Ormell (1993), these are aspects of our life to which we devote time, attention, effort and resources. They are issues or people for which we have admiration or concern and for which we are prepared to take risks, suffer


229

strain or discomfort, and even risk our personal credibility. They are not just our stated values, but are the values which we demonstrate through our behaviour. Indeed, in relation to the data above, to state values of care and consideration and not to enact them could reveal feigned empathy, which should always be of concern because it signals deceit and immoral behaviour. Of course, we cannot devote our time and attention to everything, so our demonstrated values are naturally constrained. Individuals may be interested in or driven by many issues, so values may be complex and conditioned partly by circumstances and time. There are many facets that make up the motivations of unique individuals, which are derived from both nurture and nature and the life experiences they encounter and, within those constraints, the choices they make. If empathy allows personhood and, therefore, personal values to develop, it has an even more obvious role in social values. Being capable of understanding the position and perspective of others, and being able to live and work alongside them, is central to social values. Pro- social behaviour has long been associated with empathy (Hoffman, 2000). Nevertheless, social values differ tremendously and while for one person this means an emphasis on communal or societal cohesion and care, for another it could mean emphasizing the role of individual self-reliance rather than dependency within society. Both might argue that they had strong social values. In terms of the data shown above, the role of profound empathy in social values would be to genuinely try to understand another individual’s feelings, thinking and circumstances, and then take responsibility and respond accordingly, while thinking about the best long-term interests of that individual. At this point, this becomes a moral as well as a social issue. However, empathy could be shown at a more fundamental or functional level, according to the data above, and then much less responsibility is shown for other individuals. This would perhaps be more closely related to the idea of individual self-reliance. Of course, if empathy is at a shallower level anyway, how could a person really understand the other’s position sufficiently to make a judgement about whether they are actually capable of self-reliance? So it could be argued that only through a profoundly empathic understanding could good decisions about the other be made. Perhaps to insist on self-reliance without real understanding of individual need and circumstance is to abrogate responsibility for the other. It may be significant here to consider the role of peers in the development of empathy, which has not been a particular emphasis in this project. Of course, interaction with peers in classrooms and playgrounds and beyond school enables students to develop a greater range of understandings of

230


different people, a process which will happen naturally for many students; in some situations, a helpful peer can be more helpful than an authoritarian teacher, for example. However, peer relationships for young people can be notoriously difficult. In a normative, outcomes- centred education system, their relationships are more likely to be competitive, which will make them less empathic and, therefore, less liable to grow. In large classrooms, they are likely to have to fight for the teacher’s attention and for other resources. Boys, in particular, are subject to tremendous pressure from peers not to achieve, for fear of being considered less masculine. The egocentric child or identity- obsessed adolescent may struggle to show sufficient empathy towards peers to enable them to really grow in large classrooms. The quality of interactions between students, compared with the quality of that with teachers in one-toone situations, is less likely to be as empathetic (Cooper and Brna, 2002), so in terms of modelling morality or raising achievement, peer interaction has more limitations. However, in smaller classes, where the teacher can give more individual attention and where the atmosphere is less competitive, peer relationships can be better and more consistently collaborative and supportive.

Spiritual and Religious Values Spiritual values are often related to heightened awareness, a sense of awe and wonder and a sense of mystery, provoking a tussling with the great questions of life and feeling at one with others and the wider cosmos. They are frequently related to transformative experiences and often, though not exclusively, intimately connected with religious belief. One might argue that profound empathy as discussed in Chapter 4 both epitomizes and develops many of these features. It includes that connectivity to all people and that awareness of the interrelatedness of all individuals. Its depth produces joy and pleasure in relationships, shared emotion, humour, and delight in knowing the whole person and supporting that person’s development, and this long-term and responsible perspective on their lives. It lifts students’ spirits, perceives their futures and seeks to influence them. Teachers felt that the one-toone teaching which generated profound empathy had a transformative effect on students understanding, sense of self and behaviour, and on their relationships with others. Moreover, these interactions gave joy, and Best (2003) explains that pleasurable interaction is an uplifting and spiritual aspect of learning.


231

There was some particularly interesting data on religious belief in the study, which merits some discussion, while recognizing that neither spiritual nor moral values are exclusive to religious individuals (Rogers and Hill, 2002). Nevertheless it was noteworthy and significant that a number of religious participants raised the issue of religion in relation to empathy voluntarily and their comments were at times surprising, given their own religious commitment. Morality is often linked to religion and spirituality in the literature and it is argued that guiding precepts such as the Ten Commandments ensure a code of principles by which to live a moral and spiritual life. The implication is that if the code encapsulates behaviour, then by following it, people will behave accordingly. However, the nature of functional empathy outlined in the data analysis in Chapter 4 above suggests that rules and codes are required to control the behaviour of large groups, and in schools, at least, functional empathy produces a weaker moral model for individuals than when they are shown profound empathy. In addition, Taylor (1997) argues that conflict and dissonance regarding values is rife between religious groups and even within groups. Even within the Christian tradition, distinctions are drawn between the Old and New Testament approaches to Christianity, the first more judgemental and rule- oriented, the second more compassionate and forgiving. Profound empathy relates more to the second of these two. Hull (1995) suggests that the theology of the British education system, for example, is even more specific. The Christianity required in UK schools is of a very particular kind, and is still dominated by the daily act of worship (a feature monitored during inspections), which applies to agnostics and atheists, regardless of their actual beliefs. This appears to be a strange fruit in relation to any kind of empathy, since to promote Christian worship for all religious believers and non-believers alike, given the diversity of traditions within the UK, might seem perversely unempathic. In organized religion, the ritualistic and symbolic nature of collective gatherings is a key vehicle by which spiritual and moral issues are addressed. This is particularly interesting in terms of this data, since traditional assemblies showed empathy at its weakest and with very poor models of morality demonstrated. Traditional assemblies also gave mixed messages, the moral or uplifting spiritual content was certainly not reflected in the method of the delivery, which showed shallower levels of empathy. This might even be considered feigned empathy, preaching one thing and doing another. This style of interaction turned the relationship of speaker to audience into the I-it relationship, described by Clark (1996) as unhelpful for learning. These

232


assemblies stressed control and negative emotions, allowing no interaction with pupils and resulted in decreased engagement and involvement. The teaching of both moral and spiritual issues would probably be less effective if children were less engaged and involved, which raises the question of whether traditional assemblies are an appropriate arena for promoting such learning. If no empathy is modelled in such assemblies, how can it be fostered? Religious instruction in these assemblies without the development of empathy could be damaging according to Blackham (1976), and Aspy (1972, 70) points out that giving conflicting messages can be more damaging than giving negative ones because the teacher lacks authenticity. Telling students to behave morally or encouraging them towards collective spiritual experiences, while displaying minimum care and respect for them as individuals and showing disinterest in their opinions, gives a very mixed message. The problems with these assemblies correlated well with the children’s comments. They were not keen on traditional assemblies but were more positive about assemblies in which they were involved, which were more informal, had fewer people or were humorous. These smaller assemblies and ones in which students actively participated were shown to be much more empathic in nature. Nevertheless, the more traditional gatherings are often to do with building the group mentality, a sense of belonging and group cohesion, not necessarily with engendering empathy for individual others. While ever the atmosphere remains positive and valuing, students are more likely to engage in and gain sustenance from assemblies, but when it shifts into a more authoritarian, depersonalized atmosphere, it may alienate rather than cohere. One has to consider how children would be able to feel at one with others and engage deeply with positive feelings about the cosmos, if they feel worthless either at home or when they come to school or, more especially, both. The SCAA discussion paper of 1993 linked Christianity and Religious Education to both spirituality and morality: ‘Most attention should be given to Christianity, which has contributed so forcibly to the spiritual and moral values of this country. Religious education has a particularly important part to play in pupil’s spiritual and moral development’ (SCAA 1993, 6). In contrast, the values agreed by the National Forum for Values did not specify particular religious codes but only commonly held principles, which could apply equally in the secular sphere. According to Rodger (1996), the moral basis of the Golden Rule described earlier by Haydon (1997a) is embedded in religions throughout the world and also forms part of secular principles. It also refers to action rather than mere belief. Treating others


233

as you would like to be treated implies that you understand both your own feelings and that other people would share similar emotions. Interestingly, Blackham (1976) argues that the study of religious and other beliefs without engendering empathy can be counterproductive: At all ages when world religions and non-religious convictions are studied it is important to foster an attitude of tolerance and a willingness to stand where the other person stands in an effort to see how something must appear to him. There is a danger that without an attempt to reach this empathetic standpoint, the study of different convictions may produce only negative results. (55) Such negative results have been highly visible recently through the religious antagonisms seemingly devoid of empathy during the Iraq war and its aftermath, and have undoubtedly played a distinct part in conflict throughout world history. In these cases, the religious seems to contrast sharply with both the spiritual and the moral. Some of the teachers in the study made links between empathy, religion and morality by referring to religious teaching. A recurring issue was that of treating people as you would like to be treated, the Golden Rule again, ‘“Love thy neighbour as thyself” and then no other crimes will be committed because you wouldn’t do it to yourself, you wouldn’t so that’s empathy and to my mind that’s morality as well’ (Claire). However, some made a clear distinction between religion and morality, despite being religious themselves. Fay explained that deep understanding is more related to empathy than the morality involved in religious instruction: There are people who have high religious moral standards, who necessarily wouldn’t have the empathy, maybe because they’re brought up with dogma. They’ve not really got used to the idea of relating on a deeper level, they only do things on a superficial level. This relates closely again to the idea of functional empathy and the dependence on codes of behaviour suggesting a shallower kind of empathy, whereas deeper levels of emotional understanding and attachment led to guilt feelings and to action, according to Terry, and those deeper levels of understanding and interconnectedness are required for spirituality. Deep understanding seemed to link empathy with morality and lack of empathy with prejudice and fi xed views. Peter felt tolerance was determined by

234


empathy and that to be aware of others and to empathize with them leads to consideration, guilt and self- sacrifice, which is required for morality. Teachers felt they should exemplify and articulate values naturally in their behaviour and interaction, rather than preach (Pete; Sara). Several people, like Fay above, highlighted the difference between dogma and practice. Anna, who was religious, made a surprising comment: ‘Well, I don’t relate it [morality] at all to anything to do with the church, not at all. Almost as an extreme from that’. She felt that people used religion as a cover-up for lesscaring behaviour, which worryingly relates more to feigned than profound empathy. One teacher with a Catholic background felt that he was able to show real empathy with his students, but he felt that this clashed to some extent with the more judgemental approach of his religion. It seems, therefore, that though many make connections between spiritual, religious and moral values, this is a highly debatable area, and some teachers argued that empathy is more fundamental to the moral than the religious or the spiritual. These arguments enhance rather than diminish the significance of empathy as a quality crucial to human society.

Aesthetic Values The issue of aesthetic values is very different when one considers the role of empathy. Although the origins of the word empathy were more related to aesthetic experience, the profound empathy we have discussed here is the empathy that develops between human beings. For artists or appreciators of art, the consideration is not necessarily for another living person but for the abstract other and the abstract world. Though some artists create art for a living or for altruistic purposes, their main aim is self- expression. If that self- expression has an impact beyond themselves, this may be wonderful, but that is often not why the art was created. So we might say that aesthetic values show an ability to enter another world, an abstract world, but they do not directly respond to the existing other, but abstractly through another medium, although art may powerfully reflect or comment on issues in society and move people intensely. This ability to enter deeply into the creative imagination may be closely linked to the empathy between humans, because it requires the openness and imagination to consider things deeply, both cognitively and affectively and to engage with imagined concepts, which are features of profound empathy. The effect of positive affect on the brain is to open it up,


235

to increase flexibility; however, in art, the effect of that empathy is often unreciprocated directly by another human being and, therefore, remains within the self. If another human being is affected deeply by their art, the artist may never know. There is not necessarily an ongoing dialogue with the other, which deepens and sustains the response. Artists, in order to devote time to their work, may even neglect their friends and family, because their art is paramount, so social and moral values may become subservient to aesthetic values. Noddings, who equates caring and ethical behaviour with an empathic approach, finds the common ground and makes the distinction between caring about intellectual or artistic things and ideas and caring about people: We feel, perhaps rightly, that the receptivity characteristic of aesthetic engagement is very like the receptivity of caring. Consciousness assumes a similar mode of being, one that attempts to grasp or receive a reality rather than impose it (Noddings, 1986 p. 22). This idea of ‘grasping’ a reality relates closely to Hay’s interpretation of spirituality (1997) and Nye’s concept of ‘relational consciousness’ (1998). Noddings (1986) goes on to say, however, that there are many examples of people who have cared for ideas or art but not for people, and that: ‘Perhaps some people find ideas and things more responsive than the people they have tried to care for’ (1986, 23). By being unconcerned about people, by remaining aloof or objective and more concerned about ideas or art, we can become less ethical: ‘To be always apart in human affairs, a critical and sensitive observer, to remain troubled but uncommitted, to be just so much affected or affected in just so much a way, is to lose the ethical in the aesthetic’ (1986, 22). This also ties in with the concept of the intellect being more egocentric and instrumental than emotions (Macmurray, 1935), and perhaps in this respect, potentially less moral.

Creativity Creativity, closely related to aesthetic values, also involves the power to grasp abstract and different ideas and develop or imagine new combinations of ideas (Bryson, 1999), perhaps to visualize alternatives and refuse to be bound by preconceptions. Just as profound empathy requires an opening up to the other, devoid of prejudice, so does creativity, and ,like art, it does not necessarily involve opening up to other people, although it can involve this. Creativity can involve the highest levels of artistic endeavour or simply an open and creative approach to work, learning and life. Some of our most creative moments and our most lateral thinking

236


happen when our rational brain is resting and the unconscious, intuitive aspects are allowed to mull freely (Claxton, 1997; Hesten, 1995), when we open ourselves up in a highly receptive way to deep and diverse thinking. Neuroscientists believe that human creativity may be nurtured by the leaps made between the complementary but very different halves of the brain. However, this openness and receptivity to alternative ways of thinking and seeing and valuing seems to be central to creativity and is also a feature of profound empathy. In relation to both creativity and caring, Noddings asks: ‘How can we emphasise the receptivity that is needed for both when we have no way of measuring it?’ (1986, 22). Of course, researchers do measure both empathy and creativity but the intangible and complex nature of both leaves many people sceptical. There are a number of researchers passionately engaged in research into creativity in education (Claxton, 1997; Craft, 2010; Fryer, 1996; Jeffrey and Liebling, 2001; Robinson, 2001). In Part Two, teachers felt that empathy can lead to more adventurous and creative, as well as more appropriate, teaching because the security of the strong relationship enables teachers and students to be open and take risks (Mary). Profound empathy allows more understanding of the emotional response to activities and subjects and, therefore, better, more adaptive tutoring (Mary), and teachers can be more versatile, spontaneous and inventive, trying more interesting activities which engage students such as drama, role-play and practical work (Sylvia). Empathy and creativity and the arts appear to be mutually interconnected and have often been associated in both the educational and the wider literature. Arts subjects have been found to be excellent for developing a whole range of personal, social and academic skills, for developing personal responsibility and initiative and a love and desire for life-long learning. The highquality relationships created by high levels of empathy allow teachers to be more demanding, to be more adventurous and creative without fear of failure on their own or their pupils’ part. Sylvia’s lesson, ‘The Coming of the Giant’, was a good example of more adventurous dramatic teaching and closely resembles the approach of Heathcote, the guru of educational drama, who was a strong advocate of using empathy and creative, spontaneous role-play in teaching (Hesten, 1995). The engagement of the emotions in drama focuses attention, which supports information processing in the brain, engaging it deeply (Damasio, 1999). In Hesten’s doctoral thesis (1995) on Heathcote, she writes that: ‘Empathy . . . proved to be at the heart of the teaching method Heathcote evolved over the next thirtysix years’ (2).


237

Similarly, the development of creativity across the curriculum, a key initiative in the UK curriculum in recent years, can both model and engender empathy by dint of its human- centred, expressive, and often collaborative and interdisciplinary activities. These kind of activities were valued by these empathic teachers, who championed tasks involving cooperation which allow children to see each other’s perspective, and develop helping behaviours. Disaffected children can gain an improved sense of self through working on a drama production, for example, and playing games can improve social skills and reveal hidden qualities. Cross- curricular and thematic activity which incorporates children’s motivations was suggested to have potential for supporting spirituality, as does the use of picture books and reading (Kendall, 1999; Pike, 2004). Stories are all about human relationships (D’Arcy, 1998) and support perspective-taking (Grainger, 1997). Recent European research into the effects of drama activities on young people (DICE, 2010) show a wide impact on a whole range of aspects of their characters and lives, including empathy and tolerance and what it is to be human. Jones (1996) argues that drama has the potential to enable emotional, spiritual and political change, while Winston (2002) connects spirituality to school theatrical productions which bring ‘spontaneous feelings of joy and togetherness’ a similar phenomenon to that described by Ota (1998) when she records the excitement and spiritual feelings of children, associated with scoring goals in football. This data is uplifting in that we understand the power and relatedness of empathy and creativity. However it is also concerning, given the reduction of creative aspects of the curriculum in the face of the relentless emphasis on basics over many years, which will no doubt be reinforced during the world recession. In the blisteringly competitive and relentlessly testing conditions in which schools and students find themselves, it is frightening to read that, in one study, American college students showed forty per cent less empathy than their counterparts did thirty to forty years ago (Konrath et al., 2010). Just as the constraints created by lack of resources and limited environments within the education system can constrain empathy, they, in turn, can constrain creativity. Just as empathy needs time and a relaxed environment, so, too, does creativity. Inappropriate rooms deny teachers the appropriate stimulating and varied resources, which they needed in order to engage children in learning and to meet their needs. The environment Fay worked in, with her large lower school class, seems cramped and inappropriate for a creative music lesson. Tanya gave an example of trying to encourage creative design with pupils and being restricted by being able

238


to offer just one material and one colour in terms of resource. Bureaucracy and form-filling, the rigid curriculum and pressures of the exam system reduce teacher autonomy and creativity and risk-taking, driving out both old and new teachers from the system. In overly competitive cultures, we are obliged to conceal our own feelings and detach our feelings for the other in order to win or dominate. An overly competitive culture encourages opposition and defence not dialogue, creates threats and does not assuage anxiety. It inhibits learning except for those skills that enable us to win some short- term learning race and relies on our more base instincts of survival rather than on the more generative instincts of support and communication. The ability to cut off our feelings, interaction and communication links with others may be vital to survival under threat and is probably a natural human mechanism for coping in such contexts, but can act as violence to the spirit, according to Chater (2006). The continued development of the human race as a complex civilization, able to understand and cope in rapidly changing contexts with many different individuals and groups, will be reliant on learning and understanding in positive interactive climates, in which we can open up creatively to new and challenging situations and ideas. If creative teaching excites the emotions and increases engagement and supports memory while modelling creativity then it must have consequences for achievement and future creativity. Surely such positive aspects of human behaviour are those which we need to encourage for the long-term benefit of civilized society.

Conclusion Chapter Twelve There are, it seems, some definite relationships between the many different types of values as well as some pertinent differences. We probably need some of those differences in order to support diversity and eccentricity, but we also need to be aware of their pitfalls for human relationships. Within human values, one can see the complex differences and contrasts in morality in certain cultures, where historically issues of racism or sexism or homophobia challenge the values of equity assumed in other cultures. The prevalence of fi xed attitudes and stereotypes and the limitations of lower levels of empathy can be seen at work on a daily basis in society. Similarly, the moral codes of groups which promote loyalty to


239

family and tribes while using unlimited violence on non- family members or members of rival groups is a form of limited or partial empathy. This is probably a natural survival mechanism of earlier societies but has a destructive effect on the longer-term progress towards a more universal empathy in a global society.

Chapter 13

Issues in the Education and Training of Professionals

If profound empathy is central to engagement, values and achievement in schools and, arguably, other educational institutions, then what are the implications for the selection of candidates for teachers training, their education, their appointment and their continuing professional development? Given the findings above, at the application and interview stage, teacher educators should certainly be seeking prospective student teachers who have the potential to develop profound empathy with their students and who understand the importance of relationships in learning. Most prospective teachers are capable of demonstrating some degree of empathy on entry to the profession, and research shows that desire for positive human relationships with staff and pupils is a key motivation for trainees when choosing to work in education (Hobson et al., 2006). Fielding (2007) stresses the significance of relationship in learning and when learning themselves, teachers are no different from young people in this regard. Nias (1996) argues that teachers are passionate about their relationships with students. Society requires well- educated teachers, critical thinkers, who can work according to their values and can continually model learning, as well as a moral and humane approach in their interaction with pupils. Emotion plays a central part in teacher learning as well as student learning (Hoban, 2002), and as we have seen, role models are crucial to the development of children’s behaviour (Bandura, 1969; Blackham, 1976; Kyriacou, 1986). The models offered by teachers and systems form a key aspect of the hidden curriculum, where students learn quite different messages from those within the taught curriculum (Bottery, 1990; Gibbs, 2006; Hargreaves, 1982). We need empathic teachers who value the individual, which is important because in school systems young people receive different messages about how they are valued in relation to others (Bernstein, 1975).


241

The student teachers interviewed in the research above, despite their novice status, were no less naturally empathetic than the experienced teachers and showed real sensitivity to students’ personal and academic situations. However, they were only beginning to build up that encyclopaedic knowledge of children, groups and situations, which experienced teachers accumulate over the years and which permits greater levels of understanding and enables teachers to draw on memories of previous learning interactions and of children with similar motivations and problems. For some prospective teachers, the love of their subject is a key motivator, and where academic enthusiasm and empathy are combined, in profound empathy, we have the possibility for really highquality education, but academic enthusiasm with lower levels of empathy is likely to result with students floundering with concepts and materials they cannot understand and teachers who remain unaware of their problems, as with the unempathic teachers discussed in Chapter 6.

The Selection of Student Teachers It is vital, therefore, that we give serious consideration to the selection and training of teachers and that all teachers and especially secondary and subject-focused teachers understand the importance of relationships and affective issues to learning, in addition to their enthusiasm for and knowledge of their subject. Four key provisions are needed in teacher education in this regard. First, to ensure that selection processes take into account the need for empathy, second that understanding the central importance of this quality forms part of initial teacher education programmes, and third that teacher educators learn how to model empathy in their relationships with student teachers. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, we need teachers with the moral commitment to critically evaluate and request improvements to our educational systems instead of simply accepting them as they are. In the culture of performativity, teachers can be overly deferential. They need to request a reduction in class sizes and structures, and curricula that will provide more cohesive relationships and time for personal relationships to be initiated and sustained. They also must seriously challenge the normative curriculum and testing procedures that affect levels of empathy throughout the system. Our future teachers need to enact their values even if it produces discomfort or opposition. If many prospective teachers have high levels of empathy, it may be hard to decide exactly who does not in a short interview, and again finance

242


dominates here currently over quality. In the UK, for example, all prospective trainees must be interviewed, but staff shortages in teacher education, combined with very high numbers of applicants, mean that students are often interviewed in groups. Group interviews have some advantages in that the interviewer can observe peer interaction, which rules out some candidates because they show an inability to listen and respond positively to others. However, group activities also favour certain types of students over others and often quieter, more thoughtful individuals, who listen effectively but do not interject to support their case, could make excellent teachers but are simply not heard in group interviews. Often, the number of applicants is so large that in any given group interview, most applicants are rejected, some precisely because of their gentleness and sensitivity. This may also disadvantage some ethnic minority students, which is problematic both in terms of equity and diversity of role models in schools. In short, insufficient resources to conduct a fully comprehensive interview, combined with observing students in a competitive situation, may produce poor selections in relation to empathy. Student teachers also tend to get accepted partly on how they answer standard questions, how they contribute to activities in the group, but also on how they manage to demonstrate their potential in a group situation, which is essentially quite competitive. There is a place, it would seem, for activities to probe for greater levels of empathy at interview and to detect feigned empathy, and these would probably require a one-toone interview because in group interviews, candidates tend to learn from and echo each other. Interestingly, in the preliminary investigations of this research (Cooper, 1997), an individual interview conducted by one university revealed a prospective student who really lacked empathy with some students, which amazed both the head teacher conducting the interview, as well as the author as observer. The prospective trainee had worked as a volunteer in the school and was being interviewed for a placement there. The head had already indicated how delighted he was with the candidate and her work with the children. She voluntarily ran a music club and he had been thrilled by her input and the children’s performances. It was unclear whether he was swayed unconsciously by the fact that her services came free of charge and he wanted to woo parents by offering music, or whether she had just been so effective with the particular groups she was working with. However, when asked how she would approach the teaching of children with special educational needs, she was visibly dumbstruck and was unable to say anything, presumably because she had never even considered it. She was prompted but continued to look blank. Her usual charges were the bright,


243

middleclass children encouraged to play and perform music, but clearly she had not entertained any thoughts of teaching any other kind of child. Afterwards, the head professed his genuine disbelief at her seemingly total ineptitude on this issue and, indeed, it is usually difficult to find a prospective trainee who has not even considered the teaching of special needs children. Understanding of special needs and diversity are crucial in classrooms, and we need teachers who understand and appreciate the differences between children, both to relate to them and to teach them effectively. This strange phenomenon of being able to relate to certain children and not others was described by several of the teachers in Chapter 4. It was clear from the data that teachers like this and other teachers with less empathy are very ineffective; the head teacher described them as ‘useless’ and it would be fairer to them and to their future charges not to encourage them into the profession. However, simple tests would be insufficient because even in the pilot, one younger teacher who was clearly very empathetic did not identify the importance of empathy in the ranking activity. One- toone discussion must be a more effective way of investigating real attitudes. Certainly prospective teachers should be asked probing questions around special needs, differentiation and diversity, and these answers would produce more authentic responses in a one- to- one interview.

Initial Teacher Education The question of whether students can be trained in empathy as well as being made more aware of its significance is interesting. There has been research in this area, not only in education but also in health and counselling. Early research did perceive empathy as a quality that could be improved (Aspy, 1972; Rogers, 1975;). However, although training can develop empathy in test scores and among students in groups (Walter and Finlay, 2002), practice settings, where one- to- one time is scarce or an empathic culture is absent, present a major problem for nurses (Reynolds et al., 2000). Working environments also proved a key factor in supporting or constraining empathy in education, according to the data in Part Two above. In statistical studies, empathy is negatively correlated with an authoritarian approach (Black and Phillips, 1982), and prevalent managerial approaches can be unempathic. Where care is strongly associated with women workers, it can be down- valued (Tong,

244


1997), and the association of emotion with women can result in derision (Damasio, 1999). In addition, Black and Philips (1982) argue that although training can improve empathy scores, this is less true for the more empathic student teachers, which suggests that a focus on selection could be more important. Also, if the emotional capacity of an individual is severely limited, then it may be harder to improve empathy. Consequently, it is important to note that training and the improvement of test scores may not necessarily improve empathic behaviour once in post. Additionally in teacher education, the limited contact time and perennial focus on core subjects such as literacy and numeracy can reduce time for other important issues. Topics can be marginalized, for example, special needs, racial and cultural awareness and English as a second language, as well as personal and social education, the arts, humanities and drama – all of which are essential both for modelling empathy and in encouraging empathic development in children. An emphasis on tick-box competencies or a narrow curriculum reduces time to consider deeply, meaningfully and respectfully the lives of others through a broader approach. The favour shown for the one-year Post Graduate Certificate is also problematic because students spend a large proportion of their time in school with over-worked teachers with no spare time and the rest in university in large groups and with limited contact time. This limits opportunities to address a richer curriculum and makes the role model offered by teacher educators a relatively shallow one also. As Claxton (1984) argued many years ago, we take only rare opportunities to elicit students’ deeper values and need to move away from ‘laminating students with our own wisdom and towards drawing out what they already know’ (170). This is precisely what profoundly empathic encounters do well, but they require time. A deeper awareness of the theoretical underpinnings of emotional aspects of learning, combined with the discussion of genuine case studies of particular students, as well as reflecting deeply on time spent with individual children on teaching practice, would be particularly helpful for student teachers. Unfortunately, student teachers are often encouraged to ‘take the reins’ of groups and full classes quite quickly and, moreover, they are eager to adopt the mantle of the professional. However, as importantly, they need to understand individuals and how learning happens, through watching and working with particular students, as well as managing whole class teaching. Moreover, the narrow focus on teaching the core curriculum to whole classes requires challenging, because the modelling of profound not functional empathy optimizes learning, and teacher student relationships form a key part in the effective teaching of


245

core subjects like literacy, for example, a point which Aspy (1972) argued forty years ago. In addition, teacher educators must model individual care to trainees, and though they make every effort, work load, curricular restrictions and external monitoring by inspectors, reduce time for interaction. Unfortunately, functional empathy dominates teacher education as it does schools. Moreover, if these are problems within teacher education in universities, the problems are even greater in school-based training, where there is even less time for deep consideration and reflection. Teachers and student teachers training ‘on the job’ are fully deployed in ‘doing’ rather than ‘thinking’ and moves towards less critical, school-based training would exacerbate this problem. The withdrawal of government support for the arts and humanities in both higher and community education, and in the sponsorship of the arts during the recession following the banking crisis, may be short sighted and ultimately very costly. The concept of education as a business and the different values it promotes, alongside restrictions in the curriculum, may have disastrous consequences, both for learning and the moral climate, if such values are not tempered by human and caring values. The training of staff for Higher Education is similarly problematic. Though many staff moving into HE have had other teaching experience and or training, some have had none at all, and being thrust into lecture theatres with three hundred students does not particularly help them to develop an empathic approach. Most universities provide training and qualifications for new entrants, but the quality of this varies enormously and lecturers must complete the courses alongside the heavy demands of teaching with minimal release, which allows less time for study and deep contemplation. Much of the teaching is dominated by a mechanistic approach and strategies for teaching very large classes, as discussed in Chapter 9.

The Impact of Working Conditions on Teachers The really positive aspect of education is that most teachers (and most other caring professionals) arrive with the key skills to relate well to other human beings. The negative side is that the conditions in which they work steal away their ability to empathize and to focus on human relationships, which would produce highquality interaction and learning, positive human values and raise achievement. Crucially, politicians and policy-makers and inspectors must realize this. The student teachers in our research blamed

246


themselves for not being able to meet all needs adequately. Janet described trying to show empathy with everyone in her class: ‘It’s very difficult when you have to cut yourself into 34 different pieces’. Sadly, much research also blames teachers and other carers, when they have minimal control over their own working conditions. Feelings of failure and disappointment with relationships in difficult working conditions is probably a key cause of the departure from the teaching profession in large numbers. This means expensive training, practice and experience are lost to the profession. The same problem probably also applies to social workers. Even as key cases of abuse and neglect are blamed on social workers, the papers simultaneously report the difficulty in obtaining new staff, the unbearable workloads and stress of trying to deal daily with very needy people with insufficient resources. Vast sums of money are spent on research projects into teaching strategies and curriculum, which are not the main issue in school improvement. Millions are spent on implementing and evaluating new reading schemes, mathematics approaches, new curricula at every level, when these are peripheral to successful learning. If student teachers were helped to understand the importance of time and staff student ratio for high quality learning, they would request more of it. Unfortunately, governments often suppress, ignore or fail to fund such research because they have no inclination to pay for more teachers. An improvement of staff student ratios at every level in education, combined with a concerted attempt to build in time to create relationships early in student–teacher relationships, would reduce drop out, improve the quality of relationships, and make for much faster and more effective learning, as well as developing more caring values and those life-long learning skills and attitudes.

Continuing Professional Development The continuing professional development of teachers is often focused around short courses explaining new curricular and technological initiatives, which though necessary at times, can also distract from the significance of the human relationships in teaching and learning. As teachers in Part Two explain, the more curriculum there is to cover, the less time there is to actually speak to students. The over-filled curriculum steals time from humanity and forces more transmissive rather than interactive learning. In 2000, when the issues of empathy and relationships were raised at a conference for head teachers, I was thanked wholeheartedly for reminding them


247

what teaching was all about, and it is vital that these important issues are not forgotten in the continual round of curricular and technological development. If new initiatives detract from humanity, they will degrade rather than improve learning and because hidden affective issues are always undervalued, they are more likely to be forgotten. Also, because affect is essentially human, what educationalists are naturally good at and because it is associated with women, it is continually overlooked. If highquality relationships optimize learning, the greatest losers in relation to our lack of emphasis on the human are those in most need, because these students, above all others, require fast and effective teaching. There is very little training time devoted to special needs for teachers and especially to working with students who have severe conditions with multiple disadvantages. Equally, teaching assistants require greater understanding of all these issues. Deeper and more contemplative courses are conducted at masters level or in action research projects supported by universities. Although teachers struggle to find time for this advanced study, when they do, they appreciate the deeper reflection on their practice, which such courses permit. Many head teachers also recognize the importance of this higher- quality learning and encourage staff to participate and share their research within the school and beyond. Allocating time and responsibility for conducting research could be a valuable addition to a teachers’ contract. In one action research project (Side by Side project 2008- 9), interviews conducted after their studying revealed the problems teachers face, one explained: ‘You try to encourage your children to think more but then you [emphasized ] don’t have time to think’. Another said: ‘You get sent so much to you and told that you’ve got to do this and you’ve got to do that and you’ve got to ensure that you’re covering this, that you just switch off.’ Their head teacher was explicit about the importance of teachers continuing to learn: ‘If teachers feel that they’re learners and not teachers, then you’ve got a winning thing.’ The teachers, similarly, appreciated the difference deeper learning made: ‘It’s just helped me become more of a thinker rather than just a doer . . . with this [project] we are saying that actually we want to work out what is good for us and what is good for our school (Nicola). The research clearly impacted on practice: It’s given me more of an insight into how children, or new to English children, learn . . . through the reading, because obviously you don’t have chance to do a lot of reading. You just kind of go on courses and

248


are told various things but actually the reading and the background into it . . . it’s impacted on me so I’m more aware of how they learn, so I’ve put that into my planning, my induction planning . . . how to interact, how to speak, what kind of activities I’m using, rather than them just repeating. So it has been good. (Hannah) We need learning, thinking teachers who value their own and others’ knowledge, improve their practice and their schools, and who model learning to their students. Moreover, they need to learn for their own satisfaction and development as people, if they are to enjoy their work, advance their understanding and maintain their own enthusiasm for learning, as these teachers did: ‘I get very enthusiastic . . . and want to do it and I enjoy it.’(Hannah) It is easy to make the connection to other professions and evidence suggests they have similar issues to resolve. We need highly and continually educated people in all professional working environments, if we are to provide the quality of service, and the continued development required in our demanding and complex society. Most especially, in the caring services, we need people who do care, who know what real care entails and the conditions needed to facilitate it. Caring societies breed caring people and cooperative societies breed cooperative people, whereas uncaring, divisive and aggressively competitive societies produce the opposite. We must envisage the future of our world and seriously consider how best to shape it through the selection, training and continued development of our professionals.

Chapter 14

Wider Implications and Future Work

Given the evidence and argument presented in this book, if we accept the integral nature of cognition and affect, and the significance of affect and empathy to education in terms of engagement, achievement and values development, then what are the possible implications for society and global development? If profound empathy tends to optimize learning, then currently the pace of learning must be very slow in our education systems, since in most classrooms and lectures the adult/student ratio is too poor, combined with other constraints, for profound empathy to flourish. Best (2000) argues that our society pays minimal attention to affect in education, so we must begin to afford it more, given its importance. We need to find ways of speeding up the quality and pace of human learning and for global society, we need to find ways of improving the moral models around us to avoid depersonalization, alienation and the modelling of stereotyping. At home, adults can and do interact intensively and lovingly with their children, and the crucial importance of the parental role in the support of learning and development has long been identified (Deforges and Abouchaar, 2003). These parents set the foundations of moral development with their children and support their motivation, engagement and achievement in learning throughout their educational, and even working, career. However, most parents will be affected by the climate of lower moral values, as this problem pervades all aspects of society and is often perpetuated by the media. For parents who do not have the skills, or who are trying to survive in very difficult circumstances or have not understood the importance of the parental role in education and development, they and their children will need the most support. Government policies such as Surestart in the UK, for example, have been very helpful in bringing services together to support these families and their children. We need to increase funding for such early interventions, or these families will pay the

250


price initially and society the price eventually, as low achievement and antisocial behaviour become very costly in the longer term. We have perhaps been dominated by short-term financial motives when organizing our education systems for too long. Moreover, if in a more liberal Europe, we despair of the intrusion of market values into education, we must sympathize with Scherz (2005) and Sandel (2009) and colleagues, who argue for more empathic systems and structures in the United States, which is dominated by a much more aggressive free-market morality. In private education, students have always benefited from smaller classes, where their education can be paid for by parents. When young people struggle in particular subject areas or when school entry examinations threaten, parents with the available income often pay for one-toone tuition. The Oxbridge model of one-toone tutorials and small classes in wealthy universities ensures that they maintain their world- class status. The problem is that for an educated and caring society, we need all people, not just the wealthy, to learn, progress and be fulfilled. Wealthy elites, segregated by class and privilege, who subsequently lead nations, will always struggle to understand the problems of others with whom they have minimal contact. Huge increases in tuition fees in higher education in the UK will doubtless ensure this division continues. Similar problems occur when market values and structures are introduced into health and social care. We must move forward as whole society and as a global society, not as a divided and more unequal one, which can only produce unhappiness and division. We need to convince policy-makers to replace the concern about shortterm financial capital and value for money in education and the caring services with a more elaborate theory of emotional capital and long- term gain if our society is to progress at pace and remain harmonious. The nurturing of empathy through both non-verbal and verbal interaction demonstrates care, which builds emotional capital. Reay (2000) describes emotional capital as ‘the stock of emotional resources built up over time within families and which children could draw upon’ (572). However, those students whose families are not able to nourish empathy or who have little familial support need other sources of building emotional capital. No one is self-reliant, and children least of all. Any person with whom young people have significant contact can help to build emotional capital. Everyone relies on a range of people and services for emotional support at different times in their lives and depending on their needs. An individual’s emotional resilience can be threatened at any point by sudden and unforeseen circumstances, bereavement, stress, illness, unemployment or accident, and we need human support to help us through those difficult times and


251

to visualize a better future. Those who have built up emotional capital can cope with later shocks more easily. Less-fortunate people must rely on public services or charities for the same support. Empathy, and the emotional capital it produces, enables people to sustain existing relationships and form new relationships, to navigate complex social and working worlds with a degree of selfesteem and confidence yet sensitivity to others, allowing them to build mutually respectful relationships in many aspects of their lives. Positive relationships support a person’s existing sense of self, which also enables them to take on new development and continuous life-long learning. Empathy, a uniquely powerful quality, bequeaths moral strength, which furnishes people with the courage to argue for their beliefs, helps them to resist corruption, to challenge the status quo and oppressive regimes, and to remain open to new thinking. It provides the confidence to work across boundaries and in diverse communities, which continually expands an individual’s thinking and reaffirms their sense of self. It enables people to understand themselves and their multi-faceted relationships in the complex world in which they live. They are able to draw on inner resources and strong relationships and support to overcome the hurdles that life may present. If empathy is vital for learning, this has implications far beyond the school system. We interact and learn constantly at work and during leisure time. Particularly in terms of people- centred professions, we need to recognize the centrality of highquality, positive relationships and learning to progress. This is most vital in education, health care and the social services, whose very essence is in supporting and developing human life and human capacity. However, any organization that involves human interchange must understand the significance of interpersonal and affective issues in learning. In business and industry, companies that understand and develop their workforce and understand the needs of their customers more profoundly are more likely to flourish and have social consciences. Happy, engaged workers are more productive and creative and will be able to treat their families and colleagues more humanely and be more able to contribute positively to society outside of work. The biggest threat to the development of a more understanding and collaborative society, however, is any kind of threat to human existence or resources which provoke a more aggressive, competitive stance. For example, a recession develops competition and aggression, and both civil wars and those between nations are often provoked by a shortage of resources. This is magnified and exacerbated by unfettered power in regimes where power can be abused to develop personal wealth and greed. We return

252


to Brecht (1965 and the idea that alienating and depersonalized environments force us to reduce our empathic concern for others in order to survive. The philosophy of capitalism focuses on the individual rather than on collaborative development, on individual gain and on individual, rather than on collective responsibility. Selfish individualism is the antithesis of empathy and many right-wing thinkers and many politicians have to continually feign empathy in their public statements to give even a semblance of caring humanity, for this is not what motivates them. They have no extensive personal commitment to a better society but are motivated by the rewards of power and prestige in government. They are not interested in providing systematic care and support for the under-privileged; they would prefer that left to the patchier provision of less- expensive charities and volunteers. They have no real interest in a highquality education system for all, and are happy that those who can pay for it or who can fight for it benefit most. They want to devolve responsibility, rather than take responsibility, which is the more moral option. Margaret Thatcher infamously argued: ‘There is no such thing as society’ (Partington, 1996, 691). This echoes the cry of the uncaring wealthy individualists who tries to salve their conscience and feign empathy by holding ostentatious charity dinners. Thatcher’s materialist twist on classic Christian values: ‘No- one would remember the Good Samaritan if he’d only had good intentions. He had money as well’ (Partington, 1996, 691), gives a clear indication of how self-interest and materialism can be fostered by politicians. They have little desire to take responsibility for a genuinely more equal society and, by using feigned empathy, they concoct arguments to simulate concern. We must be vigilant and alert to feigned empathy in politicians and those in positions of power, and challenge and expose it whenever it appears. Politics is a mere game for these people because they are often so wealthy they have no need of employment. Occasionally, the mask of humanity slips and their real views become apparent. Recent examples came from one who suggested that it was not sensible for poor people to breed, and another, when told his expenses would no longer include first- class travel, announced his opinion that a totally different type of people travel in standard- class carriages. These slips give us a window into their private beliefs, an indication of how they really think and feel. It is interesting to consider how right-wing politicians learn to feign so well. Was it an elite private education, their parents or their peers who taught them to dissemble so unscrupulously? Clearly, their views are also purveyed by the media and never adequately challenged, because they, too, increasingly serve the interests of very rich and powerful people.


253

Right-wing governments, rather than attempting to bring all people up to high levels of prosperity, often prefer to create a lumpen proletariat to blame and shame, on whom to the focus the eyes of the general populous when times are hard or governments are struggling themselves with the consequences of their policies. Good education and services for all is, of course, a threat to those who have always been able to buy and maintain privilege and separate themselves and their families from the less fortunate. Empathic people should be alert to these strategies and challenge them.

Future Research In the research arena, more cooperative working and sharing of understanding rather than competition will lead to faster developments. Many moves in recent years have encouraged this; for example, research councils require interdisciplinary approaches and data to be deposited and available for reuse after collection. However, time and resources must be built into projects to enable sharing to happen easily, fairly and properly. Still, too many research articles have to be bought to be read, too many researchers defend their data secretly and too many steal others ideas. Too much emphasis is put on purely quantitative, shallower approaches to the study of society, rather than on deep or longitudinal qualitative studies, which seek to understand human relationships and development profoundly. If teachers, nurses and social workers understand the importance of oneto- one interaction and the empathy it creates for improving selfesteem and progress, we might wonder why our researchers are not investigating this area for the future benefit of our children and our society. Some are, but affect is a messy issue to research and does not attract much funding. It is not straight-forward to measure, capture or assess, hidden as much of it is in the non-verbal and such a complex affective and cognitive amalgamation. Curriculum development and testing are much more concrete and attractive to funders, who are also influenced by the powerful and the wealthy and market values. Researching with vulnerable children or adults with special needs can be ethically and methodologically complex, and we need to find ways of supporting such important research. Meta–reviews of research, by dint of their inclusion criteria, often ignore the small- scale qualitative studies where affective issues are inevitably studied. The positivist approach adopted by some researchers, often in respected universities, tends to dismiss small- scale projects and more

254


human issues, partly because of their long-held ideology as members of the wealthy elite themselves. However, they may be missing the most sophisticated and transformative aspects of human society and holding back the development of society by their limited approach. Highly trained scientific researchers are frequently trained to be objective, rational and unemotional; why would they then choose to investigate the messy world of affect and human interaction? Fortunately, neuroscientists are finding emotion intriguing and are rediscovering the importance of affect that humanists have always understood more intuitively. Of course, developing empathy requires human interventions, which of all interventions are in the short term the most costly, but probably in the longer term the most cost effective, and governments know this. Their thinking is dominated by the short-termism of the electoral cycle, and even if they understand what works in education, they are simply not prepared to pay for it up front. Yet so much is lost when they do not. Educated people live longer, are more productive, have healthier children, and are better able to develop their potential in more tolerant societies. If as educationalists we understand what works, then we should argue for it time and time again and not be fooled by propaganda which puts shortterm finance before people, not be seduced by government arguments about lack of funding. The question is, can we afford in the longer term not to educate all our children to higher standards? Do we want to maintain, for example, the high level of illiteracy and innumeracy of those who fill our prisons and who, on release, return to crime and further devastate society, damaging their own and others’ lives?

So What Might We Research to Make Our Case for Profound Empathy? First, we need more and larger- scale studies along the lines of the one described here, and a variety of others to demonstrate repeatedly the impact of human intervention in education and the other caring services. They also need to be longitudinal to show the long-term benefits to people. They need to be interdisciplinary and are likely to be expensive, although not necessarily as expensive as the large Hadron Collider and all its associated resources at CERN, for example. Second, meta-reviews of the existing research are needed to bring it together under one umbrella and to include in that the small- scale studies which give rich information on the effects of highquality human interaction across the caring


255

services. If these continue to be excluded from the equation, the signifi cance of human relationships in learning and interaction will continue to be ignored. Additionally, we need studies to look very closely at when and how to offer one-toone intervention, and to what extent and in which contexts and with which individuals. I have argued elsewhere that profound empathy actually has mathematical qualities which ensure its depth and effectiveness (Cooper, 2010). It would be useful to consider these seriously to show the impact of empathy in our lives, attitudes and learning. My hunch is that we may not need vast quantities of one-toone intervention if we can offer it at the right moment, in the right quality and frequency. If profound empathy in relationships develops human engagement, values, and achievement, we really need to understand its impact in all these areas and through the findings of our research to argue for the human resources to support it. For example, if we focus on learning and how to improve the reading age of a child who is five years below average, to the level of an average student of that age, and we believe that working with a profoundly empathic teacher of literacy is the appropriate solution, how often and for how long should they meet? Currently, such frequencies have more to do with the logistics of deploying staff than with the efficacy of their effects on learning and selfesteem. Improvements in reading may have much less to do with the curriculum than they do with human contact and motivation, but we would need to observe and discuss and consider the human aspect of the intervention in great detail to properly understand the process and its impact on engagement and achievement. A half-hour research interview itself can have a powerful impact, according to Clegg (2003), and such human impact is often not considered carefully enough in educational or other research interventions. There are thousands of aspects of learning in all phases of education, which might provide contexts for research into profound empathy, and we know it has particular effect on those who have most to gain in the learning stakes. For students with special needs, we really need to do sensitive, qualitative research which approaches the world from their perspective, because some of their learning difficulties are so unique that they require a unique starting point for both research and learning. Without discovering that point, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to understand how they might learn and how best we may support their learning. We may need to adopt time- consuming, very personalized approaches to even begin to understand their world, but they may then surprise us with

256


their participation and development, as did the severely autistic children in Elzouki’s study (2011). The research methods as well as the teaching approach will require empathy, and it would be beneficial to have multidisciplinary teams, including neuroscientists, involved in such research. To consider the impact on values development, we really need complex, long-term studies and we need to consider what impact profound empathy or lack of it has on student behaviour as well as on their attitudes and thinking, which will need careful consideration and planning. Studies of the impact of lower levels of moral modelling in schools could be ethically complex and difficult to conduct, although student evaluations of similar lessons in different size classes might prove very interesting.

Concluding Thoughts Developing profound empathy certainly has immediate financial implications for the caring services and even bigger financial implications if we ignore it. If it would improve business organization and management and even research, how can we afford to ignore it? If empathy improves tolerance and understanding, then developing it must counter intolerance and the inevitable social and international disputes that ensue. If developing profound empathy is central to morality, then perhaps not to investigate further, in itself, would be immoral. Historically, had we taken a proactive approach to developing emotional as opposed to financial capital, we might have avoided many wars, including two world wars and all the subsequent consequences. Could the Holocaust or the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, for example, have happened if profound empathy had been developed in all those involved, and if we had always equalized life chances rather than encouraging and perpetuating selfishness and greed? The significance of the research explained here for learning, staff and student relationships and management of educational institutions suggests these findings have much wider implications than for schools alone. The data contains useful understanding for parenting and learning in any organization, and has implications for practice in other people- centred professions and organizations and for the management of such organizations. At both the micro and the macro level, we may need to consider deeply the importance of empathy to human moral development and learning and the future development of human society. Appiah (2007) argues eruditely for a benign global cosmopolitanism which values people of all races, religions and ethnicities, and most educationalists would agree


257

but the more challenging question is how do we persuade and enable people to value others, of whatever creed, colour and origin? If the values of the market and competition, of treating people as numbers rather than human beings, offers a lower level of empathy and morality, and models lack of care for certain people at least, then perhaps we should never be surprised when we experience racism or intolerance or indeed the violent events of an uncaring society. The American and increasingly global dream and the competition it engenders may be a fundamental cause of violence in American society. Violence and lack of empathy are commonplace and Hare (1995) warns us of the large numbers of psychopaths devoid of empathy but excellent at feigning it, who exist among us, wreaking havoc in the lives of those around them. If children are exposed to a competitive, lesscaring model at home, school and work, then should we be surprised when they commit uncaring acts against others? For children who feel alienated and exist without real care from birth, schools are scarcely beginning to address their needs, and school, after all, is their main alternative place of being to home. If anything, schools can add to their alienation with the harsh, competitive, curriculum- centred model which subjugates the feelings of the individual to group norms and seems ill- equipped to support needy pupils. Yet, empathic teachers, given appropriate contexts and opportunities, as shown in this study, have a desire to develop close and caring relationships with pupils, improving their behaviour and their learning. However, the long- established practices of the system seem to have paralyzed our mental representations of what teaching and learning might possibly be. We have taught large classes for so long we struggle to envisage an alternative. A teacher in the pilot study discussed in Chapter 4 wanted more human support in classrooms, but felt it was simply not a possibility. However, Terry, the head teacher in this study, appropriately referred to Edmund Burke’s famous speech: all it took for evil to prevail was for good men to do nothing’ – absolutely dead right, if you believe it and you think it’s right and it’s for the good of the people then don’t sit down and say nothing. As people concerned with the whole of human development who are driven to act and take responsibility for the long-term future of others, educators should take up the challenge, break existing moulds, and seek to transform attitudes and practices. We must be creative about adopting more holistic approaches to education, from the very earliest contact with children in

258


order to cultivate human society more fully, through the greater development of profound empathy and the understanding and concern it produces. If this requires greater resources and more appropriate distribution of resources, then it is our moral obligation to request them and require our governments to take responsibility and provide them.

Bibliography

Alexander, R. (2004), ‘Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education’. Cambridge Journal of Education , 34, (1), 7–33. Alimo- Metcalfe, B. and Alban-Metcalfe, J. (2005), ‘Leadership: time for a new direction?’ Leadership, 1, (1), 51–71. Anning, A. and Edwards, A. (1999), Promoting Children’s Learning from Birth to Five . Buckingham: Open University Press. Appiah, K. A. (2007), ‘Cosmopolitanism’, Association of Moral Education Annual Conference , New York University, November. Apple, M. W. (2005), ‘Education, markets, and an audit culture’, Critical Quarterly, 47, (1–2), 11–29. Aspy, D. (1972), Towards a Technology for Humanising Education . Champaign, Illinois: Illinois Research Press. Ball, S. J. (1990), Markets, Morality and Equality in Education . London: Tufnell Press. —— (2000), ‘Performativities and fabrications in the education economy: towards the performative society?’ Australian Educational Researcher, 27, (2), 1–23. Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Baron- Cohen, S. (2008), Autism and Asperger Syndrome. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Barsade, S. G. (2002), ‘The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behaviour’. Administrative Science Quarterly, December. Beard, C. (2005), Student Achievement: The Role of Emotions in Motivation to Learn – Emotional Maps. Pedagogic Research Project Report . Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Hallam University. —— Clegg, S. and Smith, K. (2007), ‘Acknowledging the affective in higher education’. British Educational Research Journal , 33, (2), 235–252. Belavkin, R. V. (2001), ‘The role of emotion in problem solving’, in AISB2001, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Bell, J. and Harrison, B. T. (1988), Vision and Values in Managing Education . London: David Fulton Publishers. Benn, P. (1998), Ethics. London: Routledge. Bennett, N. and Dunne, E. (1994), ‘How children learn: implications for practice’, in Moon, B. and Shelton Mayes, A. (eds), Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School . London: Routledge, 166. Bernstein, B. (1975), Class and Pedagogies: Visible and Invisible . London: OECD.

260

Bibliography

Best, R. (1998), ‘The development of affective education in England’ in Lang, P., Katz, Y. and Menezes, I. (eds), Affective Education: A Comparative View. London: Cassell, 72. —— (2000), ‘Empathy, experience and SMSC (Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural Education)’, Pastoral Care , December. —— (2003), ‘Struggling with the spiritual in education’. Tenth International Conference Education, Spirituality and the Whole Child Conference , London: University of Surrey Roehampton, June. Biesta, G. and Vanderstraeten, R. (1997), ‘Subjectivity and intersubjectivity in the construction of knowledge: a Deweyan approach’. York University: British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, September. Black, H. and Phillips, S. (1982), ‘An intervention program for the development of empathy in student teachers’. The Journal of Psychology, 112, 159–168. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2003), ‘In praise of educational research: formative assessment’. British Educational Research Journal , 29, (5), 623–637. Blackham, H. (ed.) (1976), Moral and Religious Education in County Primary Schools . Windsor, Ontario: NFER Publishing Co. Blatchford, P. (2009), ‘Class size’, in Anderman, Eric (ed.), Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia . Detroit, MI: Macmillan Reference USA. Bottery, M. (1990), The Morality of the School . London: Cassell. —— (1992), The Ethics of Educational Management . London: Cassell. —— (ed.) (1987), Issues in Moral and Values Education . Hull, UK: The University of Hull Press. Bowlby, J. (1951), Child Care and the Growth of Love. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Boyle, R., Carter, J. and Clark, M. (2002), ‘What makes them succeed: entry progression and graduation in computer science’. Journal of Further and Higher Education , 26, (1), 13–18. Brandes, D. and Ginnis, P. (1990), The Student- Centred School . London: Blackwell. Brecht, B. (1965), The Good Person of Setzuan . Great Britain: Penguin plays, orig published in German, 1943. Brighouse, T. (1996), ‘Beyond market forces- creating the human school’, Beyond Market Forces: Creating the Human School , West Hill College, Birmingham, February. —— and Tomlinson, J. (1991), Successful Schools . London: Institute for Public Policy Research. Broadfoot, P. (2000), Culture, Learning and Comparison . British Educational Research Association Stenhouse Lecture 1999. Nottinghamshire, UK: BERA. Broadhead, P. (2006), ‘Developing an understanding of young children’s learning through play: the place of observation, interaction and reflection’. British Educational Research Journal , 32, (2), 191–207. —— (2011), Playful Learning and the Return of Thinking: Could Playful Pedagogies Last a Lifetime? Keynote Lecture, Centre for Pedagogy, University of Sunderland, 19 January. Brown, C., Harber and Strivens. (1986) Social Education: Principles and Practice . London: Falmer Press. Brown, G. (1996), ‘Quality of life: changing youth culture and values’. Values for Tomorrow’s Society Conference , Aston University: Birmingham.

Bibliography

261

Brown, L. (1993), The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press. Bruner, J. (1990), Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bryson, J. (1999), ‘Creativity by design: a character based approach to creative play’. AISB 1999 Proceedings . Sussex: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Burke, C. and Grosvenor, I. (2003), The School I’d Like . Children and Young People’s Reflections on an Education for the 21st Century. London: Routledge Falmer. Campos, B. P. and Menezes, I. (1998), ‘Affective education in Portugal’, in Lang, P., Katz, Y. and Menezes, I. (eds), Affective Education: A Comparative View. London: Cassell, 107. Capra, F. (1997), The Web of Life . London: Flamingo, HarperCollins. Carse, A. L. (2005), ‘The moral contours of empathy’. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 8, 69–195. Chater, M. (2006), ‘Just another brick in the wall: education as violence to the spirit’. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 11, (1), 47–56. Clark, D. (1996), Schools As Learning Communities . London: Cassell. Claxton, G. (1984), ‘The psychology of teacher training: inaccuracies and improvements’. Educational Psychology, 4, (2), 167–174. —— (1997), Hare Brain Tortoise Mind: Why Intelligence Increases When You Think Less . London: Fourth Estate. Clegg, S. (2003), ‘Problematizing ourselves: continuing professional development in higher education’, International Journal of Academic Development, 8, (1–2), 37–50. Cooper, B. (1997), Teaching Empathy. Plymouth University: SPES , October. —— (2002), Teachers As Moral Models: The Role of Empathy in the Relationships between Teachers and their Pupils . Leeds Metropolitan University. Unpublished PhD thesis. —— (2003), ‘Care—making the affective leap: more than a concerned interest in a learner’s cognitive abilities’. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 13, (1), 3–9. —— (2009), ‘Enhancing the future of humanity: affective issues in learning with technology’. Computer Assisted Learning Annual Conference , Brighton, 23–25 March. —— (2010), ‘In search of profound empathy in learning relationships: understanding the mathematics of moral learning environments’. Journal of Moral Education , 39, (1), 79–99. —— (2011), ‘Developing an ethic of care with children and young people: opportunities and challenges’, in Broadhead, P. and Campbell, A. (eds), Working with Young Children and Young People: Ethical Debates and Practices across Disciplines and Continents. AG Oxford: Peter Lang, 259. —— and Barber, J. (2009), ‘Engagement, excitement and challenge in Practitioner research: a case study’, Bera Annual Conference 2009, Manchester University, 3–6 September. —— and Baynham, M. (2005), ‘Rites of passage: embedding meaningful language, literacy and numeracy skills in skilled trades courses through significant and transforming relationships’, in National Research and Development Centre for Adult

262

Bibliography

Literacy and Numeracy Research Report, Embedded Teaching and Learning of Adult Literacy, Numeracy and ESOL . London: NRDC, 30–38. —— and Brna, P. (2002), ‘Supporting high quality interaction and motivation in the classroom using ICT: the social and emotional learning and engagement in the NIMIS project’. Education, Communication and Information , 2, (2–3), 113–136. —— (2003), ‘The significance of affective issues in successful learning with ICT for year one and two pupils and their teachers: the final outcomes of the ICT and the whole child project’. British Educational Research Association, Heriott-Watt University Edinburgh, 10–13 September. Cotton, K. (2002), Developing Empathy in Children and Youth, School Improvement Research Series (SIRS). Portland, Oregon: North West Regional Educational Laboratory. Craft, A. (2010), Creativity and Education Futures . Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Crick, B. (1998), Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools. London: QCA. Cross, J. (1995), ‘Is there a place for personal counselling in secondary schools?’ Pastoral Care in Education , 13, (4). D’Arcy, P. (1998), The Whole Story. PhD Thesis. University of Bath, available at www. actionresearch.net/living/pat.shtml [accessed 30 January 2011]. Damasio, A. (1996), Descartes Error. London: Macmillan. —— (1999), The Feeling of What Happens: Body, Emotion and the Making of Consciousness . London: Vintage. —— (2003), Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow and the Feeling Brain . London: Heinemann. Darwin, Charles (1872), The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray. Davies, I., Gregory, I. and Riley, S. (1997), ‘Concepts of citizenship: results of research on teacher perceptions in England’. York University: British Educational Research Association Annual Conference 1997, Symposium on Concepts of Citizenship. Davis, D. N. (2001), ‘Multiple level representation of emotion in computational agents’, in AISB 2001, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Deforges, C. and Abouchaar, A. (2003), The Impact of Parental Achievement and Parental Support on Pupil Achievements and Adjustment: A Literature Review. Nottingham: DFES Publications. Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF). (2008), Primary Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL): An Evaluation of Small Group Work . Nottingham: DCFS. Department for Education (DFE). (1992), Choice and Diversity (A New Framework for Schools). London: DFE. Department for Education and Skills (DFES). (2003), Excellence and Enjoyment – A Strategy for Primary Schools . London: DfES. —— (2005), Excellence and Enjoyment: Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (Guidance). Nottingham: DfES Publications.

Bibliography

263

—— (2006), Excellence and Enjoyment: Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning: Key Stage 2 Small Group Activities . Nottingham: DfES Publications. —— (2007a), Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) for Secondary Schools: Guidance Booklet . Nottingham: DfES Publications. —— (2007b), Curriculum Review – Diversity and Citizenship. Nottingham: DfES Publications. Department of Education and Science (DES). (1989), Discipline in Schools . London: HMSO (The Elton Report). Deutsch, F. and Madle, R. A. (1975), ‘Empathy: historic and current conceptualization, measurement and a cognitive theoretical perspective’. Human Development , 18, 267–287. DICE (2010), The DICE Has Been Cast: Research Findings and Recommendations on Educational Theatre and Drama . Dice Consortium: 142455- LLP-1-2008-1-HUCOMENIUS- CMP. Dixon, W. R. and Morse W. C. (1961) ‘The prediction of teaching performance: empathic potential’. Journal of Teacher Education 12, (3), 322–329. Dobson, J. and White, J. (1995), ‘Towards the feminist firm’. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5, III, 463. Docker- Drysdale, B. (1990), The Provision of Primary Experience . London: Free Association Books. Druin, A. (2009), Mobile Technology for Children: Designing for Interaction and Learning. Massachusetts: Morgan Kaufmann/Elsevier. —— (ed.) (1999), The Design of Children’s Technology. USA: Morgan Kaufmann. Drummond, M. J. (1993), Assessing Children’s Learning. London: David Fulton. Eklund, J., Andersson- Straberg, T. and Hansen, E. M. (2009), ‘“I’ve also experienced loss and fear”: effects of prior similar experience on empathy’. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50, 65–69. Elias, M. J. (2003), Academic and Social- Emotional Learning, Educational Practice Series 11. Brussels, International Academy of Education, and Geneva: International Bureau of Education. Ellis, P. (1997), ‘The music of sound: a new approach for children with severe and profound and multiple learning difficulties’. British Journal of Music Education , 14, (2), 173–186. Elzouki, S. A. (2011), Understanding and Enhancing Emotional Literacy in Severely Autistic Students Using Facial Recognition Software . Leeds Metropolitan University. Unpublished PhD thesis. Ephraim, G. (1986), A Brief Introduction to Augmented Mothering. Hertfordshire, Report for Leavesden Hospital. Feschbach, N. D. (1975), ‘Empathy in children: some theoretical and empirical considerations’. The Counselling Psychologist , 5, 25–30. Fess, R. (1998), ‘Affective education in Germany. Existing structures and opportunities: are we using them effectively’, in Lang, P., Katz, Y. and Menezes, I. (eds), Affective Education: A Comparative View. London: Cassell, 28. Fielding, M. (2004), ‘“New wave” student voice and the renewal of civic society’. London Review of Education , 2, (3) 197–217.

264

Bibliography

—— (2007), ‘The human cost and intellectual poverty of high performance schooling: radical philosophy, John McMurray and the remaking of personcentred education’. Journal of Educational Policy, 22, (4), 383–409. Fischer, E. (1973), Marx in His Own Words. Middlesex: Penguin. Floridi, L. (2007), ‘A look at the future impact of ICT on our lives’. The Information Society, 23, 59–64. Foucault, M. (1977), Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison . Translated from the French by Alan Sheridan. London: Allen Lane. Francescato, D. (1998), ‘Affective education and teacher training in Italy’, in Lang, P., Katz, Y. and Menezes, I. (eds), Affective Education . London: Cassell, 228. Frankel, C. B. and Ray, R. D. (2001), ‘Competence, emotion and self-regulatory architecture’, in AISB’01, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Freire, P. (1970), Pedagogy of the Oppressed . London: Continuum. Fryer, M. (1996), Creative Teaching and Learning. London: Paul Chapman. Fullan, M. (1993), Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform . London: Falmer Press. Gardner, H. (1993), The Unschooled Mind . London: Fontana Press. Garratt, D. (1996), ‘Codes of discipline and examination league tables as régimes of truth: a case study of teachers’ values within the classroom’. British Educational Research Association Annual Conference , Lancaster University, September. Gibbs, C. (2006), To Be a Teacher: Journeys towards Authenticity. New Zealand: Pearson Education. Gibbs, G. and Simpson, C. (2004), ‘Conditions under which assessment supports student learning’. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31. Gilligan, C. (1982), In a Different Voice . Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. —— (2006), To Be a Teacher: Journeys towards Authenticity. New Zealand: Pearson education. Gladstein, G. A. (1983), ‘Understanding empathy: integrating counselling, developmental, and social psychology perspectives’. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 30, (4), 467–482. Goffman, E. (1961), Asylums. London: Penguin. Goleman, D. (1996), Emotional Intelligence . London: Bloomsbury Publishing. —— Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence . USA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Grainger, Teresa (1997), Traditional Story- telling in the Classroom . Leamington Spa: Scholastic Ltd. Gray, J. (1990), ‘The quality of schooling: frameworks for judgement’. British Journal of Educational Studies, 38, (3), 204–223. Greenfield, S. (2002), Brain Story – Part 2 . In the Heat of the Moment . BBC2 on 25 July 2000. London: BBC. Greer, G. (2010), Inaugural Winifred Mercier Public Lecture . Leeds Metropolitan University, 8 March.

Bibliography

265

Griffeths, M. (1996), ‘Philosophy as a methodology in educational research’. British Educational Research Association Annual Conference. Lancaster University, September. Guardian (2001), ‘1bn wasted on IT projects’ Guardian , 5 July 2001. Haddon, A., Goodman, H., Park, J. and Deakin Crick, R. (2005), ‘Evaluating emotional literacy in schools: the development of the school emotional environment for learning survey’. Pastoral Care , 23, (4), 5–16. Haney, C., Banks, W. C. and Zimbardo, P. G. (1973), ‘Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison’. Naval Research Reviews, 9, 1–17. Washington, DC: Office of Naval Research. Hare, R. D. (1995), Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us. New York: Pocket Books. Hargreaves, A. (2001a), ‘Emotional geographies of teaching’. Teachers College Record . 103, (6), 1056–1080. —— (ed.). (1998), Rethinking Educational Change with Heart and Mind . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Hargreaves, D. H. (1967), Social Relations in a Secondary School . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. —— (1972), Interpersonal Relations and Education . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. —— (1982), The Challenge for the Comprehensive School, Culture, Curriculum and community. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. —— Hargreaves, D. J. (2001), ‘The Nuttall Memorial/Carfax Lecture’. British Educational Research Association Annual Conference . Leeds University, September. Hase, R. A., Jones, G. J. F. and Loose, J. J. (2001), ‘Exploring the impact of emotional state on sensitivity to future consequences’ in AISB’01, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Haste, H. (1997), Moral Creativity. Open University Creativity Seminar. London. Hay, D. (1997), ‘Spiritual education and values’. Education, Spirituality and the Whole Child Conference, Roehampton Institute, May. Haydon, G. (1997a), Teaching About Values . London: Cassell. —— (1997b), ‘What scope is there for moral reasoning?’ Values in the Curriculum Conference . London, Institute of Education, 4 October. Hersch, R. H., Miller, J. P. and Fielding, G. D. (eds) (1980), Models of Moral Education . New York: Longman. —— Paolitto, D. and Reimer, J. (1979), Promoting Moral Growth . New York/London: Longman. Hesten, S. (1995), The Construction of an Archive (on Heathcote). Lancaster: Lancaster University Press. Hewett, D. and Nind, M. (1998), Interaction in Action, Reflections on the Use of Intensive Interaction . London: David Fulton. Hill, A. L., Rand, A. G., Nowak, M. A. and Christakis, N. A. (2010), ‘Emotions as infectious diseases in a large social network: the SISA model’. Proc. Biol . Sci . 277, (1701), 3827–3835.

266

Bibliography

Hirst, P. H. (1974), Moral Education in a Secular Society. London: University of London Press. Hoban, G. F. (2002), Teacher Learning for Educational Change . Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press. Hobson, A. J., Malderez, A., Tracey, L., Giannakaki, M. S., Pell, R. G., Kerr, K., Chambers, G. N., Tomlinson, P. D. and Roper, T. (2006), Becoming a Teacher: Student Teachers’ Experiences of Initial Teacher Training in England . Nottingham, UK: Department for Education and Skills. Hoffman, M. L. (1970), Moral Development, Carmichael’s Manual of Child Psychology. New York: Wiley. —— (2000), Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice . New York: Cambridge University Press. —— (2008), ‘Empathy and prosocial behaviour’, in Lewis, M., Haviland- Jones J. M. and Feldman- Barrett, L. (eds), Handbook of Emotions. 2nd edn. New York: Guildford Press, 440–455. —— and Saltzstein, H. (1967), ‘Parent discipline and the child’s moral development’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, (4), 217–232. Hogan, R. (1973), ‘Moral conduct and moral character— a psychological perspective’. Psychological Bulletin , 79, (4), 217–232. —— (1975), ‘Empathy: a conceptual and psychometric analysis’. The Counselling Psychology, 5, (2), 14. Hull, J. M. (1995), ‘The theology of the department of education’. Education Review, 47, (3), 243–253. Hume, D. (1739), ‘A treatise of human nature’, in Honderich, T. (ed.), (1995), Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hussey, T. and Smith, P. (2002), ‘The trouble with learning outcomes’. Active Learning in Higher Education , 3, (3), 220–233. Hutman, T. and Geffen, D. (2009), ‘The emergence of empathy during infancy’. Cognition, Brain, Behavior, 13, (4), 367–390. Iannotti, R. J. (1975), ‘The nature and measurement of empathy in children’. The Counselling Psychologist , 5, (2), 21. Ickes, W. (ed.) (1997), Empathic Accuracy. New York: The Guilford Press. Illich, I. (1971), Deschooling Society. London: Penguin Books. Isen, A. M. (2008), ‘Some ways in which positive affect influences decision-making’, in Lewis, M., Haviland- Jones J. M. and Feldman- Barrett, L. (eds), Handbook of Emotions. 2nd edn. New York: Guildford Press, 548–573. Jeffrey, B. and Liebling, M. (2001), Creativity in Education . London: Continuum. Jones, P.(1996) Drama as Therapy. London: Routledge. Keat, R . (1996), ‘Values and the enterprise culture’, in Conroy, J., McCreath, D. and Davis, B. (eds) Changing Contexts for Values Education . Glasgow, UK: Gordon Cook Foundation/St Andrews College, 23–29. Kendall, S. (1999), ‘The role of picture books in children’s spiritual development and meaning making’. The International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 4, (1), 61–76. Klein, J. (1987), Our Need for Others and its Roots in Infancy. London: Tavistock. Kohlberg, L. (1984), The Psychology of Moral Development: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages/Lawrence Kohlberg. San Francisco, London: Harper and Row.

Bibliography

267

Konrath, S. H., O’Brien, E. H. and Hsing, C. (2010), ‘Changes in dispositional empathy in American college students over time: a meta- analysis’. Personal Social Psychological Review, 5 August. Koseki, B. and Berghammer, R. (1992), ‘The role of empathy in the motivational structure of school children’. Personality and Individual Difference , 13, (2), 191–203. Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2001), Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication . London: Edward Arnold. Kyriacou, C. (1986), Effective Teaching in Schools . Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, UK: Simon and Schuster. Lane, A. M., Soos, I., Leibinger, E., Karsai, I. and Hamar, P. (2008), ‘Validity of the Brunel Mood Scale for use with UK, Italian and Hungarian athletes’, in Bakere, S. R. (ed.), Hot Topics in Sports and Athletics. New York: Nova Publishers, 115–128. Lang, C. (2008), ‘Caring and touch as factors in effective teaching’. Annual Conference of the Scottish Educational Research Association [SERA], Royal George Hotel, Perth, Scotland, 27–29 November. Lang, P. (1995), ‘Preparing teachers for pastoral care and PSE’. Pastoral Care in Education , 13, (4). —— Best, R. and Lichtenberg, A. (eds) (1994), Caring for Children: International Perspectives on Pastoral Care and PSE . London: Cassell. —— Katz, Y. and Menezes, I. (eds) (1998), Affective Education: A Comparative View. London: Cassell. Laurence, F. (2005), Music and Empathy. University of Birmingham, Unpublished PhD thesis. Lave, J. and Wenge, E. (1991), Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Leal, M. R. M. (2002), ‘The caring relationship’. Ninth Annual International Conference Education Spirituality and the Whole Child . University of Surrey, Roehampton, June. Lewis, M., Haviland- Jones, J. M. and Feldman- Barrett, L. (eds) (2008), Handbook of Emotions. 2nd edn. New York: Guildford Press. Lipps, T. (1897), Raumästhetik und geometrisch- optische Täuschungen . Leipzig: J.A. Barth. Long, L., MacBlain, S. F. and MacBlain, M. S. (2007), ‘Supporting the pupil with dyslexia at secondary level: an emotional model of literacy’, Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51, (2), 124–134. Lopez, N. L., Bonenberger, J. L. and Schneider, H. G. (2001), ‘Parental discipline history, current levels of empathy and moral reasoning in young adults’. North American Journal of Psychology, 3, (1), 193–204. Lundy, B. L. (2007), ‘Service learning in life- span developmental psychology: higher exam scores and increased empathy’. Teaching of Psychology, 34, (1). Macas, M., Ventura, R., Custodio, L. and Pinto- Ferreira, C. (2001), ‘Experiments with an emotion- based agent using the dare architecture’, in AISB 2001, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour

268

Bibliography

Maclean Hospital (2001) www.mclean.harvard.edu/PublicAffairs/20001214_ child_abuse.htm [accessed November 2001]. MacGilchrist, B., Myers, K. and Reed, J. (2004), The Intelligent School . 2nd edn. London: Sage. Macmurray, J. (1935), Reason and Emotion . London: Faber and Faber. Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (2002), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. Oxford . 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Martin, C. (1993), ‘Feelings, emotional empathy and decision-making: listening to the voices of the heart’. Journal of Management Development , 12, (5), 93. Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1888), Manifesto of the Communist Party. Moscow: originally Progress Publishers. McCarthy, K. (2000), ‘Learning by heart: the role of emotional education in raising school achievement and promoting the caring community’, in Best, R. (ed.) Education for Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural Development . London: Continuum, 80–90. McLaughlin, T. (1994), ‘Values, coherence and the school’. Cambridge Journal of Education , 24, (3), 253–270. McManus, M. (1989), Troublesome Behaviour in the Classroom . 2nd edn. London/New York: Routledge. McPhail, P., Middleton, D. and Ingram, D. (1978), Startline Moral Education in the Middle Years. London: Longman. Mehrabian, A. (1971), Silent Messages. Belmont, California: Wadsworth. Miller, A. (1953), The Crucible. London/New York: Penguin. Moffat, D. C. (2001), ‘On the positive value of affect’. AISB’01, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Moldt, D. and von Scheve, C. (2001), ‘Emotional Actions for Emotional Agents’. AISB’01, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Moon, B. and Shelton- Mayes, A. (1994), ‘Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School ’. London: Routledge. Moore, D. J. (1998), ‘Computers and people with Autism/Asperger syndrome’. Communication , Summer, 20–21. Mortimore, P. (1988), School Matters – The Junior Years. London: Open Books. Moseley, J. (1997), ‘Circle time: a forum for spiritual, moral, social and cultural development?’ Fourth Annual Conference on Education, Spirituality and the Whole Child, June. Mosteller, F. (1995), ‘The Tennessee study of class size in the early school grades: the future of children’. Critical Issues for Children and Youths, 5, (2), available from princeton.edu Moyles, J. (2005), The Excellence of Play. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. Murdoch, I. (1970), The Sovereignty of Good . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Murphy, T. (2008), ‘Democratic schooling practices in the Republic of Ireland: the gaps between the rhetoric and reality’. Irish Educational Studies, 27, (1), 29–39. Nadler, R. S. (2011), Leading with Emotional Intelligence: Hands on Strategies for Building Confident and Collaborative Star Performers . New York: McGraw Hill.

Bibliography

269

Narvaez, D. and Vaydich, J. L. (2008), ‘Moral development and behaviour under the spotlight of the neurobiological sciences’. Journal of Moral Education , 37, (3), 289–312. National Commission on Education (1996), Success against the Odds- Effective Schools in Disadvantaged Areas. London: Routledge. Neale, S., Spencer-Arnell, L. and Wilson, L. (2009), Emotional Intelligence Coaching: Improving Performance for Leaders, Coaches and the Individual . London and Philadelphia: Kogan Page. Nias, J. (1996), ‘Thinking about feeling: the emotions in teaching’. Cambridge Journal of Education , 26, (3), 293–306. Nicol, D. J. and Mcfarlane-Dick, D. (2006), ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice’. Studies in Higher Education , 31, (2), 199–218. Noddings, N. (1986), Caring – A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education . California, USA: University of California Press. Noguera, P. (2007), ‘Safety and caring in schools: addressing the moral basis of school discipline policies’. Annual Conference of the Association of Moral Education , New York University, November. Nye, R. (1998), ‘A psychological analysis of children’s spirituality: relational consciousness, its dimensions and implications’, Fifth Annual Roehampton Conference on Education, Spirituality and the Whole Child . London: Roehampton Institute, June. Ormell, C. (1993), ‘Values versus values’. Journal of Moral Education , 22, (1), 31–45. Ota, C. (1998), ‘Relationships and conversations – a grounding for SMSC’. Education, Spirituality and the Whole Child Conference . London: Roehampton Institute, June. Owen- Smith, P. (2008), ‘Rescuing the affective: teaching the mind and the heart’. Journal of Cognitive Affective Learning , 4, (2), 31–33. Paiva, A. (ed.) (2000), Affective Interactions: Towards a New Generation of Computer Interfaces. New York: Springer-Verlag. Panksepp, J. (2008), ‘The affective brain and core consciousness: how does neural activity generate emotional feelings’ in Lewis, M., Haviland- Jones, J. M. and Feldman- Barrett, L. (eds), Handbook of Emotions. 2nd edn. New York: Guildford Press, 47–67. Partington, A. (ed.) (1996), Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, 691. Oxford: Oxford University Press. —— (ed.) (1996), Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, 691. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 31. Piaget, J. (1932), The Moral Judgement of the Child . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Picard, R. (1997), Affective Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pike, G. and Selby, D. (1988), Global Teacher, Global Learner. Hodder and Stoughton (with York University). Pike, M. (2004), ‘Well being through reading: drawing upon literature and literacy in spiritual education’. International Journal of Children’s spirituality, 9, (2), 155–162. Preston, S. D. and de Waal, F. B. M. (2002), ‘Empathy: its ultimate and proximate bases’. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 1–72.

270

Bibliography

Priestley, J. (2000), ‘Curriculum and Kierkegaard: towards creating a paradigm for discerning the spiritual dimension of education’, in Best (ed.), Education for Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural Development . London: Continuum, 91–105. Pring, R. (1997), ‘Institutional values and personal development’. Values in the Curriculum Conference . London: Institute of Education, 4 October. Pryor, J. and Crossouard, B. (2007), ‘A socio- cultural theorisation of formative assessment’, Oxford Review of Education, 34, (1), 1–30. Purkey, W. W. (1970), Self- concept and School Achievement . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Rabinov, P. (1984), The Foucault Reader. London: Penguin. Reay, D. (2000), ‘A useful extension of Bourdieu’s conceptual framework?: emotional capital as a way of understanding mothers’ involvement in their children’s education’. Sociological Review, 48, (4), 568–586. Reynolds, W., Scott, P. A. and Austin, W. (2000), ‘Nursing, empathy and perception of the moral’. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32, (1), 235–242. Roberts, W. and Strayer, J. (1996), ‘Empathy, emotional expressiveness and prosocial behavior’. Child Development, 67, 449–470. Robinson, K. (2001), Out of Our Minds: Learning to Be Creative . Oxford, UK: Capstone. Rodger, A. R. (1996), Developing Moral Community in a School Setting. Aberdeen, UK: Gordon Cook Foundation. Roe, K. V. (1980), ‘Early empathy development in children and the subsequent internalisation of moral values’. The Journal of Social Psychology, 110, 147–148. Roffey, S. (2008), ‘Emotional literacy and the ecology of school wellbeing’. Educational and Child Psychology, 25, (2), 29–39. Rogers, C. R. (1975), ‘Empathic: an unappreciated way of being’. The Counselling Psychologist , 5, (2), 2. Rogers, G. and Hill, D. (2002), ‘Initial primary teacher education students and spirituality’. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 7, (3), 273–290. Rogerson, P. (2008), ‘Size matters’. Times Higher Education Supplement . London: THES. Rosenstein, P. (1995), ‘Parental levels of empathy as related to risk assessment in child protective services’. Child Abuse and Neglect , 19, (11), 1349–1360. Rowe, D. (2000), ‘Common schools, good citizens: towards a public discourse model of moral education’, in Best, R. (ed.), Education for Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural Development . London: Continuum, 68–79. —— and Newton, J. (1995), You, Me, Us! London: Home Office. Rutter, M. (1981), Maternal Deprivation Reassessed . 2nd edn. London: Penguin. —— Maughan, B., Mortimore, P. and Ouston, J. (1979), 15000 Hours. Somerset, Taunton, England: Open Books Publishing Ltd. —— (1992), Developing Minds. London: Penguin Books. Sacks, O. (1985), The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. London: Picador. Sacks, O. (1996) The Island of the Colour Blind .London: Picador Sadler, D. R. (1998) ‘Formative assessment: revisiting the territory’. Assessment in Education , 5, (1), 77–84. Salovey, P., Detweiler-Beddell, B. T., Detweiler- Beddell, J. B. and Mayer, J. D. (2008), ‘Emotional Intelligence’ in Lewis, M., Haviland- Jones, J. M. and

Bibliography

271

Feldman- Barrett, L. (eds), Handbook of Emotions. 2nd edn. New York: Guildford Press, 534–535. Sandel, M. (2009), ‘Reith lecture: markets and morals’. BBC . 26 August. BBC Radio 4. SCAA (1993), Spiritual and Moral Development: A Discussion Paper. York: National Curriculum Council. —— (1996a), Consultation on Values in Education and the Community. London: SCAA. —— (1996b), Education for Adult Life: The Spiritual and Moral Development of Young People . London: SCAA. Schantz, C. U. (1975), ‘Empathy in relation to social cognitive development’. The Counselling Psychologist , 5, (2), 18. Scherz, M. (2005), ‘Empathic pedagogy: community of inquiry and access to the other’. American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Montreal, 11–15 April. Schuller, T. and Watson, D. (2009), Learning through Life: Enquiry into Lifelong Learning. Leicester: Niace. —— Preston, J., Hammond, C., Brasset- Grundy, A. and Bynner, J. (2004), The Benefits of Learning: The Impact of Education on Health, Family Life and Social Capital . London: Routledge. Self, J. (1999), ‘The defining characteristics of intelligent tutoring systems research: ITSs care, precisely’. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 10, (3–4), 350–364. Siraj- Blatchford, I. and Sylva, K. (2004), ‘Researching pedagogy in English preschools’. British Educational Research Journal , 30, (5), 713–730. Siraj- Blatchford, J. (ed.) (2004), Developing New Technologies for Young Children . Stoke- on-Trent: Trentham Books. Skinner, B. F. (1956), ‘A case history in scientific method’. American Psychologist , 11, 221–233. Sloman, A. (2001), ‘Varieties of affect and the CogAff Architecture Schema’. AISB’01, Symposium on Emotion, Cognition and Affective Computing. York University: The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. —— and Chrisley, R. L. (2003), ‘Virtual machines and consciousness’. Journal of Consciousness Studies, (Special issue) 10, (4–5), 113–172. Solberg, J., Streng, K. C. and McGuire, C. (1995), ‘Living not learning ethics’. Journal of Business Ethics Netherlands, 14, (1), 71. Soos, I. (2011), The Effect of Emotional Intelligence and Mood State on Sport and Academic Performance . Seminar. University of Sunderland, 11 February. Stenhouse, L. (1981), ‘What counts as research?’ in Rudduck, J. and Hopkins, D. (eds), (1985), Readings from the Work of Lawrence Stenhouse . London: Heineman. Straughan, R. (1988), Can We Teach Children to be Good? London: Open University Press. —— (1993), ‘Are values under-valued?’ Journal of Moral Education , 22, (1), 47–50. Stringfield, S. (1998), ‘An international perspective on school improvement’. BEMAS Video Conference , 16 October. Tate, N. (1996), Times Educational Supplement , 15 January, London: TES.

272

Bibliography

—— (1997), Centre for Policy Studies in Education Newsletter. Leeds, UK: Leeds University. Taylor, M. (1997), ‘How can research into values education help school practice?’ Values in the Curriculum Conference . London: Institute of Education, 4 October. THES (2010), ‘Stress levels exceed safety parameters’. London: Times Higher Educational Supplement, 18 February, www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story. asp?storyCode=410424§ioncode=26 [accessed 29 January 2011]. Tong, R. (1997), ‘Feminist perspectives on empathy as an epistemic skill and caring as a moral virtue’, Journal of Medical Humanities , 18, (3). Underwood, J. and Pitard, V. (2009), ‘Big impact report’. BECTA Annual research Conference , Bristol, 19 November. Vandenplas-Holper, (1998), ‘Affective education in French- speaking parts of Belgium: a brief overview’ in Lang, P., Katz, Y. and Menezes, I. (eds), Affective Education: A Comparative View. London: Cassell, 19–27. Verducci, S. (2000), ‘A conceptual history of empathy and a question it raises for moral education’. Educational Theory, 50, (1), 63–81. Vischer, R. (1872), On the Optical Sense of Form: A Contribution to Aesthetics. Leipzig, Germany: Credser. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978), Mind in Society. London and Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. —— (1986), Thought and Language . Translation newly revised by Alex Kozulin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Walter, G. S. and Finlay, K. (2002), ‘The role of empathy in improving inter- group relations’, Journal of Social Issues, 55, (4), 729–743. Watson, B. and Ashton, E. (1995), Education, Assumptions and Values. London: David Fulton. Watt, D. F. (2000), Emotion and Consciousness: Implications of Affective Neurosciences for Extended Reticular Thalamic Activating System Theories of Consciousness . www.phil. vt.edu/ASSC/watt/default.htm. [accessed 22 February 2001]. Winkley, D. (1996), ‘Towards the human school – principles and practice’. Conference Beyond Market Forces – Creating the Human School . West Hill College, Birmingham, February. Winnicott, D. W. (1984), Deprivation and Delinquency. Winnicott, C., Shepherd, R. and Davis, M. (eds). London, New York: Tavistock. Winston, J. (1998), Drama, Narrative and Moral Education . London: Falmer. —— (2002), ‘Drama, spirituality and the curriculum’. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 7, (3), 241–256. Wood, D. (1988), How Children Think and Learn . London: Blackwell. Woodhead, C. (1997), The Guardian , 26 February by John Carvel.

Appendix

Pseudonyms and teacher/ student teacher roles

Fay Geoff Martin Tanya David Pete Frances Janet Sylvia Terry Sara Will Claire Mary Charlotte Anna

student teacher secondary student teachers secondary student teacher secondary student teacher secondary student teacher primary student teacher primary student teacher primary student teacher primary student teacher primary head teacher primary middle manager and teacher secondary middle manager and teacher secondary teacher of EAL primary and secondary teacher of EAL primary teacher of special educational needs primary teacher of special educational needs primary and secondary

Index

Abouchaar, A. 192, 249 academic intelligence 38 Academy of Education 38 acceptance 11, 13, 24, 48, 50–1, 54, 59, 84, 100, 109, 114, 115, 128, 151, 154, 163, 165, 171, 183, 192, 241 adaptive empathy 24 adult education and emotions 201–2 aesthetic values 234–5 affect 1–2, 14, 16, 24, 86, 133 education and 28, 30 good technology enhancing humanity and 213–14 and Information and Communication Technology 205–9 and learning, and emotions 193–5 learning design and 213 online learning and 209–13 positive 15, 217, 234–5 affirmation 31, 52, 163, 165, 167, 207, 213–14 announcing and multiplying 53 building security and risk taking and 54 modelling and transferring 53–4 personal validation 53 Alban-Metcalfe, J. 2, 226–7 Alexander, R. 3 Alimo-Metcalfe, B. 2, 216, 226–7 Anning, A. 37 ‘Antidote’ 21 anxiety 54, 60, 63, 65, 67, 77, 110, 118, 121, 125, 132, 143, 155, 156, 177, 191, 196, 238 ‘A Place To Be’ 21 Appiah, K. A. 256 Apple, M. W. 215 Aristotle 9

Ashton, E. 9, 31, 59, 220 Aspy, D. 7, 11, 33, 34, 36, 37, 87, 88, 181, 206, 221, 222, 232, 243, 245 attention 14, 22, 39, 55, 92, 96, 100, 131, 141–2, 168, 180, 216, 230, 232, 236 giving 51 sole 64, 87, 102, 138, 163, 167, 170, 206 augmented mothering 180 autism 179–80 awareness 16, 18, 24, 39, 57, 66, 75–6, 78, 84, 86, 89, 91, 92, 110–12, 124, 128, 132, 135, 163, 171, 181–2, 196, 208, 216, 218, 234, 238, 243, 248 heightened 8, 59, 230 intellectual 9 natural 117 raising of 191–2 sensual 9, 87 spiritual 9 Ball, S. J. 98, 215 Bandura, A. 32, 240 Barber, J. 223 Baron-Cohen, S. 179, 207 Barsade, S. G. 8 Baynham, M. 196 Beard, C. 197 Belavkin, R. V. 12 Bell, J. 215 Benn, P. 9 Bennett, N. 35, 199 Berghammer, R. 23–4, 25, 31, 36, 41, 88, 97, 99, 101 Bernstein, B. 240 Best, R. 28, 39, 205, 230, 249 Biesta, G. 36

276

Index

Black, H. 11, 243, 244 Black, P. 199 Blackham, H. 32, 232, 233, 240 Blatchford, P. 175 body language 56–7, 109, 110 Bottery, M. 29, 34, 215, 216, 240 Bowlby, J. 12, 18, 192 Boyle, R. 201 Brandes, D. 13 Brecht, B. 25, 252 The Good Person of Setzuan 25 Brighouse, T. 29, 33, 215, 220 Brna, P. 181, 194, 206, 208, 209, 230 Broadfoot, P. 46 Broadhead, P. 192, 193 ‘Brotherhood’s code’ 22 Brown, C. 30 Brown, G. 27 Brown, L. 7, 10, 88 Bruner, J. 202 Bryson, J. 235 Burke, C. 224 Burke, E. 257 Campos, B. P. 34, 216 Capra, F. 8 caring 11–12, 21–3, 31, 43, 57, 62, 82, 84, 98, 112, 117, 126, 144, 168, 172, 175, 183, 203, 221–2, 235, 245, 248, 250, 254–5 illusion of 152 physical closeness and 57 see also sharing Carse, A. L. 8 Cartesian dualism, rejection of 13, 36 Chater, M. 34, 215, 238 Chrisley, R. L. 213 Christianity 232 circle time technique 29 Citizenship Curriculum 29, 46 Clark, D. 25, 31, 99, 231 classroom 33, 159 comparison of lessons in 167–70 critical incidents discussion in 170–4 focused group interaction in 160–1, 164–6

less focused group interaction in 161, 166–7 observation data and discussion for 161–2 personalized intensive interaction in 160, 162–4 teachers 124, 136, 142, 143, 156 see also individual entries Claxton, G. 236, 244 Clegg, S. 197, 255 climate 221–2 cognitive empathy 24 communication 20, 36 delayed 156 emotional 23 facial expression and interaction as 55–6 gestures, body language, and movement as 56–7 height and distance as 57–8 honesty in 82 language and voice tone as 58–9 nonverbal 84, 116, 126, 250 poor 130 talk and 102, 104 verbal 84, 116, 126, 250 voluntary absence of 32 Cooper, B. 16, 39, 45, 47, 98, 161, 181, 194, 196, 198, 206, 208, 209, 210, 213, 223, 230, 242, 255 corridor talk 104 Cotton, K. 14 counselling and education 10, 21, 30, 32, 35, 39 Craft, A. 236 creativity and values 235–8 Crick, B. 46 Crick Report 46 Cross, J. 27, 30 Crossouard, B. 199 cross-school consistency 92 cultural pluralism 45 Damasio, A. 12, 13, 14, 16, 36, 37, 59, 205–6, 207, 236, 244 D’Arcy, P. 237 Darwin, Charles 15

Index Davies, I. 25 Davis, D. N. 12 Deforges, C. 192, 249 Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF) 21 Department for Education (DFE) 46 Department for Education and Skills (DFES) 21, 29, 99 Department of Education and Science (DES) 37, 222 Deutsch, F. 7 de Waal, F. B. M. 8 dialogue 35, 50, 52, 119, 155, 169, 198–9, 211 shared 38, 85, 165, 166, 168 DICE 29, 237 discipline 14, 19, 27, 53, 66, 84, 88, 93, 100, 149, 216 disposition, empathetic 19 Dixon, W. R. 11 Dobson, J. 215 Docker-Drysdale, B. 18, 20, 28, 42 , 192 drama and empathy 29 Druin, A. 213 Drummond, M. J. 37 Dunne, E. 35, 199 education empathy in teaching and learning and 35–9 hidden curriculum in schools and 30–4 and morality 27–8 queries on empathy from literature and 39–44 systems and structures modelling morality and 34–5 value promotion through teaching methodology and curriculum and 29–30 see also classroom education issues 240 continuing professional development and 246–8 initial teacher education and 243–5 student teacher selection and 241–3

277

working condition impact on teachers and 245–6 Edwards, A. 37 Eklund, J. 14 Elias, M. J. 38–9, 192 Ellis, P. 213 Elzouki, S. A. 179, 207, 213, 256 emotion 191 and affect and learning in schools 193–5 education and 195–202 significance of, in early learning and development 191–3 see also individual entries emotional capital 39, 250–1 emotional communication 23 emotional contagion, influence on groups 8 emotional intelligence 15, 21, 27, 38, 216 emotional literacy see emotional intelligence empathy breadth and depth of 73–6 consolidated effects of 113–27 constraints on 129 deeper outcomes of 109–12 effects of 103 forms of 23–4 immediate effects of 102–9 meaning of 7–9 moral development and significance of 16–21 and morality 21–6 operational definition of 48 significance of, in learning and interaction 10–15 supporting values, engagement, and achievement 121 see also individual entries Engels, F. 9, 25, 43, 99 English as another language, and transformative learning 182–3 engrossment 11, 13 enthusiasm 54–5, 59, 92, 106, 108, 112, 113, 115, 121–2, 124, 223, 224, 241, 248

278

Index

Ephraim, G. 179 ethics 18, 132, 235, 253, 256 extracurricular programs 30 eye contact 123, 138 face-to-face interaction 31 facial expression and interaction 55–6, 110 fairness 93 feigned empathy and 152–3, 210, 219–20, 229, 231, 234, 242, 252 effects of 157 Feschbach, N. D. 7, 12 Fess, R. 30 Fielding, M. 30, 98, 215, 240 Finlay, K. 243 Fischer, E. 9, 87, 205 Floridi, L. 209 focused group interaction, in classroom 160–1, 164–6 less 161, 166–7 formative assessment 37, 38, 125, 164, 199 continuous 101, 119, 123, 178 personalized 101 Forum for Values Education 46 Foucault, M. 98 Francescato, D. 11, 29 Frankel, C. B. 12 Freire, P. 98, 198, 215 Fryer, M. 8, 236 Fullan, M. 97 functional empathy 19, 88–9, 90, 97–100, 140, 153, 161, 187, 231, 233, 245 group empathy and whole class relationships 89–90 mental groupings 94–7 ‘Other’ in children and 90–4 fundamental empathy 165 communication means 55–9 initial characteristics 50–5 Gardner, H. 30, 35 Garratt, D. 215 Geffen 14 gender and empathy 22 gestures 56–7

Gibbs, C. 39, 240 Gibbs, G. 38, 200 Gilligan, C. 16, 17, 22 Ginnis, P. 13 Gladstein, G. A. 7 Goffman, E. 98 Goleman, D. 2, 8, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 23, 25, 27, 36, 183, 216 Grainger, T. 237 grasping, of reality 235 Gray, J. 33 Greenfield, S. 14 Greer, G. 192 Griffeths, M. 195 Grosvenor, I. 224 group empathy 89–90, 165, 171 group interviews 242 group-think aspect, of empathy 8 Guardian 210 Haddon, A. 39 Haney, C. 8 Hare, R. D. 20, 257 Hargreaves, A. 46, 158, 197 Hargreaves, D. H. 11, 33, 88, 98, 215, 240 Hargreaves, D. J. 46 Harrison, B. T. 215 Hase, R. A. 12 Haste, H. 24, 25, 34 Hay, D. 8, 9, 59, 87, 235 Haydon, G. 19, 88, 232 head teachers 3, 27, 48, 71, 72, 79, 83, 85, 92, 108, 119, 134, 147, 160, 215, 216–17, 223, 247 Heathcote 22, 29, 236 Hersch, R. H. 17, 30, 34 Hesten, S. 22, 29, 236 Hewett, D. 179 hidden curriculum in schools 30–4 Hill, A. L. 8 Hill, D. 231 Hirst, P. H. 30 Hoban, G. F. 240 Hobson, A. J. 195, 240 Hoffman, M. L. 16, 17, 18, 19, 43, 88, 229 Hogan, R. 12, 16, 18, 19, 59, 98

Index Hull, J. M. 231 Hume, D. 10, 15 Hussey, T. 199 Iannotti, R. J. 12 Ickes, W. 7, 8 I-it relationship 25, 31, 99, 231 Illich, I. 98 inclusion 4, 176, 184, 220, 253 informal learning 203 Information and Communication Technology (ICT) 205–9 institutional empathy removal 157 intellectual awareness 9 intensive interaction 180 interest, showing 52 inter-subjectivity 38 Isen, A. M. 15 Jeffrey, B. 236 Jones, P. 237 Keat, R. 215 Kendall, S. 237 Klein, J. 31 Kohlberg, L. 16, 17, 30, 34, 216 Konrath, S. H. 237 Koseki, B. 23–4, 25, 31, 36, 41, 88, 97, 99, 101 Kress, G. 210 Kyriacou, C. 32, 37, 98, 240 Lane, A. M. 217 Lang, C. 182 Lang, P. 27, 28 Laurence, F. 29 Lave, J. 199 Leal, M. R. M. 16, 192 Lewis, M. The Handbook of Emotions 15 Liebling, M. 236 Lipps, T. 7 listening 11, 20, 35, 51–2, 55, 59, 85, 104, 106, 107, 131, 135, 151, 166, 168, 219, 242 Long, L. 181 Lopez, N. L. 14

279

Lundy, B. L. 39 Macas, M. 12 MacGilchrist, B. 217 Maclean Hospital 14, 23 Macmurray, J. 9, 235 Madle, R. A. 7 Maguire, M. 17 management, systems, and organizations 215–22 beyond educational institutions and 225–7 leadership in higher education in 224–5 opportunities for change in 222–4 manners 93–4 see also individual entries market values 98, 213, 215, 216, 224, 250, 253 Martin, C. 215 Marx, K. 9, 25, 43, 87, 99 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) 214 McCarthy, K. 28 McCarthyism 8 McFarlane-Dick, D. 198 McLaughlin, T. 33 McManus, M. 37 McPhail, P. 32, 100 Mehrabian, A. 14 Menezes, I. 34, 216 mental groupings child-type 94–5 cultural difference 95–6 difference in teaching to groups 96 gender 96–7 Miller, A. The Crucible 8 Moffat, D. C. 12 Moldt, D. 12 Moon, B. 98 Moore, D. J. 207 moral agents 31 moral attitudes 25, 26 moral courage 25, 34 moral development 16–21, 23, 25, 30, 33, 35, 83, 249

280 moral dilemma 24 ‘Moral Education in Secondary Schools Project’ 29 moral empathy see adaptive empathy morality 9, 21–3, 216 climate affecting 85 conceptions of 81–3 and education 27–8 hidden curriculum in schools and modelling of empathy and 30–4 interactive process with empathy 83–4 multiple models of 86 religion and spirituality and 231–4 sharing and 85–6 systems and structures modelling 34–5 in wider society 24–6 moral judgements 17–18 moral purpose 97 moral realism 82 moral realists 18 moral reasoning 17, 19 moral relativism 45 moral strength 251 moral values 16, 24, 27, 30, 32, 40–1, 43, 45, 97, 158 Morse, W. C. 11 Mortimore, J. 33 Moseley, J. 29 Mosteller, F. 175 motivation 15, 19, 24, 36, 54, 60, 62, 72, 119, 120, 125, 163, 168, 169, 170, 174, 184, 195, 196, 200, 203, 204, 220, 226, 229, 237, 241, 249 Moyles, J. 192 multi-modal tools 210 Murdoch, I. 22, 87 Murphy, T. 39 Nadler, R. S. 216 Narvaez, D. 16 National Commission on Education 220 National Curriculum 96, 111, 134, 135–6, 155, 171 National Forum for Values 232

Index Neale, S. 216 neural networks 214 Newton, J. 29 Nias, J. 158, 221, 240 Nicol, D. J. 198 Nind, M. 179 Noddings, N. 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 16, 18, 21, 22, 31, 59, 87, 88, 235, 236 Noguera, P. 98 non-verbal cues 14, 19, 56, 59 normative assessment 99, 135, 147, 158, 159, 174, 176, 184, 230, 241 Nye, R. 8, 235 off-task interaction 31 OFSTED 46, 215 one-to-one interaction 120, 163, 174, 177, 181, 184, 255 one-to-one interview 243 one-to-one time situation 143–4 online learning 209–13 openness 9, 50–1, 59 see also receptivity open teachers 117 Ormell, C. 87–8, 100, 228 Ota, C. 237 ‘Other’ in children 90 boundary settings, rules, and codes 91–2 control 92–3 discipline 93 empathic structures and systems 94 fairness 93 manners 93–4 Owen-Smith, P. 197 Paiva, A. 12, 213 Panksepp, J. 192 Partington, A. 252 peer relationship 70, 72, 110, 111, 122, 126, 130, 154, 168, 177–9, 185, 207, 229–30, 242 affirmation of 53 and pressure 96, 230 respect and 86 student groups and 131–2 performativity 215, 221, 241

Index personal and social values 228–30 personal attitudes, in lack of empathy 150–2 personal exchange 104–5 personal interaction 32, 39, 42, 64, 87, 100, 168 Phillips, S. 11, 243, 244 physical contact 57, 64–5, 123, 182 physical distance and communication 57 Piaget, J. 16, 18 Picard, R. 12, 213 Pike, G. 13 Pike, M. 237 Pitard, V. 207 play, significance of 192–3 positive emotions and interactions being liked, loving, and seeing good 62 mutual respect 63–4 negative emotions, masking 62–3 physical contact 64–5 pleasure, happiness, fun, and humour 60, 62 relaxed, comfortable, and informal climate and 65 sole attention 64 time-givers 64 pre-schools and shared thinking 37–8 Preston, S. D. 8 Priestley, J. 28, 46 Pring, R. 33 professional development, continuing and education issues 246–8 profound and multiple learning difficulties (PMLD) 180 profound empathy 59–60, 61, 86–8, 97, 112, 123, 162, 170, 171, 176, 177–8, 184, 211, 221, 228, 230–1, 236, 244, 249, 255 adaptation to individual and environment 78 bridging role between different perspectives 80–1 catering for difference 76 with children 73–4 deep perception 77–8

281

high eventual expectations 78 holistic view 79–80 with individual 75 in interaction 186 meeting needs 75–6 moral aspects of 81–6 multi-modal tools 210 and persistence and self-sacrifice 77 personal and academic link 79 positive emotions and interactions and 60–5 protection 77 relationship appreciation and 69–73 solution seeking 76–7 understanding of self and others, and explaining understanding 65–9 pro-social behaviour 229 Pryor, J. 199 psychopaths 20 Purkey, W. W. 37, 59 Rabinov, P. 215 Ray, R. D. 12 Reay, D. 200, 250 receptivity 9, 12, 22, 23, 24, 36, 37, 59, 235–6 relationship 69–70 environment, resources, and wider 72–3 significance of 70 staff 70–1 teacher and parent 71 understanding of peer 72 relationship learning assessment 125–6 building greater self-esteem and selfworth in students for 113–14 building self-esteem for 105–6 climate and context 126–7 education system and 144–7 and effects on teacher 156–7 emotional links and understanding for 107–9 empathy significance in 112 emulation of empathy in students for 114–15

282

Index

environment and 137–8 feigned empathy and 152–3, 157 friendship for 106–7 fundamental empathy 50–9 individual children nature and 130–1 learning about learning of teachers for 116–17 management and 138 optimizing learning and 119–22 others’ perspective in 111 personal attitudes in lack of empathy in 150–2 personal effects on teacher for 117–19 personal exchange in 104–5 preliminary investigations and study conduct 47–50 rhetoric and reality and 157–8 security trust in students for 114 seeing the hidden in 110–11 shallow empathy in teaching and 148–50 student groups and peer relationships and 131–2 for students, and consequences 153–6 talk and communication in 102, 104 teacher factors and 132–4 teaching and 122–5, 134–6 teaching ratios and 138–41 time factor in 141–4 wider learning of teachers in department for 117 see also functional empathy; profound empathy ‘Re-membering Education’ 21 Reynolds, W. 243 Roberts, W. 12 Robinson, K. 236 Rodger, A. R. 88, 232 Roe, K. V. 16 Roffey, S. 39 Rogers, G. 7, 11, 12, 25, 28, 32, 35, 37, 43, 59, 87, 99, 205, 221, 222, 231, 243 Rogerson, P. 198 Rosenstein, P. 20

Rowe, D. 29 Rutter, M. 18, 19, 32, 33, 42 Sacks, O. 14, 179 Sadler, D. R. 199 Salovey, P. 15 Saltzstein, H. 19, 88 Sandel, M. 98, 213, 215, 250 SCAA 17, 31, 40, 88, 99, 232 scaffolding 80, 199 academic 51, 179 emotional 51, 179, 206 human 178–9 of learning 35–6, 119, 123, 155, 168, 170 Schantz, C. U. 7, 12 Schertz, M. 38, 250 school-based research 223–4 Schuller, T. 201 Selby, S. 13 self 23, 30, 43, 80, 106, 205, 223, 237, 251 being oneself, being human and 66–7 getting inside the pupil’s mindset and 67–8 -knowledge 66, 82 neurological 14 psychological 37 reasoning and explanation and 69 understanding and deeper knowledge and 68–9 Self, J. 213 self-confidence 106, 140 self-esteem 28, 33, 74, 79, 80, 94, 111, 123 , 126 , 130, 131, 136 , 139, 141, 142 , 147, 154 , 155, 163 , 177–81, 183 , 201, 206 , 207, 221, 251, 253 building 105–6, 113–14 self-expression 234 selfish individualism 252 self-knowledge 66, 82 self-reliance 229 self-worth 23, 29, 84, 114, 181, 206 lack of 28 semi-structured interviews 47 sensitivity 62, 164, 178, 182, 241

Index humour and 60 sensual 9 social 37 understanding 11 shallow empathy in teaching 148–50 Shantz 12 shared thinking, sustained 37–8 sharing 13, 35, 37–8, 99, 117, 162, 164, 166, 222, 224, 225 of emotions 7, 8, 22, 108, 111, 118, 161, 163, 168, 169, 173, 206, 233 of enthusiasm 121 of experiences 51, 85, 89, 106–8, 172, 210 games and 60 of information and tactics 76 and morality 85–6 of oneself 67, 105 personal exchange and 104 physical closeness and 57, 65 of positive visions of futures 80 of tasks 85 of understanding 55, 66, 88, 107, 173, 210, 253 see also caring Shelton-Mayes, A. 98 Simpson, C. 38, 200 Siraj-Blatchford, I. 37 Siraj-Blatchford, J. 213 Skinner, B. F. 185 Sloman, A. 12, 213 Smith, K. 197 Smith, P. 199 social being 9, 16 social capital 39 social instinct 17 social relations 37 social sensitivity 37 Solberg, J. 215 sole-attention of computers 206 of teachers 64, 87, 102, 138, 163, 167, 170 Soos, I. 217 special needs (SEN) 27, 31, 54, 65, 72, 94–5, 98, 106, 113, 117–18, 124, 126, 130, 144, 149, 154, 155, 157,

283

173, 176, 199, 207, 208, 218, 220, 243, 247, 253, 255 and transformative learning 177–85 species-being 9 spiritual and religious values 230–4 spiritual awareness 9 staff relationship 70–1 Stenhouse, L. 223 Straughan, R. 100 Strayer, J. 12 stress 22, 24, 49, 95, 131, 132–3, 142, 144, 156, 184, 195, 198, 200, 219, 246 Stringfield, S. 222 student groups and peer relationships 131–2 student teacher selection and education issues 241–3 support teachers 117, 136, 143, 146 Surestart 249 Sylva, K. 37 sympathy 10 Tate, N. 28, 45 Taylor, M. 46, 87, 97, 231 teachers education issues and 243–5 morale 34 and parent relationship 71 see also individual entries Thatcher, Margaret 252 THES 198 time-givers, teachers as 64, 144, 163, 165, 166, 167, 222 tolerance 32, 82, 84, 87, 101, 183, 233, 237, 254, 256 Tomlinson, J. 29, 33, 215 Tong, R. 244 transformative learning 176–7 students with English as another language and 182–3 students with special needs and 177–82 trust 23, 40, 52, 62, 63, 82, 84, 91, 93, 94, 104–5, 107, 114, 118, 121, 122, 130, 139, 144, 152, 157, 178, 180, 210

284

Index

unconditonal regard 205 understanding 1–2, 7, 9, 12–15, 22, 24, 49, 193, 202–3, 229–30, 233, 236, 238, 243, 246, 248, 251, 256 critical incidents and 170–4 and deeper knowledge and self 68–9 developmental 10 education and 27–43 of managers 216–26 about moral development 16–21 of peer relationship 72 of self and others, and explaining 65–9 sensitivity 11 sharing of 55, 66, 88, 107, 173, 210, 253 transformative learning and 176–85 values in classroom and 165, 168–75 see also profound empathy relationship learning; values Underwood, J. 207 universities, leadership in 224–5 values 1, 13, 25, 31–4, 46, 48, 52, 82, 83, 85, 87, 91–2, 97, 104, 119, 134, 144, 189, 193, 197, 213, 215–17, 221, 224, 228, 240, 244–8, 256–7 aesthetic 234–5 in classroom, and understanding 165, 168–75 creativity and 235–8 empathy support for 121 market 98, 213, 215, 216, 224, 250, 253 moral 16, 24, 27, 30, 32, 40–1, 43, 45, 97, 158

personal and social 228–30 promotion of 29–30 spiritual and religious 230–4 see also classroom; understanding Values Council, The 28, 46 Vandenplas–Holper 29 Vanderstraeten, R. 36 van Leeuwen, T. 210 Vaydich, J. L. 16 verbal cues 14 Verducci, S. 14 virtual learning environment (VLE) 211–13 virtue 9, 33 Vischer, R. 7 von Scheve, C. 12 Vygotsky, L. S. 35–6, 37, 87, 178, 200 Walter, G. S. 243 Watson, B. 9, 31, 59, 220 Watson, D. 201 Watt, D. F. 14 Wenge, E. 199 White, J. 215 Wiliam, D. 199 Winkley, D. 13, 23, 192 Winnicott, D. W. 19, 28 Winston, J. 29, 237 Wood, D. 17, 18, 35, 199 Woodhead, C. 28 working condition impact on teachers, and education issues 245–6 ‘You Me Us’ programme 29 zone of proximal development 36, 178

Empathy in Education: Engagement, values and achievement

Values in Education and Education in Values

Education, Culture and Values: Including (Values, Culture and Education Series)

Values in Higher Education Teaching

Values in higher education teaching

Values in Higher Education Teaching

Values, Religions and Education in Changing Societies

Professional Ethics Education: Studies in Compassionate Empathy

Spiritual and Religious Education: Education, Culture and Values Vol. 5 (Education, Culture and Values)

Moral Education and Pluralism: Education, Culture and Values Vol. 4 (Education, Culture and Values)

Empathy

Empathy

Empathy

Empathy

Empathy

Education Outreach and Public Engagement (Mentoring in Academia and Industry)

Politics, Education and Citizenship (Education, Culture and Values)

Human Values in Education (The Foundations of Waldorf Education, 20)

Values Pedagogy and Student Achievement: Contemporary Research Evidence

Empathy in Mental Illness

Student Engagement in Campus-Based and Online Education: University Connections

Achievement and Inclusion in Schools

Reality and Empathy

Empathy and the Novel

Grading Student Achievement in Higher Education: Signals and shortcomings (Key Issues in Higher Education)

Ethics and Values in Psychotherapy

Street-Empathy

Beliefs And Values In Science Education (Developing Science and Technology Education)

National Assessments of Educational Achievement Volume 1 : Assessing National Achievement Levels in Education (National Assessments of Educational Achievement)

An Engagement in Seattle

Empathy in Education: Engagement, values and achievement

Values in Education and Education in Values

Education, Culture and Values: Including (Values, Culture and Education Series)

Values in Higher Education Teaching

Values in higher education teaching

Values in Higher Education Teaching

Values, Religions and Education in Changing Societies

Professional Ethics Education: Studies in Compassionate Empathy

Spiritual and Religious Education: Education, Culture and Values Vol. 5 (Education, Culture and Values)

Moral Education and Pluralism: Education, Culture and Values Vol. 4 (Education, Culture and Values)

Empathy

Empathy

Empathy

Empathy

Empathy

Education Outreach and Public Engagement (Mentoring in Academia and Industry)

Politics, Education and Citizenship (Education, Culture and Values)

Human Values in Education (The Foundations of Waldorf Education, 20)

Values Pedagogy and Student Achievement: Contemporary Research Evidence

Empathy in Mental Illness

Student Engagement in Campus-Based and Online Education: University Connections

Achievement and Inclusion in Schools

Reality and Empathy

Empathy and the Novel

Grading Student Achievement in Higher Education: Signals and shortcomings (Key Issues in Higher Education)

Ethics and Values in Psychotherapy

Street-Empathy

Beliefs And Values In Science Education (Developing Science and Technology Education)

National Assessments of Educational Achievement Volume 1 : Assessing National Achievement Levels in Education (National Assessments of Educational Achievement)

An Engagement in Seattle

Recommend Documents