Ever since I lost my job a little over a week ago, I have had a lot on my mind. I lay in bed every night writing and re-writing my thoughts in disappearing poems, essays, and blog posts. The larger themes are there in the darkness, staring at me, but nothing seems to solidify into tangible thought. I close my eyes tightly as the words bounce around in my head looking for an escape. Words like freedom, education, identity, revolution, status quo, fear, have lost all meaning. Spectral concepts haunting me in the darkness.

I have realized at this post in my writing that this post is running at about five pages, so I will have to break it up into parts. I do want to thank the many teachers and students who have supported and written about my situation. So let’s get started and look at freedom, education and what it all means in the 21st century.

As a writer and an English teacher, I place a high level of value on words. I firmly believe that they should mean something. After all language is the most obvious tool we have to build and maintain human relationships. But the more I explore my immediate surroundings, the more I am realizing that many people, and not only students, but teachers, parents, and administrators, simply utter words incoherently, unaware of the weight that our lexicon should carry. We use words as if they are empty shells, void of their ultimate purpose of communication and understanding. Perhaps we are afraid that we will become crushed beneath the weight of our ideas if we honestly look at what our lexis means.

I suppose like all things in life, language can be subjective. Even with dictionaries, words cannot and do not mean the same things to everyone. So before I exorcize my demons, I thought it best to define the words that have been giving me so much trouble the last few nights. The following is a list of terms that I thought I understood, but I am learning that perhaps I expected too much from them. The first is a word that everyone adores. It is the foundation of most honored political ideologies. People all over the world crave it, fight for it, believe it is their innate right, but really in the new globalized world where national borders and their subsequent cultures, rules, and value sets are being erased, what does it mean to be free? What does it mean to be able to express yourself freely in a world where people upload information, text, photography, and other media/art into a collective, public pot, but are forced to synthesize the new global information through their deeply rooted nationalistic or cultural lenses? I hope to talk more about this use of technology and the web in part two of this post.

In order to make the definitions of words like Freedom less subjective between reader and writer, I suggest we look at a shared definition:

FREEDOM:

• The condition of being free of restraints
• The right to unrestricted use; full access
• The right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship:
• The capacity to exercise choice; free will
• Frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve:
• A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference:
• Exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.
• The power to determine action without restraint.

When seen in this light, I would argue that freedom is impossible. No one who has chosen to be a member of any society is ever free. The very nature of society is antithetical to freedom, because societies are meant to establish constraints and teach the next generation the very modesty that a society needs so as not to fall into anarchy and chaos. But is this true? Can we not trust future generations with the very concept of freedom that we all so cherish? Whether by our own insecurities or phobias, or by the cultural and institutional values we carry or are forced upon us us, every person is bound and restrained to truly express themselves in fear of offending someone else. This control and interference, although often times not intentional, curbs our free will and forces us to simply behave in a way we feel will be acceptable to the largest group of people in our societies. In conclusion, we are not free.

As I painfully learned the last few weeks, nowhere is this lack of freedom more obvious than in the field of education. Because teachers work with young people, who are often very impressionable, we are one of the least free members of society. We are often bound by the most constraints. Many people have told me that this is a choice I have somehow made as an educator. As a matter of fact, it is in institutionalized educational models, where it is the teacher’s role to curb many of the intrinsic freedoms adolescents exercise. Schools in a sense are society’s tools to indoctrinate and one could argue that school is designed to flush the freedom out of young people and mold them into functioning members of a status quo society, but these are terms we will explore later, for now, we are still discussing freedom. What does freedom look like for a teacher who is also an artist?

Art, it seems to me, is the ultimate expression of freedom. Whether in literature, theater, dance, film, or music, it is art’s function to be free. Any constraints on the very concept of art, renders the work no longer art.

The quandary in which I find myself is how are we meant to teach art, in my case language arts, bound by the constraints of institutionalized educational models created to maintain, not challenge the status quo? Is it possible to be an artist and teach? Is it possible to be free in education? Is it possible to maintain one’s identity as an artist, open minds to new ideas through education, while being restricted by the very institution designed to maintain the status quo? Before I answer those questions with examples from the melodrama that has become my life. Let us define a few more terms:

EDUCATION:

• the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing the powers of reasoning and judgment, and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life.
• the result produced by instruction, training, or study:
• activities that impart knowledge or skill;
• the gradual process of acquiring knowledge;

It seems to me that this concept of teaching language art, would be best served in as free as an educational environment as possible. After all, how can we develop the powers of reasoning and judgment, if we are bound by restraint? How can we prepare others or ourselves intellectually for a mature life, if we are not given open access to differing ideas? It seems to me that the very fabric of education is woven by freedom. Do we not want our students to have full access to a variety of sources? Do we not want them to enjoy the right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship? Should we not teach them how to develop the capacity to exercise choice; free will with frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve? Do they not have the right to engage in certain actions without control or interference? If the answers to these questions are yes, then how can educators be expected to teach freedom of thought (arguably the point of education), whilst being subjugated to the very repression of these freedoms themselves? How is a teacher meant to maintain their identity in the face of these opposing expectations? On one hand we want teachers to teach our kids to be open-minded, free-thinkers, who can use judgment and reason, while on the other hand we expect teachers to be a clean slate who do not veer too far from the prescribed notions of what is or what is not acceptable to the current status quo. Teach students about art and freedom, but do not be an artist or feel that you are free in anyway yourself, because you are not. These are the hard truths I am learning this month.

I have been teaching eighth grade language arts for over four years now, and one of the central themes in all the curricula I have worked with is the idea of identity- the notion of the individual’s role in society. We teach novels like The Wave, The Giver, A Wrinkle In Time, Lord of The Files, and The Outsiders in order to show students the power of individual expression and freedom to create their own identities faced with societal pressure to conform. The irony of my predicament has not been lost on me, I assure you. My curriculum demands that I teach students to value individuality, freedom, and self-expression, but as their teacher, I am not expected to enjoy any of these luxuries myself. I guess the question; I am left asking is why? Is the very concept of education really not ready to practice what it preaches?

I suppose many readers are nodding their heads in agreement, but are still saying that while I may have a point, there must be a compromise between allowing a teacher total freedom to do and say anything in their classrooms or blogs. One could argue, that we should show some restraint in order to give students the most objective educational experience possible. After all, we do not want to give teachers the freedom to preach or sermonize ideologies or dogmas. We do not want teachers to have the freedom to spout hate speech or inflammatory or racist ideas. I couldn’t agree with this more. There must be limits. So where is that line? Who decides?

In a round about way, we are back to the idea I broached early in this post: What does it mean to be able to express yourself freely in a world where people upload information, text, photography, and other media/art into a collective, public pot, but are forced to synthesize the new global information through their deeply rooted nationalistic or cultural lenses?

The question is- who decides the amount of freedom to afford any given teacher to maintain their identity and teach in a style they find fitting for their students. As global collaborations become the norm, students will begin to work with a larger and more diverse group of educators and students. If we allow school boards and to be parents be the judges than we are simplify placating the very status quo we are up against. In an ever increasingly flat world our societal norms are fluid and ever changing? We need a new model. Education cannot function the way it has in the 20th century. These are ideas I want to explore in part two of this piece.

This may be a good time to examine our next term:

Status Quo:

• The existing state or condition.
• The existing order of things; present customs, practices, and power relations

I suppose for the many people enjoying the rewards of the new global economy, things are good just the way they are. Concepts like social justice, sustainable living, human rights, labor relations, and a whole litany of our global issues, are merely subjects or ideas to be “learned” in school, but the actual work it takes to bring about change is too much for the existing order of things to handle or even concern themselves with. The present power relations will not allow students to veer too far from the modern day mantra of consumption. It is ironic that many schools champion ideas of self-directed learning and global citizenship, but this freedom is used as the bait to lure the next generation into their new commoditized world. The reality is that students are being denied the very freedom their teachers are fighting for. In short the people who control much of our educational institutions do not what to alter the status quo; they want to maintain it. Students get good grades, go to good colleges, get good jobs, and live happily ever after.

This brings us to the next term to be defined. This term is often associated with violence and has a very negative connotation in our status quo obsessed world. But history has shown us that it is the only true agent of progress and change.

Revolution:

• a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure,.
• a sudden, complete or marked change in something:
• a drastic and far-reaching change in ways of thinking and behaving;
• an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.

Revolutions are not simply violent take-overs of freedom loving people by authoritarian guerrillas. On the contrary revolutionary thought is a vital component to education. Coupled with freedom, revolutionary ideas are what allow education to function.  Anything that is not a drastic and far-reaching change in ways of thinking and behaving is not education; it is simply memorization and indoctrination.

Let’s look at the relationship of the terms we have discussed:

Educators who are free of restraints, with the right to enjoy all of the privileges of membership or citizenship, using their capacity to exercise choice and free will, with
frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve, and the right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference from external control, interference, and regulation, will by- developing the powers of reasoning and judgment and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life, and by using, a drastic and far-reaching change in ways of thinking and behaving- alter the existing order of things, which include present customs, practices, and power relations, in hopes of establishing a more just and sustainable future.

Words are messy. They can either become too complex, or by their simplicity become irrelevant. Often times repetition tends to dilute their message. Basically this is what I am trying to say:

Teachers who are free to use revolutionary educational models will alter the status quo and work towards a better world.

Education+ Freedom+ Revolution= Change
Education-Freedom-Revolution= Status Quo

So the question I leave you with is this- What is the purpose of your school? What are you teaching your students?