Education and Transformation of Individual as Students

The notion of education is broader than merely by teaching. But teaching is a significant element in education. Yet in philosophical definition of teaching there is a meaning of teaching in general which is distinguished from teaching as part of educational processes. In other words, teaching as educative.

 

What does it mean to say one is a teacher generally or is a teacher as an educator? Each of these meanings of teaching or of teacher makes a distinction in teacher's orientation towards his/her students as learners.

 

The sense of teaching is that the teacher has the task of disseminating knowledge but in teaching as education is to allow knowledge that is passed on to be criticized, reformulated and revised by the learner. This means teacher here is a facilitator.

 

However, initiation into this requires many activities by learners. On several occasions last academic session I said "…whatever ideas received from me or from text books …are not correct and final. You must challenge and criticized them in order to keep learning". Underlying this are many work maps such as weekly reading; discussion on the texts read; debates; and many other theoretical activities to build the learner with independent means of acquisition of knowledge and understanding of the world.

 

Without getting into the debate on this matter which may bring issues about 'moulding' model or 'growth' model of education, let me ask that the independent means of acquisition of knowledge and understanding the world which I practice, could it bring learners transformation through education?

 

Nevertheless, the idea of transformation of a student does not only amount to self-realization, as it will not involve just to confirming the existing view of the teacher. As I see it the transformation must be seen in the teacher's respect of the opinion of his/her students and the need for students to accept that the teacher could pass the required ideas. This could be rejected by students with reason. And if it is accepted by a student, it is entirely the responsibility of the student, as he/she must have reason for acceptance, perhaps different from the teacher's.

 

Transformation through education may be positive or negative, or right and wrong changes in the students. Whichever process of change is taking place in the learner; the transformation could be understood by seeing disruptions, interruptions, and even irritation in the learner's experience. This is necessary because one i.e. a learner is going through a discontinuity of experience.

 

If this is found happening, sometimes the relationship between the teacher and the students could be sour. For example, in 2003 academic session. Is it? Final year students of the department of political science rioted carrying placards chanting that they did not want me to teach them. Some of their reasons are: they did not want weekly assignment; that some students I personally picked to supervise their final year projects have nearly finished before official list came out from the Department; that every course I handle for teaching I review the content which put-off the students from rote learning they set for themselves. Of course many other personal attacks like that I am the one who caused their colleague to die by motor accident when he was driving at a very high speed from Kaduna to meet the time of my lecture before I closed the door to late comers. What about a female student who had fallen sick and reported me to the authorities that I am responsible, because of my rule that weekly assignments must be done during the week.

 

These are examples of interruption in learner's everyday life but are expressed in negativity. In educational contexts, however, this kind of experience has productive meaning, such that the show of negativity does not necessarily refer to something unpleasant. As one educationist observes", in learning, one moves towards something unfamiliar, be it ability, an idea, a feeling, that one did not have before. It is in this precarious situation of dealing with the unfamiliar that negativity of experience arises.

 

This type of experience is a good indication of teaching as education. The negativity plays a constitutive role in the transformation of learners. Sometimes trying to test scientific theory. For example, those students referred above who rioted against me, and in order to justify their action said "I taught them in my class of Military and Politics, 'Military Theory of Amilca Cabral' and said we must practicalise the theory of Amilca Cabral on him".

 

The process of change in students also revealed positive characteristics. In a collapsed university education system in Nigeria this trend may be as a result of:

1. Public mode experience of students both within and outside the university environment.
   
2. Family orientation on value of education could also be a factor.
   
3. External connection and influences may not impact on their school life
   
4. There are students who come to universities to work and earn certificates. Contrary to others who come only to get certificate.
   

These and other factors may produce right and positive characteristics of changes in students as individuals undergoing self-transformation. These kind of students embrace ethical and moral values both in relationship with other students and with their teachers. They are usually very hard-working, never find them left behind in class work and are theoretically worthwhile in developing ideas to understand the world.

 

I have seen these perspectives very openly, sometimes confronting each other among all my students of the various levels, in the final session with each class, which I call "criticism-self-criticism" session. This session always becomes like "telling the truth" session but not for justice as there is no injustice – but for clarification about ideas. It becomes a discourse about content of the course, how does it help about understanding the world, the method of teaching and the relationships between students themselves and relationship between students and the teacher.

 

As in our practical discussion, in theoretical discourse the relationship between the teacher and the students becomes more prominent in assessing what changes one can see in students. On the one hand, to repeat what is said from the beginning the role of the teacher is to bring out ideas, may be from multidisciplinary perspective while at the same time places significant emphasis on liberal education to allow the students to revise them in understanding the world. On the other hand the students must work hard and work with others to reformulate ideas. As Karl Mark said "…the only royal road to science is hard work". But when you got the ideas, see through them with further insights so that the ideas continuously transformed your outlook, makes you become autonomous, but with sense of others and their respect from you.

 

In 2010/11 academic session our mission is "watch your transformation". What education is doing to change you? What changes? These you are going to observe and report. On another level we would periodically assess ourselves both collectively and individually.

 

M. M. Yusif

February, 2011