The Role of Voice in My First Years as a Teacher Learner

by Paul Tarc

---

It was while I was reading Richert's Voice and Power in Teaching and Learning to Teach (1990, p. 3) for our class that I felt this spontaneous urge to tell a story.

Says Richert (p. 190),
Voice is a necessary part of reflective teaching... The process of reflection in which teachers think about their work in order to question its purpose, examine its consequences, and therefore learn about it, involves talking or a conversation of some sort.

This story is about the role of voice in my development as a teacher learner.

A few years ago, as a B.Ed. student, one final assignment was to tell my story of my year as a student teacher. I remember writing that the single most important part of that year was the interaction with other people: professors, associate teachers, and most especially my fellow peers who were also articulating their philosophies, desires and questions. I also remember that the assignments I enjoyed most were those in which I could voice my personal experiences (like this one).

I recollect one particular conversation that was particularly spontaneous, but by no means an exception, during that wonderful year of learning. A classmate, Peter, and I were walking home from a late night social event and we hit the intersection where we would split into different directions to walk the last stretch to our different houses. Of course It was too late to continue our conversation in one of our houses, so we stood out there on that cold winter night for only a few minutes. Our animated s pirits and constant movements held off the cold as we aspired to solve all the world's problems on the spot. After about an hour, we were both literally shaking from the cold and laughing at ourselves for being so crazy. At that time I didn't realize how many more conversations about teaching I would have with Peter (and others). Nor did I fully appreciate the importance of teacher talk.

I began my first year teaching at the American School in Quito, Ecuador. Three of my friends from the B.Ed. program also began their teaching careers in Quito. Peter, Wendy, Stephanie and I had all been hired at the annual, international recruiting fair at Queen's University.

During that first year, Peter and I lived together along with 2 other teachers who had taught before. I have many good memories of that first year. I also remember some very difficult moments where I really wondered what I was doing as a teacher. The one constant element was the frequent teacher talks with Pete. We spent numerous hours at that kitchen table. Peter and I shared stories, problems, occasional highs and a kind of camaraderie based in our common inefficiency as teachers. Yes, far from effi cient we were, often spending hours philosophizing only to realize that it was quite late and we had still not finished planning out that next day.

Stephanie and Wendy were not included in our teacher-talks as much as we had hoped and so we had them over for dinner one evening in the middle of the school year. That night, we decided to ask the school administration if we could take one Friday off from school to get together and talk about teaching. We proposed that, since we all had come from the same B.Ed. program, it could be a very interesting development opportunity to formally get together and share our experience and perhaps come up with somet hing on paper. They gave us the day and we took a tape recorder along on a bus to the coast on a Thursday night.

As it turned out, the most significant result was not our group talk, nor even the fact that the administration actually gave us the day away from our classes. The most striking result was that several other teachers were openly upset over the administration's decision to promote our teacher talk. One teacher said something like: "They gave you the day off to talk!" And I was really surprised; I think that I was a bit upset by the negative reactions. Those teachers certainly would have felt differentl y if we had been given the day off to go to an expert-led seminar.

As is common, the second year of teaching was a bit smoother for both Peter and me. We moved houses, and my friend Richard, who had been teaching in British Colombia, moved in with us. The talking continued and we welcomed Richard's perspective. Perhaps the collaboration was somewhat less intense than that shared struggle of our first year teaching.

That year Stephanie and I were both teaching the grade 9's; she was teaching English and I was teaching physical science. We planned and carried out a five-week unit on science, technology and society. In most of the classes, we team taught. Where it was not possible because of other class commitments, we would carry on individually with our integrated unit. I think that it is not coincidental that those five weeks provided the most collaboration and reflection of my own teaching during the year. And it certainly provided the opportunity for me to come to know Stephanie as a teacher, having shared many conversations outside of the school. I wasn't the only one who valued those weeks integrating our programs. Many of the students identified that unit as being one of the best of the year.

I was planning to finish my second year of teaching in Quito and then return to Canada. I was thinking about the possibility of doing a Masters back at Queen's. Peter was definitely staying, having gotten seriously involved with another foreign-hire teacher. For some reason, at the American School, the grade 5 and 6 science program was team taught. Peter and I had casually mentioned the possibility of team teaching if that position were to become available. One day, just before Christmas, Peter hesita ntly mentioned the possibility again and I got really excited and said I'd think about it. Shortly afterward, I talked with the elementary director. I told her that I would stay a third year if we could team teach science. I felt that it could prove to be a unique learning opportunity, one too great to miss. I was right.

In our third and final year, team teaching, team planning, team reflecting carried the idea of sharing voice to a new level. Now, instead of talking about each other's classrooms when we could find the time, we were talking constantly, and about the same class! There were many positive aspects of our team-teaching. We enjoyed the dynamic in the classroom and of course the sharing of grading and other work. I believe that it was the teacher talk and reflection, however, which proved to be the greatest b enefit of team teaching with Peter.

Our administrator encouraged the use of teacher journals which fit in nicely with our own inclinations. Much of my journal (and similarly for Pete), describes the conversations we had about our teaching. We would read each other's journals to better understand each other's reflections. Occasionally we would bring another person into the conversation. Often we would spontaneously begin to talk and then later both agree: "Too bad we didn't have the tape recorder on."

Sometimes the talking was synergistic in nature. One Friday night, for example, we were having a beer and talking about the issue of student grades. We were both uncomfortable with the importance that parents and students alike placed upon grades as opposed to learning. We also agreed that the grades were very subjective. I can't remember who suggested the idea first, but it came out something like "So if the kids are so worked up about grades, why don't we just not give out any low grades?" ("Yeah r ight -- let's just say the lowest grade you can get is a 15 [out of 20]") "Yeah, and we'll just make up our own evaluation system based on our objectives." ...etc... We were saying things that were logical, but as we were saying them, we didn't really believe that we could do it. It was definitely exploratory talk. Hearing each other sort of being unsure and then breaking out of a belief system (that you can't just change the evaluation system), demonstrates the synergy. We talked about it later and co ncurred that, without each other, we probably would never have made the leap. Sometimes, I need someone to say: "Oh yeah, that make sense, it is feasible." It acts as a validation check.

Looking back at that opportunity, I can see that we might have more fully taken advantage of it. Just as I wished that I had kept a teaching journal during my first year of teaching, I wish that Pete and I could have done more data collection and analysis last year.

I'm not sure on the degree to which the role of voice affected the quality of my teaching. I am still very much a beginning teacher. When I think about my next teaching job, I'm excited, but also a bit anxious -- will I find another Pete? Recently, a B.Ed. student was talking of the conflict which she is expecting upon entering the culture of the school. She wonders: "Will I be able to teach according to my principles?" Specifically, "Will the administration / system allow me to teach according to my belief system?"

I remember having that same question, and I still ask it. However, the few years of classroom experience, with active voice, have reframed it: "Will I allow myself to teach according to my belief system?" I now think that the greatest limiters are my own. Observing, listening, empathizing, orchestrating, creating -- these are the things that come to my mind in terms of what I need to work on to move my practice closer to my beliefs.

I suppose that what I can say is that I feel that I control my learning as a teacher. To use Richert's words: I feel that I can "act with intent".

Reference:
Richert, A. 1992. Voice and power in teaching and learning to teach. In L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education (pp. 187-197). New York: State University of New York Press.