In some tasks, students were offering up personal material. This was the intention, however it made me wonder if I was putting enough thought into how I valued their offerings. Alternatively, in the last task, focused on non-traditional life-based storytelling, students were more reluctant to share. This made me wonder if I could make students feel even safer and able to engage.
During open discussions, some students introduced controversial material and made comments looking to provoke. This did not escalate in any way and I picked up and discussed the comments as any other. However, it made me ask myself if I was prepared enough for conflict.
When analysing narratives in culture, in order to work against the Banking Concept of Education (1970, p.46) and eliminate hierarchies of taste, I asked students what stories they’d engaged with recently and we discussed the one that got the most mentions. This successfully created a sense of shared authority and choice. However, on reflection, I felt that handling the decision this way perpetuated rather than disrupted intrinsic power dynamics in the room. I realised I needed to think more about the impact of structural injustice on interaction and develop an approach that encompassed Kimberle Crenshaw’s idea of intersectionality (NAIS, 2021).
So, the key questions seemed to be:
- How can I better create a space for students to be vulnerable?
- How do I handle conflict positively?
- How can I take a more intersectional approach to relational dynamics?