Jul 20, 2021
Dr. Jane Vella and Rebecca Hutchins chat with Michael Gibbons – ITEP Scholar in Residence at the School of Education, American University – about the axiom “Dialogue is not among teacher and learner, but among learners, of whom the teacher is one.” We often center experts and expertise in training events. This axiom explains how we can equalize learning spaces with a simple shift – enriching the learning for everyone. Jane and Michael met long, long ago and far, far away during their days with Save the Children. Listen for Michael’s stories about a class with Malcolm Knowles and lifelong learning from his time in the Peace Corps in Sierra Leone.
Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or virtually anywhere podcasts are found!
This show is produced by Global Learning Partners and Greg Tilton Jr, with theme music composed by Kyle Donald.
Read the transcripts for the episode below.
JANE
Welcome to Simply True. with yours truly, Dr. Jane Vella. On this podcast, we sit down with dear friends and colleagues from over the years. To do one thing. Explore the simple truths behind some of my favorite sayings in dialogue education.
REBECCA
I’m Rebecca Hutchins, Co-owner of Global Learning Partners and your host for today’s episode of Simply True with Dr. Jane Vella. For today’s episode, we are joined by someone Jane has known for a long time, Michael Gibbons, to explore the axiom: dialogue is not between teacher and learner, but among learners of whom the teacher is one. Welcome, Michael, thanks so much for joining us today.
MICHAEL
Thank you very much, Rebecca.
REBECCA
Michael, I’d love to start by having you say a bit about yourself and how you came to know Jane.
MICHAEL
Sure. Long, long ago and far far away – that’s the way- the way it should start.
JANE
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL
My wife and I were- joined Save the Children in 1986, as a couple, to run Save the Children’s program in the Maldives Islands nation. And as part of our orientation to join the Save the Children family – Jane was the Training Director at that point and conducted the orientation, which was in Save headquarters where we were- we joined a number of other people headed out to work in different countries and settings around the world. And that’s where we first met Jane directly. And then when we were living and working in Maldives, we realized that adult learners could gain from some support in thinking about learning, theory and practice, and Jane came and helped us do some training together. And then following that we stayed in touch over many years, working on Dialogue Education, adult learning, as a component of social change and social justice work. And Jane has been one of my mentors through her work, our collaboration and through her books, over a long period of time.
REBECCA
And we recently reconnected with you, Michael, and- in a different capacity, which was so exciting.
MICHAEL
Yes, I’ve been teaching part-time at American University School of Education in their International Education Graduate program, where I teach courses in Dialogue Education, adult learning, using Jane’s books as- as many of the main resources. And we’ve begun convening our alumni more regularly, and in this inaugural alumni annual event we asked Jane to come and share some wisdom with us, because we’re a branch of the family of dialogue adult educators who have been inspired by Jane over many years. And Jane was kind enough to join us, as we’re you, Rebecca. And we wanted to recognize her contribution to our long standing program, and, and also to pledge our commitment to continue to be a source of- of Dialogue Educators going forward.
REBECCA
And we so appreciate that. And it’s so exciting to have the American University Alumni be a part of this – Dialogue Education and our network – and we’re looking forward to what more that might hold. But of course, we’re here today to talk about the axiom: Dialogue is not between teacher and learner, but among learners of whom the teacher is one. Jane. I’m wondering if you can give us a little history as to where that axiom originated from?
JANE
Oh, well, Rebecca, first, let me tell on this podcast, how much I appreciate Michael’s introduction, and also, what the American University group – the ITEP – meant to me. It means a great deal. For many years, I have said, “I want a university.” Thanks, Michael.
MICHAEL
Yeah, gotcha!
JANE
And really, this axiom almost comes out of my own experience, because over the many years that I’ve been working with Dialogue Educators, each event has taught me so much. Something new always emerges. And even with this podcast series, who’s learning the most? Haha guess who? Yours truly
MICHAEL
Or are we?
JANE
And really, it’s amazing. So I like the- I like the axiom. And I’m very proud as an English teacher of the “whom.”
MICHAEL
Well done!
REBECCA
Thanks, Jane. So, Michael, I wonder what stories come to mind for you – whether it’s a recent story or something from long, long ago – where this axiom rang particularly true for you.
MICHAEL
It really rings true to me, and it resonates throughout my life, really. I would say one of the more powerful experiences that highlighted this idea of mutual learning in groups was my sojourn as an agricultural extension worker in local villages in West Africa. I was in the Peace Corps right after college. That was my pledge to myself and my family – when I resisted the draft for the Vietnam War, I said I would serve my country but by pursuing peace rather than war. So I went to Sierra Leone, in West Africa, I was trained as an- a rice production ag extension agent. I lived in a small village, I was trained in the local language over a four month period through complete immersion. And then when I sat in the community where I was working, the first thing that happened was that a syndicate of farmers that were working together called the meeting, and introduced me to the village and to them, their members. And they proceeded to kind of ignore me and talk about what they were doing on their farms. And I realized that I was being trained, I was in a seminar with them. And even though I was the Ag Extension Agent, and over time, I learned that my inputs in support of their progress, were coequal with the inputs of their own experience, and their own exchanges of knowledge through storytelling. This was a group of men, in a group of families, in a group of villages where no one officially could read or write. They were quote, illiterate, except for a little sight reading of the Quran. But they were highly educated about the ecosystems they worked in. And slowly over time, I learned that I was a participant in a dialogue process among them about different ways we could work together to increase yield, returns on their labor, improve the output of rice they produced, reduce hunger in the hungry season, and to increase the incomes of their families. But I was disabused of the idea that my job was to tell them what to do. Or that my job was to be the technical informant of illiterate farmers. Almost immediately, they invited me into a storytelling, experience sharing and swapping space. And I found that to be a profound learning for someone who is, quote, highly educated from the US, who was presuming to arrive to help. That was one place and time where this axiom came alive for me in a way that I hadn’t expected going in. And then maybe one other time was, Jane encouraged me, years after my work in the field, had gone on for 20 years, to go back to grad school. And she said, I think I’ve found a school you might be able to tolerate and it’s called the Fielding Institute, and it’s focused on helping self-directed, mid-career professional learners not having to take courses taught by Professors. And I said, “Well, what does the professor’s do then?” Jane said, “You go and see.” The first quote, encounter I had with a faculty member was a workshop with Malcolm Knowles – – who Jane knows very well. He was called the father of adult education in the US. And we sat in a room and I had- the first class- meeting I was ever at. And I looked around there were other people kind of my age – 30s and 40s. And there was this one older gentleman, he’s sitting there very quietly, and he didn’t say a word. And we’re all kind of looking at each other wondering, well, when is class gonna start? After a while, people started talking with each other partly in asking, “well, what’s going on?” And eventually, somebody turned to the older gentleman in the room and asked him, “well, who are you?” And he said, “Well, my name is Malcolm Knowles.” And everybody just kind of stared at him like, “well, you’re- you’re the teacher. Oh! And you’re very famous. We’re all here because of you, what should we be doing?” And he said, “Well, why don’t we all go around and explain one after the other, why we’re here in the room, why you’ve come and what you would like to learn. And then we can begin.” And by the end of 20 minutes or 30 minutes, 15 of us had begun sharing our own interests in adult learning and what it meant to us. And the conversation built from there. And that was another example of something that didn’t look like a method being a method. And something like leveling the playing field of roles in a learning group, so that the tilt was not in the direction of a teacher hierarchy, one above others. And it was just wonderful.
REBECCA
I love how both of these stories have that common theme – that you, in Sierra Leone, and Malcolm Knowles, at the Fielding Institute, both modeled for everyone acting as a participant in the dialogue, and therefore, these people all felt safe, the principle of safety, and they were able to engage.
MICHAEL
Yes, I- and I’d say, in Sierra Leone, I felt the opposite of safe. I felt completely inadequate, and therefore, you know, was wise enough to keep quiet. And I think whereas Malcolm was safe, like a fox, you know, he knew exactly what he was doing, and not doing – kind of in a Taoist way – you know, doing, not doing, and he opened a space, you know, very deliberately. And gradually, I felt welcomed into the farmers space by them. Partly because I- I won some credibility, you know, over time. I wasn’t as dumb as I looked initially. But in both cases, we were leveling a playing field, where often the presumption is that an outside expert or a teacher is somehow on a pedestal and others are below. And that was a very powerful lesson about how liberating and empowering that is for everyone concerned, including the so-called instructor. But safety is a very important component of that, kind of mutually arrived at.
REBECCA
I love both of those stories, Michael, thank you so much. And Jane, I wonder what story might come to mind for you?
JANE
Well, Michael has been a fox for many years. You’ve been a wonderful fox, dear. And I see two things, Rebecca, I’m not quite sure if it’s the stories, but I see that you are showing us – or inviting us who are listening to this podcast, to name and celebrate dialogue, effective dialogue, no matter how it appears. With Malcolm, it was an old guy sitting quiet in the corner. With Michael, it was a young guy being quiet, and learning to listen, Michael. Wow.
MICHAEL
Yes.
JANE
And also, I want to say, let’s celebrate dialogue, wherever it appears and however it appears, because it’s effective. It’s effective in learning. And we don’t have to be the primary person or, or even be explicit about “Look, that’s dialogue.” No, it’s there and it’s working. And the second thing I see, dear, is the wonder of learning to be silent. As an addictive talker, I can- I can talk the paint right off the walls, as everyone knows, I am working at that still. Pardon the- oh that’s a good pun. I’m working at being still. That’s a good pun too. Whoa! Enough with the puns. I hope that’s a worthy response, Rebecca.
REBECCA
It is, it is. Thank you so much, Jane. And it is so interesting how that when you said learning to listen how everything kind of comes full circle and is intertwined so- somehow, you know, whether the title of one of your books, or this axiom, or the principles of Dialogue Education and adult learning. They all just keep coming back and are intertwined somehow.
MICHAEL
Yes, I guess, you know, one of the things that comes up whenever we posit the idea of dialogue learning – of co-creating insight that guides, you know, better action – is well, but what about if you get it wrong? Or what’s the evidence-based information? How do you bring that into dialogue? You know, you can’t do brain surgery through dialogue, and so on. And I guess, you know, that’s something that’s been fun to play with as well, is this idea about, how do you introduce into dialogue information that arises from different sources? How do we use Janes books in a class on Dialogue Education and not have the book trump the dialogue?
JANE
Yes.
MICHAEL
No pun intended there.
JANE
Yes.
MICHAEL
And here’s an example of one way that I’ve I struggled to do it. Jane’s book “Learning to Listen, Learning to Teach” posits 12 principles, and each chapter illustrates them. And then you add the quantum principles to that on top. And so one of the games we’ve played in our classes over the years, which makes it different every time with different groups, is we print out big eight and a half by 11 cards with the names of the principles, and then other eight and a half by 11 cards, with kind of rough definitions of the principles. And then they give them out to groups and we say, sort them out, you know, find the right definition for the right principle, and display them on the floor in your group. And we’ll go around and then we’ll visit groups. And you know, there are different arrangements made, and then we say- and then the groups kind of normalize to each other the right definitions with the right names. And then we ask the question, “now, if you were to prioritize among these principles in your group, how would you arrange them on the floor?” Of course, it’s a trick question. But what happens is every group then has a fierce debate about the meaning and depth of meaning of each principle in order to argue about where they go, and which one is underneath which one, and which one is a precondition of which one. Some people make circles, some people make triangles, some people put inner circle outer circle, or make them in a line. And then we go and visit each group and all these levels of dialogue about these things begin to unfold.
JANE
Exactly.
MICHAEL
And when we do this in every semester, and with different groups, it’s completely different every time.
JANE
Wow.
MICHAEL
But, but we keep drilling down into shared understanding of the meaning of them. So that the book doesn’t hijack the dialogue, it catalyzes a deeper dialogue. And I find that just magic when it happens every time.
JANE
Beautiful, Michael. I see there what could happen when you’re talking about brain surgery. For example, suppose- suppose the Professor put pictures of all the organs of the body and said to pairs of learners, residents in medical school, “Okay, folks, construct a body with these pictures.” Whoa, where in the world is the pancreas go? And why is it there? Oh, my goodness. Quit- wouldn’t that be fun?
MICHAEL
Yep!
JANE
Or the bones of the body. Yeah, a skeleton, just break it all apart and say, okay, folks, in pairs, put it together. What a great idea, Michael. And, and so what I’m saying is, I have been trying to learn Astronomy, I really want to know Astronomy, but every book I pick up, I put down by page three, because I can’t understand it. I also have tried to learn Physics. And I want to say, “Oh, please, please, you know, break it up into little pieces and ask me, ask me to put the solar system together. But give me a good companion.” Michael, you want to try?
MICHAEL
You bet! I’m a survivor of Particles for Poets at [inaudible] College. That was as close to Physics as I ever got.
JANE
That’s it. And it is, again, as you said, Rebecca, how amazing that all the components, all – and I’m going to go out on a limb here and say, every single component of what Peter Noteboom calls this ecology of learning, I love it – is it’s- it links to every other one. Because I’m thinking here, engagement, safety, fun. You know, somebody puts the eyes under the scapula, “whoops, pardon me? I don’t think so.” And they’re laughing at one another. But it would be- they would never forget that.
MICHAEL
Yeah.
JANE
And- and again, going to the other issue, Michael, the issue that people raise of, suppose we get it wrong. They would be laughing at the wrong, because they’re living in this body. And so we are also living in the world of the solar system.
MICHAEL
Yeah.
JANE
We’re living in the world of Physics. I would go out on a limb and say, I don’t think there’s any lesson or piece of the curriculum that can’t be taught with some creative learning tasks. Ouch. I’m going out on a limb here. But- but I’d love to, anybody could try one with Physics or Astronomy. I’ll pay whatever it costs.
REBECCA
But it’s true! We’re- we’re tested every day at Global Learning Partners with- with clients or potential clients that come to us with this terribly dry material and say, “can you help?”
MICHAEL
Yes.
JANE
Oh, beautiful, beautiful, Rebecca. And you can!
REBECCA
It reminds me of the story, Jane, where you told me once about a training manual. And they say, “Have we got it right?” And you said, “Have you got a match?”
JANE
That story came immediately to mind Rebecca. We’re great! We’re a team girl.
Thank you, Jane. Michael, thank you so much for joining us today. And I wonder if we can leave the listeners with one final thought. As someone who has been practicing Dialogue Education for quite some time, what’s one final wisdom that you’d like to leave us with today?
MICHAEL
Oh, my goodness. Well, you know, Jane is always so fun to be around and is so animated around the subject, and I am too. I’m so passionate about how innate learning is in all human beings, and how wise it is to work hard at framing learning tasks and staying out of the way of the learners, you know, of, of helping their own innate curiosity be triggered and unlocked. We’re always you know, this idea of grappling with, quote, motivating learners is to me a paradox or maybe an unwise thought. All- all human beings learn and all human beings are motivated to learn – it- it’s how our neurobiology works. So I think the wisest course is light framing, based on thoughtful research, and listening to and getting to know the learners, framing learning tasks and staying out of the way. And most of the framing of learning tasks is best done designed as open questions for dialogue, invitations for dialogue and co-construction. And then of landing the findings as another layer of dialogue, where groups interact and interrogate each other’s thoughts and support each other, but also challenge each other in friendly, constructive ways. I think just setting in motion patterns like that has been a true guide for over many years as to how to be an effective facilitator or supporter of the learning of adults, in groups.
JANE
Beautiful.
MICHAEL
I’ve learned much of that, you know, been inspired by Jane’s work, and Jane’s joyous way of being present with groups, so that there’s a kind of infectious desire to engage in learning in a joyful way. Beautifully put. Thank you, Michael. Thanks so much. And thank you, Jane.
JANE
Thank you. Thank you, Michael. This is a great joy indeed.
MICHAEL
To be continued –
JANE
You bet!
MICHAEL
More to talk about together.
OUTRO (MEG)
Thank you for tuning in to another episode of Simply True with Dr. Jane Vella. This podcast is produced by Global Learning Partners and Greg Tilton, with music by Kyle Donald. If you enjoyed the show, consider leaving us a review on Apple Podcasts or your preferred podcast player. To find out more about Global Learning Partners, whether it be our course offerings, consulting services or free resources, go to www.GlobalLearningPartners.com. We invite you to sign up for our mailing list, subscribe to our podcast and find us on social media to continue the dialogue.