One of the most damaging and dehumanising aspects of education and, actually, of the world, is the propensity to see the world in binary terms. Parker Palmer said, “We look at the world through analytical lenses. We see everything as this or that and ….we fragment reality into an endless series of either-ors. In a phrase we think the world apart”. This has been driven home to me over the time of the Covid 19 lockdown when I have listened to daily media briefings and paid more attention than I usually do to social media and politics, both nationally and internationally. Seeing the propensity of even intelligent people to hold a view and maintain a stance in the face of clear evidence to the contrary or even in spite of what common sense would suggest (conspiracy theories is an extreme example); and then to attack and belittle others because of the views they hold, with no thought for their humanity or concern for what might be “truth”, has been very painful to me. This has happened at a time when we have also seen such great kindness expressed. Perhaps it has been seeing these two extremes, side by side, in stark relief, that has heightened my distress.  In fact, to be honest, I have become increasingly bemused by the propensity of humankind to wound each other, seemingly for sport. For many it seems to be a bit of a game enabled and exacerbated by social media, but it is a hugely damaging game which, I think, holds back the ongoing development of humanity.

So it was interesting to read a Stuff article entitled, “It’s a brave new world when politicians compete to be the nicest and kindest.” It was affirming to read my very thoughts echoed here. Speaking of the 2017 election and Jacinda Ardern’s “relentlessly positive and kind” brand, the writer said, “And I for one sighed with relief at the very thought of trying to make a decision without being forced to watch a slamming match across the media in the leadup to election day.” I concur. I no longer have the heart for it either.

The problem for me is that this propensity to choose a particular viewpoint or even strategy or action, turn it into ideology, or into a label which says we are this and not that, or even worse, you must be this and not that, and then berate those with a differing viewpoint, is not only characteristic of politics but is deeply embedded in the schooling sector and it stalls change at a time when rapid change and responsiveness is what is needed everywhere. When we label ourselves publically – for example, we might say we are a Google Apps for Education school, or we are a Microsoft school, we are a modern learning environment or a traditional learning environment - then we make it difficult to change if we realise we actually need something different. It stops us from being able to keep adjusting to ensure we are continually doing what works best for kids. The same “slamming” occurs in education as it does in politics. It is why the head of Education Council had to ask the schooling sector to keep their comments professional when expressing their concerns about the hike in teacher registration fees and the evidence is there in the harsh comments that can be seen at times on teacher social media pages. Some teachers, just like the general population, can be so fixed on holding fast to their points of view that they just bat away alternative views without giving consideration to whether there might be something to be learned.

This way of thinking and behaving is a result of formal reasoning (Piaget’s highest stage of thinking), which includes binary logic, instrumental rationality and abstract intellectualism such as hypothetical thinking, and has been the dominant way of thinking of the 20th century and the industrial era. Formal reasoning which underpins the way our democratic process plays out, has led to the technological achievements of industrial society - achievements that have contributed so much to the evolution of human civilisation. However, though binary logic has served the world well in some ways, it is also responsible for many of the “wicked problems” we face today, such as the global climate crisis, global economic disparity and the youth mental health epidemic to name but a few. Viewing knowledge as siloed disciplines, has meant that decisions have been made that achieved a positive outcome when viewed through one lens, but had an extremely negative impact when looked at through a different lens. If you can just bat away an alternative perspective, then you can continue to do what you have always done, while the pile of debris continues to grow skywards.

Einstein said, “The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we have created them.” Put simply, we cannot solve tomorrow’s problems with yesterday’s thinking. The point is that 20th century formal, siloed, binary thinking contributed to the problems of the present and the future, and cannot be used to solve the current problems. Jennifer Gidley suggested that what is needed is an evolution of human consciousness beyond “formal reasoning” to “postformal reasoning”. In her cogent analysis “Postformal Education: A Philosophy for Complex Futures”, Gidley illustrated across psychology and education and dating back hundreds of years, the recognition and emergence of a way or stage of adult thinking that is higher or more evolved than Piaget’s (and others’) formal reasoning. She says this is what is needed now.

So it seems that my “heart sickness” may be tiredness of our current ways of thinking and could be addressed by radically and rapidly evolving our thinking. We need to think the world back together again. Postformal thinking embraces complexity rather than trying to deconstruct, simplify or remove it. It treats the “subject” as an integral whole with all its inextricably interwoven and intertwined parts. It embraces disparate ideas and makes sense of paradox – both/and thinking – and always looks for win/win rather than win/lose. It is a self-reflective, emergent, organic way of thinking, which uses collaboration, dialogue, creativity, reflexivity to solve problems; and it crosses or breaks boundaries, while preserving and growing a concept of Self that is coherent and strong. As such, it is deeply concerned with human dignity, justice and equality. In short, it is humanising.

The language of “kindness” which is trademark Jacinda Ardern, the use of words like “nice” by Todd Muller and his National colleagues and then his suggestion of a non-combative election, may not just be a return to old-fashioned politeness and manners; but may, in fact, be signalling the emergence of a new way of thinking – “a qualitative shift in the very shape of the window or lens through which one looks at the world” (Robert Kegan). Maybe those words are actually signalling an evolution of human consciousness that will, one day, see a new form of democracy that does its job while also maintaining the dignity and wellbeing of all-comers – without the “slamming” that characterises politics and that is harsh and destructive when looked at through a human dignity lens.

However, let’s be honest, words like evolution of human consciousness, postformal and humanising (words that I like) are not the stuff of election campaigns or of every day talk. They won’t sell a new way of thinking or persuade people to look at the world through a different shaped window. Not a chance! But words like “kindness” and “niceness” might, when enacted on a daily basis by our country’s leaders who show that they want the best for all people, in every way. These simple, everyday words are not weak and insignificant, but they are strong, political words, that signal an evolution (or revolution) of a new way of being that will hold the dignity and wellbeing of all human beings as the highest value (including the dignity of our political opponents).

So what does this have to do with education? While our country’s leaders have a central role to play in leading and modelling this humanising evolution of consciousness, there is no group of citizens better placed to influence this than teachers. Many years ago, Chesterton said, “Education is the soul of a society as it passes from one generation to another.” Every day when we go to our schools, it is teachers who hold the future soul of society in their hands. What are we going to do with it? Understandably, there will be many teachers who recoil from words like humanising, postformal, evolution of consciousness. Instead let’s embrace “kindness” and “niceness” and lead and model the valuing of human dignity that is signalled by these words - every day, for every single person. Let’s welcome and consider all views, all-comers and treat everyone with respect. In doing this, teachers will lead the next big evolution of human consciousness and we will create a future that is better for all.

PS: Please follow this link if you would like to receive email alerts of new posts and other information.