Since my post about how hard it can be to be and stay ‘engaged’ I have become increasingly unhappy with the word itself. It is as if once I had identified the emotional associations I perceive, I noticed that it did not seem to fit the kind of feeling I have in the state I would have normally called ‘engagement’. In an attempt to get to the bottom of my discontent I have looked at the origins of the word to see whether some deeper layer of meaning might be the source, at an almost unconscious level. This is what my online search came up with:

Origin

late Middle English (formerly also as ingage ): from French engager, ultimately from the base of gage¹. The word originally meant ‘to pawn or pledge something’, later ‘pledge oneself (to do something’), hence ‘enter into a contract’ (mid 16th century), ‘involve oneself in an activity’, ‘enter into combat’ (mid 17th century), giving rise to the notion ‘involve someone or something else’.

Maybe my dislike of the word comes from it originally referring to a business transaction or even confrontation. I realise that today it is frequently not used in this sense, that many see mainly positive connotations. Besides it seems to have gained a certain status as a buzzword in educational contexts. However, the connotations I perceive – possibly to do with the word’s origins – really put me off using it to describe the kind of response I am hoping for from my learners or the quality of my own interaction with them.

I have therefore been looking for an alternative and was surprised to find that the answer might have been with me for a while in a paper that I came across some time ago during my travels through ELT literature. In it Prof Dr Peter Lutzger, who has worked as an English teacher and language teacher trainer in Steiner education for many years, writes about the concept of ‘attunement’ and what it might have to do with teaching. The introductory quote by Boss (1979: 110) already uses language that strongly resonates with me:

“Every attunement as attunement is a particular mode of the perceptive openness of our existence. The prevailing attunement is at any given time the condition of our openness for perceiving and dealing with what we encounter; the pitch at which our existence, as a set of relationships to objects, ourselves and other people, is vibrating.”

Here attunement is seen as an essentially sensory concept of openness to our environment. While ‘engagement’ brings up an image in my mind of a practical relationship between involved parties who interact mainly on the level of cognition, ‘attunement’ emphasises the sensory and emotional component of the interaction maybe through its strong connection with music. When I was younger I learned to play the flute and for a while played in the school orchestra. I like the idea of comparing the classroom to an orchestra: everyone has their unique talent (different instruments – ‘individual differences’ in SLA) and if you all work in harmony you can give expression to a new reality together (a piece of music – e.g. a conversation in the L2). In order to reach harmony in an orchestra the director must make sure that all instruments are in tune (in themselves and in relation to the other instruments). The musicians themselves, although their ears might not be as trained as the director’s and although they might not be as skilled at fine-tuning, know when the whole orchestra is in tune or not – you can ‘feel’ (your ear senses) harmony or the absence of it (Have you ever been around when a violinist is out of tune? It actually ‘hurts’!). Similarly in the classroom the teacher is the language expert but importantly she also needs to make sure that she recognises her learners’ unique talents and how these can complement each other when they work in harmony in the class as a whole.

Lutzger points out that today the visual mode of perceiving the world, with deep roots that can be traced back as far as Ancient Greece, has unquestioned dominance. He proposes that there might be benefits in making listening our primary mode of perception and consequently understanding of the world. To support his argument he quotes another favourite of mine, John Dewey: “Vision is a spectator, hearing is a participation.” (1927:218/219). In order to get a grasp on the concept, Lutzger explores what expression the concept of attunement has found in medicine, psychology and spirituality.

I imagine many would like to avoid the topic of spirituality in connection with teaching either because of their secular worldview or because they recognise the many negative effects radical religious beliefs have had or are having on education. I think that would be wrong firstly because religion and spirituality, while often connected, are essentially two different things and secondly because witnessing or at least reading about the capacity for deep listening to their environment of some great spiritual leaders helps to shed light on the concept itself (Lutzger, 2014: 67/68).

Lutzger continues by questioning the applicability of the concept of attunement to teaching and wonders, if it is possible for a teacher to attune to a class of 30-40 students, i.e. if there is any point in even trying to make the concept of attunement fit the context of teaching. According to Lutzger it is a worthwhile undertaking because thinking of teaching as ‘deeply listening’ emphasises simultaneously the importance of attending to and allowing ‘silence’ in the classroom – “listening in the deeper sense of attunement often requires an absence of sound – silence” (Lutzger, 2014: 68). He points out that silence nowadays is often not given much attention and that instead our senses are bombarded and as a consequence become ‘dulled’ (unfit to enhance the learning experience?). He gives examples of past great musicians and poets who needed silence to allow their creativity to become activated. To show that encouraging silence and creativity can improve learning Lutzger also refers to Enja Riegel (2006) and her award-winning Steiner school in Germany, Helene Lang Schule, where amongst other things a ‘room of silence’ was introduced: “Learning to use and respect this space became an essential part of their entire school lives and for those educators from all over the world who came to observe the Helene Lang Schule, this room was often what impressed them the most.” (Lutzger, 2014: 70)

In an earlier post where I reflected on the TE714 session in which we were trying to identify our principles I concluded that personally I really valued a ‘silent period’  in my own learning and wondered whether I was allowing my students to experience this. Looking at Lutzger’s argument it seems that there certainly is a need for silence in the classroom and that is as a pre-requisite for creativity. As such ‘silence’ is maybe the teacher’s most valuable and essential ‘resource’. It allows the teacher to become attuned to her students and students to each other – listening to what is inside themselves as well as around – in order to make space for everyone’s creativity to emerge.

This reminds me of a session on ‘creativity’ I attended at IATEFL. Gloria Gil (Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina) reported on her research on how creativity was interactively  [own emphasis added] constructed in a group of high intermediate students at a Brazilian university. As a teacher researcher she realised over the course of her project that “her being sensitive to spontaneous contributions resulted in more creative interaction than following a script”. Her overall conclusion was that creativity in the classroom is a collective undertaking: “all participants are the resources used to paint the canvas and the realization of it will be creative interactions and outcomes”. It seems to me that in this kind of environment, although the imagery comes from art rather than music, the concept of attunement is fitting because here creativity is valued and because creativity is seen as something that happens between people and not just inside the individual. This is not the case in every teaching context and maybe not even in many, but it need also not be confined to ‘alternative’ environments (such as Steiner education) only. However, as Lutzger points out himself (2014: 70/71), whether you can accommodate deep listening, attunement and creativity in your own practice does depend on your view of the human being in general terms and specifically in education. If you think teaching/learning is mainly about passing on/acquiring skills then this might not be for you. If you think, however, education is about teachers and learners attending to each other as whole persons then the concept might have value and it might be a guide to a deeper understanding of yourself and your learners.

Pixabay – Symphony Orchestra, Concert

References:

Boss, M. (1970). Existential Foundations of Medicine and Psychology. New York: Jason Aronson.

Dewey, J. (1927) The Public and its Problems. New York: Henry Holt.

Lutzer, P. (2014) Attunement and Teaching. RoSE Journal. Special Issue: 65-72