I am reading Sam Chaltain’s American Schools – a fantastic text about creating more democratic schools. It is a wonderful read… one that I had started before EduCon, but after meeting Sam at EduCon and being completely inspired by everything he had to say on the Sunday morning panel, it was a text I had to return to.

In the text, Sam talks about creating a democratic culture that can create and sustain change through the three civic habits of mind, heart and voice (pg. 74.) The mind signifies the understandings we have about the communities we want to have, the heart signifies our motivation and voice signifies the skills we need. It is a lovely frame for the kind of work Sam is writing about – the kind of work it took to build SLA, and the kind of work that I advocate for when I go out and speak. It reminded me of the lens and language I use when I talk about students and teachers doing the work of their own head, heart and hands.

And here’s where it gets fun. (Or I get waaaaaaaay too into language – take your pick.) I really started to question the space between "voice" and "hands." In the end, I think Sam and I both meant much the same thing – the stuff we can do… build… say… but what was the difference? Was there a difference? Voice traditionally has been a powerful signifier of agency, especially when one looks at the civil rights struggles, so in that respect – especially since Sam’s book is about democratic schools – "voice" was a more powerful word for skills than "hands."

But I run a school where kids make stuff. And in that context… in a more constructivist context… "hands" is about the artifacts of learning that kids (and teachers) can create. Hands is about the ability to do things, and I wouldn’t want to lose that in the context of what we do… and it feels very different to me to say "hands" than "voice." Is "voice" encompassed within "head?" No. Clearly not. All one has to do is look at who has agency in the world to know that they are not the same thing.

So does it matter? Is one of us wrong? Who knows… what I love is finding someone whose ideas pushed mine in great ways and forced me to examine my own language. How will I change mine? I don’t know yet… the ideas are still running around in the brain. But Sam’s book, even though — perhaps because — it is so close to the stuff I believe has pushed me to refine what I believe even more deeply. And that’s a good thing.

So perhaps then, there are two meta-takeaways for me in this blog post. The first – language is joyous, fun and important. When people say, "That’s just semantics," I have always thought, "Just?" And second – as much as we decry the echo chamber, there are times when the folks whose views are closely aligned to your own are the ones who can push you, shape you, challenge you in ways that few others can.

And oh yeah, read Sam’s book. It really is wonderful.

– Posted using BlogPress from my iPad