Interbeing among teachers and students.

Abstract

Teachers and students are interdependent within the learning process. Mindfully using communication can help teachers and students understand their interdependency and each other's perspectives. In order to take advantage of their interdependencies, teachers and students can enact interbeing. Interbeing is the phenomenon that occurs when persons mindfully interact, being simultaneously fully other-oriented and self-oriented. This paper uses the interactionist perspective to examine the communicative nature of interbeing, providing examples of how it can be mindfully enacted.

**********

Traveling to Seattle some time ago I met a young lady named Megan. She was queued at the airport, waiting to check her luggage with her parents. In line behind Megan was a couple, just old enough to be her grandparents. I stood next in line. Megan sat on a suitcase, watched over by her mother. All the people in line were acting as they should: quiet, looking everywhere but at each other, shuffling quietly forward with the line. Megan suddenly spoke to the lady in front of me, "You're a stranger!" Smiles and laughs exploded along the line. "What's your name?" "Where do you live?" "Do you have a tree in your backyard?" "Is it this big?" Megan asked with her arms stretched above her head. "What do you do?" she asked a man old enough to be her grandfather. "I'm a soldier," he smiled back. "Why?" asked Megan. "Because I couldn't get an honest job," he grinned. The adults in the line laughed good-naturedly at his joke. Megan cocked her head as if it helped her make sense of the response, then asked the lady, the soldier's wife, "Do you have kids?" So it went until Megan catapulted herself off the suitcase, stood proud and proclaimed to us, "I turn four tomorrow." Then she whirled around to hug her mother.

The magic of the interaction lingered for a moment, then slowly dissipated as each of us retreated back into our own lives. We were richer for our contact with Megan, but now somehow removed from her though she was still within touching distance. We were entranced by the interaction with this small child. Megan was purely in the moment. There was nothing else to her but herself, us, her questions, and our answers. During that time there was nothing else to us but us, her, her questions, and our answers. No line. No rushing. No impatience. No hassles. Just pure interaction in which all of us were fully and purely involved with each other. We were mindful of ourselves, the others, and the connection among us. Without trying to create or maintain it, we had enacted interbeing. Thich Nhat Hanh derived the word interbeing from the Vietnamese words "tiep" (`being in touch with' and `continuing') and "hien" (`realizing' and `making it here and now') (1993, p. 3). When combined, tiep hien signifies the phenomenon that occurs when persons interact with each other completely mindful of all persons in the interaction, their goals, concerns, and feelings, as well as the process of the interaction itself. Persons mindfully engaged in interbeing will be dedicated to helping everyone get out of the interaction what each person hopes to get out of the interaction. The phenomenon of being mindful is the same whether described from a spiritual (Gunaratana, 1993) or secular (Langer, 1989) point of view. To be mindful is to be open to, and aware of, all that is going on around and within you, without pausing to judge those things. Being mindful is the action of being aware of any event, idea, or influence as it happens and continues to happen. Mindfulness is commonly addressed as belonging to the individual. However, when individuals interact, and do so mindfully, their collective mindfulness can lead to interbeing--the state of full awareness of all interactants by all interactants.

Teachers and Students

At their best, teachers facilitate learning, guiding students through the learning process (Cornesky & Lazarus, 1995). Following an interactionist view of communication, teachers and students create, exchange, and interpret messages within social situations with each other (Trenholm, 1991). The meaning of messages to teachers and students is affected by (1) the culture in which they speak, (2) the understanding of things, events, and ideas shared by the communicators, and (3) the words and nonverbal symbols made available by the language being used. As teachers and students seek to understand what words to use and what others' words mean they do so by (1) identifying their perspective of the situation, (2) identifying what is the other person's perspective of the situation, and (3) evaluating that other person's perspective. Within the milieu of social and individual perspective taking, individuals create, exchange, and interpret messages. Enacting interbeing optimizes that perspective taking process.

Historically, teachers (Staton & Hunt, 1999) and students (Shulman, 1986; Souza, 1999) have been socialized to act within specific roles. At the primary school level, 95% of all socializing messages focus on a combination of classroom control and the regulation of students' sense of self while interacting with others (Brint, Contreras, & Matthews, 2001). Teachers have been expected to be all knowing of content as well as ways of conveying that information. Students have been socialized to be passive note-takers who believe a single, best answer exists for any question that can be asked. A countervailing force against those socialization efforts has been the focus on student-centered instruction, cooperative classrooms, and similar initiatives. While those initiatives have become part of our common educational parlance and much has been written about how teachers are incorporating them into the classroom, evidence of the degree to which they have changed the fundamental roles of teachers and students is lacking. As such, we cannot say with certainty that the practice of teacher-student interactions is substantially different from how it has been enacted in the past. Focusing on interbeing, and the ways in which it can be enacted, can help bridge gaps that exist between how teachers and students have been taught to act with each other and how they want to act interdependently via one or more of the initiatives mentioned above. The key difference between those initiatives and interbeing is that the initiatives contain tactics designed to help students learn better, while interbeing is an attitudinal orientation through which the process and outcomes of any of those initiatives can be supported and optimized.

The Importance of Communication

The interdependency among teachers and students is strongly supported by the interactionist perspective of communication: "interactionism locates all human action within society, recognizing that while society is based on individual actions, individuals act as they do because they are members of society. The individual cannot be thought of in isolation from interactions with others" (Trenholm, 1991, pp. 37-38). Further, this perspective's three assumptions apply well to teachers and students. The first assumption claims, "communication occurs through creation of shared significant symbols" (p. 38). Interbeing is dependent on the use of those shared significant symbols. Teachers and students can be together without communicating. But to fully be aware of each other's perspectives, desired forms of interaction, and preferred teaching and learning styles, teachers and students must communicate with each other. Once begun, they can sustain interbeing only through continued mindful communication that is simultaneously other- and self-centered. The second assumption claims, "the self is constructed through communication" (p. 38). So then are teachers and students. They are created anew in every interaction. When done mindfully, teachers and students are provided the freedom to be and interbe as the current situation requires, not just within their traditional roles. The third assumption claims, "social activity becomes possible through the role-taking process" (p. 39). Accordingly, interdependent learning activity, in the classroom or mediated through computers and the Web, becomes possible only through the teaching-learning process among teachers and students. The infusion of computers into education over the past 20 years has modified the means by which we communicate, expanding the ways in which teachers and students can interact interdependently. Embracing interbeing allows teachers to recognize and facilitate their students' learning roles however, whenever, and wherever students choose to enact them.

Teaching-Student Interactions

Teacher-student interactions (TSIs) contain both structural and process components. The structures of TSIs are largely institution dependent, ranging from the physical (e.g., the location of classes and the furniture in the classroom) through the temporal (e.g., the meeting times and duration of classes) to the technological (e.g., the use of the Web to supplement face-to-face interaction and course content delivery). Teachers have some control over these structures, but it is the process components (e.g., whether students are talked at or communicated with, whether learning is delivered to or constructed by students, whether students are expected to learn in the classroom or are provided the tools necessary to learn anywhere) over which teachers have more control.

Interbeing is a middle way through the process of education. It threads the middle between two extremes: (1) teachers attempting to infuse knowledge into students, as if the latter were mere receptacles for what teachers think is important, and (2) teachers hoping that students will magically (by themselves) become infused with the spirit of life-long learning, thereby taking control of all aspects of their education. Instead, interbeing recognizes the fundamental communicative interactional aspect of the TSI, the interdependence of teachers and students, and the capacity for teachers and students to fully complement and enhance each other's efforts through mindful communication.

Putting an Attitude of Interbeing into Practice

Enacting interbeing mindfully is helped by nurturing seven attitudes: non-judging, patience, beginner's mind, trust, non-striving, acceptance, and letting go (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). Here, I will briefly describe those attitudes and how they relate to interbeing.

Non-judging

Research shows that how we react to and categorize students is often an isolated response to how we perceive students' particular behaviors, as opposed to a reasoned, balanced response that fits with the larger TSI (Brophy & Good, 1974; Baringer & McCroskey, 2000). Being mindful of our tendency to judge will help us to assess without judging, allowing us to interact with students in a fresh and open manner each time they seek to interact with us. I teach a course in which we study propaganda images, seeking to understand why they are created, how they are used, and how they affect people and societies. Students' reactions to the images vary widely. Reluctant at first to share their reactions, students become open only when they sense that their peers and I will not judge their comments. We discuss the differing opinions, but we do so seeking to understand, not to judge.

Patience

Patience in the classroom is more than effectively using wait time to facilitate discussion or allowing students the time to find their way through the material and the learning process. It is an attitude that predisposes a teacher to allow students to experience the learning process as it occurs to them rather than attempting to force an experience upon them. It is an attitude that predisposes a teacher to find ways to accommodate students' different learning styles. When teaching my students how to conduct research about communication, they understand the importance of precisely knowing methodologies. I prefer to use certain methodologies, but forcing students to follow in my footsteps denies their unique learning process. Instead, I allow them the freedom and time to develop their own preferences. My patience with their search is rewarded by students coming to embrace a methodology that "works" for them, given their research interests.

Beginner's mind

Students often come to classes with only a vague sense of what material will be covered. They are open to learning, open to the teaching style of the teacher, and desire to make better sense of their world through what they learn. In essence, they approach the new class with the open mind of a beginner. Approaching the first days of a semester, I remind myself that the students are new to the material we will cover. My excitement for the content developed over time, as I went through my learning experiences. Orienting to students with a beginner's mind helps remind me of the learning paths I have taken. Instead of assuming I know best how they can learn, the recollection of my paths helps me teach the students as beginners who are open to a variety of ideas and experiences.

Trust

Trust exists when students are willing to make themselves vulnerable to each other while believing that the other will not take advantage of that vulnerability. Being in a position of relative power, teachers may find it easier to trust students than vice-versa. Students may perceive they have much to lose by opening up themselves to teachers, and consequently refrain from behaviors that may actually build trust. I try to build trust with my students by being open to them about who I am and what are my preferred teaching and learning styles. Through discussing it, I help them understand their preferred learning styles. I create trust-building opportunities. Because trust requires putting oneself at risk, I take the first step, putting myself (my ego, my face) at risk, showing the students I trust them. Then I respond in kind when they start putting themselves at risk.

Non-striving

When teachers trust that the process of learning will happen naturally when students are nurtured and given sufficient time, they approach non-striving. By non-striving, teachers prepare themselves to facilitate learning, then enact their preparation without trying to force learning, or force all that they know and can do into the classroom. Setting the process up well then communicating with students as the process runs allows the teacher to be open to all teaching opportunities and each student's specific needs as they arise. One method of enacting non-striving is to give students some control on class content and process. Once students understand the syllabus and my general plan for the semester, I encourage students to tell me what more or what else they want to learn. Then, I modify the course content and/or process, taking into account their learning styles and preferences, while retaining material crucial to the focus of the course.

Acceptance

Acceptance is to see things for what and how they are, and to find comfort in that clear vision. Acceptance is to act in ways that will help teachers teach and students learn but to not become attached to the outcome of that effort, whether the outcome is a roaring success, a flaming failure, or something in between. I have days in the classroom that are magical. Other days, nothing I do seems to work as the students need it to work. Practicing acceptance of the teaching and learning processes allows me to distance myself from the emotions of those days. Instead of overly congratulating myself for the good days, or beating myself up on the bad days, I accept what happened, seek to understand the causes, then communicate what I perceived to the students in the class in an attempt to help make our next learning interaction as good as it might be.

Letting go

Teachers cannot force students to learn. But, we can set in place structures and employ processes that will facilitate learning. We can use communication to build shared understanding with students of those structures and processes and how they can best be used. We can trust the process of facilitating learning, then let go of the process, allowing students to find their way through the process, while patiently providing them the support they will need. Letting go is a matter of faith. Faith in the process. Faith in the students. And faith in the positive effects that come from enacting interbeing.

Conclusion

Conceptually, most teachers are likely not as far away from enacting interbeing in their classes as it may seem. What they strive to do in most cases fits well with the mindful teaching and interbeing-filled interactions. It is in the doing that the challenges arise. Maybe the challenge is lessened if we seek not to be a teacher, but to become part of the TSI with our students. To act and communicate not from us to them, but with all of us, fully present and aware of each other.

References

Baringer, D., & McCroskey, J. C. (2000). Immediacy in the classroom: Student immediacy. Communication Education, 49, 178-186.

Brint, S., Contreras, M. F., & Matthews, M. T. (2001). Socialization messages in primary schools: An organizational analysis. Sociology of Education, 74, 157-180.

Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1974). Teacher-student relationships: Causes and consequences. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Cornesky, R., & Lazarus, W. (1995). Continuous quality improvement in the classroom: A collaborative approach. Port Orange, FL: Cornesky & Associates.

Gunaratana, H. (1993). Mindfulness in plain English. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications.

Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Nhat Hanh, T. (1993). Interbeing: Fourteen guidelines for engaged Buddhism (rev. ed.). Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher (3rd ed.) (pp.3-36). New York: MacMillan.

Souza, T. J. (1999). Communication and alternative school student socialization. Communication Education, 48, 91-108.

Staton, A. Q., & Hunt, S. L. (1992). Teacher socialization: Review and conceptualization. Communication Education, 41, 109-137.

Trenholm, S. (1991). Human communication theory (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Scott A. Chadwick, Iowa State University 

Chadwick (Ph.D., University of Kansas) is an assistant professor of organizational communication. His research agenda includes studying the effects of communication upon teachers and students and investigating the dynamics of trust in law enforcement organizations.