2 Methodologies and pedagogical approaches

The contributors to this handbook are members of associations who utilize a broad array of teaching methodologies in their social and educational work. This section introduces Critical Incident Methodology, Forum Theatre, Process Work, Storytelling, Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, Metacognitive Therapy and Object Based Learning as methods that allow for a profound transformation of the learning environment.

These methods focus on comprehensively addressing conflicts, discriminatory behaviours and cultural shocks which negatively affect the learning environment if not dealt with in an inclusive manner. In the REBELAH project, these methods were introduced within the field of Critical Heritage Studies.

In order to bring all of these methodological approaches together, we followed the ethical underpinnings of Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy. In this approach, developed in Brazil during the 1970s, and which is still being consolidated worldwide today, and is still an important source of pedagogical innovation, the teaching-learning process becomes a motivating, collective and inclusive space.

Freirean critical pedagogy is based on various epistemological concepts. First, people can never be treated as objects of a process, they must always be subjects. All people, no matter their age, background or situation, can teach and learn, are owners of some knowledge, have the same right to speak, be heard and propose ideas, content, problems and solutions. Secondly, in the learning process, reflection and action must go together in a process of increasing self-awareness: awareness of ourselves as part of a community and awareness of the structures which bind such communities. Thirdly, the basis of the teaching-learning experience is a dialogical relationship which is grounded in sincerity, humility, love, trust, critical thinking and hope for all subjects involved in the teaching-learning process.

Methodologically, Freirean critical pedagogy is open to all sorts of mixed participatory dynamics based on asking questions (such as assemblies, performative research, self-reflective research, open forums and debates, and collaborative workshops) or the art of questioning. It is the ability to question, and not the ability to answer, that guides and consolidates teaching-learning praxis. It is what Freire calls problem-posing education. Below we introduce all of the concepts, methods and approaches that the REBELAH project used to foster an inclusive learning environment in teaching and training.

Approach to diversity and Critical Incident Methodology

There is an urgent need to incorporate skills and abilities that foster coexistence in diversity, including intercultural communication competences in teaching and training. In this way we can ensure the effective realization of the rights of all people, including full participation in life-long learning, particularly among those who are most vulnerable or at risk of social exclusion. Addressing diversity in education is even more relevant in situations involving people who are particularly vulnerable (such as refugees, migrants, or people from ethnic minorities). Diversity should also be addressed through an intersectional approach that takes differences across various dimensions (such as culture, gender, age, sexuality, health, socioeconomic and family situation) into account to fully understand the impact of education on learners’ well-being.

To explore the diversity, we use ‘culture shocks’ as a research tool, based on Critical Incident Methodology developed by Margalit Cohen-Emerique. The concept of ‘culture shock’ or ‘critical incident’ has been defined in many ways and from many perspectives, so let’s first clarify how we understand it:

a reaction of disorientation, frustration or rejection, rebellion and anxiety; in short, an emotional and intellectual experience that manifests itself in those who, placed by circumstances or by profession outside their sociocultural context, are engaged in approaching the foreign; this clash is a very important means of becoming aware of one’s own identity, to the extent that it is re-examined and analysed.^[1]

Culture shock can incite prejudice: in some situations, cultural clashes can come from witnessing a behaviour that breaks a valuable rule (e.g. someone finishes their meal with a noisy burp). The interpretation of this situation is almost automatic: ‘How rude!’ In other situations, we can make mistakes which break cultural rules and then feel ashamed or guilty (‘I should have known better’). In most of these situations, it is very easy to end up judging others, or ourselves, negatively. One reason for this is that these situations are often unpleasant, and rather than stopping and trying to understand them, we try to resolve the situation as quickly as we can. Making a quick judgement is one way to do this, but this means we do not investigate what is really going on or try to understand each other: to our immediate understanding, they, or I, just happen to be rude, sexist, authoritarian, etc.

Cultural clashes can reinforce stereotypes but may also be moments that can become powerful sources of learning, provided we do not act on the immediate need to escape the situation and quickly forget it. To turn these moments into positive events we have to reflect on the elements behind the sudden clash. In addition, exploring the most frequent subjects of culture shock – or a critical incident – helps to reveal sensitive areas that have particular importance, as well as cultural areas susceptible to becoming a source of tension and conflict.

There are two possible risks when we focus on diversity:

1. It can lead to a limited interpretation of culture/diversity which only focuses, for example, on ethnicity, religion or nationality (thereby overlooking other factors such as socioeconomic conditions).
2. This in turn can lead to the essentialization of differences and the stigmatization of those who are different.

The fear of not being politically correct or culturally sensitive can itself have an adverse effect. When there are real cultural differences, this fear about doing the right thing may blind us to what is really going on and thus we continue to be ignorant and unprepared to address difficult situations. In fact, this kind of blindness can itself be the result of a kind of European or Western ‘ethnocentrism’ which mistakes itself for ‘universalism’ and denies the existence of important cultural differences and/or tends to reduce them to stereotypes. So, how can we resolve the contradiction of not making cultural differences greater than they are without denying the possibility of real differences?

Critical incident methodology proposes suspending the theoretical debate and changing the register to focus on the level of practice. It proposes to do so by using a strategy to uncover the assumed set of cultural norms, values and behaviours that people have when meeting others. The increase in negative emotional turmoil that borders an intercultural misunderstanding helps us to be more aware of our own culture and invites us to explore frameworks of cultural reference in a more objective manner and thereby open a space for negotiation where prejudice has less currency.

When we talk about cultural differences, we refer to a broad concept of culture and diversity. Specifically:

1. Consider a broad view of human ‘culture’ as encompassing a variety of aspects of human action, thought and identification. Often, cultural groups are connected to a nationality or ethnicity, but this can be mediated by many other dimensions, such as social class, gender, age, sexual orientation, or subcultures related to sport, music and arts, among others.
2. Be aware that no culture is homogeneous or static but is constantly changing. There have always been exchanges between different cultures. For example, we can compare current images of a city 200 years ago and see radical changes that affect the subjective experience and the value system of the people, creating totally different worlds in the same place.
3. Consider that everyone is made up of a great diversity of cultures and that each individual acquires and integrates these cultures through their own ways of life.
4. Remember that culture is not the only factor that determines our behaviour, but it is the only one that interacts with situational factors (such as physical or mental fatigue or crowd behaviour), and personalities (such as a personal tendency to be friendly or aggressive).
5. Remember that the ‘difference’ you see from your side is not an inherent characteristic of another person or another group. You need to discuss the differences and that requires – and reveals – both sides. Therefore, we need a method that helps us to uncover differences in everyone.

 

Storytelling

The history of oral storytelling goes way back, though no one knows exactly when the first stories were told. What we do know is that before human beings learned to write, they had to rely on memory and therefore had to be good listeners in order to learn something. This might explain why a good storyteller was highly respected; they made it easier for the audience to remember the story.

Some things never change. The fact that a well-told story is more likely to be remembered by the listener is one of them. Storytelling that ‘takes place as an open and direct two-way communication between the storyteller and the audience and allows for interaction between those present’ is often referred to as traditional storytelling.^[2] ‘Traditional’ in this context does not imply that the content of the stories themselves is traditional, it refers to the act or form of the event. Traditional storytelling, in this sense, comes in various forms: as a performing art; as a means to improve communication within a corporate context (corporate storytelling); healing or therapeutic storytelling; or as a teaching tool in formal and non-formal learning processes. In our methodological approach, we focus on the latter.

Many before us have applied storytelling as an educational tool in their projects and realized its power. Nancy M. Burk, for example, used it in her work with at-risk students and discovered that ‘for many individuals storytelling yields great insight and a deeper understanding of the world around us, a way of knowing, a search for meaning and a means of reflection’ and that sharing stories allows students to ‘realise the relevance, validity, and efficacy of their cultural heritage and learning abilities, regardless of cultural differences’.^[3]

According to Alterio, ‘[s]torytelling is an ideal teaching and learning tool, for it takes seriously the need for students to make sense of experience, using their own culturally generated sense-making processes’.^[4] She also argues that:

to learn through storytelling is to take seriously the human need to make meaning from experience, to communicate that meaning to others, and, in the process, learn about ourselves and the worlds in which we reside. Meaningful storytelling processes and activities incorporate opportunities for reflective dialogue, foster collaborative endeavour, nurture the spirit of inquiry and contribute to the construction of new knowledge.^[5]

In ‘Sheherazade, 1001 stories for adult learning’, a Grundtvig Multilateral Project in which the benefits of storytelling for adult learning were researched and tested, they came to the conclusion that storytelling used as a pedagogical tool helps learners to conceptualize the learning process, it empowers them, facilitates communication, inspires personal growth and engages the adult learner.^[6]

Theatre of the Oppressed and Forum Theatre

This project also uses the methodology of the Theatre of the Oppressed (TO),^[7] which was developed in the 1970s by Brazilian playwright Augusto Boal. It was one of the main tools of a participatory communication approach and popular education movement in Latin America. Unlike many social aspects of the theatre, TO is political theatre. It is a collaborative encounter aimed at emancipation. Based on Paulo Freire’s epistemology developed in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed, TO uses theatre games to de-mechanize our perceptions, making us aware of our cultural filters by making explicit and re-enacting our own conflicts and experiences. By bringing individual issues to life on stage and subsequently extrapolating them to the experiences of the group, TO allows the participants to search for and create alternative solutions to conflicts that often prove difficult to resolve from an individual position.

Forum Theatre is the basic approach within the Theatre of the Oppressed. Based on proposals by Bertolt Brecht, Paulo Freire and Augusto Boal, Forum Theatre seeks to work towards the staging of conflicts such that the audience can propose alternatives and try them out on stage. The methodology puts the audience and the actors on the same level, transforming the audience into ‘spect-actors’ and generating debate and joint problematization. Through Forum Theatre we can rehearse real-life situations and conflicts to prepare us to understand, reflect and confront these conflicts in real life. It is a means of turning thought into action. The aim of Forum Theatre is thus to reflect, discuss and generate awareness among participants in order to find alternatives to conflict.

To describe this in more detail, each performance aims to create a dialogue that enables people to raise awareness about inequalities and social structures and find ways to face these in real life. A short play is presented and stopped at the moment of maximum conflict. After the facilitator stops the play, he or she invites viewers to open the debate and to go on stage and take the place of the protagonists in order to change the situation. The facilitator provides ideas and information to feed the debate, engages the audience and asks questions to generate reflection about our behaviours with the aim of changing our attitudes. Thus, through their performances on stage with the other actors, the members of the audience can intervene in the play and contribute their own thoughts, desires, strategies and solutions. The scene is reinterpreted as often as the different interventions proposed by the audience, with each alternative that is proposed being discussed and analysed to explore the feasibility of the proposed solution.

Process Work

Process Work or Process Oriented Psychology (POP) provides a model that integrates and uses contributions from various disciplines to facilitate the transformation and growth of individual and collective groups.^[8] This methodology is applied in different areas, such as community and organizational development, diversity and leadership training, individual psychotherapy and family relations, counselling and group facilitation. Process Work focuses mainly on developing a level of consciousness, by helping individuals and groups realize how they perceive and live their experiences; learn to change their approach; and become aware of ideas which are not noticed or marginalized and hence limit a person’s ability to respond. Much of the knowledge we need to transform ourselves and to grow challenges our ordinary consciousness. Without realizing it, we marginalize certain aspects of our daily experience, such as emotions, desires, dreams, intuitions, fantasies and moods, because they come into conflict with our basic belief system or with the dominant culture to which we belong. So, we do not give ourselves permission to hear or talk about experiences that are outside the range of our ordinary consciousness of reality or to receive signals and information from an unfamiliar reality. Process Work teaches us to connect with our deeper self and learn to be creative and flexible amid extremely unfamiliar circumstances. Process Work uses several tools. In the REBELAH project we focus on Group Facilitation.

Group Facilitation is suitable in the following contexts:

• When a group wants to achieve its goals more effectively, efficiently and sustainably.
• When making an important decision as a group, or when you want to improve the processes of decision-making.
• When it is intended to improve or streamline meetings or groups.
• In difficult times or when there are conflicts and the creation of a framework is needed to transform them.
• At any time during the life or performance of a group in which the group is required to build a new framework or a special space where all voices are heard.

During group processes, facilitators have the following roles:

• To guide the group through the different dynamics while assuring an equal space for all participants.
• To identify the diversity of positions and roles present in the group for the proper management of conflicts and emotions generated by these dynamics when touching on sensitive areas called ‘hot spots’.
• To stimulate and articulate the effectiveness of dynamic response according to the climate generated by the group.
• To give feedback to the group continuously regarding the learning generated during the dynamics in order to foster critical and metacognitive skills among participants.
• To systematize conceptual and practical experiences that emerge in the process to share as feedback with the group to ensure the multiplication of the knowledge generated within the group and the community.
• Assess and plan meetings according to the specific needs of the group.

These tasks are carried out through consultation with the group of participants, as well as with other relevant stakeholders involved.

Cognitive Behaviour Therapy and Metacognitive Therapy

The underlying concept behind Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) is that our thoughts have a significant impact on our emotions and on our behaviour.^[9] In order to help people deal with intense negative emotions and maladaptive behaviours, CBT focuses on identifying and testing automatic interpretations and thoughts (whether they are realistic or biased in any way).

There are typical thinking patterns that distort reality in specific ways – these are called ‘cognitive distortions’ – that are targeted by CBT. Some examples:

• Mental filtering: a person focuses only on the negative aspects of a situation and disregards anything positive.
• Black-and-white thinking: a person evaluates a situation or the self in an ‘all or nothing’ manner, in extreme terms. For example, they might consider themselves as either perfect or a total failure. Terms linked to this type of thinking are: ‘always’, ‘every’, ‘never’.
• Personalization: a person thinks that everything others say or do is directly targeted at them; they are personal reactions to them. They might also blame themselves for outcomes that are outside their control.
• ‘Shoulds’ and ‘have tos’: a person has a very rigid idea about how they and others should behave or respond. If others break these rules the person becomes upset; if they cannot live up to the rules, they feel guilty, depressed.

‘Socratic questioning’ is one of the main tools that can be used to challenge cognitive distortions and help us to develop more realistic interpretations. This involves probing questions such as:

• How did I come to this conclusion/interpretation? What is the evidence that supports it?
• Is there evidence against it? What is it?
• Can I imagine that there could be alternative interpretations (e.g. others would have interpreted the situation differently)? If so, what would they be?

When interpretations become less extreme and less negative, our negative feelings usually also become less intense and we become able to act or react in new ways when similar situations occur in the future. CBT also encourages people to experiment with new behaviours.

While CBT focuses on the content of negative thoughts and tries to challenge them, Metacognitive Therapy (MCT)^[10] is interested in the process of dealing with negative thoughts. Everyone has negative thoughts but not everyone becomes fixated by them. Some people might use such thoughts as motivations to develop new skills or to work harder, for example. However, others become overwhelmed by them, and cannot stop having or thinking about them. People with chronic anxiety, for example, have a tendency to worry or ruminate and they focus their ongoing attention on potential threats.

MCT helps people to identify their way of thinking and explore whether it is useful or not. For example, many people who ruminate too much think that it is important to constantly monitor for threats and that worrying is itself useful as it keeps them safe. MCT looks at how people think about their way of thinking, thus we are talking about metacognitions (hence the name, metacognitive therapy). While CBT deals with the meanings that people give to their experiences and explores whether these meanings are valid, MCT deals with the way that people think and it assumes the problem rests with inflexible and recurrent modes of thinking in response to negative thoughts, feelings and beliefs. As Wells explains: ‘For instance, if we consider the case of a depressed patient who believes “I’m worthless”, the CBT therapist tackles the problem by asking, “What is your evidence?” In contrast, the MCT therapist asks, “What is the point in evaluating your worth?”^[11]

Object-Based Learning

‘Object-Based Learning’ (OBL) is an approach that teachers and trainers are increasingly using as they seek new ways to help learners explore complex ideas, stories, events and processes in an engaging and student-centred manner. In this method, objects – from museums, archives, science collections, or even from the kitchen or bedside table – are introduced into the learning environment, where they can act as ‘thinking tools’ to promote engaged and collaborative learning, problem-solving and creative expression. Learners are invited to touch or handle objects directly where possible, or, if this is not possible, to view them in close proximity. The form, shape, design and weight of the objects, their colour and materials, fragility or sturdiness, are made aspects of intrigue, challenging learners in their novelty and inviting their curiosity and imagination.^[12]

The approach has a number of benefits. Dealing with a physical object for a while and learning to interrogate it and discover its specific qualities and complexity can bring a welcome moment of focus for learners distracted by many demands on their time and attention. The sensory and tactile dimensions of handling an object, or of observing it up close, can provide a powerful and concrete memory on the basis of which to build, associate, store and recall more abstract concepts and ideas, or memories and emotions that are difficult to put into words. Moreover, through interacting with the objects and each other, learners are encouraged to develop and express independent skills in hypothesis formation (what is this thing for?), observation (how does it work?) and analysis (what is its story?).

It is important to be up-front about some practical considerations in object-based learning. Firstly, there are logistical issues, especially if the objects involved are rare or precious. If they are to be brought to the learning environment, the teacher or trainer will want to know how they will get there, how much set-up time is needed, who will be responsible for the security of the object, what kind of knowledge and supervision is needed by the learners, and how OBL fits into the broader training goals of a programme.

If the learning is relocated to the site of the object, or to a special site where it may be handled or viewed more securely, many of these questions remain, but there may also be new questions confronting the educator: How to get to the site? Who takes responsibility for the timing of the visit? What are the security needs of the site? How is coordination between various staff handled? While this may seem like a rather daunting list of questions, it should be underlined that many museums, heritage collections and sites are very familiar with these issues as they deal with them on a daily basis, and they are well trained in facilitating OBL both on and off-site.^[13]

Secondly, it is important to take into account the perspective of the learners themselves. Learners who are more accustomed to listening quietly may find hands-on active learning more challenging. Such reticence may increase if heritage objects or environments are unfamiliar or appear as overwhelmingly authoritative. If learners are made aware of the reasons for the object-based approach, it is more likely that they will get more involved. As in other kinds of learning, the skills needed to attend to different learning needs in diverse groups are equally required in OBL.

One of the most influential OBL tools is what has been called an ‘object biography’.^[14] The idea is that just as we might describe the biography of a person by looking at the range of biographical possibilities for a person’s life in the society or cultural group to which they belong and then considering to what extent the subject realizes or departs from these ‘model’ possibilities, the same kind of questions might be asked about the life of objects. In other words, to understand an object, we might want to find out not only who owned the object in the past or what it represents or means, but also broader ‘biographical’ questions such as: Where does this thing and the materials used to make it come from? Who made it? How was the object acquired, given, consumed, repaired, stolen, lost, found, stored? What signs of this ‘use-life’ are on the object itself? What are the things inherently possible in the ‘status’ of this object in the time and culture in which it was made and first used? Were these ‘model’ possibilities reached or interrupted?^[15]Attending to the biography of an object in this way helps us to see and understand aspects of culture that might otherwise remain obscure to us, in particular the culturally specific patterns of value and exchange.

This object-based approach to discovering a heritage has a number of advantages. Firstly, it is radically democratizing. While many objects that survive from the past are kept because of the quality of their materials or the importance of their former owners (or both), focusing on the life of the object stresses everyday moments of production, exchange, consumption, repair and disposal that are common to all objects no matter what their status – from Michelangelo’s Pietà to a can of Coke.

Secondly, it provides a common means of access that flattens the amount of prior knowledge that the learner needs to have in order to ‘understand’ the object. While the object’s specific materials, iconography, or history and cultural context of ownership or use may be unfamiliar, common questions about the lives of objects that are otherwise familiar to the learner can provide a bridge to understanding the views of other people.

Thirdly, discovering and analysing the complex life of an object can be a powerful lens through which to reconsider and retell one’s own complex life story. Most objects in museums and heritage collections are de-contextualized and require a good deal of reconstruction and imagination in order to be understood. Many learners are also ‘de-contextualized’ in one way or another, whether through needing to flee an unsafe or unstable home country as a refugee, or through various forms of marginalization, or through the regular strangeness they may feel in a learning environment among people they do not know and who do not know them. Inviting learners to piece together how objects were involved in social relations can help them both recognize their own real stories of dis-connection in the stories of the objects they are encountering, and at the same time, discover patterns of unexpected connection between things and people in their own lives.^[16]