Style of Knowing Regarding Uncertainties

Abstract

This article addresses a key contrast in how teachers may regard the uncertainties of their work, considering how an orientation to uncertainty can be regarded as a decision-making style. Through the use of case studies, the author contrasts two teachers. One is oriented toward uncertainties in her work and describes her herself as being always “on the edge” of her capabilities, constantly seeking out perspectives that differ from and challenge her own and remaining vigilant to the need for improvising to respond to the circumstances of the moment. The other is oriented away from uncertainties and describes herself as prepared and deliberate; committed to achieving outcomes in line with her articulated goals and purposes; and purposeful about which unresolved questions she chooses to pursue. This contrast has implications not only for how these teachers make decisions and view their professional growth, but also for how some teachers may be understood, and misunderstood, by others. In a culture that often seeks to ignore pervasive moral ambiguities and focuses instead on questions for which there are easily identifiable answers (Cuban, 1992), an orientation toward uncertainty is more likely to be devalued or seen as an indication that one is not teaching well. Identifying these different approaches to decision-making styles enables us to appreciate the integrity and strength of each, as well as the limitations of each, suggesting new possibilities for research and for teachers’ professional development.

Notes

Notes

1 The names “Rachel” and “Laura” are pseudonyms, as are the names of the school and the students mentioned in this article.

2 Several readers have wondered aloud to me whether the subjects teachers teach strongly correlate with their stances toward uncertainty—that teachers of Arts and Humanities subjects might be more likely to have an orientation toward uncertainty and teachers of Math, Science, and Technology might be more likely to have an orientation away from uncertainty. When I looked at the other 10 teachers in my sample, their stances toward uncertainty did not neatly divide according to the subjects they taught. It would not surprise me if there is some relationship between teaching subject and uncertainty orientation, but an adequate exploration of that issue would require a much different research design.

3 The fact that Rachel and Laura share these epistemic similarities is important because they indicate similarities in developmental capacity. That is, they can be said to be at the same level or position of adult development, and their different orientations toward uncertainty are not a function of different developmental levels. While one’s epistemic commitments are likely to change as an individual evolves through different developmental stages, basic stylistic differences are presumed to remain stable across the life span. In order to identify stylistic differences between two individuals, it is therefore important to hold the factor of developmental capacity constant. Similarly, Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule (1986) make a distinction between women who occupy the same developmental position (Procedural Knowing) in their framework but who exhibit two very different styles of knowing (Connected Knowing and Separate Knowing) within that developmental position.

4 For a fuller description that includes additional aspects of these teachers’ contrasting styles, please see Helsing (2003). A fuller articulation of these contrasting styles also reveals potential connections between uncertainty orientation and other stylistic difference. For example, Rachel’s style of decision making aligns with those who are described in these literatures as right brained, global, field dependent, connected, narrative knowers. And Laura’s style aligns more with those who are described as left brained, analytical, field independent, separate, paradigmatic knowers. Daniele Flannery (1993, 2000) notes that there are similarities across many of the types of distinctions drawn in the various literatures about learning/knowing preferences. That is, while the terms used and bases for specific preferences have arisen in different academic fields, they each describe comparably contrasting profiles. Although I do not presume to generalize based on data from two teachers, further investigation into the robustness of these connections across the various stylistic literatures appears to be warranted. Attending to orientations toward or away from uncertainty may help to illuminate and clarify these potential connections.