Does it need to
change their life? Towards a better understanding of “transformative” learning
in field based courses
I recently had the pleasure of being at a workshop at my
alma mater, George Mason. The
organizers brought together a group of us focused on field-based experiential
courses. I was asked to share about my
own leadership of my program’s field based peace building course to
Morocco. My colleagues there
significantly improved my thinking especially as regards to the idea of “being
transformed” by these courses, something we as faculty and students involved in
field-based courses often talk about. What
does it mean to be transformed? Is this
a reasonable expectation for a 10-16 week course, with perhaps 2-3 weeks in the
field? Is "transformation" necessary pedagogically for
such courses to be worthwhile learning and professional development? Why do we
assume they as students require “transforming”?
 |
| Walkway in Fes Medina |
I was inspired to sharpen my own thinking on what it means
to “be transformed” by these sorts of courses.
Here are a few specifications. I
hope the field immersion component (FIC) in my field-based, experiential peace building
courses will cause the student to
1.
Think about the host country differently, especially
with respect to destabilizing simplistic, sometimes even neocolonialist
perceptions of the host country
2.
Think differently about him or herself,
especially with respect to that classic unpacking of one’s privilege
3.
Think differently about the field of peace
building,
a.
to have their view of the field broadened beyond
negotiation and mediation
b. to question much more rigorously and
deeply what ethical practice in the field really means.
Is this transformative?
Will it alter the course of a student’s life? There is scant data out there to say—but if a
field-based course of mine can accomplish the three learning goals above, I
will certainly call that a good day at (or nowhere near) the office.
 |
| Mosque in Fes |
