Reply to comment

There may not be a group story or understanding, it is possible for such a story to emerge, but not necessary to a successful open ended transactional inquiry. What is important if emergence pedagogy is to be deemed useful is that the teacher facilitate an environment that makes possible/probable an inner dialogue for each student. I attach "probable" as it has become clear to me that successful application of emergence pedagogy requires that teachers sign on to the idea that human beings are emergent systems too. As such, they cannot be conducted to adhere to an external schedule of either readiness or "doneness."

What are the implications of such a position on teachers who operate within a framework of grade level standards that mark the time for readiness and mastery? Formal education systems define the criteria that must be met in order to be "done" with school/education. If criteria are met in the institutionally defined sequence, the student will move to the next level, ultimately earning a terminal degree. If criteria are not met in the prescribed manner then the institution may decide to be "done" with the student.

Inner dialogue, the bridging of the cognitive unconscious and the storyteller (I-function), is the catalyst for learning. Learning is a life process, not an outcome tied to academic standards. And so I have a new metaphor for the teacher, that of a forger of keys. This forger of keys has three tasks: throw open door after door in the emergent classroom, vocally and forcefuly refuse to allow anyone or anything to close doors on or for another (that agency is reserved for the individual student), and finally to teach all students how to make their own keys.