Reply to comment

With the challenge of setting aside the concept of error comes an associated challenge of redefining "rigor."  We often buy the security that comes with being recognized (whether as "failure" or "success") as part of a rigorous system at the high price of ceding authorship of the standards for such a system.  The call to be awake and alert to the import of differences in experience and meaning is a call for another kind of work: not rigorous in terms of fidelity to and measurability within one imposed (even self-imposed) system of merit, but demanding of strong attention, energy, and engagement.  Play and generative wandering can never be "rigorous" in a traditional sense, but to be open to and involved with them is another strong way of being, not simply a lapse from real work.  That this is "harder to think about in terms of current educational practice" to use Paul's terms (above), is part of what keeps it obscure and unavailable to responsible reflection.  I think that to document this kind of process in classroom life could be an important way to intervene in this obscurity.