An excellent question! I have been focusing more on "learning" in
the sense of children becoming competent participants in the interactional
norms of a given group and setting, but the question is also valid
for formal educational settings where the focus is on academic learning.
I was the one who initially questioned the value of lectures as a mode
of learning because I felt (and still feel) that they don't provide
enough opportunity for student engagement--the agenda is too entirely
set by the professor--so I don't believe that I'm draconian in my
approach to students or education. But I find myself wondering now
at the incredible trigger-power that the words "pain" and "coercion"
have had among us, suggesting deep ideological roots for the reactions
to these terms. I have suggested (and still suggest) that we reflect
on the cultural basis of these reactions. On what basis does any of
us believe that life and learning SHOULD be free of any pain or
restrictions by others? Does this mirror anyone's reality? I
imagine it does not, suggesting that the desire for pain-free,
restriction-free learning is prescriptive rather than descriptive--
an ideal that is culturally constructed, and not a description of
anyone's life that I know of. Is there perhaps a better way to frame
the issues at stake here?
I gather that I'm the minority voice on this issue... I find
attempting to articulate a minority position to be rather
painful. Does this mean there is something wrong with our
discussion process? Or is this to some extent inevitable whenever
there is an open interchange of ideas? Is there a better way
to frame our goals for learning than to say that it should be
free of pain and free of restriction/coercion? (And we have all
sorts of ways of silencing--or "coercing" into silence--those we
disagree with...) Again, I'm not advocating pain and coercion;
I'm just wondering at imagining that learning/growth/change/
participation in a community of Others could be entirely free of
these things.
Robin