Knowledge, Diversity, and the Teacher's Role in Education

Introduction: The Case for Individualized Learning

The focus of this discussion is on the need for teachers to address the individual learning needs of students. Both in line with the findings promoted by the study of knowledge and evolving understandings of diversity, the central thesis is that learning is a highly individualized process, with responsibility for that process invested in teachers.

The standard approach to education is often taken for granted. Traditional curricular values and approaches to learning are generally streamlined in the United States. The use of standardized testing, grading systems, and text-based learning imposes a monolithic strategy on a subject that is actually profoundly complex and nuanced. This informs a view of education as something which must encourage learning over ranking, facilitate individual needs rather than impose collective standards, and promote personal enthusiasm rather than a fear of negative assessment. This perspective underlies the discussion that follows, which promotes learning as a highly individualized process with responsibility invested in teachers.

Worldview and Philosophy of Knowledge

Education should be driven by the very same pursuits which drive us in all of life's important endeavors. As we move out into the world in search of knowledge, we do so with an awareness of the vast spectrum of perspectives that constitute this somewhat hazily defined body called knowledge. Knowledge is a collective of the information, intuition, instinct, and ingenuity of humankind, and therefore takes on more forms than can possibly be catalogued. This phenomenon is addressed by the discipline of epistemology. According to Steup (2005), epistemology refers to the ongoing practical and philosophical investigation of what is meant by knowledge. As Steup notes, "there are various kinds of knowledge: knowing how to do something (for example, how to ride a bicycle), knowing someone in person, and knowing a place or a city" (Steup, p. 1).

This is an important point of consideration, and one which allows us to approach with objectivity the incredible breadth of human innovation and ability. A failure to respect the differentiation inherent to knowledge is tantamount to a failure to demonstrate tolerance for the ideas and insights of others and, consequently, a failure to nurture the potentially unique talents distinct to each individual.

This point also connects well to the discipline of metaphysics, which renders the discourse on epistemology a deeply complex inquiry into the values that underwrite claims of knowledge. As Haselhurst (1997) notes with reference to Aristotle, knowledge is often based on the assumption of certain principles by which validity is established — principles that can either broaden or constrain what may be characterized as knowledge. Accordingly, Aristotle asks: "it is clear, then, that wisdom is knowledge having to do with certain principles and causes. But now, since it is this knowledge that we are seeking, we must consider the following point: of what kind of principles and of what kind of causes is wisdom the knowledge?" (Haselhurst, p. 1).

The values assigned to certain degrees of knowledge may be asserted through any number of institutional or individualized sources. Among them, sociological, spiritual, and philosophical imperatives may all shape these values differently, offering an extremely challenging dimension to the understanding of knowledge. As axiology further focuses the implications of "values" as these relate to knowledge disciplines such as politics and ethics, it becomes clear that there is substantial discussion to be had on the subject of individualized bodies of knowledge. This contributes directly to a view of the world as a forum within which human beings interact, where the infinite permutations created by human interaction impose a powerful set of considerations on our understanding of the collective body of human knowledge.

Philosophy of Schools and Learning

The understanding that knowledge must be understood on such diffuse terms contributes directly to how education should be perceived and approached. A curricular approach that grants more latitude to the instructor is likely to create an environment and establish practices that address education with the flexibility necessary to keep cultural diversity in mind. Among the primary obstacles teachers face today is a climate not designed to encourage the inclusion of immigrant students, alongside an increasingly diverse range of languages represented within schools. Accordingly, a central interest of this discussion is to endorse professional standards encouraging teachers to engage in "instructional practice from the perspective of the culturally and linguistically diverse learner" (Chang et al., 2004, p. xi). Cultural, linguistic, and learning style differences are inherent to any student body and must therefore be inherently nurtured within education.

The educator who meets high competency standards in educational processes is one who is armed with the resources and knowledge to overcome impediments to learning. Philosophically speaking, rigidity is a wrong-headed approach to the nuanced task of implementing curriculum. Tompkins et al. (2007) provide a number of specific suggestions that may be applied to meet the dual challenge of addressing a collective of needs while allowing individual strengths to emerge through normal classroom activities.

Conclusion

The recurrent finding in this discussion, and thus a primary imperative driving an individualized educational philosophy, is that individual students require an atmosphere which nurtures rather than stymies their instincts for individualism and the informal creation of knowledge.