The Tale of Laertes: Double Whammy.

Laertes is in his late twenties when he enrols on the Access course. He had been allowed to leave school at fourteen for several reasons, he doesn’t read well, he did not enjoy the patriarchal system at school, got into trouble and became a school refuser. Finally the school let him leave, and he went to help in his Dad’s plastering business.

Endeavouring to acclimatise and enculturate him into the college milieu is a difficult task as he is not used to how to behave in an educational setting, this may be down to the bad experience and memories of school. He is good naturedly disruptive and constantly coming across our administrators for not conforming to ‘normal’ student protocols like arriving on time, staying the whole day and handing work in on time.

The tale of Laertes is that of a non-traditional route into FE, and is one we are familiar with on the Access course. The collaborative work we do with students talking through their educational expectations, goals and how to achieve them through study or sometimes other means, takes time and the building of trust and relationship. The Access course is a place to come at the beginning of an educational journey and some students realize at the end of the first year of study that, either art is not for them, education and its stipulations is not the right fit or it is the wrong time of life (family commitments like looking after a suddenly sick relative or a new baby) or a wellness issue (a personal mental or physical health breakdown) stops them studying. 

Laertes’ level of literacy was very low because of his historical patchy attendance at school and his refusal to sit any exams at GCSE. And yet his art practice was developing through the course to become good. The stumbling block was the written and critical elements of the course. As the weeks went on he became less engaged because of the need to complete critical annotations and art history and contextual studies sessions. In the end Laertes stopped coming to class and eventually dropped out, taking Juno a female student with him, after they had begun a relationship. He did not complete and by extension she did not complete either.  Double whammy.

Biesta (2014) and Felding’s studies (2005) on Community of Inquiry show that there has to be a meeting in the middle, the opportunity to get involved is provided but the students who don’t engage for whatever reason, bad experience in the past and trust issues don’t benefit from a collaborative democratisation of the classroom (Broadhead and Gregson 2017). Or is it that the seed has been sown? Ideas and new experiences of positive educational understandings mean that students like Laertes may try again. Access students who drop out mid-term will very often return next academic year to complete the qualification.

Bibliography
Biesta, G. J. J., (2014) The Beautiful Risk of Education, Oxon, Paradigm Books, Routledge.
Broadhead, S and Gregson, M (2017) Practical Wisdom and Democratic Education, Phronesis, Art and Non Traditional Students, London, Palgrave Macmillan.
Fielding, M. et al (2005) Factors influencing the transfer of good practice, London: DfES, Research Brief No RB615.
http://www.et-foundation.co.uk/research/joint-practice-development/




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ReViewing BlackMountain College 2024