Why did I Write this Book?
Few would disagree with the generalization that “what we want to do in schooling is to prepare pupils for adult life” (O’Hear, 1981, p. 4), yet after 23 years teaching in secondary schools and 19 years as Principal of a Sixth Form College, I cannot but conclude that we are not very good at it. Leaving aside the regular (and often unjustified) criticism from the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) and local employers that too many students emerge without reliable basic skills in numeracy, literacy and technology, I would want to argue that of equal importance is the fundamental lack of preparation for taking marginal decisions in difficult circumstances where the outcome is not clear and the solution problematic. I believe that students need to learn to live with dilemmas, and this is the primary reason for writing this book.
It will be argued that there is no shortage of courses on critical thinking, materials on problem solving and “dilemmas” to discuss in the classroom. Books abound on contemporary problems; problem solving virtually begins in the reception class. But problems are not at all the same as dilemmas. Problems have solutions and disappear as soon as these are found. Dilemmas on the other hand leave you with an aftertaste and a sense of regret about the rejected alternative. I believe, therefore, that “Problem Based Learning” by itself does not adequately address this issue.
Secondly, there seems to be an increasing tendency amongst opinion leaders, from management consultants to religious fundamentalists, Heads of State to CEO’s to strut about the world, with all the sensitivity of a hippo in a house of cards, telling us that dilemmas are no more than problems awaiting the “right” solution (and they just happen to have it). Such people preach a utopian vision of moral clarity and solutions.
Apart from being infuriating, smug and irrelevant as guides in the real world, I believe such counsel (and the fact that you can pay through the nose for it makes it worse) is profoundly mistaken. It is also dangerous. It encourages simplistic dogmatic thinking, with judgmental attitudes towards those who disagree with you. It breeds fundamentalism and undermines democratic values.
On the contrary, the choice is not between a false liberalism, which teeters endlessly and indecisively, on the one hand, and a totalitarian certainty on the other. The alternative to tolerance and dither, is not unblinking dogmatism, it is a conclusion based on the knowledge that all human judgment is subject to error, that opponents can be confronted with conviction but without absolute condemnation. Voltaire’s lines are relevant: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” (Tallentyre, 1907, p. 199).
Thirdly, as I see it, the situation has been made worse by a conceptual misunderstanding about the nature and even the existence of dilemmas. This would appear to be based on the traditional philosophical argument that genuine dilemmas cannot exist in a rational world. It is suggested that, though we may feel that they exist, burden us, drown us even, in reality they are problems that require clarity of thought, difficulties that await a solution.
The same thinking would treat education as some sort of preparation for University Challenge, the Brain of Britain or the many factual panel shows. We expose students to problems that need solutions, and the faster the better, facts that require to be recalled under pressure of time and quick mental responses. It all adds up to a mismatch between the education that is provided and the world in which we have to survive, in effect a pedagogical failure.
Give students access to the pedagogic reasoning, uncertainties and dilemmas of practice that are inherent in understanding teaching as problematic. (Loughlan, 2006, p. 6)
Understanding the nature of dilemma is therefore crucial and establishing the common sense position that genuine dilemmas do in fact exist was important at the outset. Otherwise the whole edifice comes crashing down because its foundation is false; it is a house built on sand.
The main purpose of this book therefore is to establish a case for using what might be called “dilemma thinking” far more prominently than is the norm today as a pedagogic tool, at every level of education, rather than focusing predominantly on “problem solving”. So, in part this is a book about understanding the nature of genuine dilemmas and how essential it is to prepare for them during our school years if our education is to be effective. It has been written out of a longstanding interest in the way value judgments are decided and the process by which a choice is made between difficult alternatives.
Target Readership
The primary target is the teacher educator and all those involved in developing a pedagogy of teacher education. Also it is aimed at those on B.Ed. and Teacher Training Courses, trainees and Newly Qualified Teachers, as well as experienced teachers in secondary and post compulsory education. It is also relevant to students of philosophy, politics, ethics or religious studies; it should be of interest to leaders of adult discussion groups such as the University of the Third Age (U3A) and church leaders. The Dilemmas from Classical Literature (Appendix) would be useful at all levels of education, especially for Further Education students.
Navigating One’s Way
Those who wish to understand the nature of dilemma (how it differs from a problem, whether it is always accompanied by regret or guilt) and to see a suggested typology would best concentrate on Chapter 1. Those interested in the argument that genuine “dilemmas” do not really exist at all and are really “problems” with available solutions might turn to Chapter 2 to follow the traditional rationalist arguments for and against.
Chapter 3 will be mainly of interest to those seeking the opinions and attitudes of teachers themselves in Secondary Schools. It draws on a research project undertaken by a volunteer group of ten staff over two years, then a survey of sixty Heads of Department in ten post sixteen colleges and their reactions to the idea of including dilemma thinking in their examination courses. It also includes a study visit to the USA, which set out to discover what some of their “top schools” did to encourage critical thinking and problem solving amongst their “gifted and talented”. Chapter 4 seeks a basic justification for including dilemmas in the curriculum and would be of interest to those looking for an educational or philosophical rationale.
Three perspectives are then examined, the political (the so-called “dirty hands” dispute) the sociological and the psychological, which would be of special interest to those studying those subjects. Then, those interested in the positive outcomes of dilemma and how to live with marginal decisions will see some suggested coping strategies in Chapter 8. Finally, in the Appendix there is a list of well-known examples, taken from classical literature, which would be useful as an exercise at any level of education.
Learning to live with a marginal decision is one of the most important yet difficult lessons in life and to recognise and face dilemmas is an essential part of any job or career, whether in the office or in parliament, in the operating theatre or board room, within the family or in a war zone.
Far from exhibiting weakness, this attitude shows strength; it is arguably more defective to be blind to the views of opponents, unable to see both sides of an argument or insensitive to alternative strategies, than to be swiftly decisive, unmoved by other points of view. Those who train in leadership, and teachers in our schools and colleges, can sometimes concentrate so hard on being decisive, and on fast problem solving, that they quash the very ability to make an astute decision, or reach a perceptive solution in the first place.
… Good learners are emphatically not fast answerers …
Perhaps most importantly, good learners do not need to have an absolute, final irrevocable resolution to every problem. The sentence, “I don’t know”, does not depress them. (p. 42)