I am continually amazed at the layers of knowing that exist within us and amongst us. I have been curious about this since I was a little girl. One of my first examples with this was watching a beaver movie when I was in first or second grade in the concrete basement of my elementary school building. The movie depicted beavers busy swimming, caring for their young, and building their dams accompained by lively music. I remember thinking about the hikes I had taken with my family, hikes where we spotted beaver dams, and the fact that I never realized all the life that was going on in and around those dams.
Throughout my grade school days, I was very curious about knowledge. It was a time when education was more about giving children information than focusing on their curiosity, questions and discussions. Yet, it was the educators, who were willing to deviate from the scripts to synthesize and tell stories that caught my attention. I often remark about my sixth grade teacher Mr. Quist's Vietnam stories--during the Vietnam War era, he told us stories from many perspectives about the war. Ms. Cawley, my high school history teacher, introduced me to history with the same storytelling/discussion methods. I was fortunate to learn history as part of a multi-teacher humanities program that included history, religion, language arts, art, music, and geography. It was a great way to understand the interrelatedness of topics and concepts. Later in college, I was similarly drawn to those interdisciplinary classes, and still today I enjoy looking at and wondering about the intersection and layers of knowledge and knowing.
I have taken a real interest in this Presidential election. I've read, listened to, and considered many articles, news stories, and points of view. The more I learn, the more I am aware of the multiple levels of knowledge that exist. For example, Amy Coney Barrett's nomination and appointment as a Supreme Court Judge prompted me to think and read a lot. So many leaders and people I respect did not support Barrett. Lessons from my grandmother and young life, also made me decide that she was not the right person and this was not the right time. Yet, lingering thoughts from my Catholic upbringing and my own personal beliefs related to abortion, truth, and depth of being and knowing kept me wondering about this decision. I reached out to read research and articles that a couple of my most conservative cousins are involved with. These cousins are people who have deep knowledge and scholarship related to ethics and medicine. While I tend to skirt the surface level of knowledge in multiple areas, they go very deep in their specific areas of study, work, and advocacy. As I read about their work, I found myself once again mired in the curiosity about levels of knowledge, and the reality that when you travel those levels to greater depth, your viewpoints and decisions are often challenged. Reading about my cousins' research and work last night, made me question my thoughts about Barrett's Supreme Court position. I will continue to think about this, read more, and watch how her judgeship plays out.
It is the truth that none of us can know it all, and it is also the truth that we have to think about knowledge levels with depth, interest, and a will to move ourselves and others towards a positive level of common knowlede and civil discourse and debate. How do we do that? Why is that important? How can we reckon with these varied levels of knowledge from sparse understanding to deep, complex knowing? In a time where knowledge is everywhere, how do we navigate our paths so that we are amassing foundations of good, true, productive knowledge?
How do we engage with one another with regard to knowledge disparity? Once a long time ago, I engaged in a political conversation at a party. I freely shared my thoughts. When I left the party, the guy I was with lambasted me saying, "You talked about ideas you don't understand." I was hurt, but since I didn't know the guy well, I didn't discuss the issue, but I thought a lot about it. During the conversation, I felt very confident about my viewpoints and knowledge on the topic, yet the person I was with thought I sounded stupid and unknowing. Thinking back, I know that the group were a radical group who worked on a progressive newspaper, a group that likely had deep knowledge about specific political events--events I only knew about, at the time, from reading newspaper articles and listening to the news so it's probable that I had a more surface level of knowledge for the topic, not the deeper level of facts and information they likely had.
A similar issue happened recently where I had deeper knowledge. Like most educators with long histories in the field, I've developed a strong knowledge base in the area of teaching young children. I've tried out many practices and have developed my experience and knowledge over many, many years. Recently, as some made decisions for virtual learning, it was clear that they did not understand new reserach and modern ways about successful learning. Their shallow level of knowledge related to my field, and the fact that they were making decisions for me, frustrated and worried me. To choose without knowing, in this situation, could lead to less meaningful and successful education for students as well as frustrating, undoable teaching mandates. In this situation, those making the decisions should have relied on the educators to make the decisions related to teaching and learning--they should have valued their knowledge.
When Amy Coney Barrett refused to answer many questions, I understood that. For her to answer some of those questions in ways that were understandable to the masses who don't understand the law would probably result in lots of misunderstand and problems. Yet, I fear that her lack of experience and knowledge of how so many Americans live, may hinder her ability to interpret the law for people and life today. We'll see.
What do you do about the layers of knowledge? Traditionally, people have gained depth of knowing in specific areas that they've chosen or been asked to know well, and then they maintain a good level of general knowledge via reading books and articles, staying abreast of the news, watching documentaries, attending lectures, researching, and conversing with others. It is advantageous to us to be lifelong learners who continue to educate ourselves, and I believe it is also advantageous to us to choose a few areas to invest in with greater depth and understanding--the world relies on experts to lead us in all fields, and to become an expert in any topic is valuable to oursevles and others.
We have to respect the levels of knowing that exist. With this respect, we have to be open to changing our minds as we learn more. For example, my conservative cousin who writes about issues related to humanity, ethics, abortion, and respect for life has done substantial research. As I looked at the journal she contributes to, I recognized that there is a lot of valuable information for me to read and consider as I think about my political beliefs and advocacy. We also have to invest in our own interest and areas of expertise so that we gain deep levels of knowing, the kind of knowing that helps us to do our jobs well, and we also have to reach out to the experts, know who they are, respect their investment in their expertise, learn from them, and evolve our advocacy, understanding, and decisions as we learn.
When I think of the layers of knowledge, I think of the beautiful layers of stone we see in canyons. We must all be conscious of this topic, a topic I'll continue to think about. Onward.