The Start…
Rhizomatic approaches to pedagogy have been the hidden cluster of thoughts in my approach to being a teaching and learning specialist. Nick Almond, a courageous and thought-provoking educator who was the Digital Learning Dean at LCF, opened up about what education could be and if it has the possibility to be something more.
The most affluent question or debate around his talks was ‘Risk’ and how grades affect risk and with that hold students back to provide their most potential in higher education institutes.
This leads me to my understanding and analysis of rhizomatic pedagogy and radical openness within higher education or in technical education. First I will start by siting an understanding of these concepts;
Rhizomatic pedagogy/learning:
“Rhizomatic learning uses the botanical metaphor of the rhizome to describe the complex and often messy nature of learning.”
The concept was partly informed by French thinkers of Post-structuralism Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. Which later gained traction from the development of Web 2.0 and the boom in online learning environments such as MOOC (massive open online courses).
Radical Openness learning:
“Radical openness demands the classroom be a space for relationships and dialogue. Far too many tools we’ve built for teaching are designed to make grading students convenient—or designed to facilitate the systematic observation of teachers by administrators”
“for me this place of radical openness is a margin- a profound edge. Locating oneself there is difficult yet necessary. It is not a ‘safe’ place. One is always at risk. One need a community of resistance.” Bell Hooks –
“For Hooks, the risks we talk about are personal, professional, and political. When she says “radical openness is a margin,” she suggests it is a place of uncertainty, a place of friction, a place of critical thinking” – Jesse Stommel (Link)
– I would say a crazy start to the journey, but something between these two approaches really pulls at my creative strings, is it learning about the risk factors of rhizomatic learning?
•‘epistemological risk’ – by following their own lines of inquiry, and creating their own curriculum, students may end up with a ‘warped perspective’ or ‘skewed understanding’
•‘practical risk’ – the students may not have the practical skills to cope with the open curriculum environment – skills such as self-organization – or the student might be over-dependent on the skills they have and not learn new skills
•‘ontological’. A risk to the learner’s ‘being’, i.e. a risk to their identity. This risk is ever-present. It is more than a practical consideration.
—
My observation is technical, I live and breathe technical construction methods in knitwear every day of the week, be it hand-knit or machine to digital practices. I transfer between both during projects, While machine knitting a quick session of hand knitting be it 15 minutes or 1 hour, allows me to think without being distracted by social media. It provides the internal quiet zone where I can reflect on what I’m doing or problem solving, and vice versa with hand-knitting, the machine allows me to think quickly to execute movements faster and build a relationship between my design and thoughts. Is my approach in practice rhizomatic? As long as I am questioning myself and my practice I feel that it is.
“A rhizomatic approach to fashion” Kevin J Hunt 2016 presented at NTU.
The Image visually describes rhizomatic learning to me: (LINK)
