When trying to educate in the
right way, one of the things we
can and probably should do is follow
good practice, or ‘best practice’ as it is
called in common parlance. By this I
mean practice that is thought to be both
effective and ethically sound, usually
based on traditional wisdom or academic
research. In the context of education
this constitutes the approaches to teaching,
management, and school support
that get the job done effectively in a way
that is morally good. It is good practice
both in instrumental and in ethical terms.
Yet, when we study what happens
when education is truly good, for example
through phenomenological research or,
more informally, through the kind of
enquiry Krishnamurti spoke about, we
find that a lot happens in our relationships
that is neither described in
accounts of good practice nor seen to
originate in the practice itself. What is
more, when we come into contact with
that other dimension of the relationship,
a dimension that is beyond the practice,
we may well experience it as much more significant than what happens at the
level of the mechanics of good practice.
Let us call this other dimension of
the relationship ‘the space of inner consciousness’.
We experience this space
when we are interacting with others
and with nature, and also when we are
in a state of meditation. To the extent
that our relationships are formed in this
space, they appear to have a deeper
ground than our reactions of like and
dislike, our emotional responses, our
specific actions, and the ideas we may
hold. The essence of our relationships
appears to be deeper than practice. For
example, good practice may describe
the kinds of listening skills a good
teacher or school manager needs to
display, such as making eye-contact,
being genuinely engaged, and showing
they have understood and taken on
board what is being said. But, however
good the practice, it may still not be
good at the inner level of consciousness
because good practice in itself is no
guarantee that the relationship is good
at the level that matters most. Likewise, the school community will only be a
true community (as opposed to a tribe,
a faction, a sect, or an interest group) if
it is based on a sense of connectedness
at the level of inner consciousness,
which is different from the kinds of
cohesion that come out of teambuilding
exercises. This is like the light
emitted from a lantern through the
cracks in the paper, perhaps forming a
star or a smiley face. This light does not
originate in the paper that shapes it like
a face or a star, but comes from inside
the lantern. In the same way, the goodness
that may manifest in our practices
does not originate in these practices, but
in the space of inner consciousness.
And yet it also seems important
that we seek out ‘best practices’. As a
teacher, I know I need to adopt the best
methodology I can find, just as the
cook needs to make the healthiest food,
and the head of department ought to
develop the best possible management
practice that responds to given needs. So
how can best practice and good practice
be reconciled? Here, I will explore my
understanding of inner consciousness
and its essential nature, and try to
suggest the ways in which it might
manifest (or not) in the practices of an
educational community.
The first thing we can say about the
space of inner consciousness is that there
are no divisions within it. It is whole.
Therefore, teaching and organizational practices should reflect its undivided
nature. The school community that
best reflects this would not have factions
and divisions, insiders and outsiders,
favourites and those whose presence is
merely tolerated. Where there is functional
differentiation between different groups
and individuals, this separation is only
for practical purposes and the overall
atmosphere should be inclusive. Among
all those involved in the school there
needs to be a sense that inwardly there is
only one consciousness of which all
individuals are part, and this needs to be
reflected in the spirit of the school and
in the way the organization is run. And
this sense of oneness should extend to
the animals, plants, and nature in and
around the school. Aiming for such a sense
of inclusiveness is, therefore, not merely
good for effectiveness or productivity; it
is a way of basing relationships on the
understanding that the space of inner
consciousness is undivided.
Another characteristic of the space
of inner consciousness is that, in it, all
living beings exist as much for their
own sake as for their relationship with
others. So the practices we adopt should
emphasize the value of each individual,
and reflect a sense of equality rather
than hierarchy, without ignoring the
different responsibilities that come with
different roles. The ability to meet
another human being without hiding
behind either a superior or subordinate status can be hard, as it may make us
feel exposed and vulnerable. But it is
important that we aim to do so, because
it has deeper significance at a level that
really matters that we acknowledge that
all are worthy in themselves and none
more worthy than the other.
What is more, the space of inner
consciousness is essentially transparent.
So if we want our practices to reflect
this, it requires openness to questioning
and listening with a truly open mind to
those who voice concerns. While our
capacity for honesty may be limited
by how transparent our thoughts and
feelings are to ourselves, we should be
as honest as we can be. Hidden agendas
on the part of the teacher, backroom
deal making on the part of the management,
a secret disregard for the school’s
stated aims, all these undermine the
striving towards good practice.
Related to this is trust and a sense
of security. This means that, where
management practices are arbitrary or
teacher behaviour is erratic, it becomes
much more difficult for individuals to
truly connect with themselves and
each other. Ultimately, there may never
be genuine trust and security so long as
we feel compelled to operate only for
our self-interest. To encourage individuals
to take this step into the space of
inner consciousness, it helps if we adopt
educational and organizational practices that are not only inclusive and transparent,
but also trustworthy and which
promote a sense of security for all.
Further, in the space of inner consciousness,
who we are and what we
do matters absolutely—not in the sense
of being measurable or countable in
comparative terms—but in the sense of
each of us existing in a way that is not
relative to others’ perspectives, aims or
desires. And this means that the practices
we adopt should allow all involved to
take initiative and to have the contributions
they make acknowledged, from
the youngest to the oldest, from the
headmistress to the person doing the
lowest-paid job. Our classrooms and
communities should be places where
every individual has a voice, and all are
seen to count.
If we consider it carefully, there is
only one inner realm of consciousness.
There is only one world and our practices
should reflect this. Maintaining a deep
and sustained connection with the
natural world is essential. Even if we
distance ourselves from commonly
followed practices in the rest of human
society and for pragmatic reasons thus
isolate ourselves, the individual or the
community cannot separate themselves,
in spirit, from the world around.
Indeed, a teacher who refuses to be open
to learning from others at a deeper level,
may well be bound to repeat the worst of educational practices that he might
have sought to isolate himself from.
Similarly, a community that retreats
into a psychological bubble of selfabsorption
may well eventually be
absorbed by the world around it,
altogether losing its uniqueness. There
is only one world, and all of it is part of
the natural world, and our practices
should reflect this.
The more we come into contact
with the realm of inner consciousness,
the more we may find that it has no
boundaries. This means that the greatest
results come from those practices that
take their point of reference not in
well-defined worldly goals, but are the
manifestation of the goodness that
originates in the space of inner consciousness.
This is not to say that we
should, for example, refuse to pass exams
or be financially viable as an organization.
Nor does it mean that we should
not bother to support those in need or
be involved in nature conservation.
Rather, it means that passing exams,
being financially viable, supporting
charities, and protecting wildlife should
happen in the service of manifesting
this quality of goodness. This good
may then spread in unexpected ways,
because the unbounded nature of the
inner realm knows much better than we
ever can how to find the cracks in the
paper that make the lantern shine.
As we make the demand on ourselves
to combine best practice with
relationships that are based in inner
consciousness, the space for education
opens up. Then the demands of good
practice are ones we can and should
make on the students, to the extent that
their age and level of maturity allows.
Then students may learn to treat all as
worthy of respect, including themselves,
their teachers, support staff and
fellow students; they may learn that
animals and nature are just as much
part of the whole and valuable in
their own right; they may learn not to
form factions amongst themselves or be
antagonistic towards the staff; they may
learn to be transparent in their being
and not hide parts of themselves; they
may learn not to become self-absorbed
or tribal in their outlook; they may learn
to trust and be trustworthy; they may
have the manifestation of the good in
mind even as they study for their exams
and prepare for a role in society; and
they may understand that it matters
absolutely who they are and what they
do. Ultimately it means that we will
have opened up a space for the student
to learn that who they are, in absolute
terms, is not their outward persona but
the one they are at the level of inner
consciousness—undivided, transparent,
valuable in their own right, trusting
and trustworthy, one with the whole of
existence, and unbounded in who they
can be at that inner level.