Filling the God-Shaped Hole: a Qualitative Study of Spirituality and Public High School Teachers

FILLING THE GOD-SHAPED HOLE: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF SPIRITUALITY AND PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS

A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College of Graduate School of Education Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Karen S. Berger Drotar

December 2011

A dissertation written by

Karen S. Berger Drotar

B.S., Kent State University, 1980

M.Div., United Theological Seminary, 1984

Ph.D., Kent State University, 2011

Approved by

______, Director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Natasha Levinson

______, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Averil McClelland

______, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Donna Martsolf

Accepted by

______, Director, School of Foundations, Leadership, Shawn M. Fitzgerald and Administration

______, Dean, College and Graduate School of Daniel F. Mahony Education, Health, and Human Services

iii

BERGER DROTAR, KAREN S., Ph.D., December 2011 Foundations, Leadership, and Administration

FILLING THE GOD-SHAPED HOLE: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF SPIRITUALITY AND PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS (239 pp.)

Director of Dissertation: Natasha Levinson, Ph.D.

This research explored the personal understanding of spirituality of 14 high school teachers and how their sense of spirituality influenced the ways in which they interacted with their students. Using the method of Qualitative Description, data were collected in individual interviews with each of the teachers and their responses were categorized. None of the participants was known by the researcher prior to the interview, including their spiritual or religious backgrounds or practices. In addition to the interviews, field notes and a reflective journal added to the understanding and the analyses of the data.

Teachers were able and willing to discuss their personal spirituality, how it related to religion, and how they navigated the mandates of the separation of church and state in the public high school setting. The major categories discovered in the conversations with the teachers regarding the ways spirituality influenced their teaching were in their relationships with students and in their acts and roles of nurturing. Within the major category of nurturing, teachers spoke about respect, kindness and caring, accountability, altruism, self-reflection, guidance, motivation, creating safety, counseling, modeling, openness, and compassion. Teachers also discussed their perceptions of calling to be teachers. An additional layer was discovered in the teachers’ responses related to caring

for their students; it was not enough that teachers simply cared, but it was also important

that students knew that they cared.

Among these participants, spirituality was described as an important and active

part of their teaching; yet, teachers noted that the discussion of spirituality and public

education was not something they experienced in teacher education or in their schools.

Several threads for further research are noted. One of the unintended limitations

of the project was the demographic make-up of the participants. Further research could select participants with more diversity regarding race, ethnicity, and religious background. Another area to explore relates to the importance that students need to know that teachers care. This category revealed that some of the teachers in this study believed that many of their students’ home environs were lacking in guidance and support. This may merit further exploration.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to acknowledge my gratitude to the Kent State University College of

Graduate School of Education, Health, and Human Services for the many opportunities

that have been afforded me. I am especially appreciative of the faculty and staff in

Cultural Foundations for the knowledge imparted, the guidance given, and the care

shown to me during my schooling.

I am indebted to my Dissertation Committee: Dr. Natasha Levinson, Dr. Averil

McClelland, Dr. Donna Martsolf, and Dr. Donald Bubenzer for their guidance, patience,

support, and inspiration from the beginning of this inquiry to its temporary conclusion.

Dr. Levinson and Dr. McClelland were my first teachers in Cultural Foundations and the ways in which they have taught me have always been challenging, inspiring, and unsettling enough to make me want to dig in deeper.

I acknowledge with great appreciation the 14 high school teachers who were

willing to submit to the interview process and who were candid and inspiring in what

they had to say. Their time, their talent, and their willingness to talk about things that are

not often discussed, have allowed me to add their voices to the literature and to my life.

I am deeply appreciative of the talents of Patty Sontag and Kenna Roberts for the

painstaking work they did on the transcriptions of the interviews for this study. Kenna

Roberts not only did the lion’s share of the transcribing but lent help in numerous ways

throughout the production of this final document. I thank Laura Mullen for her invaluable

help and counsel as I worked through the interview transcripts and made sense of what

the teachers told me. Her insight and support made the process one of joy.

I wish to thank my family of faith: mentors, parishioners, and friends who have

traveled this journey with me and have encouraged me, commiserated with me, and

prayed for me. I remember with gratitude my first spiritual mentors, the late Reverends

Hobart Johnson, Ted Mayer, and Carl Pierson. Their wise words, laughter, and love

continue to warmly fill my memory. And I thank my dear friends, Tara Jackson, Kristi

Price, and Nancy Brittain for being with me in all and through all. I also wish to thank

Dr. Moshe Torem for his constant support and wise counsel.

If it takes a village to raise a child, it certainly takes a family to complete a

dissertation and I could not have done this work without the incredible love and support

of my wonderful family. My late parents, Barbara Berger and Dr. Kenneth Berger,

instilled in me the wonder of life-long learning. They have supported me in all of my personal, professional, and educational endeavors in innumerable ways and I am a grateful child. My siblings, Robert Berger, Kenna Roberts, and Laura Mullen, have been beside me through all and have never ceased to lend their help, their support, and their unconditional love. They are amazing and triumphant people who still let me be their little sister when needed. I have also been blessed with nephews and nieces who have encouraged me and inspired me throughout this journey. My extended family, both those who still walk beside me and those who hover near in spirit, are sources of strength and understanding. I thank them all.

Life is typically not easy for a pastor’s kid and it is equally difficult to be the child of a doctoral student. My daughter, Elisabeth, has always been my delight and my motivation to keep going through times of light as well as times of great darkness. Her

faith and her centeredness have always astounded me, and I know I could never do what I

do or be who I am without her. Her wife, Liz, and the grandchildren Liz has brought into my life, Samantha and Scott, have added so much to my life and I am living in gratitude every day for each of them.

Finally, I express my deepest gratitude to my husband, Tom. He is a man of strong faith, great sense, and unconditional love. Our life together has been filled with the most significant moments I have experienced and I am so blessed to have experienced them with him.

This work is dedicated to my family.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... iv

LIST OF TABLES ...... ix

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Studying Spirituality in Public Education...... 6 The Problem and Its Importance ...... 8

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ...... 11 Understanding Spirituality ...... 13 Spirituality and Religion ...... 19 Religion in Public Schools ...... 23 The Lack of Connection in Public Schools...... 32 Students and Spirituality ...... 40 Teachers and Spirituality ...... 44 Making Spiritual Connections in Public Schools ...... 48 Critical Literature ...... 53

III. RESEARCH METHODS ...... 66 Research Questions and Guiding Questions ...... 71 Recruitment of Participants...... 73 Ethics ...... 80 Participants ...... 82 Data Collection ...... 87 Data Analysis ...... 90 Trustworthiness ...... 97

IV. BEGINNING WITH RELIGION ...... 105 Spirituality and Religion ...... 106 Church and State ...... 121

V. NURTURING AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY ...... 132 Respect, Kindness, and Caring ...... 134 Accountability ...... 139 Altruism ...... 142 Self-Reflection ...... 143 Guidance ...... 148 Motivation ...... 152 vii

Safety ...... 155 Counseling ...... 158 Modeling ...... 161 Openness ...... 163 Compassion ...... 166

VI. A CALLING TO CARE ...... 178 Making Spiritual Connections ...... 179 The Spirituality of Being Called to Teach ...... 189 They Need to Know That I Care ...... 198

VII. CONCLUSION ...... 207 Limitations ...... 217 Further Research ...... 219

APPENDICES ...... 222 APPENDIX A. INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPLICATION FORM ...... 223 APPENDIX B. IRB RENEWAL/CONTINUATION OF APPROVAL ...... 225 APPENDIX C. CONSENT FORM ...... 227

REFERENCES ...... 229

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Participant and School Information ...... 83

2. Participants’ Responses to Religion, Spirituality, and Church and State ...... 107

3. Areas of Perceived Spiritual Expression ...... 133

4. Participants’ Responses to Making Spiritual Connections, Spirituality of Being Called to Teach, and They Need to Know I Care ...... 179

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

As I look back over my career choices and experiences, I see that many of these have come together to contribute to my present study. Growing up in Kent, Ohio, in the

1960s and 1970s provided a particular canvas for my life. My family was connected to the university and very involved in our church. Our church was in mission to the university; we not only participated in literally building the first structure, but we participated in building the ministry. As a child I attended worship with my family as well as Sunday School, choir, and special groups. I was involved in the strong ecumenical movement that embraced Christians of several denominations in the town.

Bible study and prayer were practiced in my home. I was taught the doctrines of our denomination and exposed to those of other Christian groups.

As I entered adolescence, the university and town were rocked by demonstrations against the Viet Nam War and the ultimate tragedy of the May 4, 1970, shootings on campus. The effects of these events on my church, family, community, and spiritual life remain indelible. Unlike current community crises, when counselors are called in to work with young people, we were left alone to deal with some very painful and profound feelings and questions. I had a searching soul that was not untouched with harsh criticism, cynicism, and sarcasm even when it came to matters of religious faith. I was the first person in my family for several generations to decline confirmation in the church. I struggled with the dogma and doctrines of the church to which I would have had to pledge my allegiance. The system failed the innate spiritual awareness that I had

1 2 and I could not find peace between the two. And so, from a fairly young age, I felt a tension between what might be labeled “religion” and “spirituality.” I did not see them as dichotomy but as constructs that were related and yet not the same. I spent time struggling with this.

As an undergraduate I majored in special education and had plans to use that degree as a domestic missionary. The program I was hoping to enter would assign me to a two-year commitment in the United States serving a school that was considered at-risk.

Growing up in a religious family, I felt that I wanted to use my skills and passion to serve others. My parents had taught me to use three criteria when choosing a profession. I should choose something I enjoyed, something that could support me financially, and something that would serve God. As I explored the mission program I became interested in theology and philosophy and chose electives in those areas. I met regularly with a retired minister in the community, who introduced me to modern theologians and we spent hours talking about their writings and my questions.

Gradually, I felt a need to go further and I decided to pursue a degree at United

Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio. I did not know where such training would lead me professionally; but I went and I studied, I learned, I asked more questions, and I demanded more of my faith. I went through the ordination process, and after earning a

Master of Divinity degree, I worked as a hospital chaplain and then as a parish minister in the United Methodist Church.

As I think about those experiences, several observations come into focus. First, most of what I did in ministry was grounded in teaching. It occurred in various settings

from pulpit to classroom, bedside to graveside, living rooms to retreat centers, parking

lots to soup kitchens. Second, the content of what I was asked to teach, counsel, respond

to, or comment on rarely involved issues of church doctrine and practice, but rather, basic

life questions. People rarely called on me to clarify Robert’s Rules of Order or quote the

United Methodist Discipline. They often wanted to know what they should do in a particular circumstance, or why something was happening to them, or what purpose they could find in a tragedy or a blessing. They wanted to know if it was possible to love someone who had hurt them deeply, or how they could find peace after doing something that had caused division in their family or within themselves.

I found that there is a place for learning what “we” believe and what “we” do as followers of a particular doctrine of religion, and that is often an important and honorable pursuit. There are also life questions and quests that arise beyond particular belief systems that call us to connections beyond ourselves and between ourselves, and that we need to be prepared for that kind of self-examination and that kind of dialogue with life.

Exploring exegesis, or theodicy, or liberation theology were wonderful exercises but there was something beyond those calibrations, or maybe something more within them, that needed to happen. When “it” happened I knew it and I could feel it. The connection could be palpable. The lack of connection could be just as palpable.

When I found myself taking classes at Kent State University in 1998, and then teaching undergraduates and eventually a few graduate classes in Cultural Foundations of

Education, I was moved by how similar the university work was to my work in the church, particularly in the areas of learning and teaching. I could learn the lessons and

4 teach the curriculum. I could cover the chapters. I could take tests and give them. I could write papers and grade them. But there was something beyond all of those things that needed to happen. When “it” happened I knew it and could feel it as both student and teacher. The connection could be palpable. The lack of connection could be just as palpable.

As a student and as a teacher I have experienced success and failure. I have studied with professors who have made a lasting contribution to my life and some who have not. I have taught classes that have influenced students’ choices and lives in positive ways and I have taught classes that have not. What makes the difference? It was more than content knowledge, organization, methods, and creativity. Those things are all critical, but they are not enough. As I have thought about the best of what I have experienced, it seems to be marked by presence and connection. Those places in my life where I have been able to bring my whole-self: body, mind, and spirit, and have been able to bond myself with the Other and others, are the places and circumstances that have brought the most meaning and success in my life as both learner and teacher.

Some doctoral students come to their programs knowing exactly what they want to study and research. I was not one of them. Cultural Foundations was an academic buffet for me, and I was hungry to take it all in. I was fascinated by history, philosophy, multiculturalism, diversity, ethics, and sociology. I “tried on” many threads of inquiry through my course work and was often motivated to study the areas of interest of my professors. There were so many possibilities and I felt engaged by a variety of interests

but I struggled to find the one that was my own, the one that was inside me, the one for

which I felt the level of passion that would sustain me throughout a major project.

I kept returning to the idea of connectedness and questioned what this sense of

connection meant. Connected to what? Connected to whom? How are connections

made and how are they broken?

These queries inspired me to embark on an exploration. I had, of course, learned

a lot about the whole-self of students. From my earliest readings of John Dewey to the

most contemporary literature in educational psychology, teachers are alerted to the fact

that children come to school and bring with them, not only their mind, body, and spirit,

but also the culture of their family, their community, and when present, their religion. If

schools received the whole-child, I wondered if the classroom also received the whole-

teacher. Did teachers also bring their whole-selves into the classroom? This question led

me to a literature on spirituality and education.

I began with a hunch about the disconnect; that it might, in part, be related to spirituality, and read further into the literature on spirituality, which was growing and

insightful. However, as I read, I noticed something interesting: an absence of teacher

voices and perspectives. I started to wonder how teachers understand the spiritual dimension of spirituality in their work in teaching. I was not necessarily interested in the perspectives of teachers who were known to have an obvious sense of spirituality or religious perspective. I wanted to understand what typical teachers had to say about their

understanding of the concept of spirituality and the ways in which spirituality might enter

the classroom.

So, while I started out with a concern about disconnection in public education, I

did not set out in this study to prove that spirituality was an answer to that disconnect. I did, however, discover many ways that teachers see spirituality as an enriched form of connection with their students. Far from there being a spiritual disconnect, there are teachers who are connecting with students and understand that connection as part of a spiritual relationship. While the literature and the teachers acknowledged a sense of disconnect in schooling, my findings indicate that the teachers understood that connecting with students was a large part of what they do and the teachers in this study understood this aspect of their work to be spiritual or have a spiritual dimension.

I found the literature about religion, spirituality, and education engaging and it took me to an area of teaching that I had been struggling to understand. As I read on, I found some kindred spirits, but I also found writings that challenged me and some with which I disagreed. I understood the struggle in the literature to define spirituality because, in many ways, it defies definition, although it can be described. Many of the authors made me think, helped me develop my understanding of spirituality, and helped me find my voice and a language, so that I could not only participate in the discussion, but also invite the teachers in my study to participate in the discussion.

Studying Spirituality in Public Education

Just as the ideas of connection led me to a body of literature, the idea of studying

spiritual connectedness led me to my approach for this investigation. To research such

things from afar certainly did not make sense. As the topic for my study began to take

shape, I knew that I wanted to talk to people who were not only experiencing spiritual

7 connections, but who were also making them. I wanted to begin a conversation with the people whose voice seemed to be missing in the literature. This led me to the idea of interviewing teachers, and the teachers I was interested in were public school teachers.

On the following pages I present the ways in which this study took form, a review of the literature, and the methods I used to conduct my research. What I found in the course of my research fell into three broad categories and these categories are explored in distinct chapters. In each, I present what teachers said to me and how I made sense of what they said to me. The three general categories offered are: Beginning with Religion,

Nurturing as Spiritual Activity, and A Calling to Care.

My first category, Beginning with Religion, is so placed, because this is where my conversations with teachers began. My initial question to them was to ask them to describe how they understood their personal sense of spirituality. Without prompting, most of the teachers described first the relationship between how they understood their spirituality and their religion or their religious roots. This conversation often led to comments on the ways they viewed and navigated issues of church and state in the domain of public education.

The second broad category, Nurturing as Spiritual Activity, was central in the teachers’ remarks and holds a place of centrality in these findings. After teachers described their sense of what the spiritual is, they spoke of how spirituality manifests itself in their teaching. Their many examples of this reflected the ways in which they nurture their students.

The third broad category, A Calling to Care, represents the ways in which teachers spoke of the spiritual nature inherent in their call to teach and care about their students. They described the ways their students knew that they cared about them.

These findings and how I eventually made sense of them led me to some developing conclusions and some possibilities for further research. Even if one has some inkling, at the onset of an investigation such as this, a researcher never knows where the data will lead. This was certainly true for me. Beyond the details of what the teachers told me and aside of the many categories and subcategories of data that evolved, probably the most important thing I learned is that the teachers I interviewed had something to say and it was a privilege to listen to them.

The Problem and Its Importance

The general awareness, that whole-self presence and connection to other was present and active in teaching and learning, seemed important: I wondered if I could study it and how I might study it. As I read about public education and listened to students, pre-service teachers, teachers, and others in education, I learned about educational success and failure. There was discussion about technology, progressive programs, testing, accountability, charter schools, the socio-economic divide, enthusiasm, co-learning, funding, diversity, retention, safety, frustration, and fear. Educators weigh and juggle enormous issues: then they teach or they do not teach. Students learn or they do not learn. When I looked at the classrooms that worked and the ones that did not work, the sense of bringing one’s whole-self and being willing, or invited, to connect

with others appeared to make the difference. These elements seemed to be the sinews

that brought together academic subject and personal meaning to both teacher and student.

In order to study the connection as well as the disconnection, it needed to be named. From the beginning of my inquiry I knew the name was “spirituality” but I balked at the word. I was concerned about the relationship of spirituality with religion.

Religion plays an important role in public education. Religion is a significant part of culture. It has been the keeper of history. It has been the power behind geography and science. It has been an inspiration of painters, poets, and musicians. The history of the world’s religions is our history, for better and for worse. Religion has also been a tool of oppression and ignorance. It has been the source of much controversy, particularly in the last 60 years as our country has struggled to find boundaries and balance in the separation of church and state as they relate to public schooling. I was concerned that spirituality might be perceived as religion dressed-up or dressed-down. Some may view spirituality as a backdoor to proselytizing or as a watered down version of religious belief.

On the other hand, there is a beauty and sense of freedom in the word

“spirituality” as it relates to public education because it is so uncommon in the typical discourse. It sparks a curiosity, whether one of intrigue or skepticism, that welcomes dialogue.

I was encouraged when I found writings about spirituality in public education that were thoughtful and challenging. Authors have begun to describe spirituality and define it as it relates to education. But as Marshall (2009) noted, “The research on spirituality in teaching has been fairly recent and has tended to be philosophical and theoretical rather

10 than empirical” (p. 27). My own study of the literature has borne this out. While philosophical, theoretical, and experiential writings and reflections can be quite helpful in shaping the discussion, few empirical studies exist in the growing body of literature.

When it comes to spirituality in education, we have not thoroughly studied what happens and how it happens.

I want to know how ordinary public school teachers experience spirituality and how their sense of spirituality might be experienced in the classroom. To this end I began to review the literature and develop a plan to interview public school teachers about spirituality in education.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Since its creation, the public school system has experienced constant reform to

respond to the emerging issues and needs of students, teachers, parents, administrators,

and the community. A Nation at Risk (National Committee on Excellence in Education,

1984) was a wakeup call over 25 years ago. The report not only outlined problems but possible solutions to those problems. It ushered in an era of viewing and labeling

students and schools as being “at risk.” Students, who are at risk, exhibit a variety of

behavioral and psychological problems. Schools that are at risk exhibit high dropout

rates and declining test scores. The school system in the United States is large and

complicated partially because education is not a national system but is run by each

individual state, which chooses curriculum and dictates funding. Exceptions to this

constitutional mandate for state responsibility are more recent federal reform acts, most

notably, The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Gory, 2009).

Behind many of the fads in education as well as true reforms are concerns that our

public education system is not working. Some believe that school funding should be awarded locally, not by district or state, so that teachers and other local stakeholders, who are in the best position to understand their problems and possible solutions, can enact change. Others support the infusion of funds to schools in order to decrease class size, attract more qualified teachers, and secure better resources for instruction. Some have suggested expanding the curriculum because we are in a new age of technology and communication. Children should be prepared for the world they are about to enter.

11 12

Others see a need for discipline and order to return to the school and believe that

zero-tolerance is a way to improve the schools so that education can take place. Others

see the need for culturally relevant pedagogy that engages students from ethnocentric

communities as well as a need to recruit teachers with more culturally diverse

backgrounds. Still others are interested in returning to a curriculum of life skills, in the

spirit of John Dewey, because students do not seem to have the basic skills needed to

participate in a democratic society (Antrop-Gonzales, 2006; Galluzzo, 2011, Gory, 2009;

Noell & Gansle, 2009).

There is also a growing voice that identifies the issue as one of spiritual connection and disconnection in our society. Amid all our occupation and preoccupation with addressing the many tasks at hand, we may have forgotten our basic spiritual needs, which are ontological, psychological, and sociological (Mayes, 2001). During the last several decades our society has sought out spirituality, in both traditional forms and non-traditional forms, but we have often failed to sustain the pursuit. We have experienced a disconnect between our inner and outer voices and are searching for a connection to ourselves and to something higher than ourselves (Iannone & Obenauf,

1999). We have forgotten, or might believe that we do not have the time, to incorporate in our education the ideals that allow students and teachers to include, or even invite, their sense of spirituality into the classroom as part of their personal perspective and as a vital part of education.

As the Western world has moved from modernity to post-modernity there is a renewed interest in spirituality. This rising interest is not necessarily one of formal

religion but rather a search for a paradigm that is inclusive of universal values as well as

a wide range of beliefs and points of view that are held by societies that are becoming

more diverse (Nash, 2002). While there are connections between religion and spirituality, not all formal religion is spiritual nor does one have to hold membership in an institutional religion in order to be spiritual or pursue spirituality (Mayes, 2001).

In this literature review I begin by exploring how the literature describes the

meaning of spirituality and how spirituality is related to religion, and give an overview of

the ways in which religion positions itself in public schools. I examine how spirituality is

viewed by educators and education theorists as a critical component of education as well

as an important part of the response that teachers can embrace to answer the issues of

disconnection and connection in public schools. I then offer viewpoints regarding

students, teachers, and spirituality and present ways in which spiritual connections are

made in public schools. Finally, I present some of the national and international

contributions to the research of spirituality and education. This literature lays the

groundwork for examining spirituality in public education in the United States as well as

the necessity for capturing the voices of teachers, who are addressing these issues as they

interact with their students on a daily basis.

Understanding Spirituality

In reviewing various discussions on the meaning of spirituality in human service

professions, a few key words and ideas seem to repeat themselves in the works of various

authors. One of the major threads in understanding spirituality is that of transcendence.

Transcendence refers to the acknowledgment that there is someone and/or something

beyond self. The “someone” is most often referred to as a Higher Power, God, Allah, the

Ultimate, or Creator. The “something” is often acknowledged as a greater good that

cannot be accomplished alone.

A second major thread that is associated with transcendence is the idea of the

spiritual connection. While this connection may be related to a Higher Power, it is

equally important that it be made with other people and in some cases other creatures,

living things, or even inanimate entities.

A third thread relates to the individual’s journey, both within self and beyond self.

Self-reflection or examination is necessary and it requires both time and space.

Spirituality then, is at its essence relational. It connects one to something or someone beyond self, to others and to the self.

Understanding spirituality is a challenging process for several reasons. Language itself, with its finite terms, may limit the ability to describe spirituality. Spirituality is layered; it connects to people in multiple ways; it is seen and unseen; and it can manifest itself in ways that are experienced and yet difficult to describe. Trying to define spirituality can result in oversimplification or overly complicated explanations. A few sentences may be too basic, whereas, on the other hand, authors have dedicated whole works to definitions that are complex and challenging to sort out.

Another issue that arises in the discussion of spirituality is in confusing words and ideas that have traditionally been used to discuss both religion and spirituality, for example, “faith” and “belief.” Yet another concern is in the baggage certain relationships might carry. When associating spirituality with religion, the memory of all that is

negative about religion may be associated with spirituality. On the other hand,

spirituality can be seen as watered-down religion or stealth-religion or worse, a Trojan horse for religious indoctrination: each scenario carrying criticisms and warnings. In addition, even though spirituality is defined in relationship, it is also individual and personal. To understand spirituality one must be able to make peace with disparate ideas, or at the very least, live with the tension that the idea of spirituality is somewhat elusive.

Finally, due to the fact that spirituality, especially as it relates to education, is an emerging field of discussion, there may be an over abundance of definitions and descriptions as authors attempt to clarify the topic (Kessler, 1999; Palmer, 1998;

Shahjahan, 2004). As challenging as it may be to define and understand spirituality, there is a growing body of literature that attempts to clarify spirituality as a concept in general and as a concept in education more specifically.

The root word, “spirit,” in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek originally meant “breath” and referred to the state of being alive. As human beings have breath, they have life.

Insofar as God is seen as Spirit, God has breathed life into creation and is the power behind life (Buechner, 1973; Strong, 1890).

There is a presence of energy and breath in the understanding of spirituality and there are examples of everyday language that utilize this concept for example: being in high or low spirits, getting spirited away, and team spirit. Such phrases imply energy and vital force either within a person or beyond. While spirit may be hidden in the sense of human and divine energy, the results of spirit are visible by the things spirit produces such as creativity, thoughtful words and actions, and life itself (Slater, 2005). Spirituality

16 is felt connection. This connection is characterized by engagement with self, others, nature, and God (Bellous & Csinos, 2009).

Spirituality is the energy that fosters connectedness within the individual, between the individual and others, and between the individual and their Higher Power.

Spirituality is a common human trait and because it can transcend religious doctrine, it is compatible with public education. The universality of spirituality can be enhanced and fostered in public education (J. P. Miller, 2000; Slater, 2005).

In their development of the Spiritual Orientation Inventory in the area of psychology, Elkins, Hedstrom, Hughes, Leaf, and Saunders (1988) also commented on spirituality as “breath of life,” and pointed out that spirituality is a particular way of experiencing the transcendent dimension of life that not only relates to the Ultimate, but also values others, nature, and self. Spirituality is an awareness of the connections of life and the values that are inherent in those connections.

Elkins and his co-authors (1988) named the components of spirituality discovered in their research. These components include: a transcendent dimension, a search for meaning and purpose in life, a belief that life is sacred, a sense of mission in life, an appreciation for but not an ultimate satisfaction in material possessions, a sense of altruism, a sense of idealism, an awareness of tragic realities in human life, and discernable fruits or benefits upon relationships.

Dyson, Cobb, and Forman (1997) also identified transcendence as a component in understanding spirituality. They acknowledged that spirituality is characterized by the relational, which includes one’s relationship with self, others, and God. As relationships

17 inform or lead to a sense of meaning in life, they become central indicators of spirituality.

The dynamicity of these relationships provide opportunity for spiritual growth as individuals come to understand themselves as spiritual beings and as they come to understand others as spiritual beings, all of which connects to and through God.

Martsolf (1997) and Martsolf and Mickley (1998) noted that defining spirituality, in various disciplines, has been challenging. Their research in the field of nursing describes the major attributes of spirituality as including meaning, value, transcendence, connecting, and becoming. Making meaning is described as the process of making sense of the situations one finds oneself in life and discerning life purpose. Spiritual values are the cherished beliefs and standards that one holds. These values address understandings such as beauty, truth, and worth. Transcendence involves the expanding of

“self-boundaries,” that is, appreciating what is beyond self. Connecting is associated with relationships, which include those relationships with God or a Higher Power, with others, with self, and with the environment. Finally, becoming has to do with understanding one’s identity through life experience and reflection. Spirituality embraces the connections with self and beyond self, which includes others as well as a Higher

Power.

Spirituality is also influenced by culture and even subculture (Cushner,

McClelland, & Safford, 2000; Fraser, 2007; Martsolf, 1997). Spirituality can provide a context for the validation of cultural beliefs and practices and vice versa. Due to the fact that individuals can belong to more than one cultural or sub cultural group, the complexity of one’s understanding of spirituality can be compounded or even conflicted.

Race, ethnicity, religion, and social class are obvious cultural markers that may influence one’s understanding or sense of spirituality, but we have also come to understand that other aspects of culture such as gender, sexuality, age, geographic region, and social status influence one’s spirituality and even access to diverse spiritual points of view.

Jablonski (2001) wrote from the perspective of student services and similarly characterized the concept of spirituality in strong relational terms. She noted that the spiritual is understood in terms of development of the individual within the self and in relation to others and “Other.” Spiritual development involves a five-fold process, which includes: finding meaning in life, seeking personal authenticity, exploring the relationship with “an intangible and pervasive power” beyond humanity, developing connections to self and others, and transcending the locus of centricity by the individual.

Finding meaning in life is related to discerning one’s life purpose and the direction(s) a person takes in order to fulfill that purpose. Personal authenticity discovers and supports the genuineness and wholeness of the individual’s identity. Exploring the power beyond self relates to the Transcendent power in life and includes an essence both beyond human existence and beyond rational human knowing. Connecting with self and others grows out of the union with community and through community the individual develops relationally with both self and others. Through this development the individual not only gains deeper respect for self but is also able to move beyond self with an enriched understanding of the self as influenced and even inspired by others.

Transcending the locus of centricity, or connecting beyond self, as a component of spiritual development is also highlighted by Palmer (1999), who has written

extensively on spirituality and spirituality in education. Palmer’s experiences have led

him to establish the Center for Courage and Renewal that offers the Courage to Teach

Program for K-12 teachers throughout the country. He noted that human beings have

engaged in an ancient and long-lasting quest to connect with something beyond self and

something more trustworthy than self.

Spirituality is an elusive word with a variety of definitions—some compelling,

some wifty, some downright dangerous. The definition I have found most helpful

is simply this: spirituality is the eternal human yearning to be connected with

something larger than our own egos. (Palmer, 2010, ¶ 8)

There is a range of ways in which one may understand spirituality, which suggests a sense of the breadth of the concept of spirituality. This need not be viewed as problematic, but rather it is an indication that spirituality is multi-dimensional and multi-layered. Spirituality encompasses a variety of connections and this connectedness underscores the strength, power, and possibilities for spirituality in education.

Spirituality and Religion

As noted, there is a relationship between spirituality and religion, yet there are also distinctions, and some authors have noted the importance of articulating these distinctions because both spirituality and religion often carry preconceived ideas, beliefs, and practices. Although the discussion of religious beliefs may cause discomfort to some due to the historical abuses of religious institutions, spirituality may also be disarming to others because it may create ambiguity and concern because the idea of spirituality embraces openness, dynamic development, and discovery of both self and other

(Alexander, 1996; Palmer, 1999; Senge, 2004). Spirituality cannot necessarily be taught as much as it can be experienced, uncovered, discovered, rediscovered, and evoked

(Lantieri, 2001).

The ideas of religion and spirituality are not altogether interchangeable though many people see them as the same thing or similar. It is a challenge to completely separate the two because so often spirituality is an outgrowth of religious experience, or, conversely, a sense of spirituality may lead to the adoption of religious beliefs.

Religion is described as the embracing of specific dogma that is held by a group and expressed through doctrine related to supernatural power(s), sacred writings, traditions, and worship that is often organized and communal. Religion is frequently described as objective, specific, ordered, creedal and observable whereas spirituality is described as subjective, often more individualistic or personal, less structured, and related to a quest for connectedness, both ascendant and transcendent (Hodge & Derezotes,

2008; Houston, 2002; Love, 2001; J. P. Miller, 2000; Palmer, 1999; Shahjahan, 2004).

Houston (2002) noted, “religion is specific and spirituality is generic . . . religion gives us a rubric for working with the deity, while spirituality is the energy that connects us to the deity” (p. 59).

Membership, whether formal or informal, to a particular religion requires the following of tenets or doctrines. For example: one of the primary tenets of Christianity is the belief in Jesus as the Son of God and the Savior of humankind. Although expressed in many ways by various denominations, this is the key belief. In the Jewish tradition, monotheistic belief and following the biblical laws of the Hebrew Canon are the central

belief system. Different groups within Judaism approach the following of the laws in

different ways. Muslims base their lives as individuals and as a community on the

teachings of the Prophet and the dictates of the Qur’an, which are also interpreted in

various ways by subgroups within Islam. Religious beliefs can be intricate and followers,

as well as observers, may be impressed with their complexity as well as the expressions

of beliefs through sacred music, art, and other oral and written traditions.

Alexander and McLaughlin (2003) made a significant contribution to the

discussion of spirituality by distinguishing spirituality that is either “tethered” or

“untethered” to religion. Religion concerns itself with questions of theology,

epistemology, ethics, and community. Spirituality that is tethered to religion addresses

the theological through devotion to a transcendent being(s) or by achieving a higher state

of consciousness. Spirituality that is tethered to religion addresses the epistemological in

efforts to know the transcendent through prayer, study, and/or participation in ritual or

ceremony. Spirituality that is tethered to religion pursues ethical concerns for the good

life through prophetic justice and good works. Spirituality that is tethered to religion

addresses collective concerns through membership in faith communities and shared

discourse, practice, and memory.

Alexander and McLaughlin (2003) described five strands of the spiritual domain that can be either religiously tethered or untethered. These strands include meaning, inner space, relationships (to self, others, the world, and life), responses to the natural and human world, and community. Spirituality that is tethered to religion approaches these spiritual domains within the boundaries of their particular religious belief systems.

Spirituality that is untethered to religion approaches these spiritual domains with greater openness, freedom, and with less doctrinal specificity.

The complexities involved in the notion of spirituality are readily apparent. The

domain involves a wide range of categories of human quality, achievement, and

reaction, and a wide range of presuppositions and commitments with respect to

underlying matters such as the nature of reality and of the good life. In the case of

“religiously tethered” forms of spirituality, such presuppositions and

commitments are often more readily identified than in “religiously untethered”

forms, where they may be unarticulated. (Alexander & McLaughlin, 2003, p.

360)

The authors warned, however, that the distinctions between spirituality that is tethered and untethered needs to be handled with caution because even the distinctions within spirituality that is religiously tethered are not as rigid as they may first appear. Yet, this way of viewing spirituality as tethered and untethered will be useful as the discussion proceeds to spirituality in education. While religion and spirituality are related concepts, they are also distinct concepts. It can be argued that while spirituality is a universal human trait; it is not necessarily connected to religion (Bellous & Csinos, 2009). In an interview with Halford (1999), Nel Noddings made a similar point in noting that religion usually requires institutional affiliation while spirituality does not.

In addition to the cautions that spirituality is difficult to define and the understanding of spirituality can be broad and shapeless, Slater (2005) also warned that in contemporary society spirituality can be “sold” as a commodity just as other products are

sold to us to embrace easy fixes to life’s problems or simple ways to find fulfillment in

life. The idea of spirituality can be abused just as religious fervor can be abused. In

recent decades the focus on individuality has reached unprecedented levels and “false

spirituality” is sold to us in tapes, seminars, books, and cultish organizations to promote

easy fixes to complicated problems. Slater is also critical of those who promote the

search and acquisition of “more and better” as a substitute for spiritual experience.

People who are deeply immersed in religion or deeply immersed in spirituality

may lack sensitivity to the other. There are those who are so strongly tied to religious

doctrine and dogma that they are disconnected from the spiritual, and there are those who

are so deeply occupied with the search for wholeness, meaning, and purpose that they are

adamantly opposed to any discourse about or interaction with religion (Love, 2001).

Either extreme would seem to deprive individuals of the full range of understanding as

well as the abundance of tools and insights offered by both religion and spirituality in the

development of whole self.

Religion in Public Schools

For many people, there is an association between spirituality and religion.

Spirituality may be a product of religious identity or spiritual experiences may inspire a

need to find a more structured religious expression. This is why, in a discussion of

spirituality in public education, it is necessary to address issues of religion

. While religion is present in public education there are concerns about its place and the

boundaries that surround it.

Noddings pointed out that fear which comes from ignorance or misunderstanding

of laws and guidelines about religion in public schools may impede on the expression and

development of spirituality (Halford, 1999; Noddings, 2008). Some of the criticism

against the inclusion of addressing spirituality in public education comes from equating it

with education that is religious or with religious proselytizing.

Alexander (1996) observed that public schools claim neutrality toward religion

but are actually inhospitable to religious diversity. In the United States where there is a

constitutional mandate of neutrality concerning religion in public schools, as well as in

other state-sponsored and independent schools that claim neutrality, Anglo-American

Protestantism has made its way into the discourse of schooling. Under these circumstances, only the remnants of the commonly held civic culture of religion are conveyed to students both overtly and covertly.

A problem with such an approach is that it undercuts the possibility for fully educating students in a society that is multicultural and multi-religious. It also fails to take seriously the religious heritage of students. There is significant value in being educated in one’s own tradition as well as being exposed to other religious traditions.

It is interesting to note that educators in Canada are involved in a similar conversation regarding spirituality in public education. The absence of spirituality and religion in the curriculum of English-speaking Canadian public schools is increasingly understood to have caused a disconnection in understanding the development of their national identity and has left a void in the opportunities students have to investigate life’s big questions of heart and soul. As in the United States, the Canadian public education

25 system is recognizing that education that is neutral toward religion does not mean education that is devoid of religion (Brummelen, Franklin, & Koole, 2004).

There are inherent tensions between education in religion and spirituality and education for democratic society. These tensions are evidenced in various interpretations and practices of critical rationality, personal liberation, values, principles, and practices.

Education in religion and spirituality is not necessarily in opposition with common schooling in liberal democratic societies such as ours, but the tensions exist and the literature suggests that these should be considered carefully and respectfully.

Religious communities address four concerns that are overlapping: the theological, the epistemological, the ethical, and the collective. These concerns, it should be noted, are also central to public schooling. The conflict arises when these concerns are addressed differently in public schools than they are in religious communities.

Students who are raised in religious and spiritual environments will bring their theological, epistemological, ethical, and collective understandings with them into the classroom; these same students may return home from their public schooling with new insights regarding these concerns or even experience challenges to their understandings, which may not mesh comfortably with the worldview they receive from their family or religious community (Alexander & McLaughlin, 2003).

This kind of dissonance may, for example, be experienced by a student who is raised in a religious belief system in which women and men are not equal and women are to be subservient to men. When this student experiences teachings in school that are divergent from this belief, the student may find herself in conflict both at home and at

school. Another example that has received much attention is the teaching of evolution in

the public school. The teaching of evolution has caused a great deal of tension between

public schools and fundamentalist and ultraorthodox religious communities. The

challenge for both the religious communities and the public schools is to navigate these

thorny issues with respect and dignity and to recognize that there may never be a meeting

of minds; but helping children live in a society in which there are great differences of

belief and thought is instructive in itself.

Education that is infused with spirituality, which concerns itself with nurturing

respectful relationships and promoting understanding between participants, offers a way

in which students and teachers can address such issues of conflict. Spirituality that is

untethered to religion provides a pathway for teachers to explore differences in ways that

are educative and stimulating (Alexander & McLaughlin, 2003; Noddings, 1993).

Concern may be raised in education about spirituality that is connected to

religious belief as well as spirituality that is not connected to religious belief. Regarding

the former, there may be anxiety that spirituality would be too theocentric, and regarding

the latter, there may be unease that spirituality does not take seriously the Transcendent

or, more specifically, religious doctrine.

Alexander and McLaughlin (2003) suggested that education in religion and

spirituality may occur from either the “inside” or the “outside.” Education in religion and

spirituality from the inside can include schools that are positioned in a particular religious

or spiritual tradition but also teach critical rationality, personal liberation, values, principles, and the practices of the liberal democratic society. Such education strives to

balance rootedness and openness. But education from the inside can also become

uncritical “confessionalism” in which students are indoctrinated into a belief system.

Critics of this type of inside education in religion and spirituality note that there can lack

critical rationality and autonomy, and, at its extreme, may fail to be educational.

Education in religion and spirituality that is from the “outside” is education that

teaches a kind of moral bilingualism in which students learn to address issues of value

and morality from a range of viewpoints. While religious perspectives should not be

considered the only answers, neither should they be discounted. Even though there are

difficulties in presenting a full range of viewpoints and such presentation may conflict

with the point of view a student brings from home, this approach to spirituality in

education represents the best way to engage students in the common school (Alexander &

McLaughlin, 2003).

Teachers may be “gun shy” when religious issues are raised in the classroom

(Slater, 2005). The fear of First Amendment gaffes is prevalent among many teachers

and pre-service teachers. Nonetheless, Mayes (2001) noted that many students in teacher education programs are motivated to become teachers by their sense of spirituality, and we have a responsibility of educating intending teachers about the boundaries of public

schoolroom conversations regarding personal religious doctrines and spiritual values. He

cautioned the academy that too many pre-service teachers leave the field because they

have misconceptions about these legal boundaries. Vokey (2003) raised a similar point

that if public schools are to become hospitable to spiritual education and development,

28 the academy must also become hospitable to the spiritual education and development of its faculty and pre-service teachers.

In an interview, Nel Noddings spoke about educating for belief or unbelief that ought to educate our children for religious and spiritual literacy. She reminded us that teachers need not back away from religious and spiritual literacy in public schools because the First Amendment in no way prevents the teaching about religion (Halford,

1999). Considering administrators in public schools, Noddings believed that they need to be educated about school law, with particular emphasis on the First Amendment.

Students need to be religiously literate in order to understand our country’s history and development. Due to the fact that so much of the history, politics, and even the geography of our country were influenced by religious leaders, religious movements, and religious thoughts, our students cannot understand the reasons behind what has happened in our nation if they do not read about and understand religion. Students need to learn about Puritan theology in order to understand the historical desire to separate church and state, and we need to teach students about Islam so that they can better understand the current events and the politics of the Middle East (Nord, 1995).

Constitutionally the United States is not a Christian country. Instead, we claim we are a neutral, liberal state when it comes to religion. Religious neutrality is not the same as being devoid of religious influences and ideals. Neutrality underscores that no religion or non-religion is to be favored over another; to do so would cause exclusion and marginalization. Education is necessarily infused with religion because religious ideas and ideals are at the heart of our culture. The First Amendment was not intended to

secularize our society or to exclude religion from public life in general or public

education in particular. The separation of church and state was also not intended to

create hostility toward religion; such discrimination would also be a violation of

neutrality (Jablonski, 2001; Nord, 1995).

Understanding religious traditions is often a key in many academic subjects such

as literature, art, history, music, science, and mathematics. Students bring their home and

community cultures with them to school and often these include strong religious

convictions. If teachers are afraid to deal with these issues, relations in the classroom can

be weakened (Adarkar & Keiser, 2007; Dei, James, James-Wilson, Karumanchery, &

Zine, 2000; Dewey, 1897).

In the Supreme Court case Abington v. Schempp (1963) regarding compulsory

school prayer, the Court acknowledged the growing diversity of religious beliefs within

the public school system and how compulsory religious exercises based on

Judeo-Christian beliefs would be offensive to certain groups and sects. The Court ruled

that school sponsored religious exercises like prayer and the reading of the Bible are unconstitutional because teachers and administrators are agents of the state and such rituals would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. But the Court also noted that their ruling did not prohibit the teaching about Holy Scriptures or about religious beliefs in literature and history classes. They recognized that it would be impossible to meaningfully teach many subjects in the humanities or social sciences without teaching about religion.

In 1995, Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley, released a letter to all public school districts in the country outlining the legal parameters of religion in public schooling. Secretary Riley wrote these guidelines in an attempt to end confusion caused by the US Supreme Court decision regarding state sponsored school prayer. Fueled by lawsuits, some of the American public, including educators, were and are under the mistaken impression that children cannot pray or study religion in public schools.

Secretary Riley noted that the First Amendment of the US Constitution provides that while maintaining restrictions from government sponsored religion, students had the right to religious freedom (US Department of Education, 1995).

Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings was asked by President George W.

Bush to address the issue as it related to No Child Left Behind and noted for the country in general and public schooling in particular that the First Amendment of the Constitution characterizes the relationship between religion and the government by preventing the government from establishing religion as well as protecting the freedom of religious expression from government interference and discrimination. Secretary Spellings again underscored the limitations on the conduct of public school officials as they relate to religious activity (US Department of Education, 2003).

There are two basic constrictions for religion in public schooling. First, religious activities such as prayer and study of holy writings must be student driven and not interfere with daily educational pursuits (a student can pray in school but not disrupt any educational activity). Second, educators are not allowed to proselytize. That is, any

31 attempts through discussion, lecture, or activities to convert others to a particular belief system are strictly forbidden within the public education system.

The fear of discomfort also strains teachers and students in the meaningful work to relate religious influence in educational content. It is challenging for teachers to set and maintain healthy boundaries in student discussions where very personal thoughts and feelings, including those of religious faith, are shared. Teachers may not be comfortable with students’ inquiries because they have not done enough of their own, or they are uncomfortable with how far religious discussions should be allowed to proceed, or they lack necessary knowledge of various religious systems of belief. It is also increasingly difficult to allow for reasonable, free discussion in class about religious issues that might influence student work and choices because teachers do not feel they have time to engage children due to the focus on mandated standards and testing (Kessler, 1999; Noddings,

1993).

The question is not whether religion will come up in academic subjects, but how it will be raised and the parameters within which it may be discussed. Understanding religion and its place in public education will help to understand and differentiate the place of spirituality in public schooling. While the two may be linked, they are not the same, but neither are they mutually exclusive of one another, which is one of the reasons the discussion becomes complicated or even confused. Religion and spirituality overlap, sometimes in significant ways (Love, 2001).

The Lack of Connection in Public Schools

During the past 25 years there has been increasing discussion about spirituality in public education as well as in other human services fields (Elkins et al., 1988; Hodge &

Derezotes, 2008; Love, 2001; Savickas, 1991) and even in fields such as business (Senge,

2004). Much of the examination has described a fragmentation that has rendered modern schooling ineffective and at times irrelevant (Palmer, 1999). First, understanding what has been described as the “disconnection and the connection” in public education will inform the discussion of spirituality. Second, understanding the discourse and research about how teachers experience spirituality in their classrooms will be valuable in shaping an appreciation of what is already happening as well as providing insight about where future studies may best be posited.

In a study with public school teachers and students from four culturally diverse schools, Baker, Bridger, Terry, and Winsor (1997) noted a poignant discovery. Teachers and students cited, “alienation, feelings of distrust and lack of understanding, and lack of respect and personal connections to others as fundamental flaws in contemporary schooling” (p. 586). Many knowledgeable educators are being let down by the public education system, disconnected, and left wanting something of substance for their students and for themselves (Goens, 1996).

This lack of connection is considered a factor in the increase of behavioral issues and low levels of personal integrity present in our schools today (Baer & Carper, 1998;

Dei et al., 2000). The void of spiritual guidance in our middle and high schools has been emphasized by some as a contributing factor to self-destructive behaviors such as drug

abuse, sexual promiscuity, gang violence, and suicide as students struggle to find meaning

in their lives and as they try to escape the pain of lack of spiritual fulfillment (Kessler,

1999). In an interview with Rabbi Harold Kushner (Scherer, 1999), he acknowledged that

adolescence is a particularly critical time for children and their struggles can sometimes

translate into depression, non-communicativeness, and anger. The years that students

spend in middle and high school are formative years where social understanding and

personal identity begin to develop (Dei et al., 2000).

There have been several responses to attempt to deal with the issues faced by

children who do harm to themselves and others. An early response was a typical

cognitive approach, which tried to inform children of the dangers of self-destructive

behavior and tried to inform them about making good choices: a prevention model. But

children who get involved in self-destructive behaviors rarely come to that point out of an intellectual, thoughtful decision-making process. Some of the root causes of adolescent behavior that is destructive include: economic changes, media messages, the breakdown of the family and community, fear, unexpressed grief, and a sense of spiritual void

(Kessler, 2004).

When the spiritual void is not filled with authentic nourishment and guidance

from responsible elders, many young people seek connection, joy, creativity, and

transcendence through sexuality and drugs; they seek meaning and beauty in what

can be bought and sold; they seek initiation through self-designed rituals and

badges of adulthood. (Kessler, 2004, p. 61)

The literature acknowledges that teachers feel the strain of disconnection as well.

The pain of detachment from their students and colleagues adds to the tension in the

classroom. Many teachers go into education to make connections with students and

colleagues but many schools construct an atmosphere of combat rather than one of

community. It is little wonder, then, that participants take on the identity of combatants:

defensive, offensive, worn, and shell shocked (Palmer, 1993). Rabbi Kushner also

observed in the Scherer (1999) interview that teachers feel misused and disrespected and

they, in turn, hold themselves back from relationships with their students and colleagues.

Teachers often feel the fragmentation between their personal lives and their academic

lives when spiritual alienation is part of the ethos of the school (Shahjahan, 2004).

It is perhaps human to try to manipulate the external variables in our lives in order

to feel some power over pressing problems and thorny issues. In recent years, we have become occupied by technology in new ways as tools, like the Internet, have given us the ability to find quick answers to problems, whether or not those answers are valid or helpful. This has, in some cases, encouraged us to look for objective and outward fixes and has challenged our inclination and skills to look inwardly. Even in professions that have historically honored spiritual connections we have seen a shift of focus. Physicians are trained to repair the body and prolong life but have little training in honoring the patient’s spirit; clergy are trained to approach many of their tasks from a business model with less emphasis on the spiritual; teachers master techniques and strategies but are not taught how to engage the souls of their students (Palmer, 1998).

Another strand, which the literature highlights, is a concern for administrators in

public schools as they deal with students, teachers, parents, and layers of bureaucracy.

Leadership is not merely management when it deals with people’s dreams. When doing jobs that are multifaceted and multilayered, leaders must both stay connected to others as well as replenish their own physical and moral supplies of energy, for their good and the good of those they lead. As administrators deal with the lives of many people, they too need to be aware of the spiritual nature of their work and “the golden cord of connection”

(Houston, 2002).

For students, as well as educators, the sense of isolation brought on by societal trends as well as trends in schooling have contributed to the lack of connectedness in our present public education system. When students are in pain they often embrace behaviors they think will ease their pain, but these behaviors often lead to seclusion, or worse.

Educators can become embroiled in systemic problems that create a sense of separation within the school community. There is a cruel irony present in many public schools: even though many schools are overcrowded, they can be very lonely places where students, teachers, and staff can experience a sense of disconnection.

One of the causes of disconnection in public schooling that is identified is that of fear. Schooling can be a fearful experience for children from the beginning of grade school and fear can turn children who love to learn into students who hate school. When teachers work in fear or manipulate the fears of their students, they are diminished as educators. Faculty relations are often reduced by fear and fear is often used as a traditional management tool in schools (Palmer, 1998).

Issues of safety, which have risen since the Columbine and subsequent school

shootings and invasions, have added an additional layer of fear in public schooling.

Students, faculty, and staff are drilled in lock down procedures and inevitably consider

issues of intervention and survival. Security guards, police, bag searches, security

cameras, I.D. scans, and metal detectors have become too commonplace in some of our

schools and have threatened both access and equity in education (Kress, 2011). Since the

crises of September 11th, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq, the national financial meltdown, as well as natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, students are increasingly experiencing fear on greater levels in school. In fact, our society has been described as “The Culture of Fear” because of the devastating effects of unrest as well as the use of fear in our political system (Glassner, 2000). Schools feel these issues intensely and the cumulative effect can be tangible. “Many public school teachers and

teacher educators currently operate under a virtual state of siege,” (Adarkar & Keiser,

2007, p. 246).

Teachers, students, parents, and administrators have also been burdened with

fears around the high stakes testing that has become a priority in schooling in the United

States during the last decades. The pressure of No Child Left Behind has ironically left

many children behind as teachers often have little time available to nurture students and

explore educational passions (Callejo Perez, 2005). Noddings also noted this pressure

during the last 20 or 30 years as our society has begun to refer to education as only the

accumulation of knowledge to the end that students will go to college, get good jobs, and

earn a lot of money in order to buy “lots of stuff” (Halford, 1999). While observing a

third grade teacher read from a script of the California Achievement Test, Callejo Perez

(2005) noted, “I saw the joy of teaching drained from her, the same expression and color

on her skin as I have seen on beached porpoises in the Florida coast” (p. 75).

Fear of both solitude and silence, in the classroom, works to increase the disconnection among teachers and students. Adolescents often experience the domain of silence with ambivalence yet it can be fraught with urgent need and fear (Kessler, 1999).

Teachers also feel discomfort with silence during discussions, often filling the noise void

when students actually need time to think and feel. As a culture, let alone as teachers, we

are not taught the value of sitting quietly and learning from the company of silence

(Iannone & Obenauf, 1999). Spirituality is a way of reconnecting with self and others in

the classroom.

Understanding the need for connection is important to recognize. Teachers are

challenged to translate the experiences that profoundly connect us to self, to others, and

to nature, into the curriculum and into the classroom experience (Suhor, 1999). It is

human to want to be connected to other people, to the world around us, and often to some

kind of Higher Power (J. P. Miller, 2000; Slater, 2005). This need for connection is often

thwarted in public education by the overwhelming demands of the curriculum as well as

teachers’ fears that they may be overstepping their boundaries as they relate to the

inclusion of religion and spirituality in the life of the classroom.

In an age of science and technology we may mistakenly believe that there is no

room for human and spiritual connection. The secularization of educational goals strains,

if not excludes the development of conscience or spirit within the curriculum. Often the

38 importance of science and technology displaces the importance that spirituality has previously held and students need to be reminded that learning is a spiritual journey and there is more to education than the grades that are earned. The formal school network, itself, has tended to become more resistant toward anything that is “unscientific” and yet the impetus for learning and teaching is often found in motivations that might be labeled

“spiritual.”

In order for education to withstand the sometimes confusing and intense external pressures of success, a counterbalance of creativity, caring, goodness, and spirit is necessary to create a humane environment in which children can learn (Goens, 1996;

Shahjahan, 2004; Slater, 2005). Spiritual connectedness is another key theme in the literature and there is a wide range of ways that students and teachers make connections with self, others, and the Transcendent, as well as with the queries of meaning, purpose, and ideals.

What are the conditions of life that necessitate the need for spirituality and the

need to include spirituality in the curriculum . . . Our consciousness must be

spiritual and strengthened and supported by education so it does not become a

side effect of our language, a product of the media, of hunter gatherers in the

cities who search for goods and services, seek free trade, and make and remake

their own or Donald Trump’s version of the world. (Slater, 2005, p. 63)

Connectedness is a longing that can be nurtured by the significant people who surround an individual and some of the most significant people in the lives of adolescents

are their teachers. We decide and we choose to be connected even when the pressures of

our world teach a disconnection (Senge, 2004; Shahjahan, 2004).

If spiritual disconnection describes one way in which our education system is failing; spiritual connection may hold a hope, a direction, and a promise for education.

Schools do not just have cultures; they also have souls, and they have a deeper purpose than transmitting academic knowledge. Some of the best metaphors for public education come not from business and industry but from philosophy and theology. Schools are places of imagination, creativity, care, and idealism (Goens, 1996; Kessler, 2001). There are inherent values in the ideas and processes of spiritual connectedness in schools.

In addition to the value of spiritually connecting to students, spirituality can also enhance the overall culture of the classroom. In the research of both religious and public schools, Revell (2008) found that teachers viewed spirituality as a major component in creating a sense of community in their classrooms. Spiritual development was viewed as a counter-narrative to the forces that tend to pull at students inside school and outside school. These forces included individualism, materialism, and social fragmentation.

Spiritual connection is not only valuable in educating children for moral and

ethical decision-making, it can also foster in students a sense of mindfulness,

compassion, respect, meaning, caring, inner peace, and justice. As teachers deal with the

suffering of their students, they engage both their hearts and minds (Adarkar & Keiser,

2007; Kessler, 2004).

The classroom, or school, becomes a place of spirituality when connections are

made between people who are respectful, open, and caring toward one another.

Adolescents are not only concerned about earning high grades, making the team, and

being popular; they are also concerned about the big questions of life and they are too

often lonely in addressing those questions. Most high school students struggle with

tensions of self-reliance and interdependence, love and loss, as well as finding meaning,

purpose, and a sense of service in their lives. Teachers can co-create connectional

communities in the classroom in which students can ask the questions they need to ask

and participate in meaningful discussions.

This is the soul of education . . . Whether students are describing a deep

connection to themselves, to others, to nature, or to a higher power, they evoke a

quality of relationship that is profoundly caring and resonant with meaning and

that involves feelings of belonging and of being truly seen or known. (Kessler,

1999, p. 51)

Students and Spirituality

The discussion of spirituality in public education has grown over the last several decades with central considerations that students and teachers should be seen and treated as whole persons who bring their familial and community culture with them into the classroom, and that educating and nurturing the spirit is part of the responsibility of an inclusive education. An important part of culture is the spiritual identity and process of the individual.

The presence of spirituality in students, faculty, and staff has always been a reality in public education, whether acknowledged or not, whether accessed or not, and whether utilized or not. Spirituality can be seen at the heart of every subject that is taught

and so it does not need to be brought into the curriculum or added to the curriculum

(Palmer, 1999).

Contemporary research is beginning to suggest that including spiritual

frameworks in the school curriculum might improve schooling. This has potential for

students from non-mainstream religious backgrounds and for students from active

traditional religious backgrounds as well as students from non-religious backgrounds.

There is also evidence that by engaging students, who are in their formative years, in spiritual practices that psychological well being is promoted as social understanding is developed (Dei et al., 2000).

In an interview, Rabbi Harold Kushner noted that spiritual values, regardless of religion, are emphasized in our schools. Core values in American education that are nondenominational and universal include: truth accuracy, responsibility, admitting wrong, coming to terms with limitations, and never embarrassing another and that

“respect for the divine image in every single human being—no matter how obnoxious, untalented, or unattractive that person may be—that is a spiritual value” (Scherer, 1999, p. 19).

Bellous and Csinos (2009) proposed four spiritual styles: words, emotions, symbols, and actions as expressions that can be used in holistic learning environments.

These can welcome diversity, authenticity, and integration among students and provide for them a healthy spiritual environment. The authors suggested that by infusing the educational environment with these four styles two things can be accomplished. First, it will correct the tendency to favor one way of being spiritual over another, and second, it

will satisfy a contemporary hunger for spirituality that will “allow for authenticity and

integration to flourish alongside each other” (p. 214).

Kessler (1999) admitted that in her classrooms, she cannot explain how she and

her students invite soul into the environment. Soul or spirit has to do with connecting to

one another through listening, quietness, and understanding and can transcend across

religions and even exist outside religion. She explained that when soul is present in the

classroom, barriers come down and the centrality of students’ fear and confusion are set

aside and wisdom, wonder, and yearning guide the work.

Common metaphysical questions shared by students (Why am I here? Does God

exist? What is the meaning of life? Why is there suffering and what can I do about it?)

may be most reasonably addressed in schools if they are framed in terms of spirituality.

Spirituality is the way by which students ask the questions and attempt to answer them.

As teachers assist students in finding satisfying answers to such insistent questions about

meaning, spirituality becomes a necessary part of the discussion (Brummelen et al., 2004;

Nash, 2002; Noddings, 1993).

Nord (1995) wrote of the spiritual and religious dimensions in public education and the need to both acknowledge these dimensions and utilize them. Religion has given voice to questions of ultimate concern. Religion has helped us to form the very questions about meaning, love, hope, salvation, suffering, and death. It is less important that we approve of particular religious answers to such questions that are central to human life than we provide the place where such answers can be considered and challenged.

In addition to exploring life’s big questions about purpose, meaning, and personal identity, spirituality in education has been noted by various authors as an entry point for issues of equity, social justice, ecology, world peace, global economics and tolerance.

Education that fosters the disconnection of an individual’s mind and heart, or the disconnection between people, or the disconnection with a sense of transcendence is irresponsible. Such disconnections may reduce some kinds of tensions, disagreements, or struggles, both within and without, but they may cause just as many. While it is imperative that children leave our public school system with educated minds and marketable skills, it is also imperative that they graduate with a growing sense of themselves as connected members of community: local, national, and global. Many educators and education theorists agree that spirituality is best experienced in public schooling when it is infused throughout the curriculum and life of the school.

The school is also a place where children develop a shared social life and develop attitudes about work, tolerance, and goals. School is an educational institution but it is also a social institution and shares responsibilities with a student’s home and community in helping to develop productive attitudes regarding a sense of community (Savickas,

1991).

Schooling, at its best, addresses the needs and development of the whole child.

Connectedness is relationship with self, others, and often a divine being. Spirituality can, therefore, grow in oneself, between others, and in relationship to a Higher Power. Astley

(2003) noted the dimensions of the horizontal and the vertical levels of spirituality that connect us to one another and to that which is beyond us. He also intimated that there is

a third dimension of profundity as we connect to self. These dimensions, which may also

be characterized as breadth, height, and depth, describe connections and within such

connectedness there is a balance between looking outward, looking upward, and looking

inward to explore life’s most pressing problems. This balance is not always supported by

our modern educational culture. Schooling not only teaches disconnect at times; it often

practices the severing of such connections.

There is a need to recognize spirituality in public education because the study of

the inner life helps both educators and students to form their goals and seek careers not

based solely on external pressures. To feel connected and to feel a sense of membership

in authentic school community can help students as they develop their sense of

belonging, which will counteract isolation and alienation. Meaningful connection can

help students discover “the balm of belonging” that can heal many of the typical wounds

young people experience as they grow and develop (Kessler, 1999).

Teachers and Spirituality

There are some new epistemologies being developed that recognize a necessary relationship between the knower and the known. This relationship would allow students and teachers to learn about the world from close up instead of far away and engage in connections instead of observing them. These approaches would also allow students and teachers to not only engage with the world that is outside but also the world that is within.

They would be able to embrace the relationship between the world and self as well as acknowledge that learning occurs through relationship that is subjective (Hodge &

Derezotes, 2008; Palmer, 1993).

Academics can also experience the pain of dismemberment that is more spiritual than sociological. Nurturing connections of whole self requires teachers to attend to the inner self, create physical and emotional space that can hold the class inquiry, and engage in passion for learning and passion for their subject. Teaching occurs in community and a sense of connectedness is necessary for good teaching to thrive (Palmer, 1998).

In such community, teachers also bring their whole self and there is an ascetic nature to teaching in the dynamic of the teacher-student relationship. Just as the student has a need to be valued, so does the teacher. Even though our society has historically failed to appreciate teaching and education, as evidenced in the physical conditions of many of our schools, low teacher salaries, and the lack of recognition most other professionals receive, teaching and education is touted as highly valuable. Too often teachers and schools only show up on the radar of the public when there is a crisis in schools. It can also be noted that the school culture itself contributes to the disenfranchisement of teachers’ whole self in the work they do. While teachers rarely go into the profession for glory, they often go into teaching because of a desire to connect with children and make a difference in the lives of their students. “But somewhere just south of glory lives a more modest desire, the desire for recognition,” (Higgins, 2002, p.

296).

This desire for recognition is most genuinely fulfilled in the relationship between teacher and student. While this relationship is necessarily asymmetric (teachers should not expect students to take care of them); there remains in teaching a dynamic mutuality that is rewarding and affirming for teachers. We cannot and should not attempt to

sanitize altruism and asceticism in teachers and artificially make it a one-way street in

which teachers do all the giving and students, as well as other stakeholders, do all the

taking. Teachers receive something from the sense of connection, too (Higgins, 2002).

Shahjahan (2004) similarly made the relational point but also drew in the spiritual in a more apparent way when he wrote of the “divine fragrance” that is healing and grounding, especially in those times when academic discourse can be divisive. He pointed to spirituality between himself, as a person and as a teacher, with the divine Allah that allows him to be interconnected with other beings as well as nonbeings. He warned that when the teacher is blocked from bringing her or his own sense of whole-self to the classroom, not only is the teacher marginalized but the teacher may marginalize students.

Even though the classroom is a spiritual space, we do not always recognize it as spiritual space. Our failure to do so is also related to the constraints of time or our perception that we do not have the time. As teachers are pushed more and more by accountability, standards, and measurable outcomes, they have less time and energy to focus on students being and becoming. While people may be viewed as inherently spiritual and education in the deepest and most inclusive sense may be viewed as a spiritual venture, it may not occur to educators that spirituality is already present and should be addressed and utilized (Schoonmaker, 2009).

Yet, there are ways in which teachers can become more attentive to spirituality in the classroom including: developing their own spiritual practices, engaging with other teachers who are interested in spirituality in education, recalling one’s own early experiences of spirituality, and listening to students. The classroom is “crammed with

47 heaven” if teachers are open to seeing and experiencing the spiritual with their students

(Schoonmaker, 2009).

Connectedness is a major component in education that is holistic: which links the mind, body, and spirit of the learner and teacher to subject areas, local and global communities, the planet, and the cosmos. Some teachers who embrace holistic education expect that as the movement continues to grow and mature there will be more emphasis among educators to invite a pedagogical presence that encourages the inclusion of spirituality and less emphasis and reverence for particular teaching methods and individual experts (R. Miller, 2006; Suhor, 1999).

Many educators have confirmed that their personal sense of spirituality enhances their practice as a catalyst that is internal and personal. They are inspired to present to their students education that is inclusive and emancipatory. Such an approach to pedagogy helps students experience compassion, fulfillment, and connection (Fenwick,

2001).

Some teachers may shy away from applying terms like spirituality and transcendence to public education but they also report experiences that can accurately be described in such terms when reporting classroom experiences that are life-enhancing and significant (Suhor, 1999). Such connectedness has been described by elementary teachers as they read a book and listen to their students’ responses and by secondary teachers when discussions become “magically engrossed” as students safely share feelings, concerns, and reflections. Connectedness can also be experienced in the university classroom when a professor lights a candle, literally or figuratively, and allows

students to be quiet or to share with one another things that are utmost on their hearts and

minds.

In her interview with Halford (1999), Nel Noddings spoke of the repression of

spirituality in the public school community that is evident in both the relationships within

the classroom as well as the physical setting of high school classrooms that are often

devoid of life. Elementary classrooms are full of plants and animals and activity while

high school classrooms are often two-dimensional at best and usually the only animals present are those being prepared for dissection. The contrast is powerful and can be

repressive.

People are longing for the sacred. Even those of us who have rejected

institutional religion still have that longing. If spirituality is removed entirely

from schooling, if it becomes a topic that is more or less forbidden in everyday

conversation, then that longing becomes repressed. ( p. 31)

Making Spiritual Connections in Public Schools

As the literature clarifies that making spiritual connections in public schooling is a

critical component of education, the way in which educators facilitate such connections

remains a challenge. Education that reaches the whole child, including the spirit, may be

encouraged and research may even suggest that the inclusion of spirituality might

improve schooling; yet there has been opposition to making such reforms systemic in

public education in the United States. Such opposition may be related to the pervasive

individualism that characterizes and even glorifies much of our national identity but there

is also a concern that much of what has been written about spirituality in public education

49 is ambiguous and the ways in which teachers might include the spiritual dimension in the classroom are largely unarticulated (Dei et al., 2000).

A concern raised by Baer and Carper (1998) is that there is too much religion and spirituality in schools today. They equated religion with spirituality and noted that the religion that is being asserted in public schools is that of secular humanism. The authors found two approaches to religion and spirituality in school that are unacceptable. First, the approach, which they labeled “the cafeteria approach,” is one in which students are presented with a variety of perspectives and encouraged to choose one. The second approach is for teachers to teach about religion objectively. The authors noted that there is not enough time to teach about all religions, there is concern about what objective teaching means, and finally, they question, who will teach?

The authors believed that the best model is to have complete school choice but they also realize this is not going to happen any time soon. Their second suggestion was a release-time model. This mirrored the Gary, Indiana, model of 1914 in which children were released from academic work to study with pastors, priests, rabbis, or others who reflected the belief system of the students’ parents or guardians. This model respects the religious diversity of our society and at the same time offers the purest form of instruction in the students’ own set of beliefs. The authors believed that learning about other kinds of religion and spirituality is best left for college instruction (Baer & Carper,

1998).

Kessler (1999) created a program, a particular classroom experience called,

“Passages,” in her high school. Passages is a curriculum for teenagers that integrates

academics with a sense of heart, spirit, and community. Passages deals with a wide range

of topics from study skills, to diversity, to taking personal responsibility. Passages

includes spiritual recognition and development. While the program has had great success

and has touched both students and teachers, its weakness is that it is a self-contained program within an individual school. While students are encouraged to bring various life issues and questions to the program it is unclear whether they are able to translate the spiritual connections they make in the program to activities and settings outside the program. It is also unclear whether the Passages program can be replicated in other schools or if its success is dependent upon the insights and skills of its designer.

Nel Noddings has commented about ways that teachers can approach spirituality in public education. One suggestion she noted in the Halford (1999) interview was to restore sacred music and art to the classroom, not as a proselytizing tool but as a study in order to understand and be inspired. She also suggested that high school classes study

Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s The Women’s Bible to understand feminism as a spiritual movement. A third point about the place of spirituality in school, if approached openly, is that it can teach critical thinking to students who will need those skills no matter what choices they make after high school.

Another point is discussed in more detail by Noddings (1993) in her conviction that whether we believe in a transcendent power or not, belief or unbelief should be intelligent. That is, it should be examined. Creating places in education for “pedagogical neutrality” are necessary for young people to address spiritual concerns. This opportunity is one that all students deserve. Young people should be able to engage in

important discussions about significant life-matters in environments that are noncoercive and that are supportive.

The inclusion of religious and spiritual education has the potential to combat ignorance and mis-education. Such an educational atmosphere helps students understand the range of religious and spiritual experiences in their society and throughout the world.

By educating for belief or unbelief, students would learn tolerance of other’s beliefs.

Beyond tolerance, students would also be better equipped to utilize critical thinking on matters of religion and spirituality in a democratic society. Religious and spiritual education also has the potential of reducing psychological and physical violence in the world and also benefits students as they learn to understand themselves better. Religious and spiritual education can open the minds of students to intellectual and emotional possibilities and empower them to make choices that would not be available to them if they were ignorant of these dimensions (Noddings, 2008).

A caution also needs to be raised about the very real concern that religious

indoctrination can seep through spiritual education. The positive effect of tolerance

should be extended not only to belief but also to unbelief including atheism, agnosticism,

deism, and secular humanism. Unbelief as well as non-belief should not be regarded as a

character flaw and one objective of education that embraces spirituality should be to

dispel this kind of characterization (Noddings, 2008).

Education that is infused with spirituality is thought to invite inquiry and a desire

for social justice. Spirituality in education can help students move from individualistic

concerns to relational concerns. Students in our current educational system have

experienced a great deal of violence and it is important for all students to inquire about

their world and seek solutions to social problems from diverse points of view. The idea

here is that spirituality in education can bring a perspective for social justice and help

prepare students for responsible global citizenship by teaching them to care about others

and appreciate the relationships that extend beyond their immediate world (Adarkar &

Keiser, 2007).

Another benefit of spirituality in public education is the potential it presents to

address and take away the burden of binary thinking, which is so prevalent in our society

today. Binary thinking may be useful in some of our work but it is not useful in

promoting greater understanding of our diversity and promoting informed and respectful

relationships. Either/or thinking destroys our sense of wholeness and encourages a sense

of fragmentation. Paradox is something with which we need to learn to co-exist.

Spiritual inquiry often invites discussion of disparate ideas, for example, questioning why there is suffering or why some people have to suffer more than others especially in a world where there could be enough money, food, shelter, and medicine to care for all people. Students can develop a habit of spiritual approach, and not rigid fear, toward ambivalence and working through life’s mysteries and challenges (Palmer, 1998).

Sullivan (2003) offered another perspective on religion and spirituality in education that in and of itself addresses binary thinking. Some believe that education that embraces religious and spiritual perspectives is anti-intellectual. One may be academic and intellectual or one may be religious and spiritual. But Sullivan argued that the intellectual and the spiritual are intimately related; “First, scholarship cannot be fully

53 what it ought to be without the aid of spirituality. Second, one cannot achieve a wise-holiness if one neglects to care about one’s intellectual integrity” (p. 133).

Even though spirituality has been addressed from a variety of perspectives and academic disciplines, it is interesting to note that a lexicon, of sorts, has begun to emerge.

Words like: caring, community, compassion, nurture, relationship, purpose, others, Other, justice, connection, interconnectedness, wholeness, hope, social change, and meaning are a few that consistently surface in writings about spirituality and spirituality in education.

It appears that the field is developing a language with which to learn and teach about spirituality, or at the very least, a language with which to engage in public discourse.

Critical Literature

Nel Noddings, Parker Palmer, and Rachel Kessler have contributed a great deal to the discussion of spirituality in public education. While others are beginning to reflect on spirituality in public schooling, there is much work to be done, both in the classroom and in the journals of education. Most of the writing on spirituality in education is philosophical, theoretical, or based on personal experience. This is appropriate as the field begins to develop and much of what has been written is thought provoking and often inspirational.

The critical literature on spirituality in education addresses two threads. The first, which has been discussed, is that spirituality challenges the status quo and invites a new kind of engagement in the educational process that addresses the whole persons of students and teachers and fosters connections. The second thread addresses gaps in

54 writing and research as well as concerns with the ways in which spirituality is introduced to school curriculum.

One of the gaps in the literature that is of concern is a lack of dissenting voices among writers in the United States. One exception is raised by Dalton (2001) as he noted that spirituality can become self-centered when it becomes a feel-good tool that is solely inner-directed and lacks any moral claim on students and fails to connect them to some kind of sense of the sacred.

Another exception is the criticism expressed toward the mandated inclusion of spiritual development in public schools in Great Britain. In the United Kingdom, spirituality has been part of the formal curriculum for over 20 years. In Part I, Chapter I of the British Education Reform Act 1988, one of the duties of the curriculum is to promote “the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at the school and society” and prepare “pupils for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of adult life.” This Act has sparked an academic dialogue that is, at times, quite heated. Critics have questioned what spiritual development means, how it can be evidenced throughout the curriculum, and who is accountable for its achievement.

Wringe (2002) discussed some of the issues and problems with canonizing spirituality in the formal and official curriculum of all subjects in the National

Curriculum of Great Britain. He questioned whether spirituality as an area of “thought, feeling and discourse” can become part of contemporary education much less be identified and defined. In nurturing students’ ability to address life questions and foster their inner lives, there are subject areas that may naturally lend themselves to meeting

55 education goals that are spiritual in nature. The National Curriculum subject documents for areas like English, music, history, and geography might be areas in which spiritual development may be promoted. He critiqued the notion that spiritual development should or can be a discrete curriculum goal and that the connections between religion and spirituality may either strengthen or diffuse the power of spiritual development. He noted, especially, that this part of the national curriculum becomes suspicious in subject areas like computer technology, physical education, and mathematics.

Marples (2006) is also critical of spiritual education as part of the formal national curriculum of Great Britain. He maintained that questions of origin, identity, purpose of life, and destiny are questions most thoughtful people have and are not part of a quest that needs to be characterized as spiritual. As teachers and students engage the big questions of life the basic underpinnings of a liberal education are addressed, which include: philosophy, sociology, science, religion, polity, economics, aestheticism, and morality. It is questionable whether there is a need for an extra spiritual dimension. It is questionable whether experiences of wonder and awe, the search for purpose and meaning, and the quest for self-knowledge should be characterized as spiritual.

Minney (1991) also wrote about some of the concerns raised by the British

Reform Act 1988 but saw more potential in the ambiance of the curriculum, which can be tied to both moral education and education for social justice. Spiritual development can offer a scale of progression from wonder and appreciation to critique of human responses toward crises, both natural and human-made. Spiritual development can also assist students as they question social justice issues.

A second gap in the literature is the lack of empirical research, both qualitative

and quantitative. The quantitative works of Elkins et al. (1988) and Oman, Thorensen,

Park, Shaver, Hood, and Plante (2009), while based in the area of psychology, address

models for measurement of spirituality. These take the form of inventories and have

gone through some initial testing, respectively the Spiritual Orientation Inventory (SOI)

and the Spiritual Modeling Inventory of Live Environments (SMILE). SMILE, in

particular, identifies spiritual attributes. The inventory identifies things such as meaning,

importance of relationship, and ethical considerations. These items are identified in the

analysis of the inventory as being related to spirituality.

Bellous and Csinos (2009) described assessment tools they helped to create for adults and children that identify the primary spiritual style of individuals. The general categories of ways people relate to one another and express the things they consider of great worth are through words, emotions, symbols, or actions. The authors asserted that our spiritual styles influence the ways in which we are able, or unable, to understand one another.

The qualitative research on spirituality in education is beginning to develop.

These studies have primarily addressed teachers or student experiences with some overlap. Pajak and Blasé (1989) did an early empirical study that utilized open-ended

questionnaires in which teachers were asked to specifically describe and illustrate in

detail the life factors that influenced their professional lives. Three areas in which

teachers’ professional and personal lives intersected were identified as: interpersonal,

personal, and socioeconomic. The researchers documented spirituality as one of the 13

57 life factors that teachers reported affecting their work life. Personal spiritual beliefs were found to have a beneficial influence on teachers’ professional lives. While most respondents did not name specific religions or religious beliefs, teachers spoke in general terms of a belief in God or religious values. Some teachers noted Christianity as a source of stability, meaning, and direction and others noted Zen, Yoga, and their belief in human dignity as sources of stability, meaning, and direction.

Dillard, Abdur-Rashid, and Tyson (2000) conducted a non-traditional ethnography in their study of a university professor in a college of education. Their study collected data through interviews, observations, document analysis, and informal interactions. While the research was done in a post-secondary setting, it revealed the ways in which an African American woman approached education and research through a close identification with spirituality. Teachers who embrace spirituality grounded pedagogy may be able to create a context which is more soulful in encouraging relationships with students and teaching them. By embracing a Black feminist epistemology both educator and researcher can be freed from the kind of thinking that posits both teaching and research as a neutral endeavor. It may also free the teacher and researcher from an academy that, at times, pressures spiritual Black women to disconnect from themselves in order to be accepted or acceptable.

Revell (2008) carried out a case study of four private religious schools (Lutheran,

Jewish, and two Catholic) and five public schools that were committed to Character

Education. The schools were located in Boston and Chicago. The project interviewed 28 educators, using semi-structured interviews with principals and teachers to explore

spiritual development in education. While she wrote of exploring teacher perspectives,

the study really focused on teacher and principal views of student spirituality and the use

of Character Education in the curriculum.

Participants from both religious and public schools spoke of religion and spirituality as being different but related and both groups were comfortable talking about spiritual development and spirituality in education. Also, educators in both religious and public schools spoke of the importance of the development and nurture of the whole child as an important part of teaching as well as an important element in creating community.

Both groups of educators understood the context in which they taught and the parameters that were implied in the settings of their respective schools.

While the educators in the religious schools differentiated between the religious and the spiritual, they felt that because they were educating students in a religiously based community, they had a particular environment in which to explore and support both religion and spirituality in their students. Teachers in religious schools viewed public schools as impoverished because public schools could not address morality and spirituality within a religious framework. They also felt that there was no advantage to teaching about morality or spirituality in the public school. While their religious community was built-in, they felt that public schools had to create a community in which to teach spirituality.

The public school teachers felt that even though there was no official or mandated curriculum for spiritual development, their schools contributed to students’ spiritual lives and that spirituality in education was an important component in modern education as it

offered students something beyond the materialist and consumerist mindset in America.

Teachers articulated a greater difference between spirituality and religion because they

were not allowed to advance religious values in the public school. They reported that

they did not believe that the inclusion of spirituality in education had an impact on the

moral behavior of their students. They also emphasized that spirituality in education was

part of educating the whole child and that Character Education contributed to a sense of

community and was the best way for public schools to appeal to shared values in the

greater community. The public school teachers also noted that spirituality is universal

and non-sectarian in nature and therefore it was an ideal bridge between students’ ethnic,

cultural, and religious backgrounds.

Pedraza (2006) utilized Black feminist and interpretive theoretical frameworks

and grounded theory in her dissertation study of five teachers in early childhood

education. Through interviews, observations, and narratives, she found that spirituality

was embedded and played a significant role in personal identity and connectedness with

self and others in relation to social justice. She found that spirituality was critical among

the teachers in providing a loving education to pre-school students. Teachers also reported that multiple spiritualities are negotiated within early childhood education.

Williams (2004) conducted a dissertation case study of five African American

students in grades 7-9 who attended public school and were involved in religious and

spiritual community groups. Through interviews, observations, and artifacts the

researcher found that Christian spirituality altered the ways in which the students

experienced their school and life experiences. Christian spirituality permeated life

60 choices and supported the importance of education, as well as a desire to help others in the community.

Floyd (2009) conducted a case study, in his dissertation work, of two African

American male students in a school dropout recovery program. The researcher focused on the development of emotional intelligence, critical spirituality, and response to Black theology. Through the study of Black theology the researcher did not intend to religiously indoctrinate the students but to help them attain higher self-knowledge.

Student responses were studied through questionnaires, interviews, and written essays, and the principal of the school was interviewed to discern his perspective about the possible effects of the instruction upon the participants. The researcher found that the students’ attitudes toward life, toward themselves, and toward their personal goals were enhanced through critical spiritual development.

There is a growing body of international empirical research on spirituality and public education, especially in countries where spirituality has been part of the formal curriculum or where school cultures are open to the presence of spirituality in the curriculum. These studies have also focused on either teachers or students with some overlap. In New Zealand, Fraser (2007) conducted a study in which she interviewed nine teachers in multicultural schools in the public education system. New Zealand’s state schools are secular but teachers are expected to address students’ spiritual well-being in the classroom. Fraser noted that this raises epistemological, ontological, and pedagogical challenges for teachers.

The nine teachers who were interviewed worked with the nation’s largest

minority group, the Maori. Maori culture has unique spiritual beliefs and practices.

Teachers reported that Maori students naturally brought their spirituality into classroom

discussions, writing assignments, art projects, and interactions with other students and

their teachers. The teachers’ personal sense of spirituality was vital to their self-identity and professional practice and was one of the factors that helped educators respond to their students’ spirituality with a sense of inclusion and imagination. The teachers’ narratives illustrated a connection between their own spirituality and that of their students. Fraser

(2007) identified the strongest finding in her study on spirituality as that of connection.

The teachers discussed the importance of self as both personal and in relation to others with focus on the centrality of community for spiritual well-being.

Fraser (2007) also made an interesting observation. While she conceived the interviews as individual conversations, the teachers requested group interviews. They wanted to be engaged with one another about this topic. They did not want to discuss spirituality in the isolation of individual interviews but in small groups where they could hear other viewpoints and have exchanges with other teachers.

Francis, Robbins, and Johnson (2001) conducted a quantitative research project utilizing questionnaires to determine the understanding of the term “spirituality” among primary-school teachers in state-maintained schools in England. England has a long history of Church sponsored colleges. Due to the fact that the common schools in

England and Wales are mandated to provide spiritual development to their students, the researchers wondered if there would be any significant difference between teachers who

62 were educated at secular colleges and teachers who were educated in Church colleges regarding their understanding of spirituality. Questionnaires were completed by 298 participants. After controlling for age, sex, current religiosity, and personality, the researchers found that teachers who had their initial training in Church sponsored colleges were more likely to interpret spirituality within traditional Christian constructs than those teachers who had their initial training in secular institutions. Prior to the study there was a lack of empirical evidence regarding the effects of Church sponsored colleges on educational practice in England. The Anglican and Free Churches of England and

Wales have invested heavily in the Church colleges. As all colleges in the country are competing for funding and are pressured to justify their unique contributions to teacher education, the study showed that the Church sponsored colleges, indeed, are making a distinct contribution to the field of common schooling.

Sztokman (2009) conducted a three year ethnographic research project in a religious girls’ high school in Israel utilizing a variety of data gathering techniques including multiple semi-open interviews with teachers, students, staff, principals, and parents as well as observations of classes and informal activities. Narrative analysis consisted of identifying meaning expressed through metaphors, symbols, binary oppositions, and other narrative “fissures.” The roles of the teacher in state religious schools is to educate for religious observance and mentor students as they engage with spiritual issues and questions. These roles may not always co-exist in harmony as linear religious education is confronted by the more fluid experiences and viewpoints of spirituality.

During Sztokman’s (2009) research, the area in which the school was located was directly affected by the Al-Aksa Intifada of 2000, and the community experienced a surge of violence including bombings, attacks, shootings, and car bombings. The violence led many of the participants of the study to articulate spiritual struggles related to meaning, good and evil, suffering, and fate.

Sztokman (2009) found that students were not permitted to engage in spiritual or philosophical concerns about what they were experiencing in their classrooms. The state religious school did not provide a safe place for its students to claim agency in their spiritual dilemmas raised by the Intifada. The differences between religious indoctrination and spiritual development became clear through the narratives of the various participants.

The literature on spirituality and spirituality and education demonstrates a growing commitment with the topic. Authors have noted ways in which education has become disconnected, from students and teachers alike, due to the demands of performance based goals as well as fears surrounding discussions that include religious and spiritual viewpoints, which often leave little time for teachers to engage their students in thoughtful processes of dealing with the life issues their students face in society. Some of these studies suggest that students may involve themselves in troubling behaviors because they feel this disconnection and they do not have a place to wrestle with social issues in ways that are inclusive of the spiritual and religious backgrounds they either bring to the classroom or may develop through engagement that honors and challenges their whole person.

Spirituality has been described in terms of relationship and nurturing as teachers connect with their students and encourage them to connect with their inner being, with others, and in some cases with a Transcendent Other. Encouraging students to develop their inner sense of wellbeing and moral compass influences the ways in which they interact with others and may provide an anchor for students as they confront the storms of their personal lives. The literature also suggests that teachers have a unique, and sometimes powerful, role in nurturing a sense of spirituality in their students by modeling and engaging them in acts of caring, understanding, finding meaning and purpose, and justice.

While there is a body of empirical research developing on spirituality in education there has been little done that focuses on public schooling in the United States where the separation of church and state is a prevalent tension. Public education is not to be used as a tool of proselytizing, but neither does it need to be devoid of discussion about religion and spirituality. There is also a lack of research that investigates if and how public school teachers in this country engage spirituality in their classrooms.

In studying the literature on spirituality and education, it became clear to me that additional empirical research is needed to begin asking basic questions about spirituality of those involved directly in public education. Even though there has been writing on spirituality and religion in public schooling and the issues surrounding its recognition, acceptance, and utilization, the lack of voice from teachers in the empirical literature seems apparent. A research study investigating the ways in which teachers perceive their personal sense of spirituality and the ways in which they experience spirituality in the

65 classroom with their students will extend the existing literature base and begin to help us understand how teachers make the spiritual connections with students that are often discussed in the literature in more general terms. Teachers are the ones who are with their students daily in the classroom. It is important that we do not simply talk about their perspective but that we also listen to their voices. Therefore, a study that invites teachers to voice their perspectives on spirituality in public education is the focus of my investigation.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODS

This chapter describes the research methods I used in this project. I outline my

approach, including my research questions, the way I made contact with potential

participants, questions that guided the interviews, data collection, and analysis. I also

reflect on ethical considerations that arise from my approach as well as the

trustworthiness of my process. Bogdan and Biklen (1998) outlined five characteristics of

qualitative research as follows: naturalistic, the gathering of descriptive data, concern

with process, inductive analyses, and the discovery of meaning. These characteristics

have guided my study. During my review of the literature I was unable to locate any empirical research done on the topic of public school teachers’ perceptions of spirituality in education in the United States. This study, therefore, is an exploratory study that investigates fundamental questions of teachers’ personal sense of spirituality and how their sense of spirituality enters the classroom with them.

My philosophical approach to the study is interpretive constructivist and draws from naturalistic inquiry. I wanted to know how teachers talk about the ways in which their self-perceived spirituality influenced their approach to teaching and their

interactions with their students. Rubin and Rubin (2005) described interpretive

constructionist research as a way to discover how people attribute meaning to events.

The researcher would “expect people to see somewhat different things, examine them

through distinct lenses, and come to somewhat different conclusions” (p. 27). The

researcher would then,

66 67

Try to elicit interviewee’s views of their worlds, their work, and the events they

have experienced or observed. Rather than looking for the average and ignoring

the specific, as positivists often do, interpretive constructionists look for the

specific and detailed and try to build an understanding based on those specifics.

(p. 28)

My approach to method has been guided by Sandelowski (2000, 2009) but modified by my disciplinary training in the field of Social Foundations, which values the interpretive dimensions of educational practice and educational research. Other researchers and authors are noted to add clarification and description to my process.

Naturalistic inquiry occurs when something or someone is studied in its natural state or as close to that natural state as possible. Sandelowski (2000) noted that qualitative description draws from the general principles of naturalistic inquiry; “in any naturalistic study, there is no pre-selection of variables to the study, no manipulation of variables, and no a priori commitment to any one theoretical view of the target phenomenon” (p. 337).

While this is not a phenomenological study, it may have phenomenological overtones. Teachers described their personal experiences of spirituality. Sandelowski

(2000) noted, “Some qualitative descriptive studies have narrative or phenomenological hues as researchers might seriously attend to certain words and phrases, or moments of experience, but not produce narrative or phenomenological renderings of the target phenomenon” (p. 337).

Through the interview process, teachers have had the opportunity to respond in detail and with explanation to questions, and I have had the opportunity to elicit deeper conversation with them. By posing open-ended questions, I allowed teachers to offer their unique viewpoints in their own words and with their own constructs.

Bogdan and Biklen (1998) made the point that while recognizing that the interview itself creates an unnatural environment for the participant, “qualitative researchers believe that approaching people with a goal of trying to understand their point of view, while not perfect, distorts the informants’ experience the least” (p. 24).

Conceptions of spirituality are often individual and unique and this would hold true for public school teachers as well. Teachers come from varied backgrounds and attach meaning to their points of view in distinctive ways. I wanted to understand the ways in which teachers perceived how their spirituality might influence their presence in the classroom. Through the interview process, I hoped to engage teachers in a kind of conversation in which they would be able to express how they understand their personal sense of spirituality and how that sense of spirituality enters the classroom with them. I was interested in what spirituality means to them and how, or if, they perceived that their spirituality is something that came into play as they taught and interacted with their students.

Qualitative description (Sandelowski, 2000, 2009) is a categorical inquiry that positions itself close to the data source, not demanding an abstract portrayal of the data.

It seeks to discover the who, what, and where of an experience or event or the nature of an experience through open-ended interviews that are minimally or moderately

69 structured. “Qualitative description is especially amenable to obtaining straight and largely unadorned (i.e., minimally theorized or otherwise transformed or spun) answers to questions of special relevance to practitioners and policy makers” (Sandelowski, 2000, p.

337).

Language, both verbal and non-verbal, is the main vehicle of discovery in qualitative description. “The description in qualitative descriptive studies entails the presentation of the facts of the case in everyday language” (Sandelowski, 2000, p. 336).

These descriptions are dependent on the communication of the describers or interviewees.

I asked teachers to tell me about their spirituality and they used their own voice, used their everyday language, and shared their own understandings. They found the words to speak about what spirituality meant to them as individuals and how spirituality was present in their classrooms.

Teachers shared their understandings and experiences; through studying the audio taped interviews, transcriptions, and interview notes, I synthesized their reporting and then worked to shed light on the overall experiences they reported. “Researchers seeking to describe an experience or event select what they will describe and, in the process of featuring certain aspects of it, begin to transform that experience or event” (Sandelowski,

2000, p. 335). While listening carefully to the teachers’ voices and then reporting their narratives, there was an aspect of interpretation from the beginning of analysis that I took seriously and with deference. In this process, interview notes were particularly helpful in taking notice of body language and tone of voice expressing such things as irony, frustration, joy, conspiracy, and sadness. For example, when one teacher spoke of her

dilemma about discussing spiritual matters with her students while respecting the

boundaries of religion in public schooling she leaned toward me, smiled, and whispered.

She expressed both her sense of knowing the sensitivity of the issue and her ability to

navigate it in what she said verbally and non-verbally. Language is expressed in many ways beyond the spoken word.

Relying on teachers’ self-reporting, I depended on their candor and truthfulness.

Sandelowski (2009) described this approach as a “factist” view of data.

For example, a factist perspective of interview data assumes these data to be more

or less accurate and truthful indexes of reality “out there.” These data are taken to

be documentary traces of beliefs, behaviors, and events, and to convey what is

“really” going on. (p. 80)

Although there are two general assumptions implicit in my study (that people are spiritual beings, which may be expressed in a variety of ways, and that a teacher’s spirituality may influence his or her work with students), I realized that participants may challenge these assumptions and I wanted to understand that as well. Bogdan and Biklen

(1998) noted, “You are not putting together a puzzle whose picture you already know.

You are constructing a picture that takes shape as you collect and examine the parts” (pp.

6-7). Even though the literature shaped some assumptions, these were not necessarily found in my research. My findings emerged “from the bottom up (rather from the top down), from many disparate pieces of collected evidence that are interconnected” (p. 6).

An example of how this evidenced itself in the data collected from the interviews was the emergent category in which teachers expressed that it was not only important that they

care about their students, but that the students knew they cared about them. I had not

found this expression in the review of the literature; it is an example of an organic

expression from the interviews.

Research Questions and Guiding Questions

The primary questions I wanted to explore in this study were: Does a teacher’s

personal sense of spirituality influence the ways in which they view their teaching; and if so, how does a teacher’s personal sense of spirituality influence the ways in which they view their teaching?

Although other disciplines such as nursing and counseling have done empirical research on the subject of spirituality, I found a lack of empirical research in the area of public school teaching. Therefore, I began with a very basic study and my questions reflect this starting point. While each interview experience was unique and questions as well as follow-up questions emerged from each distinctive interview, two basic guiding questions were presented to each interviewee.

1. What is your personal sense of spirituality?

2. How does your personal sense of spirituality influence your teaching?

The first question helped me to understand each teacher’s personal point of view regarding her or his understanding of spirituality in general and its position in their life.

This conversation laid a foundation for the second question that gave each teacher the opportunity to reflect and comment on the ways in which their personal sense of spirituality might enter the classroom and their interactions with their students. This plan called for semi-structured interviews.

I had two guiding questions in mind, but was also able to be flexible in raising additional questions within the interview. The interview process also allowed me to ask teachers to clarify any statements or words they used. I was able to ask for examples as well as ask follow-up questions, which allowed me to gain more depth in the conversation (Rubin & Rubin, 2005).

Prior to asking the substantive questions of my inquiry I spent some time establishing a comfortable rapport with each teacher by asking them about their years in teaching, years teaching high school, the demographics of their students, and what kinds of things happen during their classes. “At least at the beginning of research, most qualitative interviews are between strangers, so part of the interviewing process requires establishing a connection that allows for an openness of exchange,” (Rubin & Rubin,

2005, p. 13).

I was interested in listening to the teachers’ stories and allowing them to express their own understanding of spirituality. Therefore, I did not give them a definition and I did not ask them for a definition of spirituality. Fraser (2007) noted in her interview study with teachers that teachers’ stories were more likely to disclose their beliefs and understandings about spirituality than asking them to define spirituality and asking participants to define a concept like spirituality may lead to vague responses that do not necessarily illuminate the idea.

My interest was in the teachers’ narratives. I wanted to know how they experienced spirituality in both their personal lives and in their lives with their students.

Interestingly, only two teachers asked for a specific definition of spirituality. This surprised me because I anticipated all of the interviewees asking for a definition as a possible starting point for the discussion. When the two teachers wanted to know how I was defining spirituality, it gave me an opportunity to let them know I was interested in their way of understanding spirituality and that I had not come to the interviews with a preconceived notion into which I wanted them to fit. It also proved to be a light moment in these interviews because I was able to joke with them a little about qualitative research and emerging data.

I interviewed 14 teachers and the interviews were approximately one hour in length. To capture the data in the most naturalistic setting, I interviewed teachers on-site at their schools. When possible I interviewed teachers in their classrooms in order to get a feel for the physical environment in which they taught. I was able to interview 11 of the teachers in their classrooms. One teacher met me in the library resource room because his student teacher was conducting a class. One teacher met with me in her resource room in which she did her one-on-one sessions with students and one teacher did not offer to meet in his classroom and I conducted the interview in a faculty-staff meeting room after school. I hoped that interviewing teachers “on their own territory” would add to the comfort level they experienced with me.

Recruitment of Participants

I decided to base this initial work with secondary teachers. I interviewed high school teachers working with students in grades 9-12. While teachers of all grade levels may have contributions to make in understanding spirituality in education, high school

74 teachers occupy a unique place in the development of young people. Secondary teachers work with students who are becoming adults and may be starting to take on adult responsibilities like work, relationships, and career choices. At this level, students may be searching for answers to some of life’s big questions. This seemed an appropriate place to start.

The criteria I set for potential interviewees were that they were fulltime practicing teachers who taught at the secondary level in a public school. I wanted to interview teachers whose primary job was teaching. I wanted to interview teachers who were presently working in the classroom and immersed in the classroom culture. I wanted to know what teachers were experiencing currently. I wanted to learn about teachers in public education and hoped they would shed some light on spirituality in the public school.

When I originally proposed this research project, I realized that I did not have much of a foundation on which to build. In some ways this was liberating but I also discovered that I had to make decisions about procedures and participants as the project developed.

I wanted to interview typical high school teachers about this topic so I did not seek out participants who were perceived by my contacts as having a heightened sense of spiritual awareness or religious belief, nor did I screen potential interviewees regarding their spirituality or religion. Potential interviewees were discovered through casual contacts. I asked friends who teach at elementary schools if they knew any high school teachers who might be willing to be interviewed. I discussed my research at unrelated

75 meetings and on a couple of occasions people told me they knew someone who might be willing to be interviewed. I also contacted a retired principal, who was known by an acquaintance; this retired principal put me in contact with an active principal. I hoped that this strategy for recruitment would not put any pressure on teachers to participate in the study even though there was a third party connection. This desire seemed to be accomplished as none of the teachers interviewed mentioned the third party contacts.

With all of the initial contacts, I requested that they send an email to potential participants with an invitation for volunteers to be interviewed for a research project being conducted by a doctoral candidate at Kent State University. Following the

Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved protocol I did not inform my initial contacts about the topic of my study. This was a reasoned decision. Again, I wanted to interview typical teachers and did not want colleagues to pick out teachers they thought were particularly religious or spiritual. My contact information was included in these emails.

I asked that no pressure be put on any teachers to participate in this study. I requested that any teachers who were willing to be interviewed contact me. I was particularly concerned that the teachers contacted by their principal would feel pressure to participate and I hoped by requesting that teachers contact me directly, I would circumvent that possible problem. I emailed these first contacts and thanked them for their assistance. I quickly discovered that the principal did not follow the requested procedure and had the interested teachers contact her. She then sent me their names and contact information. I believe she was trying to be helpful by communicating these names and contact information to me. Not all of the teachers who initially showed

76 interest joined the study and I did not indicate to the principal which teachers were being interviewed. In my contacts with the teachers, I stressed both the volunteer and confidential components of the study. While this glitch caused me some discomfort, the teachers involved did not seem bothered by it. In addition, even though I had some volunteers, I did not interview any teachers I know personally.

This process lacked intentionality in attempting to secure interviews with any particular category of teacher: age group, years in teaching, gender, race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. For the purpose of this study, I was not concerned with the subject area(s) in which the teachers taught or were certified. I hoped that a variety of subject areas might add more depth to my findings. For example, I was reasonably sure that issues of spirituality might be raised in subject areas like literature and writing but I did not know if or how issues of spirituality might be raised in subject areas like mathematics and science. It appeared that the subject and content area of the teachers’ classes had less to do with the ways in which teachers connected with their students spiritually than the teachers’ holistic view of their students and the opportunities the teachers discovered within the context of the classroom as well as their interactions with students after the dismissal bell rang.

By asking my casual contacts to make the initial communication with the potential interviewees, I avoided having to “cold call” teachers and it gave me the luxury of communicating with teachers who had already expressed willingness to participate in the study. If the teacher was willing to participate, I then emailed or telephoned him or

her to set up the interview. This often took several exchanges. I was available to

interview teachers on-site before, during, or after school.

Before contacting participants, application for this study was made to the Office

of Research Safety and Compliance at Kent State University for the study. The Kent

State University Institutional Review Board approved the protocol for the study February

25, 2009 (see Appendix A) and approved continuation on February 25, 2010 (see

Appendix B). The study was approved as Level II research.

Participants were asked to sign a consent form allowing the interview and the

audio taping of the interview (see Appendix C). Participation in the interview was

completely voluntary and participants were able to withdraw from the project at any time.

Confidentiality was maintained through the use of pseudonyms for each teacher and the

names and locations of the schools are not disclosed. No compensation was offered to

teachers to participate in the study.

One of my concerns with the interview process was establishing a rapport with each teacher in a relatively short period of time. Rubin and Rubin (2000) noted this as a challenge with interviewing participants. Janesick (1998) noted this as well.

The researcher must establish trust, rapport, and authentic communication

patterns with participants. By establishing trust and rapport at the beginning of

the study, the researcher is better able to capture the nuance and meaning of each

participant’s life from the participant’s point of view. This also ensures that

participants will be more willing to share everything, warts and all, with the

researcher. (pp. 39-40)

From my first contact with each teacher it was important to begin establishing this rapport. I answered emails and phone calls in a timely manner and expressed appreciation and flexibility while setting up each interview.

Another issue I confronted early in the study was whether I should have communicated the topic of my research to my participants. The protocol of my IRB did not include informing participants of the general topic prior to the interview and in setting up interviews with the first five teachers, I was not asked about the topic of my research and I did not communicate this information. I was not trying to hide anything or spring my topic on anyone. It was not until contacting another group of teachers that I realized I had not thought through this issue. Three of the teachers specifically asked in their emails what the interview would be about. I told them that my study was on spirituality in public education. The other teachers did not ask, and I did not tell them the general topic. Before the interviews began, all the teachers were aware of the topic of the study as it was indicated on the consent form and I stressed again that they could withdraw from the project at any time. Because some teachers knew about the topic of the research prior to the interview, this may have had various consequences in the interviews.

For those who knew about the subject prior to the interview there may have been two effects. Interviewees may have taken time to think about the subject and been prepared to discuss it in the interview. It could also be that having time to consider the topic, teachers may have been less spontaneous and more guarded. The interviews done with teachers who did not know the subject of the study might be skewed in different ways. They might have been surprised by the interview questions, which some indeed

79 expressed as they struggled to get their thoughts together, or they may have given cursory answers to the questions. It is possible that they, too, may have been guarded in their answers. In both cases, I gave interviewees time to think about the questions and was prepared to ask follow-up questions that would bring out their stories.

To set the participants at ease, I depended on the skills I have developed through my professional experiences working with a wide variety of people. I hoped that the confidential nature of the interviews would also empower the interviewees to be forthcoming. I was intentional in attempting to communicate to the interviewees that I cared about what they had to say and that I respected their time, intent, and disclosure.

The skills I have developed by working with people over many years were extremely helpful when at least three of the participants became emotional during the interview. I did not anticipate the topic of spirituality in education causing tearfulness, but in retrospect, I should have. Teachers were at times moved by the stories and examples they shared.

In my interview with one teacher, she told a story that brought her to tears that flowed down her cheeks. She became flustered by the demonstration of emotion in her classroom, and it seemed to threaten what she perceived as her sense of professionalism she exhibited within the boundaries of the school. She said that she had never cried at school and she added that she was angry at me. My conversation with her caused her to drift across a perceived professional boundary that she had never crossed before in the school setting. In my prodding, I was seen as the cause for that crossing and this made her both uncomfortable and angry. Discussing spirituality is a very personal, and

80 sometimes emotional, conversation. As a researcher I was always aware that I was on sacred ground.

Ethics

As part of the IRB approval of the study, the teachers were given a consent form to sign for the audio taping of the interview. Teachers were able to review their tape or transcriptions if they wished, but none chose to do so. It was stressed in contact with the teachers before the interview that participation was voluntary and they could withdraw from the study at any time (Rubin & Rubin, 2005).

Protecting the teachers’ identities was critical to this study because the nature of the interviews was very personal and their stories and examples were sensitive.

We ask a lot when we ask individuals to participate in our qualitative studies. We

usually ask for a considerable amount of time, but more important, we ask

participants to reveal what goes on behind the scenes in their every day lives. We

ask them to trust us to the point that they are comfortable sharing the intimate

details of their lifeworlds. (Hatch, 2002, pp. 65-66)

While the content of the interviews may be used for the purposes of this study and articles that might be produced from this study, teachers’ actual names are not used and their schools and districts are not identified. Interview tapes, notes, consent forms, field notes, and transcripts were handled carefully and kept secure in compliance with IRB standards.

I did not interview students and contact with students was minimal. The only interactions I had with students were when they escorted me to classrooms, when they

interrupted the interviews to contact their teachers, and in the hallways as they were

changing classes or leaving school. “Qualitative researchers in any setting may face

ethical decisions about what to do if they observe illegal activity, behavior that is unsafe,

or practices that place individuals at risk” (Hatch, 2002, p. 67). I understood that if I

observed any illegal activity I was under obligation to report it.

While I observed no illegal activity, I was challenged in a couple of situations

when teachers used disparaging language about their students in the interview. I was not

sure what my obligation was to challenge the teachers the few times this came up. In one

case the teacher spoke of the student as “lazy” and said the student’s family put few

expectations on her and that life was “pretty good” with mom and grandma who did not

challenge the student, who “didn’t care,” and “watch[ed] soap operas all day” and let her

eat whatever she wanted. My dilemma was whether or not to confront these assumptions

or the language used. I decided not to confront this teacher and to let her continue to talk.

I was there to capture her story and, in fact, it would have been unethical, as a researcher,

to confront her. This particular situation flagged an unexpected category during my

analysis that addressed the teachers’ belief that they needed to rescue students when I

discovered that she was not the only teacher to hold disapproving attitudes toward some

students and their families.

I recognized that my greatest ethical obligation was to receive what the teachers

told me with openness and respect and to report their insight and stories with the

maximum amount of accuracy with which I am capable. This responsibility was taken seriously throughout this study.

Participants

The demographic information and general information about each teacher is given to get a feel for the school in which she or he teaches and in all but one case reflects information from their state’s latest published statistical data base. In Abbey’s case, her school was so new that it was not listed on the website of her state. She reported her information to me. Teachers were interviewed at six schools all of which were located in the mid-west. For the purpose of this description a small school is one with an enrollment of 20-900, a medium sized school is one with an enrollment of 901-1500, and a large school is one with an enrollment of 1501-2000. Of the teachers interviewed, nine were women and five were men. All participants have been assigned pseudonyms (see

Table 1).

Table 1

Participant and School Information

Years % Teaching High School % Economically % With Participant School Subject(s) Size White Disadvantaged Disabilities

Abbey 1-5 Job Skills S >90* 41-50* 100*

Jackie 1-5 FCS S >80 41-50 10-20

Charles 1-5 Mathematics S >80 41-50 10-20

Max 21-30 Social Studies S >80 41-50 10-20

Phyllis 16-20 Language Arts S >80 41-50 10-20

Rick 31-40 Social Studies S >80 41-50 10-20

Tara 16-20 SPED S >80 41-50 10-20

Veronica 21-30 Foreign Language M >90 11-20 21-30

Debbie 6-15 SPED M >90 11-20 21-30

Sherry 6-15 Social Studies M >90 11-20 21-30

Laura 6-15 Language Arts M >80 21-30 10-20

Bev 16-20 SPED L >90 1-10 10-20

Eric 21-30 Mathematics L >90 1-10 10-20

Frank 21-30 Science L >90 11-20 10-20

*Teacher’s self-reporting

Abbey has been teaching for over 20 years. She previously taught at the elementary and middle school levels. She has been teaching at her present high school for less than five years. Abbey teaches at an alternative school for students with behavioral issues. Most of the students are fulltime, but there are a few who take classes at their home high schools and then are transported to the school at which Abbey teaches

for the rest of the day. The school shares space with a therapeutic farm. Abbey teaches

job skills, which includes vocational skills and employment skills. The program is highly

individualized and a major emphasis of her work is teaching appropriate social skills.

The school enrollment is less than 50 students. There is one racial minority student in the

school. She reported that approximately half of her students are economically

disadvantaged and that all of the students have handicapping conditions, primarily

behavior disorders, which include autism and mental health issues.

Jackie, Charles, Max, Phyllis, Rick, and Tara teach at the same high school,

which is a small school, in which more than 80% of the students are White, 41-50% are

economically disadvantaged, and 10-20% are students with disabilities.

Jackie has been teaching for less than five years and has been at her present school for less than five years. She teaches Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS). Her classes are electives, include students from mixed grades, include a significant number of students with disabilities, and include students from the Graduation Reality and

Duel-Roles program (GRADS), which is a national program geared to keep pregnant and parenting students in school. GRADS is designed for both mothers and fathers, but she reports that she only has had young women from this program in her classes.

Charles has been teaching for less than five years. He teaches mathematics. He teaches general classes and college preparatory classes. His classes include students from mixed grades.

Max has been teaching for 21-30 years. He previously taught middle school and has been at his present school for 21-30 years. He teaches history and his classes include students from mixed grades. He is also an athletics coach and school club advisor.

Phyllis has been teaching high school for 16-20 years. She teaches language arts.

She was previously a school club advisor for several years.

Rick has been teaching for 31-40 years and all of those have been spent at his

present school. He teaches history and his classes include students from mixed grade

levels. His is also a school club advisor.

Tara has been teaching high school for 21-30 years. She teaches in special

education (SPED), working with students who are deaf and hearing impaired. In addition

to working with students in their typical classrooms, she tutors and does testing. She also

works with her students on career and life skills. Along with working with high school

students, Tara works with students from other grade levels, often following them

throughout their public school years.

Veronica, Debbie, and Sherry teach at the same high school, which is a medium

size school, of which over 90% of the students are White, 11-20% of the students are

economically disadvantaged, and 21-30% are students with disabilities.

Veronica has been teaching high school for 21-30 years. She teaches foreign

languages. Her students are in mixed grade levels 9-12. She is also a school club

advisor.

Debbie has been teaching for 21-30 years and has taught 6-15 years at the

secondary level at her present school. She teaches special education (SPED),

specifically, students with developmental disabilities in the areas of mathematics, social

studies, and science. Her students are in mixed grade levels 9-12.

Sherry has been teaching high school and has been at her present school for 6-15 years. She teaches history and her students are in mixed grade levels. She is also a school club advisor to two student groups.

Laura teaches at a medium size high school in which more than 80% of the students are White, 21-30% are economically disadvantaged, and 10-20% are students with disabilities. Laura has been teaching for 16-20 years and has been teaching high school for 6-15 years. She teaches language arts to upper class students and some of her students are in career tech education programs.

Bev and Eric teach at the same school, which is a large school in which more than

90% of the students are White, 11-20% of the students are economically disadvantaged, and 10-20% are students with disabilities.

Bev has been teaching for 21-30 years. She taught at the elementary and middle school levels and has taught at the high school level for 16-20 years. She teaches special education (SPED), specifically students with autism, multiple disabilities, learning disabilities, and developmental disabilities. She teaches life skills and does testing.

Eric has been teaching at the high school level for 21-30 years. He teaches mathematics and his students are from mixed grade levels. He is an athletic coach and also serves as a union representative for the faculty in his school district.

Frank has been teaching high school for 21-30 years and teaches at a large size high school in which over 90% of the students are White, 11-20% of the students are

economically disadvantaged, and 10-20% are students with disabilities. He teaches

science to students in mixed grades.

Data Collection

My primary source of data was the teacher interview. Sandelowski (2000) noted,

Data collection in qualitative descriptive studies is typically directed toward

discovering the who, what, and where of events or experiences, or their basic

nature and shape. Data collection techniques usually include minimally to

moderately structured open-ended individual and/or focus group interviews. (p.

338)

In addition to the audiotape of each interview, I took copious interview notes, made field notes about the school and classrooms, and fact-checked demographic statistics with the websites for the Departments of Education in which the schools were located. The interview notes helped me to record non-verbal language, words and phrases the teachers stressed, points I wanted to investigate further, and the general flow of the conversation. The field notes on the classrooms and schools provided a place for me to record the general physical set up of the environment including placement of furniture, signs and posters on the walls, availability of technology, and anything else of note. This especially helped me to recall the individual classroom space and some of the things the teachers presented in their rooms. I felt that if a poster or seating arrangement was important to the teacher it would be evidenced in their classroom. At times, this aided in giving a fuller description of the interview.

During my first interview, the teacher gave me his general impressions of demographic data for his school. He explained that he was not sure of the accuracy in his reporting. I went to the Department of Education website to find the most recent demographic information on his school. I found that, indeed, his impressions were not accurate. In each of the interviews, I asked the teachers about the demographics of the students and then fact-checked these with the Department of Education websites. I discovered that most of the teachers over reported racial diversity and statistics for economically disadvantaged students whereas most of the teachers underreported the statistics for students with disabilities.

These procedures helped me to capture the “thick description” necessary for the most complete rendering of the interview experience. Geertz (1973) noted that thick description provides context, intelligibility, and accessibility to the data by including more than just the spoken words of the informant. By describing such things as settings, informants’ vocal intonations and facial expressions, and pauses in conversations one may get closer to implied meaning. The author offered the example of observing the difference between an eye twitch, a wink, and a mimicked wink as observations that thicken the description of interaction with an interviewee.

Field notes and the reflective journals were compiled with two general purposes: to describe the setting and to reflect my thoughts during and after the interviews, as well as during the analyses (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998). These notes were particularly important because the time between the actual interviews and the reviews of the audio tapes and transcripts were, at times, considerable. “No one can remember the content of multiple

interviews over months or years, so researchers make permanent record of their

interviews through either notes or recordings” (Rubin & Rubin, 2005, p. 203).

The transcribing of the interviews was done by a third party. While this was

helpful in many ways, there were also concerns that had to be addressed. Rubin and

Rubin (2005) raised a caution:

The downside to having someone else type the transcriptions is that the person

listening to the recording of the interview was not there, does not know the names

of the people or places mentioned on the transcript, and cannot fill in from

memory parts that are inaudible. You have to go over transcripts done by others

carefully to make sure that they have not introduced major mistakes. (p. 205)

I found this caution to be true. While the first 11 transcripts were done by private

contract, in reviewing the transcripts with the audio tapes it was necessary to correct

spelling and fill in technical words that were specific to the field of education (IEP,

Cochlear implant, Asberger’s syndrome, etc.) and fill in dialogue that was inaudible to

the transcribers but which I could either understand or complete with my interview notes.

The three transcriptions that were prepared by the Research Bureau took a long time to

receive, were of a very low quality, and had to be completely redone.

Data collection began March 2009 and was completed April 2010. This

coincided with the public school year (vacation, standardized testing, and end-of-year activities) and the availability of the teachers. One teacher who wanted to participate in the study had a series of health problems and it took nine months to secure the interview.

Another teacher forgot that the interview was scheduled and it had to be rescheduled

90 from May to September. It was important to remain flexible with the teachers, as well as persistent during scheduling. After each interview, I reviewed my notes, checked each audio tape, and submitted the interview tapes for transcription.

Data Analysis

Sandelowski (2000) described data analysis in qualitative descriptive studies as

“data-derived.” Codes of category come from the data and the analysis is reflexive.

Both quantitative and qualitative content analyses entail counting responses and

numbers of participants in each response category, but in qualitative content

analysis, counting is a means to an end, not the end itself . . . the end result of

counting is not a quasi-statistical rendering of the data, but rather a description of

patterns or regularities in the data that have, in part, been discovered and then

confirmed by counting. (p. 338)

In qualitative description, the data stand for themselves with little directive to

“re-present” them. This portrayed the basic or fundamental nature of the qualitative descriptive method.

Qualitative content analysis moves farther into the domain of interpretation than

quantitative content analysis in that there is an effort to understand not only the

manifest (e.g., frequencies and means), but also the latent content of data. Yet

qualitative content analysis is the least interpretive of the qualitative analysis

approaches in that there is no mandate to re-present the data in any other terms

but their own . . . concerns remain concerns and perceptions remain perceptions.

(Sandelowski, 2000, p. 338)

Qualitative description is interpretive in the sense that the “data never speak for themselves” (Sandelowski, 2009, p. 79). The researcher’s hand is in the data from the beginning in posing the questions through the choices of what is written in the summary.

The researcher’s task in this process is to remain close to the data and to represent it as carefully and clearly as possible.

There is a vast difference between being open-minded yet mindful of the

preconceptions (including theoretical leanings) one has entering a field of study

and being empty-headed, an impossibility for any human being with a fully

functioning brain and for investigators who tend to study things about which they

already (or should) know a great deal. There is no such thing as a view from

nowhere; having or taking a view means standing somewhere. (Sandelowski,

2009, p. 80)

According to Sandelowski (2000), it is expected that the product of a qualitative descriptive study is a “straight descriptive summary,” and while the descriptive summary may lead to further study, it is primarily focused on the description of a particular phenomenon.

Analysis is also an on-going process throughout gathering of data and after.

Informal data analysis began after each of my interviews. I reviewed my interview notes as well as field notes. I thought about the interview and what was shared by the interviewee. I tried to identify any mistakes I made in the interview and how I might correct them. I also made any additions to notes that I felt were pertinent.

Examples of adjustments that I made during the interview process ranged from simple things to more focus oriented issues. One example was merely emailing the teacher I was interviewing a couple days before the scheduled interview to remind him or her of our appointment and make sure it was still on their schedule. I also learned in the first round of interviews not to schedule two interviews in one day so that my ability to concentrate and be fully present was not impeded.

An example of a focus issue arose after my interview with Max. Max liked to wax philosophic. He began speaking when we sat down and, not wanting to interrupt him, I listened to him talk about a wide range of topics for about 45 minutes before he asked me to identify my interview questions. I thought about this experience a lot and made some changes in my introductory questions and made sure that in subsequent interviews I addressed my research topic earlier and more clearly in the meeting. I was also able to be more vigilant in bringing teachers back to the interview topic and follow-up questions after this experience.

After receiving my transcriptions, I listened to the audio tapes and read the interviews to get a “sense of the whole” and review any notations or memos made in my field notes. Thorne, Kirkham, and MacDonald-Emes (1997) recommended in their article on interpretive description that the researcher engage in “repeated immersion in the data prior to beginning coding, classifying, or creating linkages” (p. 175). By reading through the data as a whole, I began to get a sense of what was present. While asking the question: What are the data telling me? I made notations of general ideas or impressions that began to address that question. By setting aside the transcripts and audio tapes and

then reviewing them again and again, I also discovered that I was able to engage them

with a new set of eyes and a new set of ears. This helped me continue to find comments

that were relevant to my inquiry.

A line by line review of the transcripts was then studied. Coding was done by

discovering categories in the data and arranging these from the most prevalent to the least

prevalent (Sandelowski, 2000). While a descriptive summary is the product of this study,

it is hoped that it will lay groundwork for future research.

There is no mandate to produce anything other than a descriptive summary of an

event, organized in a way that best contains the data collected and that will be

most relevant to the audience for whom it is written. But such summaries may

themselves yield the working concepts, hypotheses, and thematic moments for

future grounded theory or phenomenological study, or themselves contain early

versions of them. (Sandelowski, 2000, p. 399)

Once I listened to the interviews again while reading through the transcripts, I began noting statements from the teachers that seemed important. At this stage I engaged with a peer to serve as a debriefer for my analysis. The individual, who agreed to do my peer debriefing, works in the field of human services and holds a bachelor degree and a master degree in nursing. The peer I worked with has experience in research in general and qualitative research in particular and has worked on a granted research project that utilized interviews for data collection. I made copies of each of the transcripts and submitted them to my peer debriefer. Each of us studied the transcripts making general notes on important ideas, possible categories, and examples that teachers reported. We

then met and reviewed the transcripts together and discussed the salient points we

identified. We usually reviewed two interviews at each meeting. This allowed me to see

if I had stretched my understanding of an interviewee’s responses or had missed something that should have been noted.

Initially, I had categories for “Teacher as Human” and “Teacher as Learner,” but as I reviewed the statements made by the teachers with my peer and discussed these as categories they did not appear to fit with the research questions and they were set aside.

Two categories that stood out to both of us immediately were: “Teaching as a Calling” and what we initially titled “Whole Self (fluidity of spirituality and teaching).” These

categories were discussed and as we made our way through the transcripts found more

and more statements by the teachers that fit. There were also some responses which

seemed important, but we were not sure how to categorize them. We noted these and as

categories emerged some of them aligned with the categories.

This process helped me to check my perceptions and discuss information the teachers shared. We often noted the importance of the same statements, but there were instances when my peer identified statements I had missed and I identified statements she had missed. We discussed these statements and decided whether to place them and where.

I began to create categories as we reviewed the interviews. At each review session categories were added as new data emerged. Some of the categories I identified paralleled categories suggested in the literature on spirituality and spirituality in public education such as: caring, respect, the call to teach, and navigating issues of church and

95 state; but some unique and noteworthy categories were also discovered. A growing list of statements that seemed unique grouped into a category I named, “You Need to Know that I Care.” These statements went beyond the idea that teachers cared about their students, but that it was also important for them to know that their students knew they cared.

Categories began to emerge within interviews, and between interviews, and key words were repeated across interviews. While developing the categories, it was important to keep in mind my research questions and end product and be consistent and clear.

At the conclusion of this stage, the data had produced 35 groups of statements the teachers made regarding their sense of personal spirituality and how spirituality was present in their classrooms. These groups were studied to determine how they might be clustered. I looked at the relationships between the initial categories to find out which categories might be merged and which could stand alone. I met with my peer debriefer to discuss the initial findings, and I was able to group certain statements together under more general headings. One category that became clear was one I initially called

“nurture.” Several groups of teacher statements fell under this category: guidance, motivating, counseling, and creating safety, are some examples.

At this point eight categories were identified as teachers related how spirituality enters their classroom. These categories were given the working titles of nurture, relationality, spiritual attributes, calling, openness, altruism, compassion, and you need to know I care. These categories were again studied to determine similarities within and

between. After further consideration, the category of altruism was folded into the

category of spiritual attributes, and the categories of openness and compassion seemed to

be similar to other sub-categories within the grouping of nurture. These changes, then,

formed five general categories for presentation.

I met with my peer debriefer for a final series of discussions and reviews of the

transcripts and went through them again, line-by-line, to discover if we had missed any

pertinent statements. During these reviews another category seemed to emerge. While

many of the statements overlapped with the nurture category we began to perceive a set of statements in which teachers expressed a desire and/or role of rescuing students. Our first instinct was to label this category as “savior complex,” but this quickly seemed too harsh and too loaded with a sense of overbearing religiosity that was not consistent with

the context of the teachers’ statements. “Rescue” seemed the better word to represent

this category, but we continued to waver on this label.

In addition to these categories, the teachers also discussed their own sense of

spirituality, how they related to separation of church and state issues, and identified ways

in which they sometimes experience education disconnection. Categories continued to

shift and take shape throughout this process until three major divisions became evident.

As I worked with the categories and considered how they might be presented and

discussed, I decided to create three chapters that grouped the data and gave me the

opportunity to comment on what the teachers said. The first group of data and

commentary focuses on the teachers’ descriptions of their own sense of spirituality and

how teachers navigated the issues of separation of church and state. The second group of

data and commentary focuses on the teachers’ narratives regarding spiritual nurture. The

third grouping presents and discusses the teachers’ sense of spiritual calling, the

relational aspect of spirituality, and the dynamic of students knowing that teachers care

about them.

For the purpose of describing the procedure of my analysis it may appear that this

process was linear. It was not. Qualitative research is dynamic and multilayered. It is

often messy and may at times feel chaotic. There is a delicate balance in adopting a

structure of organization that is elastic yet not out of control. I anticipated the need to be

flexible, and at the same time, understood the requirements that authentic and useful

research requires.

Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness has to do with both the internal and external integrity of research.

Because the design in qualitative research will necessarily be somewhat emergent,

attention to rigor in the process and the reporting of that process is critical to an

interpretive description. Attempts to eliminate all biases are naïve; therefore, the

researcher must explicitly account for the influence of bias upon the research

findings as much as possible. (Thorne et al., 1997, p. 175)

Lincoln and Guba (1985) have long been respected researchers and guides in the area of qualitative research. One of the issues they addressed was the trustworthiness of the research: “The basic issue in relation to trustworthiness is simple: How can an inquirer persuade his or her audiences (including self) that the findings of an inquiry are worth paying attention to, worth taking account of” (p. 290).

In order to demonstrate “truth value,” the naturalist must show that he or she has

represented those multiple constructions adequately, that is, that the

reconstructions (for the findings and interpretations are also constructions, it

should never be forgotten) that have been arrived at via the inquiry are credible to

the constructors of the original multiple realities. (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, pp.

295-296)

According to Lincoln and Guba (1985), credibility is increased by several activities, among which is prolonged engagement. “Prolonged engagement is the investment of sufficient time to achieve certain purposes: learning the ‘culture,’ testing for misinformation introduced by distortion either of the self or of the respondents, and building trust” (p. 301). Therefore, trustworthiness has two dimensions: the relationship between the researcher and her subjects and the trustworthiness of the analysis of the data.

Building trust began with my first communications with the interviewees.

Responding to their emails in a careful and timely manner began to send a message to them that I took my work and their participation seriously. While my actual time with the teachers was limited, it was important to be attentive and respectful of what they had to say. On three occasions this meant being considerate when teachers became tearful during our conversation. I was conciliatory when scheduling and on a couple of occasions rescheduling interviews. I expressed my appreciation for their time and thoughtfulness before and after each interview, and I made the interviewees aware that I

was available to them if they had any questions or thoughts of additional comments after

the interview.

Field and reflective journals have been suggested as useful tools to note

researcher experiences during data gathering and analysis (Lincoln & Guba, 1985;

Thorne et al., 1997). I kept a journal in which I recorded my thoughts and feelings about

the interviews and this helped me identify and make note of any distortions I may have

had in the field. Listening intently takes energy and concentration and so it was

important that I had a clear head and was focused. Keeping a journal helped me to

document the things I was thinking and feeling. Field notes also recorded conditions and

thoughts during the interviews.

This was particularly helpful with one interview that I felt did not go well; after

the interview, I had some negative feelings toward the teacher. I was able to record these

thoughts and feelings. This process had two positive effects. First, I was able to “put”

my feelings in a safe place, and second by so doing was able to address the transcript of

this particular interview with a freshness and openness that I may not have had prior to

documenting my feelings in my journal.

Another example of the value of my field notes came up in my interview with

Veronica. I made the mistake of scheduling this interview within an hour of a previous interview. I realized that this put my ability to concentrate in jeopardy. In addition,

Veronica had forgotten that we had scheduled the interview. I offered to reschedule it but she wanted to go ahead. She also seemed distracted because she was getting students ready for testing and the school’s daily schedule had been altered that brought a general

100 confusion in the building. I had previously interviewed a teacher whose room was filled with posters and signs to inspire her students. When I walked into Veronica’s room the walls were bare with the exception of a couple of grammar charts and the only signs that were hanging from the ceiling at the front of the room were laminated lists of the foreign language standards. It felt antiseptic and cold and my first impressions of Veronica were the same. Being able to note these things and express my feelings in my notes and journal, again, helped me to put them aside and engage with the interview.

My journal was also helpful during the analyses of the interviews. I was able to keep track of the process as well as comment on the joys, frustrations, tedium, and excitement that go along with such a drawn-out process.

Transferability makes it possible for another researcher to take up where the first researcher left off or build on the first research study. Lincoln and Guba (1985) noted that one cannot walk through the same stream twice and for the naturalistic researcher it is questioned whether one can walk through the same stream once. While I do not need to, and cannot, provide the data to make my research replicable, I have provided the description necessary for others to be able to judge if it is transferable. This is addressed by “providing the widest possible range of information for inclusion in the thick description” (p. 316). It has been critical to report on my procedures, interview content, and analysis process with the greatest detail possible. It is also critical that I convey to the reader how I came to draw the inferences that I did. In this, trustworthiness is not simply about what went into the study but also what came out of it.

101

Dependability and confirmability are tied together in my work. Lincoln and Guba

(1985) noted that dependability addresses the issue of the interview as the main data source and the interviewer as the main instrument of gathering and analyzing the data.

Confirmability addresses the issue of data support. “The issue is no longer the investigator’s characteristics but the characteristics of the data: Are they or are they not confirmable” (p. 300).

Two processes have been utilized to strengthen the dependability and confirmability of this study. The first was the keeping of a field journal, what Lincoln and Guba (1985) called a “reflexive journal.” In this journal I documented things such as: communications with the teachers; feelings and thoughts before, during, and after the interview; circumstances reported by the interviewee (“I forgot you were coming,” “I’m sorry I’m late. I tried to phone you because I lost my voice over the weekend”); my own circumstances (having trouble locating the correct office within the school complex, interactions with secretaries); after thoughts of the interview; processes followed in my analysis; and reflections during my analysis of the data.

Second, I have engaged in peer debriefing. The peer debriefing served several purposes. It checked identified patterns and categories and the supporting evidence for those patterns and categories. Peer debriefing also, as Lincoln and Guba (1985) noted,

“helps keep the inquirer ‘honest’” by asking questions, probing for bias, and challenging interpretations. Another opportunity peer debriefing offered was that of catharsis. It allowed me to express myself and provided a partner with whom strategies were devised.

102

Working through the data with another researcher was invaluable. My peer often helped me to gain deeper understanding of interviews. There were some occasions in which I felt an interview went very well, and I had collected valuable data only to realize with my peer that I had merely had a good conversation with the interviewee and the data collected was quite thin. On the other hand, there were a couple of interviews from which I left discouraged and questioned the quality of data I was able to collect. After going through my notes and the transcripts with my peer, I was able to identify that my personal impressions of these teachers had gotten in the way of hearing some of the things they had to tell me. As I mined the interviews, my peer helped me to sort out the nuggets of “fool’s gold” as well as identify some precious gems that I had discarded in my initial reviews.

An example of the first of these situations occurred in my interview with Sherry.

My initial sense of this interview was that it went very well. She was full of enthusiasm.

She demonstrated a genuine sense of caring for her students and I thought she had a lot to say. After reviewing the interview with my peer some troubling aspects of the interview surfaced and I discovered there was less depth than I had originally perceived.

The opposite experience revealed itself in my interview with Phyllis. I initially left this interview feeling that there was not much there. After reviewing my notes and the interview with my peer, I realized that I had been put off by some of Phyllis’ behaviors and her demeanor at the beginning of the interview. When I first walked into her room she did not take much notice of me and proceeded to fumigate an area of her classroom with air freshener commenting, “My students stink.” She walked out of the

103

room and had a conversation with another teacher before coming back in distracted and

disheveled. I was able to realize that I was put off by her, but after recognizing this I was

able to set it aside and review her interview and audiotape with a sense of newness and realize she had some incredibly valuable things to say.

In the end, trustworthiness will be most evident by the demonstration and

presentation of my supporting data. In the following chapters as I present my findings, I

have been mindful of my task to include the right information and I have done my best to

capture the content and tone of the responses I received from the interviewees.

Entering into this research I did not know what I would find, but I hoped that I

would gain a better understanding of how teachers perceive their own sense of spirituality

and how they see their spirituality as an influence in their teaching and interactions with

their students. I discovered that this preliminary study created a foundation for more

empirical and interpretive research to follow. Some of what the teachers shared was

comforting and exciting while in other cases it was troubling and at times alarming.

My analysis of the data followed the qualitative description outlined by

Sandelowski (2000, 2009), although I have moved away from the traditional “5 chapter” format of qualitative dissertations in favor of an organizational style that examines each major finding in a separate chapter, and interweaves my findings with my interpretation of the data. Proceeding in this way allows me—and hopefully the reader—to explore each theme in more detail and in more depth. In each of the following three chapters I present my findings and analysis thematically. Each of the chapters is organized around the three major themes that emerged in the course of my analysis of the data. Discussion

104 is woven into the presentation of the categories and I share how I made sense of what the teachers were saying to me, as is the convention of dissertations in the field of Social

Foundations of Education.

CHAPTER IV

BEGINNING WITH RELIGION

Abbey smiled and leaned closer to me as she spoke of her students. “God’s love

fills their God-shaped hole and I’m here to let that love come to them through me. They

learn that they are accepted and loved, and I think that begins to make a difference in

their lives.” The public high school teachers who were interviewed for this project were

able and willing to speak about their personal sense of spirituality and how their

spirituality entered into the classroom with them. They spoke of these things in a variety

of ways.

One of the interesting things that made an impression upon me was the teachers’

reactions to the interview topic. Many of the teachers noted that no one had ever asked

them about their sense of spirituality or how spirituality was present in their classrooms

with their students. Some of the teachers made statements about never talking to anyone

about this topic. A couple teachers said that they had never really thought about it until

our discussion, and yet they were about to talk about it.

When I began talking to Jackie about spirituality and public education, she said,

“Umm, wow, it’s one of those things you don’t talk about very often.” At the end of the

interview, when I thanked Jackie for talking with me, she said, “It’s been fun. I never

talk about some of this stuff. It was good to think about it.”

At the beginning of my interview with Frank when I shared the area of my research, he laughingly asked, “How did you come up with that?” He said he doubted this came out of the College of Education. At the end of a couple of the interviews,

105 106

teachers asked how my interviews were going and if I was “getting anything.” These

comments have given me cause to think about the lack of dialogue about spirituality and

public education not only in schools but also in colleges of education. It has also

indicated to me that such dialogue is very important.

In the early part of the interviews I asked the teachers about their personal sense

of spirituality and while they initially responded to this question they also continued to

speak of it throughout the interviews, weaving it in and out of other aspects of our

conversation. In many of the interviews the issue of separation of church and state was

also raised by the teachers early in our conversations. This seemed to reflect two threads

of thought. First, teachers spoke about the wall of separation and what it meant as well as

what it did not mean. Second, for some teachers, spirituality was closely connected to

their religious beliefs and they understood that they needed to be cautious about these

connections as they worked in the public school. There is a perception that this issue is a

loaded one in public education but these teachers, while certainly aware and articulate

about their awareness, did not seem to be over burdened by it. This chapter presents how

they expressed their personal sense of spirituality and their comments on how the separation of church and state influenced their expression of spirituality in their classrooms (see Table 2).

Spirituality and Religion

Thirteen of the teachers identified their religious beliefs and backgrounds to

explain their personal sense of spirituality. To varying degrees teachers expressed that

their religious background was tied to their sense of spirituality. For example,

107

Table 2

Participants’ Responses to Religion, Spirituality, and Church and State

Spirituality Spirituality Religious Beliefs Connected to Connected to Church and Backgrounds Religion Transcendent and State

Abbey X X X X

Jackie X X X

Charles X

Max X X X X

Phyllis X X X X

Rick X

Tara X X X X

Veronica X X X X

Debbie X X X X

Sherry X X X

Laura X X X

Bev X X X

Eric X X X X

Frank X X X

Abbey said, “I am a Christian, uh, grew up in a family that was Christian and, but, which

was fortunate because my faith was very much my own from the time I was very young

. . . there’s a lot of ownership for me.” Bev said, “I have thought over the years a lot about this [spirituality] because I am a Christian and I do believe that this job is more than just something I do for a paycheck.”

108

Laura distinguished between religion and spirituality, but made it clear that she sees herself as a spiritual Christian:

I don’t know if I know what spirituality is . . . I am a Christian. I am a big-time

Christian, okay? Umm, so, way back when, you know, I asked the Lord to live in

my life and to, you know, lead me and guide me, and I, I chose to live for Him on

a daily basis . . . I would say, you know, if I had a choice, am I religious or am I

spiritual, because when I think of religious I think more of the, um, you know, the

rules, and the this and that . . . [but] a spiritual person, I think that should show

24/7. I do go to church several times a week, to publicly show my love and

gratefulness to God.

Abbey did not anchor spirituality in a particular Christian denomination, but she clearly linked it to a belief in God:

I mean I have that God-shaped hole in my heart, and until I allow God to fill that

hole, I, it’s not going to be right. And I, I believe that is true for everyone. Um,

and so, I, I think people try to fill that hole with a lot of other stuff. And you, you

can choose your stuff. I mean, whether it’s, whether it’s monetary stuff, or

whether it’s drugs, or whether it’s, um, codependent relationships, or, you know,

whatever. We try, and you know, fill that.

Jackie expressed a more ecumenical and pluralistic point of view toward her own sense of spirituality:

We practice Christianity as a faith as a family . . . my family history is heavy on

the Pagan-Anglo ancestry. So, you know, we acknowledge the Sun and Fire

109

Feasts. We, you know, Groundhog’s Day we eat seeds and nuts. I don’t know

that we worship that, but we acknowledge that there are other mindsets about, you

know, spiritual things . . . The natural order of things. Balance, you know, I see.

One of the biggest issues I had with faith growing up, particularly when I was a

teenager, was the very male-centered deity . . . I’m fascinated by faith. I’m

fascinated by other faiths, you know . . . I have never had the conviction that one

was the only way.

Jackie told about an experience she had as a high school student on a trip to Haiti that changed some of her perspective on religious teaching. She had been taught that she was a “blessed child of God,” but when she saw other blessed children of God starving she said that the experience was bleak. “It was, it was harsh. A harsh recognition that, you know, that a lot of what I had been told was [she paused and spoke the next two words very softly] not true.” She continued,

I’ve never lost the feeling that God was. I never lost the feeling that God cared,

but, the hands-on intervention, I’m not so sure about that one anymore. So, umm,

I think He leaves us on our own. That the universe leaves us on our own a lot

more than we care to think they do.

Max, Charles, Sherry, and Veronica grew up in the Roman Catholic faith. Max noted that he went to Catholic schools but said:

I guess at a basic level I’m a Deist. I have difficulty accepting that God, however

you see him, intervenes in a daily basis in the world . . . I’m a fan of the

Watchmaker philosophy. God made it, “here it is, don’t screw it up and I’ll see

110

you in a couple years.” So what we do with it is our matter, whatever . . . I attend

a non-denominational church right now.

Charles spoke of his spirituality with more provisos.

I’ve gone through a big range on that [personal spirituality]. I was raised Catholic

and there’s a certain stereotypical guilt associated with that. It’s a real thing. I

don’t know about your background, but being Catholic is being immersed. It’s a

lot about thinking about everything that you are doing and whether or not that’s a

right or wrong thing. I’ve since have come away from that quite a bit. I still

consider myself a spiritual person . . . whether or not I still believe in God is up in

the air for me. It’s something that I have been thinking about a lot recently. And

I don’t know if my issues are with the disbelief or are my issues with the Vatican.

So, short story, I consider myself a very spiritual person and I believe that there is

that side of everybody . . . Agnostic might be the best word for me right now.

When I asked Charles to say more about what it means to be a spiritual person he talked about spirituality being the part of a person that controls compassion and emotion and, “that moral compass piece in us that we kind of develop over time. I think that’s what being a spiritual person is.” Later he said that one’s moral compass helps us as we struggle with life’s grey areas: the issues, feelings, and behaviors that lurk somewhere between the more obvious or clear boundaries and the less obvious and clear boundaries of good and bad.

Sherry identified with being raised Catholic but,

111

…Umm, not practicing Catholicism right now. I’ve married, my husband is

Methodist and we have been mostly attending Methodist church . . . I guess we’re kind of looking right now . . . it’s really kind of something my husband and I are talking a lot about lately because we have two little girls, and umm, a lot of [my daughters’] friends are starting to think about, umm, you know, starting Bible

School at their church and we’re not necessarily planted anywhere right now.

Umm, but I have a Catholic background. Spirituality [she paused], I feel like a very spiritual person. I pray a lot, … but I also know the importance of going to church routinely and that is something that my husband and I are currently trying to get settled down.

Veronica similarly distinguished between organized religion and spirituality:

I don’t know. I have a real struggle with the whole spirituality [she paused]. I think I’m a spiritual person but I’m not an organized religion kind of person. I was brought up in a Catholic family, went to Catholic grade school then left the church and a lot of the, uh, church things. So, I miss the part of a, umm, the community service part of the church, and I do that through school, and I try to get the kids involved in community service through [paused again] I guess my spirituality comes from, I don’t know, working with other people and just doing for other people. Umm, I think, I feel very spiritual when I’m outside, when I’m in nature.

Eric made distinction between religion, spirituality, and the church:

112

I am a Christian and I, umm, the church I go to is non-denominational. I, I’m

strong in the faith, but not necessarily strong in the church. Umm, in that sense

that, I’m a believer and I believe in Christ, as a Christian and so forth, I don’t

believe that every action of the church or every opinion of the church itself is

necessarily perfect. But I also believe in attending an organized service and I

guess the foundation of my life is in my faith. But it doesn’t, it guides my actions

but it doesn’t overtake my action. I don’t separate spirituality from faith.

Phyllis and Frank both expressed some discomfort with the word “spirituality.”

Both see it as a vague term that displaces religious truth or belief. Phyllis echoed the

criticism that spirituality may be viewed as religion watered-down or an ineffective form of religious belief. Phyllis said,

I really don’t like the word ‘spirituality’ because I really think, I mean, I believe

as a Christian, … [she paused and sighed], I mean, I know we’re all spiritual

beings, but I don’t, but I think spirituality has replaced the truth in a lot of cases.

And the truth is, is that Jesus Christ is, was, the Son of God. He’s our Savior.

And I think that we have gotten away from that with the whole idea of spirituality

as opposed to, you know, what, what, who gives us our spirituality.

Frank shared a little different viewpoint,

The very word, ‘spirituality,’ kind of bothers me. I mean it’s, it’s so nebulous. I

almost, you know, my, my religion, what I practice and what I believe. I don’t

know if that’s spirituality or not. But for me, Christianity is,…first it’s a self-help

program. I mean, you know, ways of living, good things, ideas for ways to live.

113

And I decide what I should do or should not do. But it’s also about, you know,

how groups work together and communicate to do things . . . I guess if I had to

come right down to what, what my religious spirituality would be, it’s the ability

to deal with people in a good way.

Debbie spoke of several connections she makes with spirituality and religion as

well as experience within family relationships.

I attend church regularly . . . It’s the sense of love, sense of belonging . . . I think

that family relationships have a lot to do with your, you know, the caring and love

and your acceptance and wellbeing, all of that, to me, ties into spirituality.

As Tara spoke of her faith in relation to spirituality she also emphasized her

discomfort in the ways public education not only neutralizes religion but, from her point

of view, eradicates the connection to spirituality,

I’m a Christian and it means very much to me, and I’m always afraid of crossing

that line between church and state in the school setting. And I like, especially I

also teach younger ones and I don’t like the idea that we’ve eliminated some of

the school holidays. And we’re not allowed, we don’t call Christmas, ‘Christmas’

anymore, we call it, ‘the holiday.’ You know, ‘the holiday season,’ or however

we call it, whatever the terms they use, it offends me. You know that’s offensive

to me that we’ve taken everything and de-spiritualized it.

Some of the teachers spoke directly about spirituality in the classroom and its connection to biblical teachings. For Frank and Phyllis these attributes are set within a

Christian context. Frank said,

114

My faith, Christianity is in there, my faith is in there too, the attributes/behaviors

of people behaving good toward each other are . . ., I mean, the basic lessons that

come out of the Bible. They’re, you know, they’re in my existence. Basic

attitudes that, you know, are taught through it . . . And I have had times when I

didn’t know what to do in the classroom and literally I talked to myself and said,

“Is there anything I ever read in the Bible that speaks to this situation?”

Frank also alluded to the lesson related to Jesus dealing with a woman caught in adultery when Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again” (Gospel of John 8:11, NRS).

So with the kids that are in my classroom, “I’m not angry that you did something

wrong, but at the same time, we’re not going to do it again, and I’ll help you” . . .

science and the Bible, they tell me the same thing.

Rick did not make any statements that connected his sense of spirituality to any kind of religious background or belief and he did not speak of any Transcendent being.

He spoke about spirituality as part of his philosophy of living well and living humanely.

He stated,

I mean, my life philosophy is, is getting the most out of life. Umm, you know,

like, like one of the slogans for the National Geographic is “Live Curious” . . .

Yeah I mean that’s my vision, you know, I mean obviously religion doesn’t enter

into it for me because, of course, we are a public school, and uh, so, if I can just

make a better people or at least throw out the ideas of that [he paused] and that

includes, you know, getting kids away from discrimination, you know. Kids still

115

say things that are discriminatory and uh, sometimes just trying to get them to

think in different ways and to be kinder to each other.

When asked about their personal sense of spirituality most of the teachers immediately commented on their religious background but they did not all connect their present sense of spirituality to institutional religion. In some cases, the information seemed to be shared to provide a context for their personal history. Institutional religion played various roles in the teachers’ sense of spirituality.

For some like Laura, religion has stimulated her sense of spirituality and she described a relationship between the two while able to distinguish them as different. For teachers like Frank and Phyllis, the relationship was stronger and may be said to be inseparable or even indistinguishable. Religion was part of their spirituality and spirituality was part of their religion. They both spoke about the ways in which they tried to emulate Jesus in their approach to their students and that Jesus was not only central to their personal faith, but also a role model in relating with students. They even expressed some discomfort in the word, “spirituality,” in that the idea of spirituality might represent a kind of watered-down or politically correct way to talk about religious values, which they held at great worth.

While Charles acknowledged a religious upbringing, he expressed a more recent distancing between religion and his understanding of spirituality. Not only was his personal sense of spirituality not dependent upon a connection to institutional religion, but he was at a place in his life where he was more comfortable with the two being

116 disconnected. He did not disavow a belief in a higher power, but he articulated that he was not sure what he believed.

Some of the teachers spoke very specifically about their relationship with a

Transcendent power. Phyllis’s Christian faith made her mindful that God gives her a sense of spirituality, that God is the source. Sherry looked to God in prayer, which she said was a frequent act in her life.

Teachers spoke of looking to God for guidance, meaning, and solace. For some,

God brought order to life and helped them make sense of their experiences. Some looked to God to help them in their daily lives, including teaching. Phyllis’s Christian faith made her mindful that God gives her a sense of spirituality, that God is the source. Laura spoke of being led by God and guided in her daily life by God. It was an important part of her spiritual life to express her gratitude to God in worship and praise, whether that was in the formal setting of her church or singing in her car. Eric also expressed his belief in Christ and the importance of public worship.

Spirituality also expressed itself in the teachers’ lives as an expansive capacity or the ability to reach out and experience life with purpose and in relation with others. Max spoke several times during the interview about the importance of what we do with what we have been given, what we do with our lives. Veronica expressed her spirituality in terms of service to others and in caring toward the earth. Reaching out, beyond self, was of great value to her. Frank echoed this when he spoke about spirituality being evidenced in the way he behaves toward others. Bev also spoke about the power of her faith enabling her to reach out toward others and Laura noted that her sense of spirituality

117

permeates her daily activity and behavior. Debbie talked about the spiritual dynamic in

terms of belonging. She experienced belonging with her community, family, and

students.

Teachers also talked about spirituality and their sense of personal development

which may be looked at as an element of depth. Abbey spoke of the development of

ownership of her spirituality from childhood through adulthood and how she chooses to

fill herself with God. Laura described her spirituality as permeating the layers of her life

and how she found her connection with her church invaluable; her spirituality was

something that “showed” all the time in every situation. Jackie raised the importance of

balance that spirituality brought to her life and the profundity that spiritual balance had

on various aspects of her life. Frank described his faith as “a self-help program,” and that through personal growth one could then influence others in positive ways. And Rick talked about his spirituality and personal development in terms of becoming a better person.

While it has been suggested that spirituality and religion can be severed, the narratives that these teachers provided did not, for the most part, bear that out in their personal experience. At the same time, teachers were able to speak with greater clarity about their religious beliefs while they struggled more to articulate their sense of spirituality. This was not surprising. Teachers’ understandings of religion were reflective of the literature (Love, 2001; Shahjahan, 2004). Dogma, doctrine, and practices are to a certain extent concrete “things” that are more easily identifiable.

118

Teachers were able to comment on specific biblical principles as well as denominational

doctrine of which they either agreed or disagreed.

When teachers were asked about their personal sense of spirituality, there were

often great pauses as they searched for ways to express their thoughts. Some of the

interviewees, like Frank and Rick, asked for a definition of spirituality. Just as the

literature struggles to describe spirituality (Martsolf, 1997; Palmer, 2010) the teachers also struggled to express their understanding of spirituality. Frank used the word

“nebulous” in his initial reaction to the question. Phyllis stated that she did not like the word, “spirituality.” These responses are also reflective of the conversations that are taking place among authors who are writing about spirituality and spirituality in education, and who worry that the term has become a catch-all term that lacks analytic specificity.

Reflecting on the teachers’ responses about religion and spirituality, I am reminded of the concept that spirituality can be tethered or untethered to religion

(Alexander & McLaughlin, 2003). As Rick spoke about his spirituality, it was untethered to any association with religious belief. I broached the topic a couple of times during the interview and he did speak about religion but he never connected religion and spirituality for himself. He expressed his spirituality in ideas of living well, caring for others, and rejecting unnecessary confrontation. Charles seemed to be considering whether his spirituality was tethered or untethered. He expressed that he was processing that connection in which he was raised. He had rejected denominational dogma but was not sure whether or not he believed in God.

119

The other 12 teachers described their spirituality as tethered to their religion yet

they spoke of this in different ways and to various degrees. The tethering between

religion and spirituality was done at various lengths or distances. Some of the teachers

like Laura, Frank, Phyllis, Abbey, Tara, Eric, Bev, and Debbie closely aligned their

spirituality with their religious beliefs and participation in religious communities. Some

of them shared about their personal relationship with Jesus Christ, how God led them or

spoke to them, and opportunities they felt God had given them. They spoke about

attending church, reading the Bible, and being in prayer and Bible study groups. For

these teachers the tether brought spirituality and religion into very close proximity.

The tether between spirituality and religion for the rest of the teachers was, to varying degrees, somewhat looser. While Max told me he attended a church, he also described himself as a Deist. The relationship between spirituality and religion was a more distant one. Sherry talked about a personal faith in God and of her childhood religion but said that she was struggling right now with her formal association with any particular church. Veronica had grown up involved in religion and she acknowledged a

Transcendent being but she had severed ties with the church. She talked about connecting with God in nature and in relationships with others. Jackie’s spirituality was connected to religion, but a diverse understanding of religion. She accepted many ways of believing in God and many paths that lead to God.

From these conversations I learned that even in this concept of spirituality that is either tethered or untethered, there is much diversity. Spirituality may be tied to religion, as it was for most of the teachers I interviewed; but there is a sense of elasticity in that

120

bond. The relationship between religion and spirituality may be close or distant and it

may be firm or somewhat looser.

My sense of the teachers’ reactions and responses—demonstrated in their pauses, starts, stops, and grasping for words—is that the question of spirituality called forth a distinctive level of thoughtfulness in their comments. On some occasions a long pause was preceded by a “Wow!” or “No one’s ever asked me that before,” or “I didn’t see that coming!” This was a new conversation for many of the teachers and it challenged them to articulate thoughts and feelings that they possessed but had not necessarily discussed before in the context of public education.

While religion and spirituality are not mutually exclusive, most of the teachers spoke about religion and spirituality as being different. Spirituality was not always anchored in religion. At the same time most of the teachers spoke of a relationship between religion and spirituality. These findings are not unexpected and are represented in the literature, but they may point to the source of some discomfort for teachers in the public school domain.

Spirituality was described in different ways, yet with most of the teachers it was an important part of who they were, a part of their sense of whole-self. They could speak of spirituality in specific terms but it also seemed to permeate their sense of self and therefore their identity as educators.

When spirituality is connected and even rooted to personal religious backgrounds and beliefs, teachers may be concerned about issues of entanglement regarding questions of separation of church and state in their classrooms. The literature, as well as teacher

121

education, more generally, strongly cautions educators about such entanglements.

Indeed, many of the teachers expressed concerns about the issues of church and state in

the interviews, but they were very aware of them and they were aware of the ways they

navigated the separation.

Church and State

Public school teachers and public schools must follow the laws of our nation and

in order to follow the laws we must understand them. The most prevalent stricture

outlined in the laws that have evolved from First Amendment challenges regarding public education has attempted to clarify the illegal nature of proselytizing by faculty and staff, who are agents of the state. The teachers interviewed for this project seemed to be very clear about not coercing or converting students to their particular belief or non-belief.

This appeared to be an indelible boundary respected by the teachers. At the same time, most of the teachers did not feel that this meant that conversations about religion and spirituality, and in some cases conversations about their own religion and spirituality, were altogether inappropriate or prohibited.

Some of the teachers were careful to state that they entered into discussions of spirituality and religion through the curriculum. Discussions of history, literature, and culture were touch points for religious influence that potentially led to conversations about spirituality. Some teachers were very careful about what they said and how they

“walked the line” between sharing or withholding their religious beliefs with students, and others said that when students asked their personal opinions they felt comfortable sharing about their spirituality. This suggests that teachers are aware of the dangers of

122 being seen to establish religion through their expressions of faith, but they are also cognizant of their rights to religious expression in certain contexts.

“As a public educator, we’re not allowed to talk about, you know, religion . . . but if the kids talk we’re allowed to talk about it” (Debbie). Eric expressed a strong viewpoint about respecting the boundaries of church and state and was critical of teachers who did not respect those limitations. Interestingly, he raised this issue as one of both law and religious integrity,

I cringe at people who try to be, who try to be missionaries in the classroom, first

of all it’s illegal . . . I just get very nervous about it. Like, I say, it’s proselytizing.

Actually, I think it’s a sin from a faith standpoint. You don’t intentionally violate

the law; you don’t intentionally violate a person’s freedoms.

Abbey was thoughtful for a moment and said,

Some people ask me, “why don’t you,” you know, “shouldn’t teachers be allowed

to teach their faith? Shouldn’t they be allowed to share their faith in the

classroom?” I’m like, “no,” because I don’t want someone who’s a Wiccan

influencing my kid. You know, so it’s not my place. If I have a student in my

classroom who has a different belief, it is my job to respect that belief . . . for me,

uh, [the students] deserve respect because God has created each of us [her voice

grew louder], I can’t say that part, [then quietly] you know, I can say, you know,

the other.

Max noted that the curriculum often gives him entry into discussions with his students about religion and spirituality. “I have the unique ability to teach The

123

Reformation and not get fired.” Through the subject of history Max was able to both educate students about religious history as well as engage with them when they raised questions about spiritual issues of right and wrong, tolerance, and social issues, as well as religious literacy.

Phyllis also spoke about the need to educate students about religion as she taught literature.

Most of my students, the students that I have, very few of them are even aware of

religion. Like a lot of them don’t know even the difference between, between

Christian religions, let alone other religions. Like many students think, that when

we read Romeo and Juliet, we touch on the Catholic religion because that has a lot

of the Catholic rituals in it and they need to be aware of what’s going on so they

know what they’re reading. And many students don’t even realize that Catholics

are Christians. Like they don’t even understand the umbrella of that religion . . .

So, a lot of times, like there’s a, like if you’re reading something, there’s a

biblical reference, and you stop to explain that, many students are just unaware of

that.

Tara spoke about the curriculum challenging her ability to not “cross the line.”

When these challenges arose for her, she said that she often had a dialog in her own head about how far to go in her discussions with students and where to draw the line. In helping a student to understand the book, The Chocolate War, she said,

That was a hard one to explain without mentioning my spirituality and [she leaned

closer] crossing the line between church and state . . . when I was trying to

124

explain that to my student it was like, “Have you heard the story of Jesus before?”

“Yeah, maybe.” You know he really didn’t remember. I guess he had said he had

gone to Sunday School at one time, you know. So then I had to explain it, and it

was like, am I crossing lines here? You know, and I’m glad I’m in my own little

room by myself and nobody knows what I’m saying here.

Obviously, teachers like Tara sometimes feel that they are bumping up against those lines and because the lines are often inexact teachers can experience discomfort and they are often forced to make judgment calls about the appropriateness of sharing their beliefs. I found it significant that the teachers struggled at times because this demonstrated that they continued to think about and evaluate their boundaries with students.

Phyllis said,

Students are very aware of the separation of church and state. They might not be

aware of church, but they are aware of the separation . . . I have at least one

student every year say, “We’re not, it’s illegal for us to pray in school.” And I’ll

say, “No, no, that’s not true. You can pray it up!” [She laughed.] You know, “It’s

not illegal.” You know, they like have a misconception about what, what, it’s

like, they’re unclear about it.

In sharing values Veronica stated,

I don’t preach that or anything or any of my thoughts about those things, but I

sometimes expose the kids to them, but I might say, “I, I believe that this, this is a

good thing and listen to this, here’s what it is,” but I don’t ever preach to them. I

125

don’t talk much about religion because I don’t feel that’s my place in the

classroom. I try to keep that between the church and state [she laughed] separate.

Though, this, umm, school is quite conservative and there’s a lot of religion. I

mean, uh, we have umm, it used to be FCA, Federation of Christian Athletes.

Sometimes they’ll do a gather-around-the-pole kind of thing, Bible studies, a lot

of the kids are involved in those kinds of things. So, there is a lot of religion

around here.

Tara was the only teacher to mention the changing culture of recognizing

religious holidays in the public school system and the discomfort she feels about these

shifts. Anecdotally, I have often heard this issue discussed and have observed it reported

in various news media. Some have framed it as a scourge on society and part of the

downfall of public education. Tara openly shared that she took offense at “Christmas

Break” becoming “Winter Break” and “Easter Vacation” becoming “Spring Vacation.”

She seemed to view these changes as attempts to rid public education of a sense of spirituality. In this part of our conversation, she noted the concern not of spiritualizing

education but of de-spiritualizing education. None of the other teachers made mention of

this so it is unclear, at least through this project, if this is a shared issue.

Debbie and Laura both pointed out that they keep religious books in their

classrooms including Bibles and devotional materials. “Well, I have Bibles here and

devotional books, and some other reading like mysteries. The students know they are

there if they need them” (Laura).

126

Debbie showed me a variety of books on the classroom bookshelf that included a

Bible for teens with study helps and explanations, God’s Little Instruction Book for

Teens, and books of quotes. “So, if they have a question you know, even a spirituality-type question, then I will, ‘Let’s look it up,’ and so we look up in a book here and I’ll read to them the story about it.” Debbie pointed out a book, Am I Going to

Heaven?

I think that the kids will come and ask the spiritual questions if something has

happened. We have a lot of death discussions in here . . . if grandparents have

passed away or classmates, umm, family members, you know, the kids’ll come

and then they’ll start asking questions about, you know, death and dying and what

happens. So, then that leads to a lot of spirituality-type things, you know, “What

happens to your spirit?” “What happens to your body?”

Several teachers had inspirational posters on the walls of their classrooms and some of the posters pictured religious figures such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi,

Mother Teresa, The Dali Lama, and Pope John Paul II with various quotes. These posters were predominately in the classrooms of those teachers whose subject matter included history and literature. When asked about the posters, the teachers noted that these religious figures were also historical figures, who had inspiring things to say to their students.

In both the academic literature and in teacher preparation, it is common to strongly caution public educators about the separation of church and state. This caution may often go to the point of practically instilling a sense of fear to a degree that teachers

127

feel they need to completely steer clear of any discussion with students in the sphere of

the religious or the spiritual. The public school teachers interviewed were aware of and

understood the First Amendment of the Constitution and the clauses regarding both the

establishment of religion and impeding the freedom of speech. Not only were the

teachers cognizant of these boundaries but some expressed that their students were aware

of them, though students sometimes were misinformed about the scope of the law.

Of the comments shared with me about the boundaries of church and state in public education; I was most intrigued with Eric’s insight about teachers proselytizing.

Not only was this an issue of law and appropriateness for him, but it was also a matter of faith: to break the law was a sin; proselytizing in the public school was a sin.

Those teachers who taught subjects in which religion played and plays a significant role believed it was part of the curriculum to teach about the influence of religion in areas like history and literature. They also expressed that students often did not have basic academic knowledge about religion, echoing Noddings’ (1993) concern that we must teach for intelligent belief and unbelief in public education as well as religious literacy. Phyllis and Veronica specifically mentioned the lack of religious literacy among their students which became apparent when studying literature in their classes. They both had to spend time in class explaining the significance of religious undertones in stories, as well as historical religious points of view that have changed over the course of history.

Phyllis specifically expressed surprise that her students had so little knowledge of institutional religious belief but this presented her with the opportunity to teach her

128

students about the development of religious dogma and practice. In her examples, this

centered on the Roman Catholic faith. While she saw this as an opportunity, there was

also a burden on her to “get it correct.” She had to research the religious beliefs

expressed in classic literature, as well as how the religion had developed to the present

day, in order to answer questions that students brought up in discussions.

Beyond the academic, things become less defined. Teachers are often asked

questions of a spiritual nature during times of crisis like in the case of a student or faculty

death, a national disaster, or acts of terrorism. As students try to make sense of such

crises, they not only ask about their teachers’ opinions, but rely on their teachers for

support and solace.

Students also struggle with issues of day-to-day living and growing up. They raise questions in class and outside of class about making choices and morality that can often become religious or spiritual in nature. In these kinds of conversations many of the teachers expressed a deep awareness of “walking that line.”

Teachers approached these situations in a variety of ways. Some believed that if asked a personal point of view they were free to express themselves and share their religious and spiritual beliefs openly, but generally did not initiate such conversations.

Other teachers felt they should offer students a variety of possible expressions and belief constructs and encourage students to be considerate and make the best choices they can make. A third approach was expressed by some teachers who felt their spirituality was an obvious part of their identity and inseparable from who they were as individuals and as teachers. They were unapologetic in sharing this part of themselves as a resource for

129

their students. Teachers often connected their sense of being a spiritual resource in terms

of their ability to nurture their students, and these findings are discussed further in the

next chapter.

I was most surprised by the teachers who had religious books and resources in

their classrooms that were not related to their academic subjects. At first my surprise bordered on shock. I was taken aback by the presence of Bibles and overt Christian literature, such as devotional materials, on the shelves in the classrooms of Laura and

Debbie and the display of the poster of Pope John Paul II in Eric’s math room.

While I wondered about the appropriateness of these materials, and the appropriateness can certainly be debated, I listened to what the teachers said about them, and I listened again as I reviewed the audio recordings of the interviews. While the presence of these materials may be viewed as proselytizing and the teachers in these classrooms expressed an evangelical leaning in their own religious views, in the end I did not feel that they, personally, were trying to convert their students to Christian belief.

They seemed to sincerely want to provide inspirational and comforting resources for their students. Both Laura and Debbie stated that they did not recommend that students read these materials, but that the materials were on their shelves and the students knew that they were welcome to use them.

While the provision of Bibles and other literature may be arguably misguided, I believe the intentions of the teachers were genuine and that they wanted to offer spiritual support to their students who wanted it. I would have liked to have seen a more ecumenical variety of resources available, but I do not believe the teachers were being

130

intentionally insubordinate. In fact, as the interviews progressed, I experienced these

teachers as very knowledgeable, considerate, and caring of their students’ beliefs whether

or not they shared those beliefs.

When I asked Eric about the posters on his classroom walls, I did not single out the poster of Pope John Paul II. Eric talked about encouraging his students to find inspiration and value from a variety of voices. He felt that the more “real life” people the students were exposed to the more resources they would have for the hard work they were expected to accomplish.

Whereas the literature on the separation of church and state in public education, and the laws that have been created around the establishment and freedom of expression clauses, are not particularly alarming it seems that controversy is stirred up to a greater

extent in news and popular media. This, more than the realities of classroom teaching,

may be the place of the greatest disservice to clarity about religion and spirituality in

public education.

The conversations I had with the teachers about their own sense of spirituality,

religion, and spirituality in public education occurred in the early part of my interviews

with them. Going into the interviews I did not know if the teachers would or could talk

with me at any length about this topic. I was not sure if they had discussed this aspect of

their identity as individuals and as teachers before, and indeed some of them commented

that they had not. Even so, I was amazed at how articulate and thoughtful they were and

that they were so willing and able to participate in this kind of conversation, and they had much more to say. Within our conversations about a personal sense of spirituality

131 teachers began to talk about how their spirituality was evidenced in their teaching and in their interactions with students. One of the ways teachers talked about this was to describe various roles they held in nurturing students. In the following chapter I present and discuss the ways in which spirituality entered the teachers’ classrooms through their interactions and their roles of nurturing.

CHAPTER V

NURTURING AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY

The most comprehensive part of the interviews with the 14 secondary educators in the public schools centered on the general category of nurture. Teachers spoke of the role of nurturing as one of the ways spirituality enters into the classroom. This important discussion in the interviews was not surprising, because the literature is imbued with commentary on the significance of nurturing students in ways that will help students

develop a sense of self-worth, a sense of value for others, and an ability to navigate life

with an inner compass that will promote qualities that are enriching and inspiring

(Kessler, 2004; Palmer, 1998; Slater, 2005; Suhor, 1999).

The teachers spoke of nurturing, even parenting, students in a wide range of

interactions, all in the context of spirituality. Some of these interactions could certainly

be accomplished from a more secular mindset, but the teachers characterized their

various acts of nurturing as spiritual.

Nurturing occurred in various interactions and roles that teachers experienced

with their students. These included nurturing a sense of respect, kindness, caring,

accountability, altruism, and self-reflection in their students. Teachers also saw

themselves in roles of guide, motivator, creators of safe space, being counselors or

confidants, models, being open with their students, and being compassionate with their

students (see Table 3).

132 133

Table 3

Areas of Perceived Spiritual Expression

- Reflection Respect Kindness Caring Accountability Altruism Self Guidance Motivation Safety Counseling Modeling Openness Compassion

Abbey X X X X X X

Jackie X X X X

Charles X X X X X X X

Max X X X X X X

Phyllis X X X X X

Rick X X X X X X

Tara X X X X X X X X

Veronica X X X

Debbie X X X X X X X X X X

Sherry X X

Laura X X X X X X

Bev X X X X X

Eric X X X

Frank X X

One way of understanding this multiplicity of responses is to look at them through the dimensions of height, breadth, and depth. Height refers to those actions and roles that reflect a bond or association with the Transcendent. Breadth refers to those actions and roles that show a connection with others; and depth refers to the inner lives of the teachers and students. These dimensions do not necessarily line up with each category in

134 a neat and clean way. There is frequently some overlap; acts of nurturing may be multidimensional. At times the ways in which teachers nurtured their students pointed to a perceived connection with a higher power, but they also demonstrated an expansive quality as well as a desire to cultivate attributes of profundity in their students.

“I am kind of a Jack-Of-All-Trades,” was the way Debbie expressed the various nurturing roles she played in the lives of her students which had spiritual significance to her. Working with students who have special needs over several years, she viewed her role as educator linked to, and even inseparable from, that of nurturer. As the interviews continued the teachers became more specific about the roles and specific actions in their classrooms that related to their ideas of spiritual nurturing.

Respect, Kindness, and Caring

Some of the teachers noted that respect, kindness, and caring are important spiritual qualities they try to infuse in their students. Debbie gave a list of some very specific examples of spiritual qualities that she demonstrates and tries to instill in her students. “[I] kill them with kindness. They come in and all have so many problems.”

She also named trust, a sense of belonging, caring, values, morals, tolerance, patience, and empathy as important qualities in her classroom as she worked with students who have developmental disabilities, and she added, “I just tell them, ‘You need to be kind.’”

She laughed softly, “so, you know, I, they just get their little sermons from me.”

“I guess my spirituality is giving students a respect for life” (Rick). Rick made several statements and gave examples of the need to learn respect toward the gift of life.

135

I think, you know [as he cleared his throat], my philosophy toward life is humane

living; I’m very much opposed to wars, I think, uh, one of the things we talk a lot

of in class is, you know, I’m just not a war person where I like to talk about the

death and destruction in battles. I kind of like to talk about how we can avoid war

and avoid the destruction and the needless deaths . . . So, I try to get students into

a mentality that, that, gets away from the macho-Rambo image that we solve all

our problems with violence . . . [I want to] kind of promote a kinder, gentler world

and not all the violence that they see on TV, movies, video games. Like I said,

just a respect of life, and themselves, and the process of what we are engaged in

education.

Abbey’s voice dropped to a soft whisper, “What I do talk about is that everyone deserves respect because they are human…, they deserve respect because God has created each of us, you know.” She looked at me conspiratorially and her voice returned to its normal volume, “I can’t say that part, but, you know, I can say, you know, the other, and that’s the part, the kids know that, and they, they trust that. So that, I would say, that is the single biggest overriding thing.”

Tara noted the importance of “being kind to one another [and] being truthful to one another” as spiritual values that were important to her in the classroom. Tara indicated that hearing impaired and deaf students often experience a lot of cruelty in their integrated classes and so it is important to her that they experience kindness and show kindness to each other. Jackie said with emphasis,

136

I’m adamant that the kids use positive language. They don’t talk negative to each

other, about each other, or about themselves in my presence. And I would say

that’s part of my spiritual value, umm, acknowledging the positive and leave the

negative alone.

Jackie also talked about the opportunities she has in her food classes to have her students work together,

So you know, just acknowledging our similarities, across cultures, across ages,

across gender, across ethnic heritage, umm, I would say that probably led me to

acknowledge that that had come from a spiritual place. Umm, you know, food

does that, kind of naturally.

Veronica is able to utilize course content to underscore spiritual qualities she wants to inspire in her students. While studying Voltaire’s Candide she noted that the lessons of equality and fairness emerged in her lesson,

We must cultivate our garden, our own garden, and not steal from somebody

else’s and a lot of the Commandments would be involved in this whole thing.

You don’t, umm, covet someone else’s goods, you don’t steal, you don’t . . . you

know, do all those bad things. Just take care of what you have and do the best

you can in your world.

Bev spoke of her interactions with students as well as adults,

Well, [with] my students and the faculty, I think that I try to be authentic. I try to

show them, I try to model for them the kind of behavior that I would hope would

be considered positive. And the thing with the way I treat people, I try to be kind,

137

I try to be caring, I try to put their needs, like as a department chair, put their

needs in, make it, make them feel valued, and the same with the kids.

Charles reflected on his care for his students that seemed to surprise him in their response, “I get very disappointed in them, and I tell them that. And I don’t know; it almost seems like they care that I’m disappointed.” Frank noted, “It takes about three weeks before they suddenly realize that this is an adult that’s on my side.” He also observed,

So, a lot of times we’re feeling toward [administration] the way kids are feeling

toward us. And my thought is, make sure [students] don’t feel like I feel this

way…We know exactly how they feel; we just don’t realize we know how they

feel.

Phyllis also related some basic spiritual qualities she stresses in her classroom and commented that these spiritual qualities influence choices we make as well as how we respond to difficult situations and relationships.

Well, I mean, obviously I would want, obviously, you know, you would want to

choose to tell the truth as opposed to lie. You would want to, umm, forgive

someone as opposed to harbor a grudge. Or you want to choose to [paused] I

don’t know, just be good. Just to be a good person. And they are choices; I mean

you encounter choices all the time . . . that comes from your heart. If something

affects you and makes you do something that goes against the way you believe,

that’s your own self; that’s not necessarily the situation. I mean, that’s really

what the New Testament is all about. I mean, when you read the New Testament,

138

Jesus constantly puts himself in situations where he’s with people you shouldn’t

associate with. But it didn’t affect him because he was pure, you know. So I

think that we have to remember that.

Abbey spoke of spiritual qualities as well as the source of spirituality,

And I guess I’ve, for me [laughed softly], spirituality in life is very much, that,

umm, a dichotomy, umm, you can’t save your life unless you lose it . . . when I

struggle, it’s because [laughed again], I’m trying to do things my way instead of,

you know [looked out the window and nodded toward the sky], . . . my job is to

live my life and to listen to the Holy Spirit, and do what the Holy Spirit, kind of

calls me to do.

Later in the interview Abbey spoke of unconditional love, “[I] don’t get bent out of shape about what kids say to me. You know, ‘you can say, you know, this-that, you can say whatever you want, you know. I am still going to care about you.’”

As the teachers spoke about the spiritual qualities of respect, kindness, and caring; their comments pointed to all three dimensions of height, breadth, and depth mentioned previously. These qualities cut across the dimensions. Respect, kindness, and caring were not only nurtured as spiritual attributes that related in an expansive way to others but in many cases the teachers wanted the students to be able to embrace them in the depth of feeling toward themselves. Teachers not only wanted students to be respectful, kind, and caring toward each other but also to be respectful, kind, and caring toward themselves. Jackie might have expressed this with the greatest clarity when she said that she does not allow her students to speak negatively about each other or about themselves.

139

The height dimension was not as prevalent in the teachers’ comments about respect, kindness, and caring as the other dimensions, although Abbey addressed this dimension when she spoke about everyone deserving respect because everyone was created by God. Abbey felt guided by the Holy Spirit and she becomes a part of the action of the Holy Spirit as she works with her students by teaching them about respect, kindness, and love. She becomes a conduit for God by first listening to the Holy Spirit and then acting on what she has been told to do. In this sense, the height dimension is also multifaceted in that by connecting to the Holy Spirit, Abbey’s interactions with others are effected, which becomes a stimulus in the dimension of breadth.

The comments that Phyllis made cut across all three dimensions. By invoking the example of Jesus she connected to the height but this example also speaks to depth and breadth: Jesus came down to earth and exemplified behaviors and attitudes she believes are to be emulated and also instilled in her students. Both Abbey and Phyllis are motivated by God and that motivation inspires them as individuals and as teachers.

Accountability

In the context of spiritual nurturing the teachers also spoke about helping their students develop a sense of accountability. While accountability is described situationally, it has broader implications as it is infused in students that are seen as whole persons. Through accountability teachers were helping students learn to take responsibility for themselves: individually and communally. Accountability goes beyond the class subject matter or a particular assignment and considers the whole student and the subjectivity of the learner.

140

“It’s our job to hold them accountable” (Charles). Charles spoke about helping students work out their problems before they became issues that needed administrative attention. In this sense, he described accountability as a way to help students put their problems with one another in perspective and give them control over the outcome of disagreements.

I tell them, “I don’t want to go there” [reporting unacceptable behavior to the

administration]. But if they keep acting like this we got to go there with it.

“Yeah, and you know now we got to make it an issue for administration, now we

got to put it on your record, we don’t want to make it something that you have to

carry with you all the time because earlier in the day John called you an asshole,

you know, and then shoved you” or something stupid, “It’s not worth it, it’s little

stuff and it’s life, and it’s going to be okay guys. And it has to work out.” And

you know, it doesn’t work out all the time, and I don’t want to say it works all the

time, but a good two-thirds of the time it gets dissipated because it is something

stupid and they’re ready to let it go, because they just need somebody to tell them

they’re being stupid.

Eric spoke about the importance of creating a culture of accountability in his classroom as a spiritual framework. He holds students accountable for their individual work and he clusters them in work groups.

If a kid doesn’t do their homework I’m going to make it a little more public than

most teachers do because it’s a culture. I have a room. It’s a culture and all

twenty-five of us are doing this together and it’s a setting where if one person

141

sitting in a group like this doesn’t do his homework and I ask them to share their

homework and one person hasn’t done it, that’s hurting that culture. If this kid

hasn’t done his work I need to somehow address that…Because publicly; it’s not

just that kid. So they are going to feel that stretch because it’s not just

mathematical, it’s mathematical and it’s their behaviors that are going to be

addressed just like they would be in their house or in their living room. And it’s

not going to make them feel good if they aren’t behaving right.

Eric continued,

I don’t go all the way off, I don’t try to be abusive to a kid but like I said I want to

stretch them. And if a child doesn’t do their homework they need to realize that

isn’t just about them. It hurts the relationship, it’s hurting the culture of the room

and they need to fix that.

Eric also acknowledged that there are times when he has been wrong to push a child because he didn’t know the circumstances of their behavior. He also holds himself to accountability,

I get back in it and fix it…and I can send them an email, “Hey you had a rough

day. I’m sorry, I didn’t know. I’ll help you catch up on things as quickly as

possible.”

Both Charles and Eric spoke of accountability in the context of spirituality.

Accountability in the classroom seems to be connected to both community and to self.

As students are taught that their words, actions, and work affect others, there is a dimension of breadth in this emphasis of spiritual nurturing. Accountability to self is also

142

an important quality as teachers encourage students to look inward in a constructive way.

Eric touched on both of these dimensions when he spoke of creating a culture of

accountability in his classroom. Community accountability was important as was

personal accountability to which he held himself as well as his students.

Altruism

Another quality that teachers nurtured in their students which they characterized as spiritual was teaching a sense for the greater good, or altruism. “You know, we are for the greater good” (Charles). Veronica framed it in much the same way; “I think what we are what we do for the world.”

Rick said, “All these kids are very good at being altruistic.” He works with the

Student Council, “we do a lot of stuff with [The] Animal Farm Sanctuary. That’s one of the charitable organizations we work with.” He felt that caring for abused animals added greatly to his students’ understanding that there was something they could do to make a difference.

Max put it this way: “And of course we teach more in class than just the content.

At least I sure hope so. I sure hope we teach morality and ethics and a personal philosophy.” Sherry is involved with a national group of students who are active in outreach.

I lead a group here called TAHA (Teens About Humanitarian Aid), and we have

served meals at missions, we’re currently collecting all those Easter supplies . . .

in the main office for donating Easter baskets to the County Children’s Services

143

for foster children. Last year we raised nine hundred dollars for Doctors Without

Borders.

Several of the schools were involved in the “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle” Program

dealing with issues of ecology and care for the earth. Eric mentioned that some of his

students were involved in a group that committed “Random Acts of Kindness.” Students

would gather secretly and anonymously and do something nice for other students, faculty,

or staff. During a recent lunch break students had quietly gone out in the Faculty/Staff

parking lot and washed some cars to get the winter salt and dirt off of them. The teachers

and staff went to their cars at the end of the day and were surprised to find them clean.

While teaching students to embrace a sense of altruism certainly stretches them to

adopt positive feelings about reaching out to others and doing good things for others, it

also may create a deeper sense of meaning for life in the students who are experiencing

service to and care for others. Rick spoke of students not only being willing to help

others but also being eager to do so. Many of the teachers assist their students in making

life better for others and in so doing feel personal accomplishment, satisfaction, and

pleasure within themselves, which is also important for their growth and development.

Through acts of altruism, teachers help students to relate to other people, other creatures,

and other things. They learn that all of life is linked and that they can have a positive

effect on those connections.

Self-Reflection

Some of the teachers felt that their sense of spirituality led them to teach their students to be self-reflective of their behavior, their motivation, their goals, and their

144 interactions. Rick said, “To me, that is all part of spirituality, that inducing kids to be more humane people, understanding people.” He also said, “You have to get kids to think, [it is important] just trying to get them to think in different ways.”

Later in the interview Rick returned to this same theme.

You have to challenge their belief systems sometimes. Just, again, I’m not, I just

say, “Hey, you think about it. You make the judgment call. It’s not up to me to

tell you, you look at it and you decide.” So, I use that, that phrase a lot, it’s,

“don’t listen to what I say, you make your own decisions,” you know. And I

don’t care which way they decide because that’s up to them. So, I just want them

thinking. Just like when we talk about politics. “I don’t care if you’re a

Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Communist, I don’t care. What I care about is:

do you know why you’re a Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Communist,

whatever you are. Green Party, it doesn’t make any difference to me,” and it

doesn’t make any difference to me. It really doesn’t. I just want them to have,

uh, an understanding of what they are doing.

Some of the teachers echoed this desire to get students to think about what they are doing and saying, and embrace a sense of ownership toward their thoughts, words, and actions. However, they did not want to be seen as molding their students too much.

They wanted to foster autonomy in their students but they wanted that autonomy to be thoughtful and grounded. They wanted to spark their students while at the same time they were cautious about being overly intrusive.

145

Max also remarked about teaching self-reflection within and beyond the scope of course content:

I’m conscious of the fact that every time I stand up in front of my room [laughed],

and put on my vaudeville act that I am teaching a lot more than, right now we just

finished a drill. I’m teaching a lot more than that. I’m teaching the philosophy of

life, I’m teaching ethics, I’m teaching responsibility, all that stuff.

Laura talked about a major essay project she does with her students that she reported has a strong sense of spiritual reflection not only for herself but also for her students in what guides them in their lives. They discover together some important truths and acknowledge their core values.

I find myself drawn to, like, those life lessons. Umm, every year my kids write

[an essay on life lessons] and we enter a contest that was just completed this year.

Umm, and we spent quite a bit of time on that where they just think about

something, you know, that guides them. “Why,” I always say, “why are you the

way you are? Why are you, you? Why aren’t you a drop-out or on the street or

whatever? Why do you make the choices you make? Think about the people

who have influenced you, or, you know, the situations that have influenced you.”

So, they pick something to write about, you know, that guides them. What’s one

of their lessons of life? And that’s, wow, a very powerful piece, I think, that we

do all year. It just really gets them to thinking about their life and who has made

a difference in their life, and how, perhaps, they made or can make a difference in

someone else’s life, and it is just, you know, it’s a cool thing!

146

Phyllis also spoke about a writing project she had her students do which she found to be revealing and gave her some spiritual insight into her students and opened some channels for both understanding and interaction. She had the students write their life stories in six words. While it was a writing assignment, Phyllis reported that it was infused with spirituality in the forms of reflection, humor, sadness, and hope. “They wrote their life story in six words because Hemmingway once had wrote his, so during

Writing Week, they wrote their life story in six words and some of them, were just, you know” [her voice trailed off as she showed me 5x8 cards on which students had written their assignment]. Phyllis began pulling out cards and reading them to me.

“My life story/Has no explanation.” Some of them are really good. Here’s one,

“No dad/ But the perfect father.” And I asked him what he meant by that and he,

he has a stepfather and that’s what he meant. Umm, I’m looking for some

specific ones. “Born, grown man/No father around.” “In school/No time/No fun,”

[she laughed]. This one I found . . . “He left/She stayed/We suffered.” And that’s

what happened is that her mom and dad divorced and he left. And she stayed and

they suffered. You know, and so, they will tell you a lot in their writing even if

it’s only six words. So they reveal a lot to you. “Parents divorce/Life went both

ways.” “Parents divorced/Both sides and me.” You know, divorce plays a big

role in their lives because it is so prominent . . . I love this one, “Good side/Bad

side/Love both.” They are very reflective of their lives, you know, young people

are, in general, because they are not so worried, at least in my classroom, about

being judged, you know.

147

Phyllis said that she posted this assignment on the bulletin board in her room

without the students’ names and that it became almost a shrine that students, faculty, and

staff were drawn to when they visited her room. People reported that they were moved

by what they read.

Phyllis’ example points to the dimensions of depth and breadth in this assignment,

which became a spiritual revelation for her, her students, and others. Students were given

the time and place to reflect on who they are and who they were becoming as well as the

relationships that expanded their identity in various ways.

Debbie commented that spirituality comes into her classroom because it is not all

about academics.

You’ve gotta place your priorities in life and, you know, addition and subtraction

aren’t always up to the top of the list here. So, you know, you’ve got to help kids

work through… their life situations in order for them to be able to be open to

understand education, you know, the functions of what we’re doing in here.

One of the books Laura’s students reads that led to interesting discussions that touched on spirituality was, Five People You Meet in Heaven.

And I love that book [her face lit up], so I know that it comes through when I

read. Oh my, because I think it’s, I think any age, it really touched me and I think

it can touch, you know, my sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen year olds as well. I

think there are so many life messages in there and that we need to talk about

because a lot of times they do not get that from their home environment nor from

148

some of their more traditional classes . . . I mean, my classes are different. We do

a lot of life stuff . . . we focus on life.

Laura spoke of life lessons in the context of spiritual journey. “I think they get much more out of it when, whatever we’re talking about it can be related to their lives and they get a chance to share.”

Being a self-reflective teacher and teaching students to be self-reflective seemed to be of major importance to many of the teachers. While the dimension of depth was obvious in this area of teaching it also led to breadth in understanding others. Several of the teachers acknowledged how life continually entered their classrooms and that teaching their subject matter was only part of the education that happens with their students. At this level of their education, the teachers did not merely want students to comprehend facts but they also wanted them to be able to process information as well as consider various points of view and why they believe what they believe. This kind of

“depth perception” is a challenge for high school students and the teachers felt a great responsibility to begin nurturing it in their classes. Some of the teachers also noted that self-reflection may also lead to understanding others with greater sensitivity and deference.

Guidance

Another way of spiritually nurturing students was articulated in the role of the teacher as a guide. The role of guide expressed both a sense of height and a sense of depth. The height dimension can be seen as the teacher points students in a direction that often takes into consideration a higher power. There is also a strong element of depth in

149

the teacher’s comments as they encourage their students to become self-reflexive regarding their growth as individuals and aware that they have options.

Debbie stated, “You just keep them on task and lead them to adulthood.” Tara made a similar statement: “Basically, you get them ready to go off into the world.” Max spoke of helping his students navigate life by stressing to them, “You must think about why you do what you do . . . we want them to understand right and wrong with a capital

‘R’ and a capital ‘W.’ We talk about character is what you do when no one watches.”

Charles said, “My role is more of a guide . . . It’s one at a time and day by day, different, fun, and stressful and it sucks sometimes but it moves along and they all have breakthroughs.”

Debbie made several statements about guiding her students in a kind of parental role.

I throw in what I call my “Mother Debbie” sermons all the time . . . “don’t be

afraid . . . we’re going to get through this together.” When you work with kids,

you’ve gotta have, you know, some understanding to be, umm, able to help them

. . . help them to feel better about themselves . . . let them know that they’re,

they’re good people, and, you know, if they make wrong choices, that doesn’t

mean they’re a bad person, they just made a bad choice. So, you know, try to

help them with their, their sense of being and, so [paused], that they’re gonna feel

better about them.

Several of the teachers discussed their involvement as advisors and coaches in extracurricular activities with students. These settings offered unique opportunities to

150 guide students. Eric brought up the fact that when coaching he was able to work with students for an extended period of time in which the students chose to be involved and how this often leads to distinctive kinds of interactions with students. At the time of the interview he had just returned from taking a group of athletes to a conference. Being with his students off campus was yet another opportunity to talk with his students outside an academic setting.

Max was also a dedicated coach who reported great satisfaction in the opportunities coaching offered. He spoke of being able to guide his athletes in this role, particularly in encouraging them in their work ethic and working together. He said that being with students outside the classroom and for hours at a time offered him more chances to interact with students including students he did not have in his classes.

Jackie spoke of the importance of creating a careers course at her school in which she guides students to investigate various career choices,

All of which are really important to kids with limited resources in their current

lives and if they don’t have a lot of people in their current lives and if they don’t

have a lot of people showing them what all their options are outside of here . . .

they don’t have anybody showing them what their other options are and I thought

it was important.

Tara also said, “I have to be honest with them. I share my morals and values with them. Because sometimes they don’t get that anywhere else and I feel like it’s important that they at least get it from somewhere.”

151

Debbie raised the issues of her students dealing with grief and antagonistic

situations.

It’s been kind of a calm this year, except for personal, you know kids having

people in their family or people that they know are sick, you know, they’ll want to

ask questions, and you know, and I try to teach them a little bit of compassion,

and you know, how to react to, to talk to people when they’re sick and to have a

little bit of patience and understanding. That kind of thing, ‘cause these kids

don’t, they’re not exposed to a lot of that so they don’t know how to be calm, they

don’t know how to, you know, you don’t have to fight all the time, you know. A

lot of these kids come from very, umm, violent is not the word, but it’s just

hostile, hostile environments, and so they don’t understand that you don’t have to

always be fighting and you don’t have to always be yelling . . . I just tell them,

“You need to be kind.”

Tara noted that she guides her students in a variety of ways,

Because all of my students are hearing impaired, so they have issues that go along

with that: with the disability and not fitting in and so on and so forth. Counseling

on the right path to choose as far as careers [and] life choices.

Frank spoke of the sense of hostility that many of his students, who are struggling academically, display. Their frustration with the school system and teachers reflects how they have been let down or categorized as unsuccessful. Frank specifically asked to teach some “lower level” courses so that he could interact with these students. He spoke of several instances in which his ability to nurture students helped to guide them to a

152 different place in their education in which they found inspiration, excitement, and success.

Spiritually guiding students formally and informally is an important role that the teachers articulated. Opportunities come up for guidance during class sessions and when students seek out teachers who help them find their way. Students seek reassurance and comfort as well as skills in approaching life issues. Teachers encouraged students to discover answers both within themselves and beyond themselves: to acknowledge their own goodness and the goodness they can find in others and in the world. This pointed to dimensions of both depth and breadth. Teachers saw themselves as a resource for students who may lack encouragement in their home environments or even in other classes.

Motivation

Teachers also spoke of their spiritual role as motivator for their students not only in their academics but also in their lives. While motivation came from the depths of the teachers’ sense of spirituality, it was hoped that it would inspire in the students a desire to develop both a sense of height in aspiration and a sense of breadth in stretching their sense of the possibility.

Laura said, “I hope the way I live my life is important and the way I share my life with them makes even a little difference.” Max also spoke about his role in motivating students. He invites students to embrace excellence. He said that one of his messages to students was,

153

You have to aspire to something greater . . . They’ve got to know that there is

more, at least it’s possible, we teach that every day up here. And it’s woven into

things, and I’m not quite sure if they realize we’re doing it. I kind of hope they

don’t in a way, they just walk out of here with a better work ethic than when they

came in, they understand that being on time is important, that the little things in

life matter, from the first day of class, we tell them, “your goal from now until

you die ought to be that I’m going to be a better person tomorrow than I was

today.” In some way that might be with knowledge but it might be something

else too . . . You know it’s that kind of stuff, so I guess that’s my spirituality.

Motivation as part of their spiritual role was expressed by teachers in other ways.

Although I was unable to meet with Rick in his classroom, he reported, “I have some motivational posters on the wall about people who have overcome adversity, things like that to motivate the students.” He also tried to connect in a positive way with his students at the beginning of each class. “I usually start by saying to them, ‘I hope you’re having a good day,’ something positive for them.”

Tara’s role as motivator was inspired by her own childhood,

I can’t say that I was brought up in the greatest environment. I was pretty much

brought up in the ghetto area…, so I think that’s why some of those things are

important to say. I’m more vehement about and express to my students that, “you

have the choice to make . . . you know that you have your choices, you do not

have to follow what’s around you.”

154

Bev noted that it is important that she expects a lot from her students and said in an emphatic tone of voice, “I think sometimes kids will fulfill whatever it is you expect of them.”

Motivation by teachers was hoped to encourage students to embrace their inner strengths and abilities but to also look outside themselves and beyond themselves, to set goals and to dream. Max articulated what several of the teachers said about motivation as a process of encouraging students to be better today than they were yesterday and even better tomorrow. Teachers reminded students that they had choices and as they grew up they would have more choices. While some of these were academic and occupational, they were also choices about the kind of person they wanted to be and the kind of influence they wanted to have with their lives. Tara was one of the few teachers who came from a home and economic environment that was difficult and she said that she understood, personally, what some of her students were experiencing. She felt her life-story was a motivation for students who might think they were stuck or had few choices.

Charles admitted that his background was so different from most of his students that he did not always understand what they were experiencing, yet he tried, and he made efforts with his students to encourage them. This encouragement often went beyond mathematics. He, too, wanted them to embrace their choices.

None of the teachers were naïve about their students and the challenges their students experienced. There was no superficial cheerleading in their commentaries but there was a sincere belief that all of their students could find some level of success in

155 school and in their lives. Being a motivating force for their students was something they took seriously and when students overcame or succeeded, the teachers expressed sincere delight.

Safety

Teachers also spoke about the need to create in their classrooms a safe place physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. This had an expansive dimension to it as well as a dimension of depth. They spoke of safety as a sacred trust that creates an environment in which the students can both learn their academic work and also grow and develop as people. Creating safe space often took insight, flexibility, and patience on the part of teachers because they had to understand why students might not be responding and what they needed to change so that students could succeed and take chances.

Charles noticed that homework assignments were not being completed and discovered. “They don’t have a place to do it. Either a place they feel safe doing it or a place dedicated to do it.” So he began to allow students to do their homework in class.

He wanted to, “make this stability that they don’t have in other places.” Max wanted to create an environment in which his students could take risks in sharing their ideas. “‘I will protect you if you do. I’ll protect you from the students in the class and protect you from me,’ and that gives them license to get it wrong.” He added, “They just need somebody to listen to them that’s got to be safe. They need security to feel safe.”

Laura also spoke about the need to create ground rules in class discussions so that students could build trust with her and with one another. She tells her students:

156

You have to honor and respect anyone else’s opinion no matter how far it is from

yours. You do not have to agree. I know that I won’t agree with everyone’s

opinion, but you have to agree to disagree and be able to hold that discussion in a

rational way.

Teachers spoke passionately about the acts of creating safety for their students. It seemed to be a profound cause for them. Tara stated, “I feel like I need to protect them, you know, as much as I can. They know it’s safe to talk to me.” Abbey remembered her experiences in teaching at several different schools; “wherever I am in every setting, there have always been kids who have been the unliked, the unloved, by the culture, who have found safety and found a haven in my classroom.”

Eric said, “I hope they feel safe in my classroom.” Later in the interview he spoke about the importance of his students feeling safe because they needed to feel safe in order for him to challenge them.

Well, they have to feel safe because I have full intentions of stretching them and

that’s going to be uncomfortable and so there has to be a foundation that they are

going to survive this mathematically, that I care about them as a person, that I’m

not going to in any way, shape, or form going to hurt them physically, mentally,

or any other way.

Debbie also talked about the importance of making her classroom a safe place.

“They can come in here and they know they’re safe.” She spoke with greater volume, “I am their safe house. This is their comfort room.” She added,

157

I think it’s about in the beginning, establishing the rapport with them so that they

feel comfortable in here, I let them know that, you know, this is a place that

they’re gonna be okay . . . So, in the very beginning of the year, you know, I

establish a sense of comfort for them to know that this is, this is going to be okay.

They’re going to have an okay year . . . and some of the hard questions in life

come in here, but it doesn’t leave the room and it doesn’t leave these four walls,

and they know that.

The act of creating a safe place and being a safe adult for students was one of the very touching parts of my conversations with teachers. Max was an individual who could be intimidating and at times exaggerated but to hear that he assured his students that he would keep them safe from each other and from him made me pause.

Many of the teachers saw their responsibility for safety in almost mission terms: creating a “safe haven,” being their “safe house,” and protecting them. Many of the teachers dealt with student populations that did not always feel safe in other classrooms, in the halls, in the community, or even in their homes. The teachers’ passion about safety was multi-dimensional. Teachers wanted students to feel a personal sense of safety as well as a communal sense of safety and there was also in some respects an intangible dimension of safety that went beyond the personal, academic, and interpersonal.

Teachers wanted students to be well, to feel a sense of wellness and security.

158

Counseling

When Debbie spoke of discussions with her students being safe within the four walls of her classroom; she began to touch on another nurturing aspect about which several teachers spoke: the sacred role of counselor and confidant. Rick said,

Some kids want to confide in you, that is where you are really making a big

difference in a kid’s life, when they come up and confide something to you, “I’m

having this problem or this issue,” and a lot of times, you know, I just had to refer

them to a guidance counselor, but [other times] just give them some assurance.

But, uh, just doing that, I mean, they are appreciative of that, just having someone

to talk to. It’s like when we do after school tutoring, sometimes kids come in just

because they want to talk to me, you know. It’s not so much about the school

work, they just want to talk to me and tell me what’s going on in their life.

Tara commented that counseling was a major role for her that she saw as a spiritual outlet; “A lot of counseling. That’s the biggest part of the job.” Later she brought up this role again.

So they do get to trust me and know me well. So they do come in and know me

as an advisor. And so, you know, they’ll come in and say, you know, when they

get into their high school age and they’re dating…, “I’m thinking of having sex,”

or something like that. It’s amazing what they’ll tell me.

Charles also spoke about students who confide in him.

If this girl is having issues we can go over there [motioned to corner of the room]

while they [the other students] will have something to do, we can go over there

159

and figure out what’s going on. We can go out in the hall and figure out what’s

going on. But things, I mean, I am trying to think of a couple . . . I had a boy

whose dad died last semester. He spent the better part of a week, coming back to

his own from that and he has…, I have a girl whose dad “came out.” She found

out that her dad is gay this year and she’s gotten a lot of flak for that . . . anything

that they want to talk about, if they’ve got an issue, that they want to talk about.

Rick also talked about the importance of conversations that occur individually with students and how a few minutes with a student between classes can make a difference.

Those are conversations that might come up one-on-one if someone is having a

bad day, and they might stick around and talk with me for a few minutes after

class . . . Well, like a girl came up to me after class and said her sister is

transitioning into a man, and she was upset because of all the problems her sister

is having in this transition . . . Yeah, things like that are maybe the more of the

personal nature that kids would share.

Debbie said, “Sometimes they don’t need me to do anything but just sit and listen.” Debbie has a wonderful large table in her classroom that is the hub for her students. The table is a safe space where students make connections with each other.

We sit around and play math games and then we, you know, we talk and it’s, it’s

good, and the kids could sit here and talk and, yeah, this is, this is the table

[laughed]; it’s just nice to hear them, you know, share about each other, you

know, they talk about choices or, you know, they’ve got boy problems or girl

160

problems, they, you know, they talk about it with each other. So, it’s good, you

know. Then, every once in a while; they’ll ask my opinion.

“When you work the way I work with small groups of students or one-on-one, you learn a lot, you hear a lot, so you’re a good go-to-person” (Tara). Abbey explained how she used social stories and relaxation techniques to help her students with behavior disorders reframe situations that derail them in school. She said,

Sometimes it’s really simple stuff. Not rocket science. Sometimes it is being a

good listener, you know. Sometimes it is saying, “Yeah, I know. This really

stinks. But someday you’ll have a job and you are going to have stuff in your life

that stinks and you will have to put it aside and go do your job. So, your job is

school [and] here’s how we’re going to put it aside.”

In some cases teachers expressed surprise at the amount of counseling they do with students and some of the issues that students bring to them. If a student feels confidence in a teacher they may share with the teacher some very personal and disturbing things. Guidance departments are often affected by budget cut-backs and the number of guidance counselors and school psychologists was particularly a problem in the schools with financial problems. Teachers reported that they were more likely now, than in previous years, to be called upon to deal with serious issues of neglect and abuse in addition to the “simple stuff.”

Counseling students may be a matter of drawing out a problem or helping a student deal with an issue. It often strengthens the breadth of a teacher’s relationship with a student but teachers reported that this was an area in which they often turned to

161 their own sense of spirituality for higher guidance when counseling a student. Finding guidance and strength in God often helped teachers to be more responsive to students seeking counsel. Some teachers spoke about praying for students or about situations as well as turning to the Bible for guidance.

Modeling

Another category of the spiritual in nurturing students that the teachers addressed was that of modeling. Phyllis said, “And so everything that you do, every interaction you make has some kind of effect on them because they look and listen. And it’s different than what they know, from a lot of them.” Bev said, “I try to show them, I try to model for them the kind of behavior that I hope would be considered positive.”

Laura utilizes a research format on “hot topics” in which students have to research a topic and report on various views of the topic and then lead a class discussion. When asked how the students learn to do this kind of presentation she responded,

Modeling, first of all. I do one first or I do a couple first . . . because truly some

of them have not been taught that and they think whenever they have an opinion

they are allowed to blurt it out . . . so, I would definitely say through modeling.

Rick discussed modeling behavior when students are inappropriate in class. He talks to them privately after class,

And we talk about it briefly, like I said, non-confrontational, low voice, just,

“here’s why I wish you wouldn’t do that.” And sometimes I’ll say, “Is that a

reasonable request?” And they’re like, “Yeah, that’s reasonable.” And I’ll say,

“Okay, thanks.” I think that works best. You know, teachers, it has always

162

amazed me how teachers go in and declare war against the students and want to

yell and be confrontational. And that does not work. I can tell you that. That

doesn’t work. You either, you just set up a battle with the students. So, I always

find that it’s easiest to deal with people on a rational basis and just explain your

point of view and usually kids will usually accept it.

Tara acknowledged her own strengths and weaknesses to her students in order to help her students.

I’m very honest with my students about that. Tell them what I do best and worst

. . . You find ways to compensate for what you don’t have. So, you know, I

showed them my report card from college, you know …You’ll see the difference

between what I was good at, and what I wasn’t good at. But you have to take

those subjects too.”

Debbie spoke about dealing with her students’ life issues and the content she needed to cover in her classes. For many of her students, education will make a difference in what they are able to achieve, “I try to instill in all my students that education is important in their life.”Debbie also spoke about how her students were learning to respond to others.

If something bad happens to one of the kids and they come in and they’re crying

and they’re all upset, umm, that the rest of the kids, they’re learning that kindness

is the key. You’re not to make fun of them, not to make the situation worse . . .

you show them some kindness, show them the caring side of the situation. If

163

they’re in tears and they’re hurting, you don’t kick them when they’re down. You

know, so spirituality kicks in and we can feel a sense of caring.

Students are very adept at watching and listening in order to discover if teachers are living what they are saying. Modeling is, for many of the teachers I interviewed, an important spiritual element of their teaching. The spiritual presence of The Golden Rule was evident in many of our conversations. Teachers believed that one of the greatest avenues for nurturing students was to treat them well and show them how to treat others.

It was reported that students picked up on this attitude and atmosphere in the individual classrooms and while teachers hoped it would influence students in other settings they at least knew it was at work in their classes.

By modeling how to treat others, how to behave, and how to work with high ethical standards, teachers encouraged student development on many levels. Students grew as individuals and in relation to others. They also might grasp the relationship that teachers had with their higher sense of spiritual self.

Openness

Teachers also spoke of openness as a spiritual quality that they bring into their classrooms. “To me it’s having an open mind, an open ear, and an open heart, and just being ready to work with instead of through the kids” (Charles). Openness was described by the teachers in two ways: being open to the students and being open about themselves to the students. Openness was often portrayed as the antithesis of judgment.

Max stressed to his students at the beginning of each course that their past experiences, including failure and behavior issues, do not have to follow them into his

164 classes. “[My class] is an opportunity to start over again.” When asked about what kinds of things the students come to talk to him about, Max identified parental issues as a major concern and his need to be open to listening to what they have to say.

Oh, parents that are battling over them over custody. [An] absentee parent comes

back, places great demands on behavior and time that wasn’t here before. Parents

are in the process of getting divorced, and um, and one parent just not going to be

there. The child thinks it is their fault. And so you work through those questions.

But, I think what you do is you listen a lot. And you make sure you don’t pass

judgment.

Abbey spoke about listening to her students’ problems, “and they know you’re not judging them, that you have an open mind.” Tara talked about receiving what her students have to offer. “I think accepting what they accept, you know, and going with what they’ve got to learn, going with their strengths.”

Debbie stated, “I am not judgmental with them.” She offered some examples throughout the interview that demonstrated her openness. At times she gives her students the opportunity to vent their frustrations.

And they know that I am not going to jump on them because they said a bad

word, you know, because they came in and this is the way they have to vent, and

if they vent, I tell them, “We’ll close the door, you vent, so that you can go out

and have the rest of your day.” You know, so every once in awhile we hear a few

words that get dropped, but then, you know, but then they know not to continue

with it.

165

Debbie discussed several instances of dealing with her students’ social issues, which are often exacerbated by their disabilities, and balancing that with teaching course content.

We do get our work done. I mean, we do, there’s a lot of learning that takes place

in here, umm, and you know, like I said we get the math done . . ., they know

what they need in here. As long as they are working, I’m willing to help, and

that’s what we do, you know, we help them make a difference.

Her students also talked to her about their relationships.

And that’s the thing you can’t, some people will just down play and say, “Oh,

you’re just in high school.” Well, you know what, they are just in high school but

right now that love is their love, you know, and it is very real to them right now,

even though, you know, nine times out of ten these couples aren’t going to be

together, you know, forever, but right now, it’s, it’s important to them.

Laura described her openness about her spirituality with her students.

I am always open . . . I never hide the fact that I am a Christian. I will say,

however, I do not stand in front of my classes and preach to them, but I do openly

answer any questions.

Veronica made a similar statement about being open about her own sense of morality but refraining from pushing that on her students.

So, you know, I don’t preach that or anything or any of my thoughts about those

things but I sometimes expose the kids to them but I might say, “I believe that

166

this, this is a good thing,” and “listen to this, hear what it is,” but I don’t ever

preach to them.

Laura and Veronica demonstrated the delicate dance of being open and yet holding back, of listening but not judging.

Teachers’ sense of openness toward their students was a key part of their acceptance of their students. They acknowledged that they may disagree with a student’s point of view and may even share that disagreement with the student, but they felt that working at openness, and sometimes it was work, gave them more opportunities to nurture students. Openness expanded the breadth of the pallet with which the teachers had to work. It often led to greater trust between the student and the teacher, and some teachers spoke of openness leading to a feeling of safety for students.

Charles’ statement about having an open mind, ear, and heart was very moving.

Even though he was in his first year of teaching, he grasped the importance of being open toward his students in a myriad of situations. Openness seemed to cut across the dimensions of height, breadth, and depth for the teachers in the different ways they expressed their openness and the different ways they hoped their openness would have some influence on their students.

Compassion

A final spiritual category of nurturing that stood out in the teachers’ responses was that of compassion. Teachers expressed both how they felt compassion as well as how they showed compassion toward their students. Jackie said,

167

I don’t do it for the money, I do it because I just think they matter . . . I believe

nobody goes into secondary education who doesn’t love and care about it, what

matters is the kids, it’s always about the kids.

Frank stated, “Every amazing teacher I’ve known, it was like there was something in them that they wanted kids to do well, and they wanted the kids to be well. And they knew the kids could be well.”

“I try to be there for my girls” (Laura). When discussions get intense in Laura’s class, “They know that we will take the time to stop and make sure that everyone is okay.” Laura also said, “My heart goes out for a lot of our kids,” and when she spoke about students talking openly about having numerous sexual partners, she said, “It just breaks my heart because most of them are seventeen or eighteen years old and, you know, I don’t know. It just breaks my heart.”

Tara is often affected by what her students are experiencing. There are times, due to their disabilities, that typical students take advantage of them and bully them. When she spoke of her student who had his hair set on fire by a student he thought was his good friend she said, “It breaks my heart sometimes [paused] I worry about them a lot. I pray for them a lot.” Sherry reflected, “I am worried about this generation. Like, where’s the human empathy?”

“I care, but caring is also setting boundaries. Sometimes setting limits is the best way to show I care” [Veronica]. Jackie made a similar statement, “I sometimes have the opportunity to bridge the gulf and help them understand that another adult cares by setting boundaries.”

168

Debbie acknowledged the end of the school year as a difficult time, especially for

her students who will be graduating,

As seniors now, they are starting to mature. They’re, they’re starting to get

scared. This is the scariest time . . . they’re going to be leaving the security of

school. The, the regular schedule, as much as they complained about it and hated

school their whole life, now they’re getting scared because what are they going to

do? Yes, so they have all kinds of things on their plate to deal with.

She also said,

But when you work with kids, you’ve gotta have…, some understanding to be,

umm, able to help them, you know. Mine’s the case of, you know, going through

everything that they’ve gone through, but I think maybe since I’ve worked with

them for so long and maybe, I don’t know, maybe it’s my soft heart, you know.

When Charles spoke about having his students do their homework in class he

said,

It’s just a change in the expectation and where that work happens. Is it feasible to

ask a kid with no structure or support or safe place to do their homework at home,

to take it home and do it? Then grade them on the fact that they didn’t do it?

You’re grading their home life, not their ability.

Frank spoke about compassion in terms of changing the patterns of students, as well as teachers, who operate in survival mode and recognized when individuals are just trying to survive, education cannot happen,

169

If you’re doing survival, emergency survival mode, you can’t relate to the teacher,

um, you just can’t. Of course if the teacher’s doing that, and I’ve seen cases of

that, that is also a problem. If a teacher is going through a divorce, or an

emergency, survival mode, they can’t do it. They are not there. Well, that’s one

example, or a spouse dying. You know, those things can really affect everyone in

the classroom because the teacher is not there.

Laura expressed her sense of compassion for her students, which pointed out the huge investment she makes because spirituality is part of the whole-self she brings to the whole-selves of her students. After a pause during which she looked down at the desk and looked up again, making direct eye contact with me, she said, “My heart lies in them.”

As the teachers talked about the spiritual aspects of nurturing students their demeanor became especially emotional on the topic of compassion. The way they spoke and the way they looked made it quite easy to feel the depth of what they were sharing.

Nurturing students, while described in a variety of ways by the teachers interviewed for this study, was not a particularly surprising finding. The literature is infused with reflections and examples of spirituality entering the classroom through teachers’ devotion to nurturing their students. I thought, going into this study, those aspects of nurture would be not only a probable category but a major one. Teachers valued their subject matter as well as their own knowledge and skills as educators, but they recognized that there was more going on in their classrooms than the content of their courses, their mastery of the subjects they taught, and praxis. They also acknowledged

170

that the classroom experience for their students reached beyond the knowledge and skills

of the content material.

While it could be fairly argued that the various expressions of nurturing students

could be described in secular terms, the teachers made the connections between these

attitudes and actions with their sense of spirituality. For them, such things as counseling,

openness, guidance, and creating a safe environment were connected to their discernment

of the spiritual in their personal as well as professional lives. Whether they had always

viewed nurturing students as a spiritual domain or whether they, over the years, took

secularized notions of nurture and spiritualized them was unclear. What was clear was

that nurturing was a major category when discussing spirituality in public education.

One way to make sense of these seemingly disparate examples of spiritual nurturing shared by the teachers is to view them through the dimensions of height, breadth, and depth. These dimensions cannot be necessarily neat and clean but they will be used here to understand some of the meaning teachers expressed as they discussed various ways in which they viewed nurture as spiritual. Height would embrace those examples of nurture that point to something larger or greater than self. Breadth would express a connection of nurture between individuals. Depth would describe the actions of nurture that recognize and develop the students as whole persons with a sense of inner meaning.

The dimension of height points students, and sometimes teachers, to something that is greater than them, something that is larger than them. This might be seen in acknowledging a “greater good” or a Higher Power in their lives. At times the teachers

171 seemed to view themselves as a spark or even a conduit in this process. One of the obvious categories of nurture that aligns with this idea is that of altruism. When teachers led or worked side by side their students in outreach projects like raising money for humanitarian aid, working with abused animals, and supporting ecology programs they not only nurtured an ability in their students to reach out beyond themselves but they also fostered a concern for “the other.”

In some examples the teachers gave of guidance as an act of nurture, they demonstrated how they sought to lift students up to higher levels of ethic, kindness, and goodness not only toward others but in themselves. Rick, Max, and Tara in particular spoke in these terms. Several of the teachers talked about creating an environment in the classroom that lifted up the students and protected them. While this could also be somewhat self-serving in building a classroom setting that was controlled, pleasant, and productive, it does not detract from the life lessons that can be learned and embraced beyond the school.

Max also provided an interesting way of lifting his students up by proclaiming a kind of do-over with each new class. By telling the students that their previous academic failures and behavioral lapses were in the past, as far as he was concerned, he offered the students a fresh start in his classes. He encouraged them by allowing them to be free from the things that might have weighed them down, from their personal history that may follow them around in other settings.

The teachers who worked with students through athletics and clubs also reported unique opportunities in challenging their students. In these settings teachers worked with

172

students for more extended periods of time and as they got to know them were able to

encourage and even push them to do more and be more.

Modeling may also be considered a way of uplifting students to be more and do

more in their lives. Teachers were aware that students listen to them and watch them.

When teachers lived before the students with positive attitudes and behaviors they believed that meant something to their students. Rick spoke of peaceful co-existence.

Abbey talked about unconditional love. Laura modeled behaviors such as verbal

boundaries or screens. Tara revealed to her students that she had strengths and

weaknesses. Teachers showed students possibilities for their lives, how do deal with

conflict and disappointment, and how to move beyond their current circumstances.

Some teachers also acknowledged that to various degrees their acts of nurture

pointed to a Transcendent Being: God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit. Some drew inspiration

and guidance from Holy Scriptures. There were instances when teachers openly shared

with their students about the connection they made between nurture and a higher power.

This happened most often when teachers were asked direct questions about their beliefs.

But more often teachers reported that their relationship with a higher power was the

impetus for the quality of nurture they felt toward their students.

In some cases, like that of Laura, Abbey, Phyllis, and Frank, the teachers hoped

that students would see their God-centered faith through what they said, what they did, and how they lived their lives. In this way nurturing and being nurtured was not simply an act between teacher and student but between God and teacher and student, creating a kind of dynamic spiritual cycle. The teachers’ spiritual understanding came into human

173

relations in hope of touching students in such a way that the students were open to some

power greater than themselves.

It must also be noted that in other instances spirituality motivated the teachers

greatly and manifested itself in the nurturance of the students and stopped there with no

expectation that the students would make the further connection to God. Spirituality was

the teachers’ stimulus not necessarily the students’. This should not be seen as failure on

the teachers’ part. Spirituality continued to inspire and energize these teachers greatly

but because of personal choice, or possibly a sense of boundaries, some teachers seemed to feel that providing nurture for their students was enough.

The breadth of spirituality in the classroom as described by the teachers often

took the form of making connections between teacher and student as well as between

student and student. In the role of counselor, the teachers often had opportunities to

strengthen their ties with students whether students were just having a bad day, dealing

with a crisis situation, or struggling with a choice. When students feel that they can talk

to a teacher, be heard, and understood; it strengthened the bond they have. Rick spoke about the need students have to simply tell him what is going on in their lives as well as confide in him things of a more confidential nature.

Some of the teachers who had students in their classes for several years spoke about the growing breadth of nurturing they were able to experience with their students.

In particular, the teachers who worked with students who had various handicapping conditions were able to continue their roles in nurturing over several years. Tara

174

commented on the fact that her students get to know her quite well, which added to the

building trust between them.

The bond between students can also be strengthened through expectations

teachers have for the way students are to treat one another in their classrooms. Laura

expected her students to be respectful of each other’s opinions. Jackie did not allow

students in her classes to speak negatively toward one another or about themselves. Eric

focused on creating a culture in each class that was interdependent. Debbie talked about

the wonderful table in her room which had become a gathering place for her students

where they can talk to each other.

Openness also seemed to encourage broader interactions and growth in the students. Several of the teachers spoke about the importance of being non-judgmental.

Sometimes students needed to vent frustrations. Sometimes they needed to talk to

someone about at-risk behaviors. It is also important for many of the teachers to be able

to receive opinions or even values they do not share.

Spirituality as depth in the classroom was expressed in several ways by the

teachers as they spoke about the importance of nurturing their students. Here, the

teachers focused on inner meaning and development, learning about self, and recognizing

that students are whole persons whose lives outside the school are often difficult.

One of the ways teachers embraced the dimension of spiritual depth was in

teaching students to be self-reflective. Encouraging students to think, challenging their

belief systems, and helping them to create a philosophy of life are examples of the

dimension of depth emphasized by some of the teachers. When students reach secondary

175

education they begin to have the ability to process why they do the things they do, why

they hold certain beliefs, and why they make certain choices. They begin to be aware of

not only assessing their past but also building their future with intentionality.

Laura and Phyllis discussed writing assignments that inspired the students to go

beyond superficial thought, peel off the layers, and dig into the very things that formed

their identity. The assignments they shared during the interviews were interesting

because they were so different and yet they got to the core of their students. Laura had

her students engage in a major essay project that included a presentation and class

discussion whereas Phyllis asked her students to write six words, but those six words

were to represent their life story.

Debbie commented on the fact that she sometimes had to spend time helping her

students process their life situations before they are able to concentrate on school work.

If a student is in a personal crisis they may have great difficulty in attending to their

mathematics lesson.

Fostering self-reflection and allowing it to happen are time consuming and demand a lot of energy and concentration from both teachers and students. It takes time and patience to allow students to figure things out, to allow them to get it wrong, and to

allow them to think through issues: both personal and academic. All of the teachers who

spoke, at one point or another, during the interviews about being present as students

wrestled with their angst, felt this kind of nurturing to be important and worth their time

and energy. Some believed it to be life altering.

176

Another area that brought depth to students’ experience was accountability.

While being accountable to one another was part of the breadth of connection between

students, being accountable to themselves was a process that provided depth. Again, at

this stage in their development, high school students take on more responsibility, and part

of the responsibility that many of the teachers articulated was being truthful with

themselves, holding themselves to standards, and learning to control their behaviors.

Abbey gave a good example of learning accountability for some of her students.

Abbey teaches students who have behavioral disorders, most of whom are not able to function in a typical high school setting. Some of her students can be thrown off balance by slight changes in their lives or perceived wrongs done to them. She teaches them a variety of reframing techniques that they can begin to master on their own in various settings. The goal is to regain control of their behavior and to recognize the things for which they are responsible.

While filling the role of counselor, teachers can strengthen the spiritual breadth of students but they can also have influence in the area of depth. Most of the counseling that teachers experience with students occurs on a one-on-one basis. In these situations teachers can encourage students to articulate issues in greater detail, they can challenge students to look at various approaches to a problem or various sides of an issue, and they can follow-up with students who have taken some time to think and problem solve.

Most of the teachers I interviewed spoke about their concern for students’ development in one way or another. They recognized that they played a role in their

177 students’ journey from childhood to adulthood. They seemed equally excited by their students’ academic development as by their personal development.

Nurturing students in various ways also underscores the relational nature of the work they do and the importance of interactions between teachers and students. The teachers spoke about the relational aspect of spirituality with great specificity, with passion, and at times with emotion. Even when presented with difficult situations, teachers talked about moving through their own anxiety in order to connect with their students. Teachers seemed most comfortable expressing this aspect of spirituality. This may reflect the ethos of teaching as well as the natural qualities most teachers bring to the profession.

This relational aspect of teaching was not only evident in the interactions between the teachers and their students, but also in their sense of calling to be teachers, as well as the importance that students knew that teachers cared about them. In the next chapter I present the ways teachers talked about their relationships with their students and how the relational characteristic of teaching connected to their sense of calling. I also describe the unexpected finding that was revealed in the interviews as teachers spoke about the importance of students knowing that they cared about them.

CHAPTER VI

A CALLING TO CARE

The final group of findings and discussion from the teacher interviews is focused on the ways in which spirituality influenced the relational or a call to care, the call to teach, and the importance of their students knowing that they cared. Debbie spoke with a smile on her face as she related a recent event that was both humorous and an example of

the relationship students have with her when they toilet-papered her house. “It’s fun to connect with them that way, too, you know, so that they know that I am like real.”

Teachers spoke of the importance of the relational aspect of their work in how spirituality came into their classrooms. In fact, for many, this was a vital characteristic of spirituality in education. Teachers’ sense of the relational was also connected to their sense of being called to teaching.

In this chapter I present the ways in which the teachers’ sense of spirituality emerged in their calling to be in relationships with their students and the belief that they were called to teach. The teachers also spoke about the significance of their students knowing they cared about them (see Table 4). This final category was one I did not anticipate. It revealed a need for a particular type of recognition, not public recognition or accolades, but an almost inner or intimate recognition on the part of the students that their teachers care about them. It hinted to the fact that caring is not merely a linear act, but one in which the students’ knowledge of the teachers’ caring completes a circle.

178 179

Table 4

Participants’ Responses to Making Spiritual Connections, Spirituality of Being Called to Teach, and They Need to Know I Care

Making Spiritual Spirituality of Being They Need to Know I Connections Called to Teach Care

Abbey X X X

Jackie X X X

Charles X

Max X X X

Phyllis X X

Rick X X

Tara X X X

Veronica X

Debbie X X

Sherry X X X

Laura X X X

Bev X X

Eric X

Frank X X

Making Spiritual Connections

In the context of our discussion on spirituality in education, many of the teachers commented that making connections with students was related to their spirituality and the spirituality they brought to the classroom. When speaking about her students in the

GRADS program, Jackie said, “So sometimes just having one strong connection to

180 somebody is enough to keep them here . . . sometimes that’s all it takes is to get them connected to one grown-up.” Her course content also nurtures relationship: “it does give me connections. It gives me an opening to make connections with the kids that don’t have connections.” She continued, “So I think, I think the connections, you know, is what matters.”

Jackie noted that because she taught elective courses, she was often in a unique position to be in relation with her students,

The difference between success and failure can simply be whether or not they

make that connection with one person. And for kids with learning disabilities,

with behavior disabilities, with attitudes, I may be the only teacher in their entire

day where they don’t put up a block the second they walk in the door. I may be

the only one, and I may never know which is that one that I am the only one for,

whoever gets all the way in. I may never know. So, I think it’s important to

make an attempt with all of them . . . It’s connectedness, isn’t that what we all

need?

Laura reflected,

It is definitely more of a relationship than it is content, and not that I, you know,

neglect my duties there, but I think when they come back to visit me, they come

back because of a relationship, not because, you know, one assignment they had.

Laura continued, “I’m really into the relationship piece of it. I think they get much more out of [discussions] when, whatever we’re talking about, it can be related to their lives and they get the chance to share.”

181

For Laura, having time with students also helped to build relationships.

Relationships with the kids are key to me and we develop them through

connecting with situations, literature, what happens in their life and in the media.

Umm, I also get to spend more time with them than usual because I take them to

[a university] and to their Cosmetology Boards and we spend time.

Sherry said,

I think I have a pretty good rapport with my students . . . and so many are, are

attention starved. You just give a little bit of attention or, you know, care about

them a little bit, and I care about them a lot… they want to interact with you, you

know. It’s not hard, I think, to build a good relationship with these kids. They

are nice kids. They’re respectful kids. They let us teach.

There was also concern in Sherry’s voice and on her face as she talked about some of the issues her class discussed in history, she sighed,

I see a lot of these kids that are detached, umm, and I feel like, I don’t know, I

feel like in a lot of ways, as an educator, I don’t know, I feel like they need to be

woken up.

“It’s taking time to understand the lives of the students you are leading,” said

Frank. He continued:

How do you make the relationship worthwhile? Uh, part of that, you know, the, I

think the ultimate, the ultimate thing that seems to kind of spread through all of it

is, is building trust. You know, that, that seems to be the key and that takes a little

bit of time. I seem to be reasonably good at it. Young people usually seem to

182

believe what I say and know I’m honest about things. Uh, the one thing with the

kids at schools is, is the ability to say exactly what I’m thinking and not hold

back. And, but say it in a decent way. I mean, if, if something is wrong in the

classroom, I don’t, (he paused), leave it in my head and get angrier and angrier

every day. I just find a way to say it so they can understand what I’m feeling.

And I’ll ask the question, how are we going to deal with it, because if I’m angry,

if something is bothering me as a teacher; that harms the whole situation. And I

go that way with them, too. If they are doing something strange, that causes

problems [then] that breaks the relationship we need to have.

Frank echoed what some of the other teachers noted when he spoke about the power struggles that develop between the teacher and the students and how these struggles threaten the relationship he works to establish.

…usually by the time I’ve talked to a student, they’ll do what I want them to do

because they’ve realized that my only interest is in what we’re trying to

accomplish in class. Most students that are of a low level that would do the really

weird things; see it as a power struggle, and that needs to be taken away…if we

build relationships, the power struggle goes away. Now it’s not who is in charge;

we’re both in the same game, same reason.

Frank continued by commenting on his view of spirituality that was focused on building relationships.

…traditionally, schools are intended to be a: “I give something; you take it. I, I

am the giver of knowledge. You should shut up, shut up and accept it,” kind of

183

format. And it takes work, and a certain talent that isn’t, I don’t think it’s [he

paused], you’re not going to learn this in an education college…there is nothing

about how do you build a relationship with the kids that’s strong.

Veronica also spoke about the importance of having time to build relationships with her students.

I try to get to know them. And because I have, umm, students often for multiple

years . . . you learn a lot about the students, more so than you might in another

class. So, I, I have to get to know them [she laughed], otherwise I’m not doing

my job.

Tara not only works with her students over multiple years but also works with them in small groups, most often outside their typical classroom setting in a resource room. “It’s very one-on-one and personal a lot of times.” She added later,

Yeah, I, because I do see my students year after year, and some of them I’ve had

from preschool all the way through to high school. I get to know them and their

families very well. So they, I’m like an extra mother or aunt in the family. So

they do get to trust me and know me well.

Abbey spoke of spiritual relational boundaries. “And those rules [in the Bible] are there because of the way that we are created to be in relationships, we’re created to treat people with respect.” Rick gave an example of relational interaction in a similar way.

Well, I mean, normally if somebody used language, like if someone would call

someone a fag or a queer, or whatever, I’ll call them up and usually at the end of

184

the period, I’ll say, “You know, that kind of language isn’t acceptable,” … I’ll tell

them, you know, “you have kids in the classroom here who are either gay or have

families with members who are gay, and it’s just not fair to them to be exposed to

that kind of hateful language.”…But at least they know that my policy is that they

shouldn’t use it in class.

Rick also saw his work with Saturday School as a time to connect with students, to check in with them, and to be in contact with students who were not in his classes.

Saturday School is where kids who have behavioral problems are sent… it’s

basically a long detention on Saturday. But that’s another opportunity [I] have to

talk to kids, “Hey, what did you do wrong? Why are you here?” you know. I,

you know, depending on how many kids are in Saturday School, that gives me a

chance to talk to kids too, and meet kids who I wouldn’t ordinarily meet.

Tara spoke of a specific incident with one of her students who had a hearing impairment. She made mention that her students are often the targets of abusiveness in the school.

Students will pretend to be their friends and take advantage of them. They are so

hungry for friendship they can be used and even humiliated by other students. I

feel like I need to, you know, protect them as much as I can. I had one boy who

thought a student was his best friend and kind of led him on and then through

some string of events, ended up setting fire to his hair in a lab one day . . . And he

couldn’t understand why his friend would do that to him. I couldn’t understand

either. But stuff like that happens and then they come to me. It breaks my heart

185

sometimes. This student felt so hurt and alone. That was one time I talked about

my understanding of God and God’s love, that even though he felt alone, he

wasn’t.

Tara sat silently for a long time. “But, yeah, they come to me with things like that, and like I’ve said, I’ve been, for a lot of them and their families, one consistent person in their lives since they came to school here.”

At the end of my interview with Tara she sat for several moments quietly. She had spoken earlier in the interview about a former student contacting her over Spring

Break and how much that meant to her. Now she revealed that the former student had been the boy in this incident. He had been suicidal in high school and had tried to suicide several times and at one time slit his wrists. Tara said that when his mother found him, she called Tara before she called 9-1-1. As Tara related this incident tears began to stream down her face.

I don’t know why she called me before she called the squad. I said, “Call the

squad!” It was like she didn’t know what to do. It was awful. These kids need to

know someone cares. Their families need that too. There’s a reason I am here, I

guess.

While discussing making connections with her students, Jackie simply said,

“God’s love flows through me.” Phyllis spoke about her sense of spirituality in creating relationships with her students and possibly hinted that spirituality was a part of her hidden curriculum.

186

Well …you just try and practice the basic principles, you know, Christianity. I

mean, you forgive them, you treat them with respect, you look at them as

individuals. I mean, it’s just the way you act on a daily basis, you know [she

paused], it’s, I mean there’s hidden curriculum in every classroom and your

hidden curriculum is really set by you because that’s you. You know, if you walk

into a class where, you have a teacher who [she sighed] treats students with

disrespect or, I mean, that’s a hidden curriculum and that’s something that [the

students] are learning. You know, so that’s where that influences them. And so

everything that you do, every interaction you make, has some kind of effect on

them because they look and they listen. And it’s different than what they know

for a lot of them.

One of Phyllis’ students wrote an essay that touched their relationship in a profound way. The student wrote about hating rent, because paying the rent was a struggle, and because his parents had to pay rent the student did not get any birthday presents. “So every year on April 25th, I bring him a birthday present, ‘cause he, I know, you know.” We sat quietly for a moment and then Phyllis began to cry and apologized to me for her tears. “I never cry. I don’t think I’ve ever cried in this place. So I’m kind of mad at you.” She continued to be upset about her display of emotion when talking about how this relationship touched her. For two days Phyllis emailed me about her concern over her tears and how I might interpret them. She also wanted reassurances about the confidentiality of her identity in the project, but I also assured her of my respect for her tears.

187

Abbey shared a different example of a way in which her relationship with a

student broadened their view of her as a person of faith. Abbey took the time, in what

may seem on the surface to be a simple exchange, with a student to create an opportunity

for her student to understand her as more than an educator of academic content. Abbey

talked about how her religious jewelry (wearing a cross) could stimulate interactions with

students. The previous year she wore a “Pray for China” bracelet and one of her students

asked her about it.

And this one girl said, “What is that, why are you wearing that?” And I

explained, and she said, “Well, I don’t like Christians.” And I said, “That’s okay;

we’ll still get along.” [And] I don’t know, it was not probably six months later,

she said to me, “you know, you’re not like any other Christian I have ever met.”

The importance of the relationship between teacher and student was somewhat expected. The relational aspect of teaching pervades the literature on spirituality and education (Kessler, 1999; Lantieri, 2001; Noddings, 2008; Palmer, 1998; Shahjahan,

2004).

In some cases, again, teachers like Jackie, Phyllis, and Laura saw themselves as a conduit through which their relationship with God flowed from them and to the students.

A few of the teachers like Tara and Abbey saw the potential of a circle being completed when the students recognized, through their teachers, they could have a connection to

God. Some seemed to even view their experience as a sense of agency: God has done this for me so I can now do this for my students. The idea of connecting, on some level, to their students not only enhanced their abilities as educators but was critical to their

188 abilities as educators. From the point of view of many of the teachers, without the relationship or connection with God, the symbiotic processes of teaching and learning could not come full circle or be accomplished to the extent to which they strived.

Abbey certainly spoke to this when she talked at several points about “filling the

God-shaped hole.” She spoke of her student who had antagonistic feelings toward

Christians but through the course of the year as they developed a relationship the student noted that Abbey was not like other Christians she had known. Abbey also talked about unconditional love as a spiritual attribute. She may become frustrated with students but she never stops loving them. Her love and care for them is not dependent on their behavior.

Teachers who had students in their academic classes or interacted with students through extracurricular activities over a number of years, again, spoke about the opportunity this gave them in developing relationships not only with their academic students but also with the broader student body as well as parents, siblings, and even extended family. The longer the teachers had contact with students, the more they could build relationships with them. Some like Tara and Bev, who had students throughout their public education, had relationships with students that were quite enduring, even post-graduation. Eric also spoke about students getting in touch with him after they graduated, especially when they were on breaks from college. In this situation, their relationship shifted somewhat. The teacher-student boundaries were less rigid and he felt that he was able, and with greater specificity, to talk to them about spiritual matters

189 including his own beliefs and how his spirituality influenced the ways in which he thought about life’s big questions.

Frank, Sherry, and Laura all spoke about taking the time to get to know their students as central to building a relationship with them. Understanding what their students are going through in and out of school, being honest with students, and having the time to build trust (for both students and teachers) were key elements in developing relational connections.

While the relational aspect between teachers and students does not require a spiritual overtone, most of the teachers in the study did spiritualize this characteristic of connection. Teachers also felt that their relationships with students were a kind of sacred trust, something to be honored, something that was a privilege, and something they did not take for granted.

Within the teachers’ conversations about the relational it can be observed that relationships are multi-dimensional. Many of the teachers felt strongly connected to God and from that Higher Power received strength, insight, and comfort. These gifts they shared with their students in a variety of ways, explicitly and implicitly. Their relationship with the Transcendent rippled through them and from them to their students, and this contact also facilitated a growing depth within the teachers and with the students.

The Spirituality of Being Called to Teach

As teachers spoke about their sense of spirituality and how their spirituality was part of their interaction with students, they also talked about being called to teach and how they find meaning in what they do. In Hansen’s (1995) discussion of teaching as a

190

vocation, he explained that a vocational call provides both social service and personal

meaning. Teachers feel a sense of calling both within themselves and from the society

they strive to serve for the better good. “Teaching is a social practice,” and even though

much of it occurs inside a classroom, “what goes on there is rarely left at the door. It

becomes part of the lives of individual students, part of the life of the school, and often a

central part of the life of the teacher” (p. 9).

Hansen (1995) suggested that,

Teaching takes shape through involvement in work that has social meaning and

value . . . however, vocation does not imply a one-way subordination of the

person to the practice. Vocation describes work that is fulfilling and meaningful

to the individual, such that it helps provide a sense of self, of personal identity.

(p. 3)

In addition to this inner impetus and the external social response to a sense of calling, many of the teachers described the Transcendent aspect of being called to teach.

Several of the teachers acknowledged a direct calling from God to teach or to expand their duties in the school. The understanding that “this is something God wants me to do,” was also part of their understanding of vocation. Some spoke of the very real presence of God in their work.

“I felt my whole life, I felt very called to teaching. Teaching is my vocation . . . I am called to be here” (Abbey).

Bev made several statements about the spiritual nature of her calling to teach as well as a sense of calling she experienced when taking on new aspects of her job.

191

And I like it here, but I feel like my faith has always been a part of coming into

the building. And I don’t feel like I can do this job alone. I feel like this is where

I’m supposed to be, and if God supports me on this, then this is what He wants me

to be doing.

Later Bev reflected,

I feel like this is where I’m called to be. In fact, when the department chair job

became available, I don’t know, I’ve lost track, seven years ago maybe, the

woman that was the department chair, I went to her, and, first I was just praying

about it. And I just felt like God kept saying to me, “you are the logical person

for the job.” I didn’t know that much about the job. But, I took it, and I felt

convicted of, you know, this is what God directed me to do; this is what I should

do. And I really love it.

When Bev decided to apply for the department chair position she said,

It really made me think about why I do my job. And I said to [the principal and

department chair], “I don’t just come to work just to earn a paycheck.” I said, “I

look at this as a ministry.” This is what I’m called to do. This is where I feel God

wants me . . . And, we, I can share other wonderful things [paused and cleared her

throat] that have happened, umm, and that have just bolstered my faith in the fact

that God is partnering with me.

Bev also spoke of a grant she received to create a room for her students who have disabilities that would model an apartment and help teach life skills to the students. The grant came together quickly and provided more funds than they requested. “But for me it

192 was just another way of knowing that this is what I’m supposed to be doing for as long as

I’m supposed to be doing it.”

Laura talked about her passion for her students and her belief that God was instrumental in her becoming a teacher.

I hope that just my [sighed deeply], love for my students, my passion for my

students, I hope that all, I guess that is a way of expressing that. I mean I know

that I was called to be a teacher. I mean, I truly feel that, that’s, I mean, I know

that without a shadow of a doubt that is what God had me to do . . . I know that

this is what I was meant to do.

Tara reflected at the end of the interview about God calling her to be a teacher as well as the fact that she does not talk about the spiritual nature of her calling or her sense of spirituality in what she does.

This [spirituality in teaching] is something I don’t talk about with anyone. It’s

kind of hard to [she paused], you’ve made me think of things I don’t usually think

about [she paused again]. I guess, I guess, I know that I’m supposed to be here,

doing this. I feel like God wants me here. I don’t know where God will use me

after I’m done teaching but right now I’m supposed to be here.

Sherry spoke about both the calling to teach and the calling to care about her students in a way that suggested that the calling to care was a higher calling: “I think God has me here to care about them [the students], yeah and teach, but to care.” Frank made a powerful comment when talking about the connections between his faith and his calling

193

to be a teacher. He said, “Truly the things I’ve learned from my faith, from the Bible,

from my church stuff, bleeds over into my classroom.”

A sense of depth was evident as teachers spoke about calling. In the call to teach,

teachers experience “becoming” something more, a kind of soul-craft that occurs in them

through their process of developing within the call. Rick spoke about the meaning of his

identity as a teacher a little differently than the other teachers. He was the only

interviewee not to spiritualize his sense of calling to teach and yet he spoke of becoming

a good teacher as a process, a part of one’s identity. “I’m obsessed with [teaching], in a

good way, you know? So it, if you are going to try to be a good teacher, then it is

something you become.”

Teachers spoke about the meaning they found in their work. Frank called it, “The

Soul of the Teacher.” He said, “There’s a certain inner-thing teachers have when they’re

good, that has to develop . . . so there is this internal, positive thing always working to

build that relationship while you learn.”

Laura reiterated that her spirituality is part of her whole-self. It is present throughout her life and in the many roles she fulfills.

I know God uses me, and I hope He uses me every day, but I know He uses me,

you know, in my teaching…I mean, I guess I try to let it infiltrate all of my life.

My relationships with, you know, not only here at work, and not only just with

my students, but my colleagues, umm, and I do have some who are Christians. I

have some who are not. I hope they can tell, you know, that I’m set apart, not

better, but set apart.

194

Rick spoke of the satisfaction he feels in his work as a teacher and that it was an opportunity.

I like what I do. I like coming in every day. I enjoy it. If I didn’t like it, it would

be a struggle. And, and I probably wouldn’t be able to recharge my batteries. But

because I like it, I don’t see it as a burden; I see it as an opportunity. And there is

a big difference there. Helping people, to me, is a privilege, not, not a burden.

Max reflected about the unique place he holds in his students’ lives and the responsibilities that position requires as he challenges his students.

I have to have them doing things that are unpleasant sometimes and sometimes I

get on their case a little bit. And it, that’s motivation, that’s motivation. But their

friends are not going to do that. And so the relationship is what it is. But I think,

I know, that they listen. At least some do. And if I reach two it’s worth the

journey.

Jackie expressed her sense of mission through her elective classes that offer her students ways to succeed that are distinctive from other classes. The joy she receives in being part of her students’ successes was obvious by the tone in her voice and the smile on her face when she said:

[My] classes are great for kids that don’t get a lot of success in other ways,

because you put them in a kitchen and they just are rock stars. So, that’s one of

the reasons I teach what I teach because it reaches those kids, which is nice.

She also spoke of the spiritual as a communal dimension. “Working together as a team

. . . I would consider those skills to be, umm, have spiritual relevance. I mean, I think

195

religion is about group thinking, but group doing is also a part of that.” Jackie also said,

“I believe it just exudes . . . God’s love flows through me.”

While discussing TAHA, raising money, and awareness, Sherry spoke of being a mediating force between God and her students. She said,

And, I feel that another way that God has gotten me in touch with these students

that, umm, are very motivated, kind of a testimony that He’s put me in contact

with these students to, to be a leader in this building in a different way.

Phyllis talked about choosing to be with people who may have different beliefs or who embrace different behaviors. She noted that this choice was one exemplified by

Jesus. She made an articulate statement when she asked the question, “How can you affect the world if you don’t go out in it?”

Max reflected on thoughts about his legacy while challenging students to think about theirs.

The wins and losses come and go, it’s the people that matter; it’s the character of

the program that matters. We talk about legacy, “What will it say in your book?

When you leave here, what will it say? What do you want to leave behind?

That’s your chapter in the book.” And that, that hits kids. And that’s what we

want to do. That’s spiritual in a way too. That’s legacy.”

For most of the teachers, their sense of calling to the teaching profession was something they spiritualized. That teachers felt spiritually called and find spiritual meaning in their work is also described in the literature (Hansen, 1995; Pajak & Blase,

1989). While calling can be expressed in more secular terms (matching skills to the

196

profession, loving children, a long standing desire to become a teacher, the need to help make the world a better place), most of the teachers I interviewed were very specific about their calling being connected to their sense of spirituality.

Bev spoke of being convicted by God to do the job she is doing. Laura and Tara

both felt that God had called them to be teachers and they were where God wanted them

to be. Many of the teachers spoke in terms that something or a Divine Someone preceded

them and brought them to the place of teaching. Frank spoke of teaching as part of his

understanding of a bigger circumstance in which he lives when he said that what he had

learned from his faith, the Bible, and from church all bleeds over into his classroom. The

connections are transcendent and earthly, vertical and horizontal, captured in a sense of

both height and depth. While the presence of spirituality in their calling as teachers was

meaningful and sacred to the teachers I interviewed, there is also reason to note concern

in the spirituality of being called to teach.

While Frank spoke of his sense of spirituality in teaching, he earlier sounded a

cautionary alarm. One of his concerns had to do with teachers identifying as

missionaries, possibly evangelical missionaries, in the classroom. He certainly believed

that teachers brought their sense of spirituality into the classroom with them, but he was

wary and even suspicious of teachers who might view themselves as being on an overt

mission to bring God to their students. This seemed to be a concern greater than the

separation of church and state. He was concerned that spirituality could easily fragment

into a kind of stealthy religiosity.

197

In this sense, there is a danger in the more overt ways that teachers might share

their spirituality with students and that students can be put in a position that ceases to be

educative. When a teacher’s spirituality is rooted in religion there is a possibility,

particularly in light of the power differential between student and teacher, that a teacher’s

sharing can become surreptitious.

This is a valid concern and one I shared when I was first alerted by the presence of Christian literature in some of the classrooms I visited. But after completing the interviews with the teachers and reviewing both the audio tapes and the transcripts, I did not feel that any of them were genuinely or purposefully falling into such a congregate.

Some of the teachers articulated more direct connections between their spirituality as it related to their religion, but none of them seemed intent on putting their faith on their

students. Even so, Frank’s caution is one that should be understood and heeded.

Teachers have great power and influence over their students and they must be

cognizant of this power and influence especially as it relates to sharing their personal

sense of spirituality. The teachers who I interviewed appeared to be clear about the

inappropriateness of becoming an instrument of evangelism in the classroom but I

observed that a couple of the teachers came precariously close to that line. Debbie not

only had religious literature in her classroom as a resource for students, she also spoke of

opening the Bible with them when they struggled with difficult questions about life and

death. Laura talked about students asking her to pray for them, although she never said

that she prayed with them. On the other hand, others, like Eric, noted that they attend

198

church in communities outside their school district in order to make sure their roles as

teacher and congregant do not become overly enmeshed.

Spirituality played an important role in the call to teach for many of the teachers in this study. In addition to talking about spirituality in their relationships and their call to teach, teachers also spoke about the importance of their students knowing that they cared about them.

They Need to Know That I Care

The final category that I found interesting and evidenced itself in the late stages of analysis was the way teachers spoke about the need for students to know that they cared about them. “You need to know that I care,” was a surprising finding that was evident in what many of the teachers shared but is not represented in the literature. This category revealed a kind of quest for self-fulfillment. There are times when teachers are accused

of being selfish or entirely selfless. These extremes are often accompanied by value

judgment. I use the word “accused” for both, because, even when we lift up teachers as

selfless there is something inherently unhealthy and unbalanced about this “compliment.”

The teachers spoke of the importance that recognition flowed between teachers and

students. Just as students need affirmation, so also do teachers, yet, even in this simple

sounding interaction, there are cautions to be noted.

While teachers talked about many ways in which they care about their students,

they also made the point that their students knew they cared. For some of the teachers,

this was another way of bringing the Transcendent into the classroom with them. “I

199

guess that’s my biggest spiritual connection with students. That they know I care and I

think that means something to them” (Sherry).

Jackie said,

I think the most important thing to me is that the kids know that they matter. I

think they need to feel valued and valuable. They just need to know somebody

cares. I don’t think you can teach a kid unless he thinks you care. I don’t think

you can teach any of them anything if they think you don’t care. So I think that’s,

that’s where I start.

Later she added,

Well, being real is important to me. They know authenticity and they respond to

it. I’m real with them and they know I’m real with them. If we didn’t have that I

don’t think I could get anything done with them.

“They want to know you care about them,” said Bev, and later she added, “I always want the parents to see that I care, and I want the kids to see that I care. That is important to me.”

Debbie made several statements throughout the interview that aligned with this category. “I kind of deal with the whole kid and they know that.” She added,

I think that, you know, the fact that they know that I care about them, you know,

it gives us a connection, because they know that they can trust me. Umm, they

can feel it. I’m hoping that they can feel it in here . . . and they know that they

can trust me . . . I’m a student advocate for them and they know that.

200

Later in the interview Debbie said, “They know that I’m going to help them,” and “I

respect what they are going through and I think that they know that.” Laura also made

several statements of this nature:

I guess I hope I show my spirituality really all the time, like even in my

classroom. Like, if you would ask my kids, I think they would all, I am sure they

would know that I am a Christian.

When Laura’s class was discussing a recent suicide of a student in their school

some of the big life questions came up,

I think those come up when things happen . . . and I appreciate the fact, and I hope

it sounds okay to say, but, I love the fact that they know they can ask those things

in my class. Do you know what I mean? I know they know that I won’t say,

“you know what, we don’t have time for that today. We have to do our pronouns”

[she laughed] you know what I mean, or whatever. They know that we will take

the time to stop and make sure that everybody is okay and that, you know,

questions are answered if we can, or we will explore or, you know, just talk to

make ourselves feel better.

For some teachers, like Laura, the spirituality of relationships with students is a way of bringing God into the classroom. “They learn that I listen” [she paused]. “I have a bumper sticker that says, ‘God listens.’ I try to bring that to them.” Finally she said,

“Sometimes they ask for prayers, they come to me and ask me to pray for them. They know I will.”

201

Tara said the same thing: “But, yeah, the kids know that I care and they know they can come to me with a lot of stuff.” And Abbey confirmed the importance of the students knowing they are cared for: “The kids pick up on the unconditional love. The kids know.”

Sherry believed that it meant something to students to know she cared about them.

Jackie felt it was important that her students knew they were valued and valuable to her.

Jackie also felt that she was in a unique position with the kind of classes she taught and that she could make this connection with students in ways other teachers might not be able. Bev said that her students wanted to know she cared about them. Tara said that her students know she cares.

Higgins (2002) captured this dynamic of recognition. “The logic of recognition is clearly circular, but not all circles are vicious ones” (p. 302). It was not enough for these teachers to merely care about their students, an act of the heart and soul that goes in a single, one-way direction. It was important that the students knew they cared, and teachers, in turn, found it important that this circle continued to be completed. Teaching is neither wholly selfish nor selfless. The recognition teachers valued was not in superficial accolades but in knowing that their efforts were having effect.

This last finding, or twist on the finding of caring, actually goes beyond simple caring, and it is not benign. Overall, students knowing their teachers care about them is a positive aspect of their relationships; but it also raised an issue for me after I reviewed the interviews several times. Some of the teachers spoke about being “the one” or possibly even “the only one” in a student’s life who cared about them. Max spoke about the

202

difficulty of instilling ambition in the students he taught. His school was the most

economically disadvantaged of all the schools I visited. He said,

Some people want the success route without paying the price and so you have to

make them understand that everything in life is at a cost and if you want to drop

out of high school, I say that’s okay, if you want to flip burgers, but if you want to

achieve more, you have to understand that there is a path to get there. We teach

that every day, every day. You know Al Smith [sic] said, “The tragedy of the

poor is not poverty it is a lack of aspirations” [sic], and that is absolutely right.

It’s the idea that, “I can’t. Why bother” . . . no doubt it’s tough but we have some

kids in our class that have never seen success, success is a night watchman

because that’s all they’ve ever seen. They’ve got to know that there is more, at

least it’s possible . . . and sometimes this is the only place they hear that.

Sherry spoke of the ways in which she perceived a drop in behavioral standards even as academic standards were rising,

Things we let these kids get away with as far as how they treat each other, how

they treat the building, how they treat teachers, how they treat themselves, the

way they dress, some of the [pauses]; there’s just not a lot of respect for

themselves . . . we should be teaching these kids [values]; it’s not getting done at

home.

Sherry also raised concern about the school’s new policy on retaking tests. She understands that not all students learn at the same pace. If a student fails a test they are

203 allowed to take it over and she feels that because parents do not supervise their children this leads to accountability issues.

In theory, that sounds great, but in practice, you have kids that just kind of stay up

all night and watch the football game rather than study, or they say, “I’ll take it

and flunk it the first time and see what’s on the test and then I’ll be better

prepared for the second time around,” and in real life, sometimes you don’t get

second chances like that. I don’t want a surgeon operating on me [laughs] who

says, “That didn’t work, can I retake it?” No, my life was just on the table. So, I

don’t know, I just don’t feel like there’s that accountability, responsibility, I don’t

know.

Tara said, “I share my morals and values with them. Because, sometimes, they don’t get that anywhere else, and I feel like it’s important that they at least get it from somewhere.”

Bev commented that some of her students have low or no expectations from their families. One student, who has apraxia but also has a high level of cognition, was not speaking because her family did not push her to speak, even though she had the ability.

She noted that the student was babied and that her mother “didn’t care” and “didn’t expect anything from her.” Sherry and her team set goals for the student and they were the ones who pushed the student into speaking.

While I appreciated the fact that teachers wanted to be sure that students had someone in their life who cared, I became concerned that this attitude might move

204 beyond the altruistic and into a more self-aggrandizing approach, or maybe even something more treacherous.

Teachers could conceivably view themselves as not only a “safe haven” for their students but they could also view themselves as “the one who rescues” their students and their care could morph into a sense that they alone can reach a student or they alone are giving students the grounding, values, and life philosophy they believe the students need.

In some instances, particularly in the conversations with Max, Sherry, Tara, and Bev, teachers presented a view of students and students’ relationships with others as being bereft of the positive connections they were making with these students. There was a tendency to make sweeping generalizations about the guidance and nurturing that students were getting, or not getting, outside their classrooms. The suggestion that students in general had home lives that were missing care and moral guidance was made on more than one occasion. I wonder about the accuracy of this assumption. In these instances of “they know I care,” a caution is raised about a teacher’s perception, bias, and possible distortion of other influential actors in students’ lives.

When Max mentioned teaching students to understand right and wrong, “with a capital ‘R’ and a capital ‘W,’” I got a sense that he did not trust students’ families to instill such moral values and it was in his class that they learned these things.

Everyone who has a passion for reaching young people must also be cautious of making indiscriminate generalizations and even specific judgments on families they may not know much about, or who receive information and perspectives from the student as a single source. While Tara later contextualized the importance of students knowing she

205 cares about them, an early comment raised concern about this generalized assumption: that students, as well as their families and their communities are morally bankrupt. “I share my morals and values with them. Because sometimes they don’t get that anywhere else and I feel like it’s important that they at least get it somewhere.”

I also recognized that many of the teachers I interviewed interacted with students who had behavioral disabilities, learning disabilities, and physical disabilities. Debbie,

Jackie, Abbey, and, later, Tara framed this discussion a little differently. They worked with students who were struggling on a number of levels and with parents who were often weary and worn from years of working with children with special needs and with institutions that did not always serve them well. They recognized that families, and even students themselves, did not always understand the complications or the layers that special challenges brought to the lives of students who were not only grasping for education but also for their place and identity in life.

As I listened to these teachers it was evident that their students knowing they cared was not self-serving but a genuine need to be sure of their connection and at times to be a lifeline to their students. As the work and care of teachers needed to be recognized by the students, even in this, there was a sense of giving. The recognition was not wholly for the teachers’ sakes but also for the sake of the students. Knowing that their affirmations of care resonated with students was an important part of the relational flow between them. Reciprocity of acknowledgment and care are valuable interactions between teacher and student and teacher.

206

The conversations with the teachers about spirituality in teaching emphasized that teachers saw their students as whole persons and that they also brought themselves to the classroom as whole persons. When dealing with students who are often struggling in a variety of ways, teachers can be an additional layer of support for young people.

Teachers have the opportunity to strengthen other connections that students have with other educators, with their families, and with other supporting individuals in the students’ lives. Teachers have the responsibility to not belittle those connections even if they are viewed as lacking. Teachers can play a significant role in helping to create more connections that are both stronger and more spiritual for their students.

CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

When I began this study I did not know what I would find. There is a growing body of literature on spirituality and spirituality in public education but much of it is written from the point of view of philosophers, theologians, and practitioners who have a particular perspective as it relates to their experiences. In my conversations with 14 public high school teachers, I found that these teachers had a deep sense of their own spirituality and a firm grasp on how their spirituality came with them into their classrooms. I discovered that among these teachers; spirituality deeply influences the way they think about their work and how they view and value their relationships with their students.

The literature often spoke to the issues of connection and disconnection.

Disconnection included distrust, lack of respect, and lack of relationships between educators and students (Baker et al., 1997; Goens, 1996); the failure of modernity to offer purpose and meaning in life (Alexander, 2006); detachment that teachers feel from their students, colleagues, and self (Palmer, 1993); and the disconnection that is brought on by fear (Adarkar & Keiser, 2007; Callejo Perez, 2005; Palmer, 1998). Spirituality in education can be a counter-narrative against social fragmentation and materialism

(Revell, 2008). The teachers I interviewed spoke a great deal about spiritual connection in relation to acts and roles of nurturing and qualities of relationship but they said very little about disconnection. They seemed more focused on the ways in which they can connect with their students than on the issues or systemic problems that cause

207 208 disconnection. A couple of teachers did talk, in passing, about disconnection.

Interestingly, economics was cited by two teachers, one working in the most affluent school and the other working in the school where there was the greatest level of poverty.

I was not surprised by the teacher’s comments that cited poverty as a disconnect because not having some of the basic resources to teach students and teaching in a building that is old and in poor condition have been noted as a factor in disconnecting students from their education. I was intrigued, though, when the teacher at the most affluent school noted that wealth contributed to a disconnection in education. He spoke about students feeling entitled and of parents pushing students so hard to succeed that they often felt overwhelmed.

The other time disconnection came up in our conversations with some frequency was the mention of the high divorce rate in students’ families. This was noted as a cause of students’ stress, instability, disruption in home life, and often the accompanying poverty that comes with divorce. Aside from passing mention of these issues, the teachers did not focus on disconnection.

There was also little mention of systemic problems in the school systems themselves. Aside from cursory comments about administration and other teachers, the participants did not focus on these relationships even though they had the opportunity to raise them. Other factors of disconnect that were mentioned in passing was the “brain drain” caused by students being allowed to take college courses and parents who discouraged students from taking classes in the arts because such classes did not count as much toward the students’ grade point average. Students leaving campus to take college

209 courses was also mentioned as a factor that kept them from participating in sports and clubs, which some of the teachers saw as important outlets and opportunities for students to develop. But, by and large, the teachers focused on the connections with their students.

Several aspects of nurturing which the teachers described, such as the longing to be nurtured (Shahjahan, 2004), inner peace, compassion, respect, caring (Kessler, 2004), and accountability (Kessler, 1999) coincided with the literature on spirituality and teaching, as did the teachers’ sense of calling and the facets of the relational including addressing life’s big questions (Nash, 2002; Noddings, 1993; Nord, 1995) finding meaning (Kessler, 1999), social justice (Adarkar & Keiser, 2007), and making connections with God, others, and self (Hodge & Derezotes, 2008; Shahjahan, 2004).

Even as these aspects reflected what I have learned in the literature, the teachers provided dimensions of height, breadth, and depth to these findings. They were able to put experiential skin to the bones of the academic text, humanizing the threads and categories of attributes and meanings. Teachers spiritualized their acts of nurturing, their roles as nurturers, and the relational aspects of teaching. Many of them also understood their call to teach as one that came from God and they felt God’s presence with them in their work.

This added a new facet to the discussion of teaching as vocation, which often concentrates on the inner desire to help students and be an agent of change in their lives, and the social desire to make a difference in the world (Hansen, 1995).

The teachers also provided examples of spiritual nurturing as well as roles of nurturing that were not as clearly stated in the literature. These included an attitude of

210 kindness, altruism, and accountability, and the roles teachers assumed which were related to spirituality included: guide, motivator, creators of safe space, counselors, models, and being open or non-judgmental toward their students and their needs.

Including God in the picture in such an overt way is bound to raise concerns, as indeed it does for many preservice and practicing teachers. In discussions with my undergraduate students about spirituality and religion, I remember clearly such comments as, “I’m not going to touch that with a ten-foot pole,” or “You can lose your job over that,” or “There’s no way I’m going to go into that with my students,” or “I heard on the news that a teacher got into big trouble when she let a student read from the Bible for a class project.” The teachers in this study seemed to clearly understand the meaning of the laws surrounding the freedom of religion and the establishment clauses of the United

States Constitution. If we cannot assume that this small sample is representative of public educators, we can assume that pre-service educators would benefit from a clearer understanding of how religion and spirituality can be a resource in classrooms and schools in a country that honors a separation of church and state.

The teachers in this study reported that religion and spirituality come up, whether or not they are part of the formal curriculum. Part of being an educated person is learning to negotiate difficult and sometimes contentious subject matter. Navigating the parameters of appropriate discussion on religion and spirituality in public education is, in itself, educational. Teaching teachers, other school personnel, and children how to talk about such issues seems to be a worthy goal. Even though it may be difficult or challenging does not mean it should be avoided or dismissed.

211

A few years ago some public schools decided that they would no longer allow

students to play dodge ball in physical education or on the playground because there were

cases where students had been hurt during rough play. This made national headlines.

While banning dodge ball may have freed these schools from legal liability for injuries

sustained, the ban did not teach children how to play the game with self-restraint. The ban did not teach children how to abide by the rules or remind them that it was a game to be played for fun. The ban did not teach the children that rubber playground balls were not missiles to be used to render another child unconscious. All of these lessons, and the lessons that might have organically evolved from them, were lost.

Too often the culture of our society, and more particularly that of public education, would rather dismiss issues, avoid slippery slopes, and steer clear of entanglements instead of wrestle with meaning, possibilities, and boundaries. In spite of some very real concerns and aside from the rhetoric, the teachers in this study found great value in inviting the spiritual into their classrooms. In fact, many reported that these kinds of discussions enhanced the height, breadth, and depth of interaction and relationship with and among students. It was often in this climate of inclusion that proverbial “teaching moments” surfaced. And it was often in the climate of including the spiritual that teachers were touched and moved by what students said and the needs that students exposed.

In the narratives of these teachers, I discovered that the educators, by and large, exercise healthy ethical parameters when engaging with students about aspects of spiritual formation. They allowed for this piece of personal identity to be considered and

212 at times challenged students to consider it. But teachers also wanted students to develop personal autonomy in their understanding. They challenged students to be thoughtful about what they had been told (directly and indirectly). They challenged students to be self-reflective in what they said. They challenged students to use critical thinking when considering what others said, including the teachers themselves.

While teaching undergraduate students in the College of Education I included discussions in my Cultural Foundations courses on religion and spirituality. These discussions often created tension in my students and I believe that some of the tension came from discussing something that was new for them to consider, to verbalize, and to engage. While I think it would be a mistake to make spirituality a measurable outcome in the curriculum of teacher education courses that would be quantified and tested, I believe that we need to provide a place in teacher education, in school settings, and in continuing education for these discussions to take place. Some of the teachers I interviewed expressed surprise at my topic and some shared that they had not spoken about spirituality and education to anyone, ever. Some of the teachers interviewed in this study seemed to appreciate the opportunity for such discussion.

The teachers I interviewed who had more years of experience in the classroom told me that it took time for them to develop insights and to cultivate the personal skills and insights that connected their spirituality with their teaching; nonetheless, I believe these conversations could begin at the undergraduate level.

Colleges of Education in general and Cultural Foundations courses in particular could, at the very least, begin the conversation and offer a place in which preservice

213 teachers can experiment with ideas and read about the spiritual dimensions of teaching.

While it would be lovely to infuse discussions of spirituality throughout the teaching curriculum, it would also be unreasonable, because such infusion would quite probably lead to overall lapses in raising the conversation. This is evidenced in the critiques of the mandate to include spiritual formation throughout the common curriculum in The United

Kingdom (Marples, 2006; Wringe, 2002). Some of the criticism questioned the feasibility of addressing spiritual formation in all course content. For example, creating spiritual development objectives in physical education or computer programming appeared to be artificial or even convoluted. Foundations of Education courses would be a most appropriate place to begin the dialogue and to encourage students to wrestle with any angst they may experience about spirituality as well as religion in education.

This anxiety first presents itself in issues of religion in public education and understanding what the separation of church and state means. Once that is decoupled, a space can be created for the discussion of spirituality. It should be noted, however, that simply clarifying the First Amendment and the inappropriateness and illegal nature of religious proselytizing by educators in the public school is not the crux of this conversation, nor does this clarification eliminate all possible discomfit. Spirituality in public education will continue to be a complicated conversation even as we find the language and the ability to discuss it. This study underscores that the consideration of spirituality within public education is important.

Most teachers in this study made connections between their religious beliefs and their spirituality. For some, this connection was part of their personal history. They grew

214

up in religious traditions and even if they no longer followed those traditions, religion

had an influence on their spiritual development. For other teachers, religion and

spirituality had a close relationship and each influenced the other. For a few, the link between religion and spirituality was inseparable. For one teacher there was no mention of a relationship between spirituality and religion. These beliefs and relationships need to

be acknowledged and respected in both the academy and in the public school domain

because they are part of one’s identity and they have an effect on teachers and their

interactions with students.

We regularly talk about educating the whole child, yet there is little conversation

about recognizing and nurturing the whole teacher. The teachers I interviewed were

aware that they brought their whole-selves to their students and that this was important, and yet they also indicated that their understanding of both the whole child and the whole teacher engaging in education was something they developed over time and often in isolation.

This is a tremendous investment and one that also deserves time and place in teacher education. With the heightened emphasis in the academy in recent years on academic standards and achievement and the myriad concerns that such emphases raise, we would do well and serve the profession well by claiming some time and space in undergraduate and graduate courses for this conversation.

Again, one way to begin this would be to initiate the conversation in teacher education. Even as we equip future teachers with content knowledge, methods, and pedagogy we can also equip them with language and voice to discuss spirituality in their

215

teaching. But that will not be sufficient to sustain the dialogue as teachers continue to

grow and develop in the profession. We also need to find ways to continue to develop

the language and encourage the growth once teachers are in the field.

One of the interesting elements in the Fraser (2007) study of teachers and

spirituality is that she first conceived that her investigation would center on interviews

with individual teachers. She soon discovered that the teachers wanted the interviews

done in group settings. The teachers wanted to talk with each other. They wanted to not

only express their own understandings of spirituality in teaching, but they also wanted to

hear what others had to say and be able to respond to each other’s experiences and ideas,

as though the spiritual was both an individual voice and a collective voice.

The challenge we have is to create opportunities for teachers to continue to

engage in conversations about spirituality and religion in public education. I use the

word “opportunities” with intention. A sure way to rob the life from this kind of ongoing

conversation would be to make it yet another learning objective, another task to be

completed, or another agenda item that needs to be covered during faculty in-service or

departmental meetings. If recognizing and developing one’s spirituality is as important

to teachers in general as it was to teachers in this study, we can find a way to create space

in which they can attend to these needs.

A third idea that I discovered through this research that made a great impression on me was the reciprocal affirmation that teachers experienced when they knew that their students knew they cared about them. This was a profound facet of the relational. With the exception of Sherry, whose school system provides an opportunity for students to

216

send personal messages during Teacher Appreciation Week to teachers who have been

influential or special to them, none of the teachers cited public accolades, recognitions, or

applause at assemblies as the moments when their own self-fulfillment as educators was

most felt. Although such acts of gratitude were probably appreciated, teachers spoke

most sincerely and emotionally when they spoke about their students knowing they cared

about them.

“They know I care,” is an added dimension to “I care,” and it is a significant one,

which this study underscores. It changes the horizontal and one-way direction of caring to a dynamic and multi-dimensional exchange in which teachers found personal meaning and purpose. When teachers spoke of this dynamic, there was excitement and passion in their voices and sometimes delight on their faces. This was often the liveliest part of our conversation even though I did not recognize it at first. While Noddings (1984) explored the idea of caring through the perspectives of the ones-caring and the cared-for, she noted that the ones-caring find fulfillment when the ones cared-for flourish. The teachers presented a need about caring that takes this idea a step further. They needed to know that their caring had been received and accepted. They did not require direct acknowledgement or gratitude, but they needed to acknowledge that the students knew they cared.

Educators are often put on pedestals, though these pedestals are more sentimental than actual, as evidenced by the way teachers are valued in tangible ways like working conditions, salaries, and the recent backlash against union rights and collective bargaining. We give lip-service to the value of teachers and even put them in untenable

217

corners by referring to their self-sacrifice, their selflessness, or their heroic qualities.

None of the teachers I interviewed spoke in these terms and none of them suggested that they found purpose and meaning in their work in anything resembling these

characterizations.

What they talked about instead is their students knowing they were there for them,

that their students knew they cared, and that even if their students had no one else, they

knew they had their teacher. While I expected to hear teachers talk about the joy of

helping students make connections in their lives and being part of a student’s moment of

comprehending something new or difficult, I did not anticipate this facet of reciprocity

and self-fulfillment for teachers.

Through this research I was able to answer the questions I had framed for

investigation. I found that among the 14 teachers I interviewed, their personal sense of

spirituality influenced the ways in which they viewed their teaching and I found that the

teachers’ personal sense of spirituality influenced their teaching in the ways they nurtured

their students, in their relationships with their students, and in the way that they viewed

their call to teach.

Limitations

It is important for any researcher to acknowledge the limitations of a project. One

concern of a study based on interviews is that the main data source is the self-reporting of

the interviewees. Another concern is that the interviewer is the main instrument of

gathering and analyzing the data (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). While interviewees may want

to please the researcher and “give her what she’s looking for,” I attempted to reduce that

218

potential tendency by interviewing teachers I do not know personally. I also worked

during the interviews to present an open and interested attitude so that participants felt

comfortable reporting personal points of view that may or may not be shared or

understood by me. I tried to get out of the way of each interviewee so that she or he was

able to respond to the guiding questions to the best of their ability.

In stressing the confidential nature of their identity in the research, it was also

hoped that teachers would be able to be honest about their beliefs and experiences. In

two cases interviewees asked for reassurance about the confidentiality of the interview,

and I believe the assurance I was able to give them encouraged their openness and

candor. Still, the nature of the interview depends on the teachers’ self-reporting and what they choose to disclose or not disclose. The interview is also dependent on the researcher’s ability to make an authentic connection with the participant and be fully present during the conversation.

The particular teachers who were willing to volunteer for this study indicated a sense of cooperation and willingness to spend time with the researcher to arrange the interview (which was, in some cases, time consuming), conduct the interview, and be available for follow-up communications. Teachers who volunteer to participate in studies are often comfortable with the process and their ability to articulate their point of view on various topics to the researcher. I did not work with any reluctant teachers and this, in itself, may have influenced the kind of data that was gathered. This is unavoidable since all interviewees volunteered their participation.

219

The number of interviews accomplished is a limited sample, but it was sufficient for an initial study in Social Foundations of Education. Further interviews, especially with other subgroups of teachers (middle school teachers for example), may add new insights.

Until the interviews were completed, I did not know the backgrounds of all the participants: their race, ethnicity, religious and spiritual backgrounds, or the number of years they had taught at the high school level. It was not until my final interview that I discovered that all the teachers were White and most of them self-identified as Christian.

Again, further interviews with high school teachers of racial and ethnic minorities and non-Christian backgrounds may enhance my understanding of this topic.

Another limitation of this study may be the number of schools in which the teachers were located. Six of the interviewees taught at the same school, three at another, two at a third school, and the remainder from single schools visited. In the largest group only two teachers were in the same department. Although I am not studying schools, I am aware that schools have cultures of their own. Teachers may have been practicing in schools that are more or less open to cultivating an ethos of spirituality in the classroom.

I was cognizant of this during both the data collection and the data analysis.

Further Research

As I completed this exploratory study, I naturally thought about where it might lead me in future research. While many of the findings from the teacher interviews reflected some of the literature, there were attributes of spirituality and spiritual roles that the teachers discussed that were not evident in the literature. One area of further

220 exploration would be to continue to interview public school teachers in order to discover what other teachers might add to this conversation.

One of the areas of disappointment for me was the racial, ethnic, and religious demographic make-up of my interviewees. The teachers I interviewed were all White and

13 of the 14 teachers identified with either a Christian background or were practicing

Christians. Of course this was not totally known to me until I encountered the last of the interviewees. I wonder if I might discover additional insights by interviewing public high school teachers from diverse racial, ethnic, and/or religious groups. The literature on spirituality and education written from the perspectives of non-religious, or non-Christian, or non-White researchers and practitioners is somewhat different in tone and content than that written by White, Anglo, Protestant researchers and practitioners (Adarkar & Keiser,

2007; Dei et al., 2000; Shahjahan, 2004). I would like to find out if such diversity would hold true with public school teachers. I also wonder if public school teachers who teach at the middle school or elementary school levels might have anything different to say about spirituality in education or might have insights that are dissimilar from high school teachers. These would be natural extensions of my study for further research.

A third potential area of future research presented itself within the finding of teachers knowing that their students knew they cared about them. One of the disturbing parts of this discussion came into focus through the comments of a couple of the teachers that were disparaging of students’ home lives or seemed to view parents and/or other adults in students’ lives as, at best, ineffectual, and at worst detrimental to students’ development of ethics, spiritual connections, values, and motivation. I wonder about the

221 teachers’ claims that the educational system is the only place where “these students” get support and guidance, or that a particular teacher “is the only one” who cares or connects with a student. This presentation by some of the teachers may be worth exploring. While a study aimed at determining the accuracy of these claims would be enormous and complicated, and I have my doubts about whether it is feasible, it would be possible to further explore the prevalence of the teacher as rescuer as the role relates to caring. Some of these comments may have been “off the cuff.” Some of them may represent a particular experience with a specific student or family. It would be possible to investigate if other teachers are concerned that students’ primary source in the areas of guidance and support come from their relationships with teachers.

A fourth avenue for continued research might be to investigate ways in which a place for the discourse of spirituality and religion can be created in teacher education.

This might involve working with preservice teachers as well as faculty who teach

Cultural Foundations courses. It would be helpful to further understand why these conversations are not taking place: is it due to anxiety, lack of understanding, or not recognizing the need to nurture this part of the teacher? By working with faculty I might be able to explore how such conversation might begin and how they might be continued.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPLICATION FORM

Appendix A

Institutional Review Board Application Form

224

APPENDIX B

IRB RENEWAL/CONTINUATION OF APPROVAL

Appendix B

IRB Renewal/Continuation of Approval

226

APPENDIX C

CONSENT FORM

Appendix C

Consent Form

228

REFERENCES

Abington v. Schempp. (1963). 201 F. Supp. 815, aff’d, 228 Md. 239, 179 A. 2d 698,

reversed. Retrieved from http://www.nationalcenter.org/scot63.htm

Adarkar A., & Keiser, D. L. (2007). The Buddha in the classroom: Toward a critical

spiritual pedagogy. Journal of Transformative Education, 5(3), 246-261. doi:

10.1777/1541344607306362

Alexander, H. (1996). Interreligious education. Religious Education, 91(4), 415-416.

Alexander, H. (2006). Spirituality, morality, and criticism in education: A response to

Kevin Gary. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 25(4), 327-334.

doi:10.1007/11217-006-9007-1

Alexander, H., & McLaughlin, T. (2003). Education in religion and spirituality. In N.

Blake, P. Smeyers, R. Smith, & P. Standish (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to the

philosophy of education (pp. 356-373). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Antrop-Gonzalez, R. (2006). Toward the school as sanctuary concept in multicultural

urban education: Implications for small high school reform. Curricular Inquiry,

36(3), 273-301. doi: 10.111/j.1467-877X.2006.00359.x

Astley, J. (2003). Spiritual learning: Good for nothing? In D. Carr & J. Haldane (Eds.),

Spirituality, philosophy and education (pp. 141-153). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Baer, R. A., & Carper, J. C. (1998). Spirituality and the public schools: An evangelical

perspective. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 56, 33-37.

Baker, J. A., Bridger, R., Terry, T., & Winsor, A. (1997). Schools as caring communities:

A relational approach to school reform. School Psychology Review, 26, 586-602.

230 231

Bellous, J. E., & Csinos, D. M. (2009). Spiritual styles: Creating an environment to

nurture spiritual wholeness. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality,

14(3), 213-224. doi:10.1080/13644360903086471

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An

introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

British Education Reform Act 1988. Retrieved from

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts1988/ukpga_19880040_en_2

Brummelen, H. V., Franklin, K., & Koole, R. (2004). Transcending the commonplace:

Spirituality in curriculum. Journal of Education Thought, 38(3), 237-254.

Buechner, F. (1973). Wishful thinking: A theological ABC. New York: Harper & Row.

Callejo Perez, D. M. (2005). Curriculum reform and teacher education: The loss of

innocence. Taboo, 9(1), 73-80.

Cushner, K., McClelland, A., & Safford, P. (2000). Human diversity in education: An

integrative approach. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Dalton, J. C. (2001). Career and calling: Finding a place for the spirit in work and

community. New Directions for Student Services, 95, 17-25.

Dei, G. J. S., James, I. M., James-Wilson, S., Karumanchery, L. L., & Zine, J. (2000).

Removing the margins: The challenges and possibilities of inclusive schooling.

Toronto: Canadian Scholar’s Press.

Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. In L. Hickman & T. Alexander (Eds.), The

essential Dewey: Pragmatism, education, democracy (pp. 229-235).

Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

232

Dillard, C. B., Abdur-Rashid, D. I., &Tyson, C. A. (2000). My soul is a witness:

Affirming pedagogies of the spirit. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in

Education, 13(5), 447-462. doi: 10.1080/09518390050156404

Dyson, J., Cobb, M., & Forman, D. (1997). The meaning of spirituality: A literature

review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(6), 1183-1188. doi:

10.1046/j.1365.2648.1997.004446.x

Elkins, D. N., Hedstrom, L. J., Hughes, L. L., Leaf, J. A., & Saunders, C. (1988). Toward

a humanistic-phenomenological spirituality: Definition, description, and

measurement. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 28(4), 5-18. doi:

10.1177/0022167888284002

Fenwick, T. J. (2001). Critical questions for pedagogical engagement of spirituality.

Adult Learning, 12, 10-12.

Floyd, S. K. (2009). To what effect can Black theology and critical spirituality break the

chains of oppression within the dropout recovery school setting (Doctoral

dissertation). Retrieved from http:edt.ohiolink.edu

Francis, L. J., Robbins, M., & Johnson, P. (2001). Shaping teachers’ interpretation of

spirituality: The contribution of Anglican and Free church colleges in England

and Wales. Journal of Research on Christian Education, 10(1), 39-51. doi:

10.1080/10656210109484916

Fraser, D. (2007). State education, spirituality, and culture: Teachers’ personal and

professional stories of navigating the nexus. International Journal of Children’s

Spirituality, 12(3), 289-305. doi: 10.1080/13644360701714977

233

Galluzzo, G. R. (2011). For federal reform dollars, why not think-and-act locally?

Education Week, 30(22), 26-29.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Glassner, B. (2000). The culture of fear: Why Americans are afraid of the wrong things.

New York: Basic Books.

Goens, G. A. (1996). Does your school have a soul? Principal, 76, 54.

Gory, K. M. (2009). Comprehensive school reform: Meta-analytic analysis of Black-

White achievement gap narrowing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 17(25),

1-13.

Halford, J. M. (1999). Longing for the sacred in schools: A conversation with Nel

Noddings. Education Leadership, 56(4), 28-32.

Hansen, D. T. (1995). The call to teach. New York: Teachers College Press.

Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. New York: State

University of New York Press.

Higgins, C. (2002). Teaching and the dynamics of recognition. Philosophy of Education,

296-304.

Hodge, D. R., & Derezotes, D. S. (2008). Postmodernism and spirituality: Some

pedagogical implications for teaching content on spirituality. Journal of Social

Work Education, 44(1), 103-123. doi: 10.5175/JSWE.2008.200500598

Houston, P. D. (2002). Why spirituality, and why now? School Administrator, 59(8), 6-8.

Iannone, R. V., & Obenauf, P. A. (1999). Toward spirituality in curriculum and teaching.

Education, 119(4), 737-743.

234

Jablonski, M. A. (2001). The implications of student spirituality for student affairs

practice. New Directions for Student Services, 95, 1-5.

Janesick, V. J. (1998). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry,

and meaning. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative

inquiry (pp. 35-55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kessler, R. (1999). Nourishing students in secular schools. Education Leadership, 56(4),

49-52.

Kessler, R. (2001). Soul of students, soul of teachers: Welcoming the inner life to school.

In L. Lantieri (Ed.), Schools with spirit: Nurturing the inner lives of children and

teachers (pp. 107-131). Boston: Beacon Press.

Kessler, R. (2004). Education for integrity: Connection, compassion, and character. In R.

Eisler & R. Miller (Eds.), Educating for a culture of peace (pp. 57-79).

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kress, T. (2011). Going high tech under high surveillance: Technology integration, zero

tolerance, and implications for access and equity. Radical Teacher, 90, 15-24.

Lantieri, L. (2001). A vision of schools with spirit. In L. Lantieri (Ed.), Schools with

spirit: Nurturing the inner lives of children and teachers (pp. 7-20). Boston:

Beacon Press.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Love, P. G. (2001). Spirituality and student development: Theoretical connections. New

Directions for Student Services, 95, 7-16. doi: 10.1002/ss.18

235

Marples, R. (2006). Against (the use of the term) ‘spiritual education.’ International

Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 11(2), 293-306. doi:

10.1080/136443606000797313

Marshall, J. M. (2009). Describing the elephant: Preservice teachers talk about spiritual

reasons for becoming a teacher. Teacher Education Quarterly., 36(2), 25-44.

Martsolf, D. S. (1997). Cultural aspects of spirituality in cancer care. Seminars in

Oncology Nursing, 13(4), 231-236.

Martsolf, D. S., & Mickley, J. R. (1998). The concept of spirituality in nursing theories:

Differing world-views and extent of focus. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27, 294-

303. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00519.x

Mayes, C. (2001). Cultivating spiritual reflectivity in teachers. Teacher Education

Quarterly, 28(2), 5-22.

Miller, J. P. (2000). Education of the soul: Toward a spiritual curriculum. Albany: State

University of New York Press.

Miller, R. (2006). Reflecting on spirituality in education. ENCOUNTER: Education for

Meaning and Social Justice, 19(20), 6-9.

Minney, R. (1991). What is spirituality in an educational context? British Journal of

Educational Studies, 39(4), 386-397.

Morse, J. M. (1998). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.

Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 56-85). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

236

Nash, R. J. (2002). Spirituality, ethics, religion, and teaching: A professor’s journey.

New York: Peter Lang.

National Committee on Excellence in Education. (1984). A nation at risk: The full

account. Portland, OR: USA Research.

Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education.

Berkeley: University of California Press.

Noddings, N. (1993). Educating for intelligent belief or unbelief. New York: Teachers

College Press.

Noddings, N. (2008). Spirituality and religion in public schooling. Yearbook of the

National Society for the Study of Education, 107(1), 185-195.

Noell, G. H., & Gansle, K. A. (2009). Moving from good ideas in educational systems

change to suitable program implementation: Coming to terms with some of the

realities. Psychology in the Schools, 46(1), 79-89.

Nord, W. A. (1995). Religion & American education: Rethinking a national dilemma.

Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

Oman, D., Thorensen, C. E., Park, C. L., Shaver, P. R., Hood, R. W., & Plante, T. G.

(2009). How does one become spiritual? The Spiritual Modeling Inventory of Life

Environments (SMILE). Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(5), 427-456. doi:

10.1080/13674670902758257

Pajak, E., & Blase, J. J. (1989). The impact of teachers’ personal lives on professional

role enactment: A qualitative analysis. American Educational Research Journal,

26(2), 283-310.

237

Palmer, P .J. (2010). Teaching with heart and soul: Reflections on spirituality in teacher

education. Retrieved from http://www.couragerenewal.org/parker/writings/heart-

and-soul

Palmer, P. J. (1993). To know as we are known: Education as a spiritual journey. San

Francisco: Harper San Francisco.

Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s

life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Palmer, P. J. (1999). Evoking the spirit. Education Leadership, 56(4), 6-11.

Pedraza, L. (2006). “Because they are spiritually discerned:” Spirituality in early

childhood education (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from

http://proquest.umi.com.ohiolink.edu

Revell, L. (2008). Spirituality development in public and religious schools: A case study.

Religious Education, 103(1), 102-118.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in

Nursing & Health, 23, 334-340. doi: 341BR

Sandelowski, M. (2009). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in

Nursing & Health, 33(1), 77-84.

Savickas, M. L. (1991). The meaning of work and love: Career issues and interventions.

The Career Development Quarterly, 39, 315-324.

Scherer, M. (1999). Linking education with spirituality. Education Leadership, 56(4), 5.

238

Schoonmaker, F. (2009). Only those who see take off their shoes: Seeing the classroom

as a spiritual space. Teachers College Record, 111(12), 2713-2731.

Senge, P. (2004). Going public: Spirituality in higher education and the workplace. New

York: Peter Lang.

Shahjahan, R. A. (2004). Centering spirituality in the academy: Toward a transformative

way of teaching and learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(4), 294-

312.

Slater, J. J. (2005). Spirituality and the curriculum. Taboo, 9(1), 59-68.

Strong, J. (1890). Strong’s exhaustive concordance of the Bible, with key-word

comparison of selected words and phrases in the King James version with five

leading translations. Nashville: Abingdon.

Suhor, C. (1999). Spirituality—letting it grow in the classroom. Education Leadership.

56(4), 12-16.

Sullivan, J. (2003). Scholarship and spirituality. In D. Carr & J. Haldane (Eds.),

Spirituality, philosophy and education (pp. 127-140). London: RutledgeFalmer.

Sztokman, E. M. (2009). Spirituality amid dogma? Some approaches to educating for

religious belief within a state religious school in Israel. Journal of Jewish

Education. 75, 150-172. doi: 10.1080/15244110902856500

Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. R., & MacDonald-Emes, J. (1997). Interpretive description: A

noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge.

Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 169-177. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X

239

United States Department of Education. (1995). Secretary’s statement on religious

expression. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/10-1995/religion.html

United States Department of Education. (2003). Guidance on constitutionally protected

prayer in public elementary and secondary schools. Retrieved from

http:www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.html

Vokey, D. (2003). Longing to connect: Spirituality in public schools. In D. C Carr & J.

Haldane (Eds.), Spirituality, philosophy, and education (pp. 167-180). London:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Williams, A. Y. (2004). Examining the impact of Christian spirituality on academic

attitudes and behaviors of African American students: A qualitative case study

(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu

Wringe, C. (2002). Is there spirituality? Can it be part of education? The Journal of the

Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain, 36(2), 157-170.