Learning as performance art

[kaberett]

I have dealt for a very long time with perfectionism: judging myself by my (perceived) failures and discounting my successes; struggling to ask for help or admit lack of understanding; in short, being terrified of being seen to learn.

In my first year at university I hit the point where I said, to a demonstrator in a practical, "I don't understand this." The demonstrator reasonably responded, "Okay, what don't you understand?" "Any of it," I replied. "I have no idea what I am supposed to be doing. I do not understand the problem that has been set. I do not understand any of the things." (I get slightly approximate in that last bit of transcription.)

We got me sorted out. The demonstrator left. I started working my way through the problem sheet.

The lecturer walked over and thanked me.

He thanked me because, he said, it was incredibly refreshing to hear somebody admit to not understanding. I had done so in frustration and in misery -- but I was told it was okay, and I was thanked.


So: visibly learning in public is something I consider important activism. Especially now that I seem to be in some senses "cool" and definitely respected (weird and uncomfortable to say, but I think true), I'm very aware that it is not only good for me.

It is good for me - learning that the world won't end if I do; I get your insight - but e.g. responses to the Things I've Learned From Counselling posts makes clear it's got broader value, in terms of both concrete information and a sense of possibility (cf possibly the best compliment I've ever received: "you make things seem more possible").


But I'm a perfectionist.

So I look at the list of ways in which learning in public can be good for people, and I think about how important it obviously is, and then decide that this means I have to do it right.

"Learning wrong" is different to "getting the answer wrong" in several obvious respects, not least of which is that in learning "the right way" (klaxons should be going off at that phrasing) it's okay to say "I don't know" or "huh, I messed up there". But still... I want to model it correctly. I want to demonstrate that it's okay to say "I don't know"; I want to show the process from confused beginnings to nice pat conclusions, with dead ends along the way; and always, always, always, I bring with me this awareness, this self-consciousness that pulls and tweaks at what I've written until it provides a clear narrative.

I alluded to this sideways and wryly in a recent post (), in part because that series of posts is a fairly rare example of me stream-of-consciousness-ing all over the shop: the particular instance linked is the moment of realisation & precipitous conclusion where I suddenly work out what's been going on in my head, and the extent to which previous discussion was focussing on the "wrong" things (useful, to be sure, but nonetheless a slantwise approach that wasn't the one to help me find my way to the middle of the maze). And yet even with realtime display of the wild goose chase, I was carefully and consciously curating the things I said -- as I am now, for all that this is a topic on which I still don't have a neat conclusion.

I envy & am awestruck by & fear & admire the people who not only learn in public but do so without looking over their shoulder. My heart is tugging in the direction of an idea of authenticity, but I think even that's a smoke screen: to trust enough to make mistakes without needing to wrap oneself in the belief that doing so has value to others - to be able to just do it - is something that, well, I want to learn to do.

Comments

[batdina]

I learned how to learn publicly by teaching. It worked like this: I'd present a thing and the class would start doing whatever it was I asked them to do and then there would be a student who either didn't get it, or had a question about something I hadn't ever considered. I had a few choices. I could ignore the question (nope, that's not me) or I could admit I didn't know the answer, but that I'd find out the answer and get back to them. And usually by the next time the class met, I had a response to the question, and we'd do a little dance about that, and move on to the next thing.

I think what I decided was that I'd rather be honest with my students than pretend to a knowledge they could suss out later was bullshit. Once or twice something like that happened in a room with an observer, and generally speaking the observer was always blown away that I admitted to not knowing something in front of students. Then again, I was the kind of prof who had a dictionary on the lectern just in case there was a word I didn't know and had to look up. and I did that as a teaching thing too.

I haven't a clue if any of this is helpful to you or not. :::smile:::

[azurelunatic]

Unfiltered, perhaps?

(There are many reasons why I filter myself, but there are some contexts where I figure that Unfiltered Me is unlikely to hurt anyone.)

[highlyeccentric]

I think this 'learning in public is never not-constructed' is why my first shrink didn't accept DW as a method of journalling. Of course, as a literary scholar, I can now say that all selves are constructed and private diaries are no exception (indeed in some ways more so...). But I didn't have that answer to hand at the time.

HOWEVER. I notice in this post a thought-trap into which I also fall sometimes: the idea that other people are doing the Thing more truthfully/effectively/wholely and obviously what I need to do is either perfect the image, or feel around until I find the key to doing it WHOLELY AND WHOLESOMELY. I fall into this trap as much with journal-keeping as I do with scholarship, so. Hell I even feel like that about *reading for fun*. Other people have more literary interests. Other people have LESS literary interests but have unlocked the Secret of Fun. If I tick enough books off on goodreads sooner or later I will discover the Secret of Literature, or Possibly Fun.

Does it *matter* if your learning in public is persistently curated? It is honest, within the confines of the medium and your boundary-keeping. It seems to work for you. It provokes interest and confers benefits on others. Yay!

[kaberett]

Hm'n, I wonder if some of it is that I expend vast amounts of energy on curating my self to pass for allistic, neurotypical, generally acceptable, etc? And as such view this curation as an extension of the ways in which I'm terrified of letting myself be "messy" and asking for help when I don't know what the help I need even is? As work that helps me survive but prevents me from getting free?

And of course it's all tangled up in the bit where somebody I am head-over-heels in love with does seem to learn in public unselfconsciously and confidently, and this is one of the things I adore about them.

[highlyeccentric]

It would not surprise me if your conscious curating skews with your perspective on self-revelation in any format, yeah. (Fwiw, the more irrational end of my history with the 'everyone else has a trick to authenticity and I'm going through motions I don't grok' thought-trap was indeed what set off a few doctors' 'maybe this is aspergers' alerts, so...). As with the question of self-curating to pass as allitistic etc, self-curating to 'model learning in public' is perhaps an endless quest? I mean, it's probably not possible to do it RIGHT and be done with it, in either case?

Oh, the curiousness of falling for those who embody the traits we wish we were better at. *shakes head, little to add on that one*

[quirkytizzy]

SO. THIS. YES.

A lot of people in my life don't really get journaling as a learning experience, either. But it gives you practice in being honest with yourself, with the added benefit of an audience. It's not the same immediate back and forth that you get face to face, but it IS safer, and for a lot of us to learn how to be honest, we need that safety, too.

That last paragraph of what you wrote - it really helps me feel okay about my ways of learning. Thank you. Sometimes I, too, get caught up in thinking the rest of the world is so much better at this "being who they are in the world" thing, not remembering that we all have our own boundaries.

And Kaberett - I have only found that kind of bravery in myself (the admitting publicly that I was utterly lost) in math classes. I admire the hell out of it when other people manage to do it - so that was awesome that you did.

[silveradept]

I feel like I should be able to contribute something useful, considering my job is often about helping people to learn in public, and assuring them that doing so is normal.

Although it doesn't necessarily do anything for my own perfectionist tendencies, but I think mine are rooted in having adverse experiences of other people deriding me for being "stupid" when wrong, as is the wont of children looking for opportunities to make a smart person seem more human. So, I think it might be similar, but it's different enough that I don't feel like anything from my experience could be useful.

[kaberett]

I've had similar experiences with derision when being ~wrong~ about something; and I'd definitely be interested in what you have to say if you feel like sharing it! And, hey, it might well be useful to my other readers *g*

[silveradept]

As it turns out, I did write about it some in 2010, and it's still mostly applicable, although light on personal experience in the concrete.

On Embracing Error was what I called it then.

[calissa]

Fast running out of brain power for today and I don't really have anything useful to contribute. However, I did want to say thank you for writing this post. I identify with that first sentence and I like the idea of learning as a public performance. I think I've been making progress towards that without having consciously realised what I was doing.

[highlyeccentric]

Relevant in some ways to this post: http://theferrett.dreamwidth.org/385520.html