Teaching Today’s Students:
Towards a More Engaging Pedagogy

By Ong Puay Liu, Ph.D

Introduction

Teachers today face a daunting task of educating students, be it in schools, colleges, or universities, and more so in Dhamma schools. These students would rather be somewhere else than in school. Hence, the question arises as to the kind of approach teachers, especially Dhamma school teachers, can adopt so that students can feel positive about going to school and benefit from the experience of receiving a holistic education. What kind of pedagogy is appropriate and beneficial for today’s students so that they can be taught and guided to generate the right questions, develop the right skills, acquire the right knowledge, cultivate the right values, and live by the right moral principles?

The Context: The Educational Situation

Bhikkhu Bodhi (1998) has this observation on the declining state of education in schools: ‘Ideally, education is the principal tool of human growth, essential for transforming the unlettered child into a mature and responsible adult. Yet everywhere today, both in the developed and developing world, we can see that formal education is in serious trouble. Classroom instruction has become so routine that children often consider school an exercise in patience rather than an adventure in learning. Even the brightest and most conscientious students easily become restless, and for many the only attractive escape routes lie along the dangerous roads of drugs, sexual experimentation, and outbursts of senseless violence. Teachers too find themselves in a dilemma, dissatisfied with the system which they serve but unable to see a meaningful alternative to it.’

Malaysian newspapers provide testimony to Bhikkhu Bodhi’s observation – students’ disrespect for teachers, misbehaviour, bullying, gangsterism, violence among students, and even between students and teachers. The Ministry of Education is reported to be considering reinstating corporal punishment for students who misbehave or show no respect for authority while in school. Why is education taking a turn for the worse? Instead of being a place to transform students’ character, and help to bring out the best in them, schools are now playing the opposite role, that is, it now functions as a place for bringing out the worst in students. Why is this so?

One major reason, according to Bhikkhu Bodhi (1998), is a loss of vision regarding the proper aims of education. The word ‘education’ literally means ‘to bring forth’. It indicates that the true task of this process is to draw forth from the mind its innate potential to understand things. The urge to learn, to know and to comprehend is a basic human trait, as intrinsic to our minds as hunger and thirst are to our bodies. In our schools the minds of the young are deprived of the nutriment they need for healthy growth. In the name of education the students are passed through courses of standardised instruction intended to make them efficient servants of a demeaning social system. While such education may be necessary to guarantee societal stability, it does little to fulfil the higher end of learning - the illumination of the mind with the light of truth and goodness.

This brings to mind Paulo Freire’s (1972) thesis that the mainstream education system is like the banking system, where the bank receives and saves the deposits of the public (as depositors of the bank) without investigation, inquiry and dialogue with the depositors. Similarly, in mainstream education, students are like the bank, receiving and saving information given to them by their teachers (as depositors). These students do not ask, discuss or examine the information given by their teachers.

Freire proposes one alternative approach to the existing mainstream educational approach. The basis of Freire’s alternative system is the real experiences of the everyday lives of students. From his personal experience as a school teacher, and later as a university graduate, Freire developed the thesis that there exists a gap between teaching and learning methods, and the real life experiences of the students. Freire believes that the education system should be holistic and inclusive, in that it should not only concentrate on reading, writing and arithmetic, which he defined as “reading the word”, but should also include the real life experiences of the students, which Freire calls “reading the world”.

Today’s educational system, ‘hijacked’ by the demands of the state and market, aggravates the task of teachers in carrying out their responsibilities efficiently and effectively. Freire recognised this education problem in the late 1960s and even went to prison for his perceived ‘anti-state’ and ‘anti-market’ ideas.

The Buddha’s Pedagogy: Food for Thought for Dhamma School Teachers

More than 2,500 years before Paulo Freire, the Buddha Gotama expressed similar emphasis on the students’ personal experience as the basis of education to allow them to see for themselves how the Dhamma is applicable to, and beneficial for, their lives here and now. After listening to Brahma Sahampati’s appeal, the Buddha decided to rescind his earlier decision not to teach the Dhamma he had discovered upon his Enlightenment (MN26.21 Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search). However, the Buddha knew that people have different capacities and inclinations and would therefore need different methods of instruction to get the message across.

“Verily, Ananda, it is not easy to teach Dhamma to others. In teaching others Dhamma, Ananda, establish five things within you. What five? Teach others Dhamma, thinking: I will give a talk in a gradual manner; I will give a talk with the Path in view; I will give a talk out of kindliness and compassion; I will give a talk not as a means for gain; I will give a talk not for my own harm nor for others’ harm, but for spiritual gain.” (AN5.159 Venerable Udayin)

a. Ānupubbīkathā – the Gradual Approach

Ānupubbīkathā means gradual instruction, talk or sermon. The term, as illustrated by Ven. Nyanatiloka (1980), refers to the progressive sermon given by the Buddha, in accordance with his omniscience, the capacity and readiness of the listener(s). The Buddha’s method was to begin with something simple, basic, and close to the hearts of his listeners, so that they could relate what he was saying with their experience and living conditions. The Buddha knew that “few are those beings that are wise, quickwitted, not deaf or dumb, competent to judge the meaning of what is spoken well or ill. And more numerous are those who are fools, slow-witted, deaf or dumb…” (AN1.19). “When thus advised and instructed by me, some of my disciples attain Nibbana, the ultimate goal, and some do not attain it.” (MN107 Ganakamoggallana Sutta) Still, the Buddha continued to teach the Dhamma without discrimination.

b. Adaptation Approach

The Buddha had the ability to understand the background of those to be instructed. Whenever the Buddha imparted his teachings to others, he firstly ascertained their dispositions, tendencies and purposes; and thus he selected, adjusted and aptly preached the doctrines with reference to the background of each individual or group of people. For example, Buddha used the word “Brahma”, then existing as a major idea or belief – Brahma-God – to preach the path leading to higher attainments, that is by cultivating the four brahmavihara, or sublime virtues (Siddhi 1995: 198 & 201). The Buddha also adapted traditional ideas and practices and adjusted his sermons to suit the temperaments of his listeners, a method that came to be known as ‘upaya-kusala’ – skilful and expedient means of converting people (Siddhi 1995: 200).

c. Illustration Approach

Another skilful means of the Buddha was the use of analogies, similes, parables, stories and fables taken from the everyday lives of the listeners. The Buddha incorporated beautiful verses in order to make them sweet, effective and attractive (Siddhi 1995: 210). According to the Buddha, he used analogies “for there are cases where it's through analogies that knowledgeable people can understand the meaning of what is being said...” (MN24 Rathavinita Sutta: Relay Chariots).

In that manner, the Buddha used the simile of the lute (AN6.55 Sona Sutta) to explain the Middle Way to Venerable Sona Kolivisa; the simile of the saw (MN21 Kakacupama Sutta), where the Buddha tells the story of bandits carving one’s limbs with a two-handled saw, to illustrate the correct way to develop patience; and in the Alagaddupama Sutta (MN22), where the Buddha using two famous similes – that of the water-snake and simile of the raft – conveys the importance of developing right view.

d. Analytical Approach

According to Siddhi (1995: 202), the analytical approach, or vibhajja-vāda of the Buddha’s teachings is one of the most important characteristics found in the earlier texts. For example, the Buddha used this analytical method in his second sermon – Anattalakkhana Sutta (SN22.59: The Discourse on Non-Self) – where the Buddha divided the empirical existence of human beings into five basic aggregates – body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness, with their respective elements or constituents. Why did the Buddha use this analytical approach on the body and mind? It is because the Buddha wanted to show that there is no abiding entity called the ‘self’, and hence, it is pointless to think in terms of ‘self’, that “this is me or mine” (Kapila 2007).

e. Practical Approach

“Ehi passiko, Paccatam veditabbo viññuhi ti” – Come and investigate (for yourself); (as this teaching is) to be personally experienced by the wise. This practical approach or what Siddhi (1995: 203) calls the experimental approach, underscores the standpoint of the Buddha regarding the Dhamma. In many suttas, the Buddha emphasised the need not to blindly accept what we have heard without reflection, investigation, critical inquiry and practical realization. The Buddha makes this assertion very clearly in the [AN3.65] Kalama Sutta (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 2002).

f. Syntactical Approach

While the analytical approach breaks down a concept or entity into smaller parts, the syntactical approach refers to the application of one concept in different contexts. Kapila (2007) gives the example of the word “dukkha”, or suffering, which the Buddha applied in several related contexts. For example, as illustrated in the First Noble Truth: “Suffering [dukkha] as a Noble Truth, is this: Birth is suffering; aging is suffering; sickness is suffering; death is suffering; association with the loathed is suffering; disassociation from the loved is suffering; not getting what one wants is suffering; in short, attachment to the five aggregates is suffering (SN56.11 Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting in Motion the Wheel of Truth). The Buddha’s intention was not only to explain the meaning of suffering in different contexts, but more so, he wanted to convey the truth on impermanence, the changing nature of existence, and the futility of clinging on and becoming attached to impermanent objects.

Conclusion

The Buddha realised the formidable task of teachers more than 2,500 years ago. However, the Buddha was not disheartened for he had unshakeable faith in the Dhamma he discovered through his own effort, experience and understanding. Hence, travelling from place to place to preach the Dhamma, he met a multitude of individuals from different backgrounds and with different dispositions. The Buddha had to improvise and adapt his delivery methods to render his teaching effective and beneficial to the listeners. The Buddha did all these out of compassion to help beings live a happy life, and ultimately to end this cycle of suffering.

Hence, Dhamma school teachers in particular should ponder on the Buddha’s advice and his pedagogy, which is based on the premise that every human being is “educable” – each can be trained to ‘bring forth’ their latent capacity and potential to acquire knowledge which will stimulate character building, moral development and spiritual advancement. For today’s students living in a material and commercial world, the teacher’s task is indeed daunting, but not impossible.