Integral Education in Auroville

   

   On the walls, classrooms, and even the people at the schools in Auroville boast pictures and symbols of two of the most influential people of the city: Sri Aurobindi and the Mother. These two figures worked hand in hand, and even lived in the same home in Pondicherry, to promote human unity and are major forces in the Auroville’s dedication to peace, cooperation, freedom, serenity, and of course education; and their teachings are the base of Integral Education, the name of the “true teaching” that teachers strive to practice in Auroville.

   Sri Aurobindo references three principles of true teaching, or Integral Education, explained and paraphrased in Psychic Education, A Workbook. Personally, Integral Education has been a difficult concept for me to understand, as it seems so philosophical without much tangibility of concreteness. For this reason, finding out exactly what Integral Education is—what it looks like, sounds like, feels like—was one of my questions for study here in India. It was also a goal for me to see how Integral Education fits with my own philosophies and practices as a teacher. My impressions of Integral Education, while still a bit fuzzy, are taking shape with the more time I spend working with students and teachers in Auroville. Some of the things I am seeing in the schools seem to fit the definition, while others have been non-examples or are missing a few pieces. Regardless, the teaching (and the teachers) in Auroville is powerful and inspiring, and I feel privileged to have been a part of it.

    “The first principle of true teaching is that nothing can be taught. The teacher is not an instructor or taskmaster, he is a helper and a guide.  His business is to suggest and not to impose” (133).  This means that students have their own bank of knowledge and experiences; and teachers are responsible for tapping into this wealth of inner information that students already possess. They should do so by providing learning experiences that invoke their creativity and knowledge and by creating and sustaining a warm, welcoming environment for students’ minds and inner beings to thrive.

    At Udavi school, Selvi, the third standard (third grade) teacher, explained that the school and the teachers must teach the whole child through five lenses: physical, mental, vital, psychic, and spiritual.  In my own thinking, this means to teach the whole child. Similarly, this first principle of Sri Aurobindo suggests that students need an environment “that invites and facilitates the blossoming of the psychic presence, of the mental, vital and physical instruments” (133). At Udavi School and Aikiyam School, I have seen this first principal come to life, as many teachers strive to provide engaging and stimulating learning material and experiences that draw upon students’ intellect and surroundings. No, they’re not all the way there yet, as some instances do highlight more rote approaches to learning, but they are on the right path.  Students at these schools have a focus on academics (mental) in both English and Tamil languages, solving problems in a variety of ways. Teachers cannot teach uniformly to all students, as each child comes with a different set of skills, aptitudes, and learning styles. “The Mother used to say that each sadhak has a unique path” (Psychic Education, 134).

    In a first standard classroom at Udavi School, the teacher had students solve addition and subtraction problems with pictures and numbers, using cards he premade with an equation (with a missing sum or addend) and a picture of each object. Each child selected his own card to practice from the collection, each with a varied level of difficulty. Students were able to work the problems out on their own at their own pace and ask for help when needed. In this instance the learner is in charge of his own learning, while the teacher observes, facilitates, and reflects on how he can better support the child.

   In second standard, students wrote and read story problems using double-digit numbers and addition, which the read aloud like game-show questions. They were in charge of the learning and in making sure that others got to the right answer, so in this sense, were the teachers and the learners. In this same class, students made word chains, where each word began with the last letter of the previous word until it came full circle. In this activity, after the teacher modeled an example, the students used their own knowledge to select their own bank of words.

   At their annual presentation celebration, students present self-selected projects to other classes and teachers. These projects range from logic games, to presentations on matter, to stories written in Tamil, to Styrofoam boats with a motor. Whatever the project, it was clear that the students had choice, did thorough research, practiced oral communication skills, and took pride in sharing their learning. it was a learning process which exemplified the first principle. “The learning material is meant to develop the faculties of the mind of the student, such as the faculty to think scientifically, the ability to express oneself clearly, and to strengthen the qualities of the vital, such as enthusiasm or perseverance” (135).

        To teach the physical being, teachers are creative and getting students to become aware of their bodies, balance, and in incorporating movement in the classroom. At Aikiyam school, the Cresh (pre-K) teacher had kids go out the courtyard area where there is a large, circular sand pit and walk along the perimeter, which was a circle with about 4 inches of width—about as much as a balance beam.  Children “followed the leader” round and round with their arms stretched out to help with their balance. These same kids go for walks around the campus and play in the sand pit. While the kids play, Alia and I tried to incorporate authentic talk in English with the kids. “What are you making?” we’d ask, as many kids turned cooks in the sand pit, dishing out chapatti and dosas from their sand pails. “Let me try!” “Bring me water, it’s too spicy!” The teacher, Usha, picked up on this and began to follow our lead, using English during the play.

     There is a focus on the psychic during morning meditation and prayer each day at Udavi School. In first standard, incense is burned and prayers offered to Ganesh (the Hindu elephant god), who stands proudly in the classroom corner. In second standard, students recite spiritual quotes by the Mother from heart. Teachers approach behavior issues in a holistic way. Asking kids to relax when upset or to control or “train” various parts of their body (their hands, their mouths), Selvi explained, are ways they are trying to involve students in their development as opposed to punishment, but this can be difficult she said.

     The chemistry of Mother, Sri Aurobindo, and the gods of the major religions represented in Auroville (Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity) is something I have and still am struggling to comprehend. While the teachings of Mother and Sri Aurobindo do not constitute a religion in any way, I can’t seem to see how they can all work together. As I mentioned above, the schools hang pictures of Mother and Aurobindo around the school and in almost every classroom. Often the class will chant or meditate in front of their photos. Also often present is a statue of Ganesh, the Hindu elephant god, or Shiva. How or if these pieces work in cohesion, I am unsure. When I asked Usha, the cresh teacher at Aikiyam about it, she said she wasn’t sure either and that I should ask the principal. So while these two figures were instrumental in creating a community like Auroville, there seems to be some differences in opinion regarding their standing within the Tamil villages of Auroville.

   Sri Aurobindo said: “The second principle is that the mind has to be consulted in its own growth. The idea of hammering the child into the shape desired by the parent or teacher is a barbarous and ignorant superstition... To force the nature to abandon it’s own dharma is to do it permanent harm, mutilate its growth, and deface its perfection. It is a selfish tyranny over a human soul and a wound to the nation, which loses the benefit of the best that a man could have given it…” (137). In other words, the teacher should treat each child as a different learner and teach his class in a way where different children are busy learning different things according to their developmental level in order to make progress (138). The child should have dialogue with the teacher and with others and be able to make choices in regards to his learning and growth. So, not every child may excel in math and those who do may prefer literature, although literature may not be as valued. School should be a play where children are free to choose paths that they value and should value the choices the children make.

    This second principle is powerful, lovely, but quite idealistic. In Aikiyam school I noticed that students in the fourth standard wrote autobiographies, which they proudly posted in their classroom for all to see. These listed the names of their parents and their occupations, which were limited to carpenter, mason, driver (for men) and housekeeper (for women). While these students may have great dreams and passions, they come from a village (not the more affluent “Aurovillian” status that this city was built to promote) where their dreams may not match the reality.  This isn’t to say their dreams can’t be achieved, it’s just much more difficult. But the teachers don’t let the kids know this; they don’t give up. The kids come to school smiling and they love learning. Some love school because it’s a place they don’t get beat and can read books (or just have access to books), use materials to write and draw, and make friends. Satthiya, the sixth grade teacher, went to Aikiyam and said the best thing about her job is the students and being able to give back.  This is a difficult principle to achieve, but it’s inspiring to see the work that these teachers are doing to help children see possibilities for themselves.

   “The third principle of education is to work form the near to the far, from that which is, to that which shall be… We must not take up the nature by the roots from the earth in which it must grow or surround the mind with images and ideas of a life, which is alien to that in which it must physically move. If anything has to be brought in from outside, it must be offered, not forced on the mind. A free and natural growth is the condition of genuine development,” explained Sri Aurobindo (140). This principle again concerns the need to teach the whole child and to provide an atmosphere and the resources needed to match the age, level, and interests of each child.  The learning experiences need to be relevant to the child. As I mentioned, the village children and the Aurovillian children do not have the same experiences. “The surroundings of children growing up in a village are so different than those growing up in a big city that they develop a different mindset” (141). While I wouldn’t consider Auroville a “big city” it does cost to become an Aurovillian and not everyone who applies may be accepted, so life in the Tamil villages verses the Aurovillian homes provide different opportunities. The teacher should start with what the students already knows in order to help him widen vitally and mentally (141).  Moreover, the teacher must be a participant in the child’s learning (142).

   Since many teachers are also English Language Learners, I find this principle to be especially relevant as teachers and students often work together to construct meaning and understandings in English and practice together. Many teachers take classes with Adult ESL specialists during their lunch or planning time at Aikiyam School. Another example is teacher’s willingness to allow children to respond in Tamil or an English-Tamil mix if they do not know the correct way to respond in English. This allows all students to be active participants in their learning and others’ learning (through the sharing of their questions and ideas). For assignments, often times students have the freedom to chose to write in English in Tamil. While visiting the fourth standard at Aikiyam, Arun showed us the wall of writing he and his classmates had done. Many were written in Tamil, and a few in English. Arun’s story was all in beautifully written English. When we asked why he chose English, he said because he was trying to learn. When we asked which was easier, writing in Tamil or in English, he said Tamil. This illustrates some of the freedom that students possess, and their ability to make progress and challenge themselves when it feels right.

   While I tried to pick apart the components of integral education, which is very much the goal and philosophy behind teaching in Auroville’s schools, Shankar explained that these components work together in a cohesive way and cannot really be picked apart. For example, and academic lesson that may be tackling the mental aspect is also quite often physical and vital.  Integral Education, then, is not really a technique or a trick, but a new attitude or focus in the teaching/learning process.  I hope to see more examples during the rest of my time here and to reflect on examples of IE at work in the US.