Religious Studies News

In developing strategies for an intercultural pedagogy that addresses the real-life social, economic, and demographic challenges, I have found Orlando O. Espín’s concept of humanitas extremely helpful. Part of Espín’s explanation of humanitas is that it includes “the intersection of specific, living, and diverse contextualizations that recognizes another as human precisely because it recognizes in the other the historical, living reality of unfolding specific and diverse contextualizations that humans have constructed, and continue to construct in history” (53). Classroom experience and my prior work as an academic dean have convinced me that we need to keep in mind these multiple and shifting contextualizations as we develop specific teaching strategies for a variety of disciplines in religious studies. The students we teach are not abstractions who come to us as blank slates, but are real contextual beings whose lives intersect with other contextual beings, as we all interact with each other in the temporary community of our time of study together.

Therefore, part of my developing pedagogy is reminding myself that, before students ever step into the classroom, I need to keep in mind the diverse intercultural contextualizations they bring with them, including the fact that some of the students may be knowledgeable in many alternative paths of education and that I need to honor that life experience. Being very intentional about intercultural teaching, I have, for example, drawn upon African and African-American religious traditions and perspectives as a concrete, measurable step in rethinking and restructuring the core curriculum courses at three different schools. Some of this approach I discuss more fully elsewhere (see Aponte, “Rethinking the Core” in Teaching African American Religions, ed. Carolyn M. Jones and Theodore Louis Trost, Oxford University Press, 2005), but the courses included a two-semester survey of the history of Christianity and courses in social and contextual analysis and congregational studies. It was a step in shaping core courses in a way that addresses present and future multicultural realities.

This brings me to another point of my developing intercultural pedagogy: that we are learners together. I understand that as instructor and as the one responsible for handing in a grade to the registrar, I hold a certain type of power that the students do not have. Nevertheless, I am convinced that communal learning can be fostered effectively in my classroom. In this conviction I draw on my own intercultural contextualizations as a second-generation Puerto Rican Latino scholar of religion who draws on a vital feature of Latina/o theology: its collaborative methodology, known as teología en conjunto. As a shared endeavor, Latino/a collaborative theologies arise from both the historical and daily contexts of Latinas and Latinos in the United States. Such an approach represents more than the parochial concerns of a marginalized community. Doing history or cultural analysis in a collaborative way, en conjunto is another way of doing engaged pedagogy, one in which both students and instructors are learners together, fostering an educational community within the classroom. After a few sessions, some students recognize this collaborative emphasis and ensure its place in our discussions as together we create spaces for collaborative learning. 

Most of my interaction with students is through oral discourse, via lectures and discussions. The lectures in core requirement courses — rather than an inflexible unidirectional delivery of information — take on more of the form of both an extemporaneous performance and a multivoice conversation as we become teachers, learners, storytellers, and interpreters together. Related to this performance style of lecturing has been the sharing of my own personal stories, as appropriate to the subject. I intentionally allow for more discussions during class as a way to affirm our being learners together and to cultivate a community of learning rather than of competition. My persistence in encouraging student interaction has led to community-building and a new contextualization in which we have opportunity for dialogue and “an opportunity to process new paradigms, new ways of thinking” (hooks, 194).

I also attempt, finally, to recognize and honor the importance of different learning styles. For example, some people do well with oral discourse, while others are more visual learners. I make greater use of the syllabus as a learning tool and document rather than as a simple list of readings, so that in the first class session I “exegete” the syllabus and my plan for the course and thereby share with the students aspects of my pedagogical plan for our work together. I embrace the fact that there are certain rituals in the classroom, including the first and last sessions of the course, so that there are opportunities for us to become acquainted with each other and to be introduced into this temporary community, as well as an opportunity for us to say goodbye at the end of each semester.