Ridge Shukrun

So, you’re interested in implementing some form of contemplative practice into a course you will teach. Before continuing, stop and ask yourself this question: why I am interested in implementing a contemplative practice?

There are many reasons why you might be interested in this, and this section is intended to give you a chance to take a reflective (and perhaps even contemplative) approach to this process, identify your goals in using some of these practices, and consider the possible risks.

First, you might ask yourself: what do I understand “contemplative” to mean? You will no doubt come across several definitions (including in this OER), but what is your own personal experience of contemplation? Do you have a personal contemplative practice? Have you participated in any contemplative activities? What benefits have you received from them, and how feasible would it be—given your level of experience—for you to share those benefits with your students through your course?

Second, you might ask: what is my goal in doing this? Contemplative practices (CPs) have many benefits, but one must be careful in understanding one’s goal for trying to share these benefits. Is this truly for the benefit of the students? Or am I implementing this for my own benefit? Tips for how to implement CP in a way that benefits the students will be discussed in the Who benefits? section below.

A final question to consider here: how can I implement a CP appropriately and in a way that truly benefits the students? Is it designed in a way that can be integrated meaningfully into the course? That is to say, does it make sense in the context of the course?

While you are ultimately responsible for how you choose to implement CP into your classroom, we believe that these questions are necessary if one is to approach implementing them respectfully, appropriately and meaningfully.

What approach should we take in implementation?

There are several potential issues with implementing a contemplative practice separately from its cultural context and original goals. In this section, we will deal with the issue of removing a contemplative practice from its cultural context, thereby narrowing its scope for the individuals in question.

In the study A Powerful Silence by Maia Duerr (2004), data on the role of meditation and other contemplative practices in American life and work was collected through in-depth interviews with “84 professionals who incorporate contemplative practices in their work,” (Duerr, 2004) including but not limited to educators. The study found three main approaches to the implementation of a contemplative practice:

1. The clinical use approach, which is “goal-oriented and functional” and focuses on “stress reduction, relaxation and concentration”
2. The doorway to change approach, which holds a “balance between goals and intentions”—often by beginning with the clinical use approach by leaving the door open to the possibility of “exploring the psychological and spiritual facets of their lives”
3. The transformative use approach, which is “intention-oriented” and focuses on the “transformation of individuals, groups, and society

An example of the clinical approach in the context of a secular university is Concordia’s Mindful Campus Initiative which draws on research by Davis and Hayes through the Centre for Mindfulness. (Davis & Hayes, 2012) This approach takes a more utilitarian view of a contemplative practice such as mindfulness meditation by presenting it as a tool “in the service of improved physical and mental well-being.” (Duerr, 2004) By contrast, certain traditional Buddhist understandings of meditation seem to clearly fall into the transformative use approach; in such views, the practice is an integral part of the Eightfold Noble Path (Keown, 2013) and is directly intended to orient the practitioner towards a total transformation “for the purification of beings, for the surmounting of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for the attainment of the true way, for the realization of liberation.”(Kabat-Zinn, in forward to Gilbert & Tirch, 2009)^[1]. In this approach, individuals are generally encouraged “to explore questions of meaning and spirit in their life,” and the practice is often presented alongside “ethical guidelines” such as the Buddhist precepts. (Duerr, 2004)

Is one approach better than the other, particularly when considering the context of the classroom? At the very least, we can make the case that the different approaches vary in terms of their scope; for example, the clinical approach seems to narrow the scope of the practice in how it treats the individual. It focuses on how the individual feels (stress reduction, reduced rumination, decreased negative affect), on their ability to regulate their emotions, and their brain’s productivity (cognitive flexibility, improved working memory) (Davis & Hayes, 2012). The clinical approach does not necessitate considering questions of meaning, purpose, and value, ^[2]which in the traditional context, are inseparable from the practice itself. On the other hand, the doorway to change approach and the transformative use approach both open the door to these questions; as a result, they are more likely to treat the human being as a whole (holistically) rather than partially.

Again, we are not making the case that such benefits which the clinical approach focuses on are irrelevant to the students or that this kind of approach should not be considered. It is our view that at the very least, the appropriateness of this approach to the implementation of CP should be questioned and evaluated based on the needs and context of the course. On the other hand, it is also worth questioning how the transformative use approach does or does not fit in a secular institution, and how it might be implemented respectfully and appropriately without 1. knowingly or unknowingly imposing a particular worldview or 2. culturally appropriating/watering down the practice. We will discuss further in the next section on cultural appreciative and relevant pedagogies.

Perhaps a middle way such as the doorway to change approach offers the best balance between the two. In either case, it is clear that the method must be appropriate for “specific settings and audiences” (Duerr, 2004). There is no one-size-fits-all practice, and an educator must know their audience so that they may tailor their approach to it.

Finally, we might ask whether the educator themselves needs to be a practitioner. Just as the implementation varies depending on the practice, the level of expertise necessary varies depending on the practice. For example, some practices (such as many in the OER) are designed to be accessible for beginners and suitable for educators of different fields; others, such as Joseph Siddiqi’s noticing movement of attention is more specific to the field of the arts and might need some tweaking to fit into the context of another field. Ultimately, we recommend that the educator try the practice for themselves before implementing it in the classroom, because as both a practitioner and an expert in their field, they would then be well-positioned to judge how to appropriately implement a particular contemplative activity or practice in a way that fits into the context of the course they are teaching.

Framing the contemplative practice

Before proceeding, we feel it is important to preface this and the next section by posing the following question: are the traditional ethics and worldview in which a practice originated inherent to that practice?

It is not our goal to argue that this is the case for all practices all the time; instead, we aim to raise the question so that you as the educator may explore the relationship between the practice and its traditional context, with the goal of better understanding the practice and the ways in which it may be possible to appropriately and meaningfully implement it in the classroom.

We will begin this section by continuing to use the example of certain forms of Buddhist-style meditation due to its popular and even mainstream adoption under the umbrella of “mindfulness”, “mindful practice” or “mindful exercises”. Its implementation is often justified through the promotion of measurable benefits such as (but not limited to): stress reduction, reduced rumination, decreased negative affect (e.g. depression, anxiety), less emotional reactivity/more effective emotion regulation, increased focus, more cognitive flexibility, improved working memory (Davis & Hayes, 2012).

These benefits are certainly worthwhile and relevant to not only students, but indeed, all people. However, it is certainly the case that many of the Buddhist traditions have a very different goal and understanding of the practice. For example, in some traditions, meditation is understood as a method for achieving enlightenment, which is the liberation from “the endless cycle of rebirth” through the cultivation of the Eightfold Path (Takahashi Brown, 2002). Again, it is important to note here that this understanding of Buddhism does necessarily characterize all Buddhist traditions.

Another example of a contemplative practice which has been re-framed for a secular context is the Christian practice of lectio divina, or “holy reading”. The traditional goal of the practitioner is to “rest in the presence of the Holy Spirit” by following its four steps (lectio, meditation, oratio and contemplatio). (Wright, 2023) Importantly, this practice does not involve just any text, but specifically the Christian scriptures. Jake Wright, a Philosophy professor, implemented a modified version of this practice in his classroom with these goals: “increased attention to cognitive and non-cognitive reactions to the text, willingness to engage with the material in novel ways, and the opportunity to engage in independent disciplinary practice” (Wright, 2023). In his implementation, Wright’s students engage with philosophical texts rather than the Christian scriptures.

Inherent in certain traditional understandings of these practices are worldviews which hold to certain beliefs about the nature of reality (metaphysical) and human purpose (teleological). In a secular context, however, these practices risk being stripped of their cultural contexts, their traditional worldviews and goals. Or, perhaps even worse, they are presented as secular practices while still covertly (or unknowingly) retaining some of these. There are at least two possible issues with this kind of implementation: 1. the risk of imposing a worldview and 2. cultural appropriation/the watering down of the practice to fit the needs of the practitioner. The educator should be aware of and try to avoid both of these. The best way to do this is to actively address these in the classroom. The educator might want to discuss the cultural and historical background of the practice, including its goal or benefits according to its original tradition. The educator might also then discuss how they perceive the practice, their own experience with it, and how their implementation differs from (or is similar to) the traditional practice. Finally, the educator might discuss (if necessary) how this practice fits into a secular environment, and what its goal or benefits might be in this context. Please refer to the Cultural appreciation or appropriation chapter by Naj Sumar for a lengthier exercise regarding cultural appropriation.

The “value” of contemplation: or, what is educating for the good?

In this section, we will briefly take up the question that was alluded to earlier: specifically, the question of ethical values in contemplative practice. To begin, it is our view that education in general should be oriented towards a kind of learning which produces critical, ethical members of society: that is, people who 1. can exercise a critical discernment towards themselves and the world around them and 2. act according to the good of both themselves, others, society and the non-human world. In a classroom which is oriented towards such goals, the student develops these to the degree which they are able to seriously and authentically engage with the course. Similarly, in certain traditional understandings of the practice, Buddhist meditation is inseparable from ethical guidelines (such as the 5 precepts) ^[3]which accompany them precisely to the degree to which the practice is taken seriously.

As demonstrated by the different approaches to contemplative practice in Duerr’s study, not all who implement a contemplative practice or activity in the classroom necessarily need to design it to support such moral development. In particular, the clinical approach does not seem to require this (but certainly can include it, such as in the form of gratitude, empathy, etc.); on the other hand, as we begin to consider the doorway to change and transformative use approaches, such a consideration becomes more and more relevant. Depending on the depth of the implementation and the goals of the practice, it would be helpful for the educator to be aware of and consider some or all of the following implications:

• What are the ethical values of the worldview in which the practice was developed?
• What, if any, ethical values do the practice aim to cultivate?
• How is the above related to the course material? Are there links, congruences and maybe even perceived incompatibilities between them?
• How should they address the above in the classroom?
• How should they ensure that the students’ ethical development is supported and respected?

Again, the context of the course will ultimately determine the relevance of an implementation which discusses or includes ethical elements related to the practice. As mentioned above, we are not arguing that the original ethical values or worldview of a practice are always inherent to it; our aim is to raise the question of the relationship between the practice and its original context, so that you as the educator may be better positioned in deciding how or how not to implement a particular practice.

For more discussion on CP and values in the classroom, please also refer to the Building community in the classroom section.

Who benefits?

In this section, I would like to take up the question of who is benefiting from the implementation of a CP. This question is essential when considering whether one should implement, and it is also linked to the first question posed in this section: why are you interested in implementing a CP? The title of the section is perhaps provocatively chosen to highlight the principle that the implementation of CP (and education in general) should be of service to the students. If the educator is only interested in implementing a CP for selfish or egotistical reasons (sometimes even under the auspices of benefiting the students), then they should perhaps re-consider. If, however, the educator is interested in CP with the goal of benefiting the students and enriching their learning, then here are some recommendations regarding how to implement:

• It is important that students can opt into these practices; in the practices presented in the OER, authors give examples of how to introduce and frame the practices for students, giving them needed context to understand them. They also give alternatives or adaptations for students who may not be able to or comfortable with the practices as described.
• Before implementing CP in the classroom, instructors will want to think through how to present them to students, how to ensure their teaching is trauma-informed, and how to offer adapted versions when needed.
• A good implementation of CP ideally entails that the instructor be sufficiently experienced with the practice to answer questions and offer guidance. They might also want to familiarize themselves with different perspectives on the practice, or offer students additional resources for consultation, should questions arise.
• When implementing CP in the classroom, the goals for doing so should not be abstract. The projected goals and benefits to the students and the classroom should be clear and concrete. Consider the course you are teaching, the approach which is most appropriate for the context, and the level at which the implementation makes the most sense. Please refer to the Benefits of CP&P chapter for a lengthier discussion on the benefits of CP.
• Finally, even with all the planning in the world, we can never perfectly predict what fruits our efforts will bear. As such, resolve to stay open and learn from your experience.
• When things do go well, share your results with other educators so that they and their students may also benefit from your experience.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we encourage you to consider these questions and points we have made with the hopes that they help you do what is best for your students (and as a consequence, yourself). As was mentioned above, take this opportunity to engage in self-reflection; your and your students will no doubt benefit from it. With all this being said, we wish you success on this journey, as well as the success of your students.

References