Authenticity in teaching

Disclaimer: I never teach online so it is a real challenge for me to answer these questions given the lack of teaching experience. In this post, I am going to share what I found in the literature regarding the concept of authenticity in teaching and my viewpoints from the student’s perspective.

Authenticity is often described as being “real” or “genuine” and the common advice for the instructors who would like to build authenticity in their teaching is to “just do what comes naturally” (Weimer, 2012). Kreber et al. (2007) argued that even though authenticity in teaching was an important concept, it was under-explored in the literature. Additionally, they also found out that authenticity could be understood and interpreted in various way and there was no single definition of authenticity (Kreber et al., 2007). I totally agree with Kreber and colleagues (2007)’ assertion that “as long as authenticity remains only vaguely understood and ill defined…it is…not feasible to articulate a persuasive rationale for why we should be concerned with the phenomenon in the first place” (p. 25). In their research, Kreber and colleagues did a comprehensive literature review aiming to develop a common understanding of the concept of authenticity among educators and scholars as well as further explored how this concept possibly linked to student learning. Their study offered lots of helpful and thought-provoking insights that can help us advance our understanding and knowledge about this topic, so I highly recommend you to read it when you get a chance. Below are some of my key takeaways that I found most interesting.

With regard to the definition of authenticity in teaching, these are the most well-defined and relevant in the context of our discussion.

Cranton and Carusetta (2004) defined authenticity in teaching as a process of “being conscious of self, other, relationships, and context through critical reflection” (p. 288).
Cranton (2001) viewed authenticity as the “expression of one’s genuine Self in the community and society” and an authentic teacher as someone who combines his/her self and teacher and delivers that through the job of teaching or through the relationships with students.
Last but not least, Chickering et al. asserted that the idea of authenticity in their mind with regard to teachers and students was kind, caring, and responsible.

From these definitions, we can see that authenticity is not just limited to the way teachers lecture or communicate with their students, in other words teaching and communication styles, but rather authenticity is concerned with teachers’ personalities and characteristics as a whole and how they interact with their students.

What does literature say about how authenticity in teaching is like?

Palmer (1998) posited that authentic teachers who have found their integrity enabled 3 pivotal connections: teacher and subject (teachers caring deeply about their teaching subject), teacher and student (teachers caring about their students), and finally student and subject (students having been interested in the learning subject). Furthermore, authentic teachers promote the meaningful engagement of students with the subject matter by helping students to develop genuine interest and appreciation for the subject (Palmer, 1998). Kreber et al. (2007) further supplemented the authentic relationship among teacher, student, and subject that authentic teachers were at the very least interested in supporting students’ learning of the subject matters and some would go further to cultivate students’ development and authenticity in a broader sense. This suggested that authentic teachers not only embrace their true self but also genuinely care and encourage students to be authentic.

In their article, Kreber and colleagues (2007) also offered a very good summary of the possible features of “authenticity in teaching” that emerged from the literature. Even though the list is not exhaustive by no means, it surely gives us a better idea of how authenticity should look like in theory.

Consistency between values and actions
Presentation of a genuine Self as teacher
Care for students
Care for the subject and interest in engaging students with the subject around ideas that matter
Care for what one’s life as a teacher is to be
Self-knowledge and confronting the truth about oneself
Being defined by oneself rather than by others’ expectations
Critically reflecting on how certain norms and practices have come about
Self-definition in dialogue around horizons of significance
Making educational decisions and acting in ways that are in the important interest of students
Promoting the “authenticity” of others (at least their learning and possibly their development in a larger sense; leaping ahead rather than leaping in)
Reflecting on purposes (and on one’s own unique possibilities, that is those that matter most) in education and teaching
Constructive developmental pedagogy emphasizing the dialogical character of the teaching–learning interaction

So, what does it mean for online teaching?

It is needless to say that many of the aforementioned ideas are often hard to contextualize in online environment as the presence of instructors is often not too obviously visible, not to say neglected. Indeed, given the lack of various social cues in online environment, it is a real challenge for online teachers to present themselves as genuine and enthusiast expert who passionately cares about not only the subject matter but also the learning and development of students. In addition, it is also worth pointing out that the uncomfortability or fear of technology sometimes genders unnecessary anxiety and depletes instructors’ level of confidence and that detrimentally affects how the students would perceive about the instructors. On the bright side, technology also brings new opportunities for instructors to engage with and show their authentic self to students on a larger scale with less time and effort, but undeniably the instructors need to be open and willing to experiment, build confidence with technology, and be creative in using technology. In sum, I think the first and foremost step for instructors to be authentic in online teaching is to develop a certain degree of competency and comfortability with technology so that they can take advantage of technology to present their true self to students rather than let the technology hinders their teaching.

References

Chickering, A. W., Dalton, J. C., & Stamm, L. (2006). Encouraging authenticity and spirituality in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cranton, P. A. (2001). Becoming an authentic teacher in higher education. Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Cranton, P. A., & Carusetta, E. (2004a). Developing authenticity as a transformative process. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(4), 276-293. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1541344604267898

Kreber, C., Klampfleitner, M., McCune, V., Bayne, S., and Knottenble, M. (2007). What do you mean by ‘authentic’? A comparative review of the literature on conceptions of authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 58(1), 22-44.

Palmer, P. (1998). The courage to teach. Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Weimer, M. (2012). Six Paths to More Authentic Teaching. Retrieved from https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/faculty-development/six-paths-to-more-authentic-teaching/