“I think our teacher just talks about herself personally whereas most teachers don’t bring in like their personal lives“, S1 remarks (Interview with S1). She then reconsiders her answer and notices that the teachers of two other classes outside of the Institute also included their personal life. For L3, the question whether lecturers and tutors infuse their classes with personal aspects is beyond dispute:

“I think […] as a teacher you really […] cannot give up yourself. Tell who you are and what you are in your teaching practices. […] from my understanding of teaching it’s unavoidable. Because that’s such an important part of teaching, you shouldn’t […] try to isolate it away from your students. And the idea of sharing and being interactive and relating to your students is really important. So you have […] an authentic relationship, you know.” (Interview with L3)

In L3’s opinion, the way in which someone teaches a class is strongly influenced by “who and what they are”, meaning by the person’s background, culture and self-image. This idea is mirrored by Burgess who states that “pedagogical styles are inextricably linked to ‘subject cultures’” (2016: 113). Using this connection instead of trying to hide the personal self from the students, L3 argues, goes hand in hand with the concepts of interactively sharing knowledge with the students and relating to them. Indeed, the personal identity of the teacher must be included in the class to make the relationship authentic.

This strong connection between the lecturers’ and tutors’ lives and the class content, is perceived as an opportunity and actively used in the form of stories. In Aboriginal perception, stories do not automatically imply fiction but rather are the source of knowledge and learning (Butler 2009: 37). Thus, personal stories not only convey information about the teller but can also be used effectively to facilitate learning in tertiary education, as the following examples show:

“After talking about police issues at big Aboriginal events, L2 asks: “Did I tell you the story about my husband in 2010?” As we shake our heads, she goes on vividly describing an incident in which the police thought her husband had stolen a car, although it was his own. “You would hope that people are not that judgmental…” L2 says at the end of the story.” (Class 1: Tutorial 17/09/2015)

With this story, L2 addresses a prejudice which is implied in the notion of a high police presence at big Aboriginal events, namely the idea that all Aboriginal people are prone to criminality. As some of the students might share this opinion, it would not be beneficial for the class climate to directly address and critically discuss this issue. By telling a story, however, which relativises the prejudice and shows the effect it can have in reality, L2 manages to introduce the topic in a more depersonalised and less confronting way (Butler 2009: 72). Furthermore, the story reinforces her statement as it provides a concrete, real-life example (Donovan 2007: 100).

Like L2, L1 also tells stories for another reason than just to include her personal life into the content:

“L1 interrupts the lecture briefly to answer a question which has come up although it does not directly relate to the topic. She again uses her own experience to explain the situation in depth. Afterwards, she returns to the actual topic and gives another personal example. When she was in primary school she was asked by the teacher which her favourite traditional bush food was and answered that it was a particular kind of worm. Although the teacher tried to calm down the class, she was picked on for a long time for eating worms. When asked the same question again years later, she answered “fish” and was this time told that this did not count as traditional Aboriginal food. In conclusion, teachers have to be really careful how they treat Aboriginal students in class, L1 says.” (Class 1: Lecture 01/09/2015)

In this example, instead of simply explaining that the treatment of Aboriginal students in secondary school is a sensitive issue, L1 tells the class a story about her own lived experience with this problem. As stories, as opposed to mere explanations, link “thought, action and emotion”, they provide “greater depth of understanding and clarity“, Burgess claims (2016: 111). Thus, L1’s personal example helps the students to understand all implications of the topic.

In conclusion, the lecturers and tutors make active use of their cultural capital by including their lived experiences and other aspects of their personal lives into their teaching practices (Burgess 2016: 113). By the students this is mainly perceived in the light of the relationship between them and their teachers which is thus enhanced and protected. However, this is not the only effect. The stories also “infuse the curriculum with ‘real life’ examples”, as Burgess describes it (2016: 113) and thus render the content more understandable and relevant to the students in the same way as the methods discussed in the first section of this analysis.

To move on to the conclusion of my analysis, please click here.

To return to the overview over the second part of the analysis, please click here.

(Also see the categories “Relationship“, “Lecturer’s/Tutor’s relation to the topic“, “Connection to identity and culture“, “Storytelling“, “Connection to students’ world” and “Positive learning environment“.)