The path of the person

In an educational context, the non-participation of learners does not always indicate disinterest. By focusing on their individual progress rather than the success of the pedagogical framework, we design resilient tools that respect each person’s pace and challenges, fostering both individual and collective growth.

The Misplaced Expectations of the Educator

When, in an educational setting, we propose an activity to participants, especially if the number of sessions is limited or the activity is a one-time occurrence, we carry certain expectations. Indeed, we have worked on our framework and want our efforts to be meaningful. We therefore expect participants to engage in some way, as we envision it.

For example, if we ask participants to take photos and then discuss them together, with the rule that the person who took the photo does not speak, but rather the others share what they perceived from it, we expect them to express themselves and enrich their peers with their perspectives. If they do not, our expectations are disappointed.

We then feel, and rightly so, that they have not followed the rules of our pedagogical framework or that they are unable to do so. This can lead to a sense of failure. And if only one or two people in the group speak while the others remain silent, we find it regrettable, as those who took the photos could have been much more enriched if the others had shared their thoughts.

As a result, we might almost resent them for not participating, for not playing along, for doing something else, for looking at their computer or phone instead, or for failing to concentrate. Of course, in the moment, we can express this to them without stigmatizing them. But if, despite this, they still cannot engage, then I believe it is important to consider these participants in their own journey and not interpret their non-participation as disinterest or a lack of investment.

It may simply be an inability to express themselves at this stage of their journey. From the inside, it is not at all easy to share with a group what one feels about an image. If we consider the individual’s path, if we place the person at the center of our attention rather than the pedagogical framework, then indeed, our framework has not “fully worked,” but that does not mean those who did not participate have not progressed or gained something. Perhaps next time, during another exercise, if they did not feel judged the first time, they will dare to engage more, having grown and progressed.

This is less a matter of benevolence than an understanding that the people we guide—whether children, adults, or even peers—each have their own legitimate challenges and paths to navigate.

Designing Resilient Pedagogical Frameworks

Thus, it seems important to me to design pedagogical frameworks that can function whether everyone participates or not. I believe this awareness of the individual’s journey should inspire us to create resilient pedagogical tools, capable of adapting to the non-participation of some or all participants. These resilient frameworks will not depend on the level of participation, allowing us to respect and support each person’s progress.