How Can Ignorance Be Useful to Teachers?

Abstract

Highlights

Teachers can use ignorance to improve their role and facilitate the learning process.

Strategic ignorance can be used to strengthen impartiality and avoid spreading oneself thinly.

Feigned ignorance can be used to reinforce independent learning skills and avoid high dependence on simple questions.

Teachers’ admission to ignorance can be used to promote humility, curiosity, and psychologically safe environments.

Ignorance is commonly juxtaposed with words such as bad, evil, wrong. However, this type of thinking is narrowly naïve. With deeper introspection, ignorance may not be entirely negative. There are cases in which ignorance can be useful, especially in the educational arena where it is commonly viewed as the opposite of education. From this viewpoint, I shall discuss how teachers can use ignorance to improve their roles and facilitate the learning process. I will also share my experience and insights as a teacher in education about ignorance. This article is divided into three parts: (a) strategic ignorance, (b) feigned ignorance, and (c) humble ignorance.

Strategic ignorance

According to Saad (2011), humans have evolved to have the instinct to consume. We tend to want more in life, regardless of whether it is possessions or information. However, having more information does not necessarily mean that we will become happier. There are only some things that we want to deliberately avoid to function harmoniously. This is a strategy; hence, it is referred to as strategic ignorance. We strategically ignore some information because if we obtain it, it may have negative repercussions on our being or performance (e.g., getting depressed, becoming more biased). Therefore, ignorance may be a bliss.

Let me describe how I use strategic ignorance as a teacher in my profession. I will start with my interactions with my co-teachers at school. It's fine with me that I am ignorant about what they tell about me. I understand that, since we are gregarious human beings, gossiping is natural. Evolutionarily, it has become hardwired in us because it has been a way to survive (Dunbar, 1998). I admit that I gossip as well. By gossip, I mean any “informal conversation, often about other people's private affairs” (Collins, n.d.). Besides, it is hypocritical if one would say that they have never done that. Gossiping is a ubiquitous phenomenon (Waddington, 2012) and schools are no exception.

So as long as it does not destroy my credibility and it is just a part of a minor chit-chat, I do not worry about it. It is technically a waste of time if I delve deeper into the source of every single gossip about me. It is pitiful of me if I seriously complain every time my name comes up. To avoid hassle and unnecessary conflict, I strategically ignore it.

The same is true for gossip made by students. Teachers are popular topics for students. I know that because I was once a student like them. Back then, we gave childish and funny nicknames to the teachers, ranted about the tasks they imposed on us, and even copied their mannerisms and signature phrases. Now that I am a teacher, I can confirm that it is still happening because some of my students admitted to doing so.

Of course, I know that I am not exempt when students talk to their friends. However, I deliberately do not want to know what they say about me, because that is beyond my sphere of control. This is what I do—I undertake my best as a teacher, but what students do next, such as their reactions, is already beyond my control. In addition, if I try to search for the root of the information, it would be transgressing the privacy of students and their right to freedom of speech. If I learn that it is unpleasing, I may become infuriated. Consequently, I will become biased in grading the students who made these gossips. I may retaliate by giving them low or even failing scores. Worse, I can generalize the entire class.

I have seen this happen when I was in college. A professor failed most of the class because he learned that he was the center of mockery in a private group chat on Facebook. He did not separate his feelings from his professional work. Out of anger, he confronted the class, demanding more details about it, such as the list of people involved in the chat and the comments. This aggravated the situation. He told the class that he had failed them, and he did. This led to injustice for those who had received passing grades. Well, I cannot blame him completely because, after all, teachers are still emotional human beings. Had he chosen to utilize strategic ignorance, it would not have escalated to a bigger scale.

Another situation in which I used strategic ignorance was when I performed many tasks as a basic education teacher. In addition to teaching Civics, History, and Economics, I must mentor eight students and 16 parents, who must be met regularly. I also needed to handle affairs in my advisory class. The principal then asked if there was a volunteer to be one of the advisers of the Science Club. My colleagues pushed me for this. I could strive to learn how to handle a club, but I strategically ignored it. I told myself that I should not be pursuing it because I would be spreading myself too thinly, which could negatively affect my performance. This should be given to teachers who were not playing many roles and were not as busy as I was.

Feigned ignorance

There are times in which teachers should feign ignorance, but I do not pertain to the narcissistic type of feigning to escape consequences; instead, I refer to withholding information. Why would teachers feign ignorance? Teachers are recognized as more knowledgeable than students. This is why, first, they facilitate learning. However, they do not always provide immediate information to students. Why? Otherwise, the art of teaching would diminish.

For example, I do not lecture students in a bland manner, such as providing the information to them in a flash and then telling them that my work is done. Many times, I find myself feigning ignorance in promoting learning. When students ask questions, I use the Socratic art of questioning. I must keep control of myself and not give the information immediately, so I provide further questions that will lead them to the answer. Through this, I became a real teacher who guided students. I help them to figure out their answers through their thinking. This is an artful orchestration of the teaching–learning process. It is creative. There is acting in it. This leads to engagement. In addition, it becomes a unique, yet meaningful learning experience.

Another situation in which I feigned ignorance is when I apply the devil's advocacy strategy in teaching. This is when I pretend that I do not agree with what the students say. I pretend I am ignorant of the advantages of a certain side, and so I critique and oppose them. This makes them think about their thinking—that is, metacognition. I test their convictions and make them reflect critically. Through this, they become active and alert to every detail. This encourages them to see the nuances and blind spots in their arguments. This is a good way for them to become active agents in the quest for the truth or best solution.

There are also instances when I feign ignorance because I want students to utilize their resources. For example, when students ask, “Sir, what is the definition of lugubrious?” I would respond, “I forgot. Perhaps, something under your table could help you.” Though I know the answer, I do not want them to become reliant on me for answering even simple questions when, in fact, they can do it on their own, that is, self-learning. This avoids the connotation that I am a walking encyclopedia. I will not spoon feed every single bit of the simplest information to them. This makes them sedentary and can debilitate their learning.

To reinforce these rules, I pretend that I have forgotten them. Hence, I ask the class in general, “It seems I have a mental fog right now but what should we do when somebody gave a wrong answer?” One might say, “Correct constructively.” Another might pinpoint, “Do not laugh at others when they make mistakes; instead, we should help them.” However, this is an arduous strategy. It shifts from teacher admonition to class rules reinforcement. I commend those who know what to do and have made an effort to learn about our class rules. Consequently, this encourages others to be mindful of class operations.

Feigning ignorance concerns not only the art of teaching but also the science of learning. How? Students best learn when they do not know the answers to questions beforehand, so that they will try and solve them on their own, and then clarify whether it is correct. Scientifically, this makes learning more effective and memorable (Brown et al., 2014; Giray, 2021). Without teacher's deliberate instruction, they will figure it out on their own using prior knowledge and other available resources. This is a type of retrieval practice that cognitive scientists call generation. Its effect is “making the mind more receptive to new learning” (Brown et al., 2014). When teachers pretend that they do not know the information first and do not attempt to blurt out the answer in a flash, students get to utilize generation. Their role is to provide feedback if students have gotten it right. Again, not spilling the answer immediately or intervening in the process of generation makes students more cognitively effortful, which advances a more successful learning.

Humble ignorance

Many people in history find ignorance malicious. Plato asserted, “Better be unborn than untaught, for ignorance is the root of misfortune.” Robert Browning said, “Ignorance is not innocence but sin.” For Sri Chinmoy, “Ignorance is an enemy, even to its owner.” Misfortune, sin, enemy: This is how many prominent people characterize ignorance. I believe that the ignorance they are referring to is arrogant. An arrogant ignorance, from the term itself, is prideful about ignorance to the extent that, although negative repercussions can be seen or anticipated, the owner is indifferent to making a positive action. If the ignorant is arrogant and even gives advice to others, it becomes a huge problem. Coupling ignorance with conceitedness is highly problematic and can cause problems such as misinformation and political manipulation.

Relating this to the field of education, if teachers advise about a certain matter when, in reality, they do not know anything about it, they lead students astray. This is because many students trust their teachers; they are also noncritical of the information teachers provide. Hence, these teachers do not act as a reliable guide, which all teachers need to be. If they are just blurting out something without fact-checking it and their intention is to be credible, they are, as Frankfurt (2005) calls, bullshitting, which refers to a “speech intended to persuade without regard for truth.”

However, if ignorance is partnered with humility, it becomes a source of knowledge. Confucius pointed out that if one knows their ignorance, it becomes knowledge. Knowledge is knowing the extent of ignorance. This can become a starting point in the educational process. Without humble admission, I believe that facilitation can never occur. Without the exception of teachers, the process of learning becomes more open and facilitative if one acknowledges their ignorance. Teachers must admit that they are ignorant of certain subject matters. Otherwise, they will be caught in the cycle of pretension, which will be figured out eventually because, after all, no individual is all-knowing.

Yes, humble ignorance begins with recognition and admission. I do not think that it is fitting for teachers to bullshit their way throughout their teaching careers. Their integrity will be destroyed, given that we are already living in a world of accessible information, where, in one click, students can figure out the real answer. Victor, a student, shared the following experience with me.

“When I was in high school, I had this teacher who refuted that the Marcos regime was a bad time, and she even declared to us that it was peaceful and the Golden Age of the Philippines. For the longest time ever since I was politically unconscious back then, I believed that the late President Ferdinand Marcos, Sr. was a great state leader without even researching facts and figures about it. In that case, I was naïve by believing the hearsays of old people because I was very blind to their authority figures. When I reached college, it was only that time that I knew it was only … hearsays, even if they’re told by old people who witnessed his administration.”

In this situation, Victor's teacher did not admit her ignorance, and hence, merely repeated what she believed. I surmise that the teacher was an admirer of the late president, and so she was blurting out positive, yet untruthful, matters just to make students believe. The problem is that the information provided by the teacher is not factual or validated. This can be easily verified through different legitimate sources. This single scenario was negatively impressed in Victor's memory, and it perhaps made him hold grudges against his teacher for giving him false information. Had the teacher admitted her ignorance and researched before discussing the subject matter, her students would have remembered her as a credible and professional individual.

What I recommend is that teachers admit their ignorance in front of the class. Personally, I have done so on some occasions. I became open to students that I did not know about certain matters. My credibility was not wrecked. I became more respected. This scenario teaches students that there are human beings who can become ignorant, and it is fine. What matters most is not ignorance of the matter at hand, but what teachers will do after. Is it going to be dismissed? Is the teacher going to say anything just to prove that he is an intelligent teacher, or will the situation be used as a learning opportunity?

When there are complicated questions to which I do not know the answer yet, like, one time, I was asked, “We must not lie. Honesty is the best policy. But, Sir, what should I do if there is a killer who is asking the location of his victim and I know he will kill her? Shall I become honest in that case?”—What I do is I admit, apologize, and tell them that to give me some time and I will figure it out. In such situations, I temporarily suspend the excitement of giving an answer. I need more details. I need to provide a more nuanced answer that I must be sure of first. At other times, I ask for their help. We make this into an assignment. Now, it becomes an opportunity for the class to research and use their skills and resources to explore the topic and obtain a correct answer. As a result, this becomes no longer the task of the teacher, but of all the students in the classroom. Here, it shows a psychologically safe atmosphere in which ignorance, particularly the humble type, is permitted. I have to put a caveat here. Teachers should not become ignorant regarding subject matters, especially rudimentary ones. Surely, their credibility is at risk.

Humble ignorance can be characterized by joy. This type of joy stems not from arrogance or indifference, but from the understanding that ignorance is an inherent part of human nature. We perpetually ignore several things in our lives. Psychologically speaking, our minds are limited in their ability to perceive everything (Chabris & Simons, 2011). Besides, no matter how long we devote ourselves to studying, we will not be able to completely grasp all the knowledge in the constantly expanding universe. With the multitude of disciplines and topics in the world, it is impossible to have complete knowledge of everything. Additionally, it is impractical to strive for this. Hence, acting as if one is an all-knowing god is truly insane. We can find joy in our lives if we accept that we are ignorant of some matters in this world and that we cannot and must not answer all questions.