“Teaching Toward Utopia: Complainstorming and the Pitfalls of Utopian Education.” Unpublished paper, 1-15. Sterman, John, Travis Franck, Thomas Fiddaman, Andrew Jones, Stephanie McCauley, Philip Rice, Elizabeth Sawin, Lori Siegel, and Juliette N. Rooney-Varga. 2014. “WORLD CLIMATE: A Role-Play Simulation of Climate Negotiations.”
If utopia can be described as a “space of hope” that inspires “social dreaming” (Sargent 2010, 5) and nourishes “the desire for a better way of being” (Levitas 1990, 198), Ricoeur adds that it is also, and as importantly, a “space of criticism” that provides a critical vantage on ideology.
For students to think conceptually, they need opportunities to head up to the mountaintop, pause, and take in the entire forest. They need the chance to search for big ideas—to generalize, summarize, and draw conclusions by looking at their learning in a holistic way.
My hypothesis was that by turning students into active producers of utopia via a critical simulation they would be in a better position to meet course objectives, namely to learn the conventions of utopian discourse and to adopt a critical utopian frame for evaluating utopian texts and real-world phenomena.
A utopia, it seems, is a perfect society, where everyone lives in harmony and happiness. But utopia, literally, is no place. So why is it that there have been so many different visions of utopia? How is it that the idea of utopia has continually inspired theoretical analyses of society, fictional imaginations of a better world, and even historical attempts to create such a perfect#N#society? In this course, we’ll draw on literature, history, and philosophy to try to grapple with the meaning and importance of utopias and utopian thinking. We’ll engage in a series of “dialogues with utopia”—utopian visions in dialogue with the ideas and issues of their contemporaries, but also our own dialogue between ourselves and with these utopian visions—in order to ask what these utopias tell us about what we think is good, whether a utopian vision can offer an effective critique of actually existing social orders, and whether it can serve as a model for changing contemporary societies. We’ll be engaged in lots of discussion—this is, after all, a seminar. I hope that we will be able to use these texts and questions to reflect upon our experiences, and perhaps to challenge some of our presuppositions—please bring your own questions, concerns and agenda to the conversation! The most important thing you can do to succeed in this class is to come prepared every day, so that we can all learn from each other’s questions and insights. The reading requirements for this class are high—the number of pages per session will occasionally be quite long (i.e., novels) or dense (philosophical prose). (I know that you’ll have a lot of reading—but I promise that this is fun reading, and most of the novels are page-turners.) Be forewarned—welcome to college!
Its goals are said to be achievable only through the forceful imposition of a static model of perfection upon a necessarily conflicted and diverse humankind. While it is true that visions of utopia are everywhere employed by individuals and groups hoping to impose their versions of the good upon others, postmodern thought has informed a new generation of utopian thinkers who address in more ambiguous and complicated ways the ancient utopian question: to what extent, and to what ends, do we humans create the realities we inhabit? and how then should we live?
Because utopian literature expresses what an author desires, what the author feels is lacking in his or her own society, it is inherently a political and social critique. This course focuses on a variety of nineteenth and twentieth-century texts that deal with utopian and dystopian expressions of women’s desires. Students will study the historical, political, and cultural aspects of women’s situations and how those situations impact literature and vise versa. Students will also study this literature’s#N#relevance to people’s daily lives, what is left lacking in utopian expressions, and the results of realized utopian hopes. This approach to texts will allow students to enjoy the literature for its own aesthetic value and for its relation to and reflection of the culture in which it was written and the desires it expresses.
Utopianism, social dreaming, can be both a fundamental component and a critical way of understanding the complex totality of economic, cultural, political, social, and personal life. As it projects or interprets social values and practices that are both critical of and better than the status quo, a utopian method can be a dynamic tool in the processes of socio-political transformation.
This course will cover American science fiction, utopian, and dystopian literature and film, emphasizing themes dealing with the imagination of better worlds and worse worlds, including post-nuclear apocalyptic societies and the modern post-9/11 world. Because science fiction and utopian/dystopian literature expresses what an author sees as possible, hopes is possible, and fears is possible, it is inherently a political and social critique. We will discuss the causes and effects of these critiques. Texts will include various novels, short stories, and films.
1. Using categorizing, naming, and sorting activities: In order to understand individual concepts, students need to grapple with examples, non-examples, and attributes of a concept. We can ask students, “What is it like?” and invite them to describe the key features.
If students do not have a strong understanding of individual concepts, they’ll struggle to see patterns and make connections between them. Likewise, if we don’t give students time to construct understanding, it will be challenging for them to apply their ideas to projects, current events, or other new contexts.
Coaching students to think in terms of concepts helps them understand how to apply their learning in the future.
Learning knowledge and skills is like standing in the middle of a forest, surrounded by trees: It ’s easy to spot details but hard to see patterns. For students to think conceptually, they need opportunities to head up to the mountaintop, pause, and take in the entire forest.
A map of the world that does not include Utopia is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing. And when Humanity lands there, it looks out, and, seeing a better country, sets sail. Progress is the realisation of Utopias.
Simulations are simplified models of reality intended to teach specific learning objectives (Hertel and Millis 2002, 17). Advocates for simulation pedagogies tout their potential to motivate students, foster deep learning, achieve learning objectives, enable student-centered learning, and bridge disciplinary gaps (Hertel and Millis 2002, 1-14).
In each instance discussed above—the military, corporate America, and (higher) education—simulations have been embraced for their uncanny ability to engage learners and situate meaning in ways that optimize the acquisition of a particular domain, be it military tactics, business practices, or discursive fields.
I decided to employ the methods of critical simulation in my course on utopian literature for several reasons. For one thing, both share an emphasis on critical thinking. In Lectures on Ideology and Utopia (1986), the philosopher Paul Ricoeur observes that utopias are vital for the critique of ideology:
If utopia is itself an exercise in critical simulation, one in which authors design alternative futures that critique and inspire, what better way for students to learn about utopia than by imitating this process? Students in my course would become designers of utopia, and in doing so they would practice the critical habits of mind intrinsic to the utopian frame and situate their understanding of utopian texts within an embodied experience of utopian design.
The students presented five brochures for intentional communities at the end of the semester: Halo, a tourism and export-based island resort; Vacileeco Palati, a high-tech new-Atlantean commune; Northern Green, a secessionist eco-commune; Guavaland, an agrarian autarky with sprinkles of futuristic technology; and Phoenix, a back-to-nature libertarian community of individual producers.
I decided to follow up the students’ final presentations with an exit survey to have them debrief about their experience with the critical simulation.