“Once upon a time, fire led our ancestors into the circle. It made sense to put the fire in the center and to gather around it. A circle defined physical space by creating a rim with a common source of sustenance lighting up the center. These ancestors needed the circle for survival – food, warmth, defense – and they discovered that the circle could help design social order”
(Baldwin & Linnea, 2010, p. 5).
Image Credit: Julie Mooney (2019)
Circles are often used because they align with an ontology (way of being) of community, in which the nature of humanity is understood as seeking to belong to a community and to be in good relations with the humans, flora, and fauna who form that community (Rendón, 2014). People assemble in circle in many contexts and cultures, including many Indigenous communities of Turtle Island (North America), and peoples in other regions throughout the world.
Indigenous Talking Circles
I use the term Indigenous to refer to the First Peoples in the territory called Canada, where I am a non-Indigenous, settler of Irish and Scottish ancestry; this umbrella term – Indigenous – includes First Nations, Métis, and Inuit.
Talking circles are a common practice in Indigenous communities. As Hanson and Danyluk (2022) explain, “A talking circle is a pedagogical approach rooted in Indigenous Knowledge systems, in which the circle reflects and embodies significant ontological, axiological, and epistemological principles and beliefs” (p. 1) Importantly and traditionally, talking circles are learned through experience, by participating in one, observing and following the practice as it unfolds (Hanson & Danyluk, 2022). Increasingly, in Canadian educational context, educators who identify as non-Indigenous, settlers, are working to foreground Indigenous pedagogies, in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action, and as a step towards reconciliation. When the global Covid-19 Pandemic happened, educators moved their lessons to online platforms. In their 2022 article, Hanson and Danyluk offer advice and resources to educators who wish to facilitate talking circles in online learning contexts.
While "talking circles" as described above are rooted in Indigenous knowledge systems of this territory, learning and gathering in circle is common to many cultural contexts and lands throughout the world, including my own ancestral Celtic cultures. As Margaret Wheatley highlights, in contemporary society, "we don't 'discover' circle practice so much as remember it. As humans, our species' memory is filled with circles. Circle is the way humans have always sat together and gotten to know one another. Sitting together as equals, slowed down, held by the shape, drawing on ancient familiarity" (as cited in Baldwin & Linnea, 2010, p. ix).
The Circle as Physical Shape in Physical Space
The circle itself, as a physical shape in which to gather, communicates equity and togetherness, allowing everyone in the circle a clear line of sight to one another, flattening any hierarchy that may exist between people due to their role and/or status, and encouraging community-mindedness (Camilleria & Bezzina, 2021; Styres, Haig-Brown, & Blimkie, 2013). In Western educational systems, particularly in adult and higher education contexts, circle pedagogy is the exception to the long-practiced rule of organizing learners in individual desks and rows, facing the front of a room, where the authority figure presides. The way the room is set up and the way learners and teachers are arranged in the physical space influence, and to some extent, determine pedagogical possibilities. That is to say, how and where we are in physical spaces influences and determines what we are able to learn and how we are able to interact.
A Brief Overview of (some Western) Learning Theories
If learning is focused exclusively on one expert delivering conceptual content to a group of novice learners, then arranging the learners in rows of desks facing the front, where the teacher communicates their expert knowledge, will serve the goal of one-directional content delivery. This teaching paradigm, in which the teacher is a ‘sage on the stage,’ centres cognitivism.
Cognitivism is a leaning theory in which learners receive, categorize, store, and retrieve information on an intellectual level; in cognitivism the brain’s mental processes are analogous to a computer (The Open University, 2024): information in, processing, and information out. Cognitivism has been criticized because it is difficult or impossible to observe the learning process inside a learner’s brain, and therefore difficult to assess learning. This theory has also been critiqued because it suggests learning is purely an individual and private activity, devoid of context and interaction with one’s environment and/or social relations. Moreover, this theory focuses on the mental or cognitive function of learning, neglecting the social, emotional, physical, and spiritual experiences and understandings of learners. In this way, cognitivism aligns well with a sage on the stage approach to teaching and learning, where learners are expected to listen, receive, and then reproduce the conceptual knowledge that has been given to them by the expert teacher.
"From the moment we enter school, education chops us into pieces: it teaches us to divorce soul from body and mind from heart."
(Galeano, 1992)
Behaviourism, as learning theory, was developed in response to cognitivist theory, in an effort to address the absence of context and interactions. Behaviourist theory contends that learning occurs when learners observe others’ behaviour, act on it or attempt to mimic it, and receive feedback (The National University, 2024). That feedback, whether positive reinforcement or negative consequences, alters the learner’s subsequent behaviour (The National University, 2024).
Social constructivism, a learning theory first presented by Vygotsky (1978), proposes that the learning process goes beyond individual, intellectual functions and behavioural feedback loops. In social constructivism, learning occurs relationally, through interactions between learners and in relation to the situational context of the learning environment. New knowledge is developed from existing knowledge, rather than simply acquired from an expert (TECHE, 2024). In this way, learning is rooted in each learner’s subjective experiences and a process for developing understanding is achieved through social interactions that emphasize collaboration or co-construction (Berkley Graduate Division, 2024).
The Circle as Powerful Pedagogy
The circle, as a pedagogical approach, could potentially involve all three learning theories simultaneously – cognitivism, behaviourism, and social constructivism – although circle pedagogy more likely tends towards social constructivism, and goes beyond this learning model. The circle invites the whole person into a process of learning in community, in relationship, and through reflection on and storying about each individual’s emotional, spiritual, physical, and cognitive experiences. "An education that keeps us present and alive is one that seeks to challenge our dualistic belief systems based on either/or frameworks and to work with the whole person with balanced attention to intellectual, social, and spiritual development" (Rendón, 2014, p.66). Sharing our stories of experience and listening to one another in circle allows us to see each other in new ways, to remove the layers of power and imbalance between us (Plett, 2020). Furthermore, as Plett (2020) contends, “circles help us hold the complexity of power imbalances, conflict, and deep collective grief and fear. Circles teach us to be present for each other’s pain and share the burden of it without projecting it onto each other” (p. 321).
Sitting in circle creates an open space in the middle, into which participants speak, so that we are not speaking to or at one another, but we are speaking our own stories into the space, a space that everyone in the circle is co-creating and holding together (Plett, 2020). A talking object passed around the circle can be used to regulate this process, so that everyone has a chance to voice what they have to share. The talking object helps everyone to focus on listening to the speaker; the process of only speaking
Image Credit: Julie Mooney (2019)
when one has the talking object helps to prevent interruptions, debate, direct responses, and efforts to fix each other (Plett, 2020). In these ways, the circle helps to slow down the rhythm of conversation, making space for “deeper listening and more intentional speaking” (Plett, 2020, p. 322).
Challenges with Circles
Circles are, however, not neutral spaces; each individual brings into the circle their own values and experiences (Laurila, 2019). As Plett (2020) articulates, “each person is invited to take responsibility for what they bring into the circle, what they contribute to the energy and wisdom of the circle, and what they take out” (p. 321-322). Sometimes, in circle, conflicting values bump up against each other, such as colonial and decolonizing perspectives (Mooney, 2022). In these moments of discomfort and discord, learning can be difficult, but the circle encourages reflection and empathy among peers (equals), transforming challenging moments into opportunities for deep learning (Camilleria & Bezzina, 2021).
The circle provides a space in which to “deepen conversation, transform conflict, grow relationships, generate collective wisdom, and hold space for complex challenges” (Plett, 2020, p. 324). However, when circles don’t work, it is often because one or more in the circle won’t let go of their pain or face their blind spots in order to move forward (Plett, 2020). Or, it might be impossible for the circle to reach its potential because a “power imbalance is too great to allow the most marginalized to feel safe” (Plett, 2020, p. 323). In such situations, sometimes the best circle wisdom that can emerge is a collective acknowledgement that the circle has done what it can and it is now time for those present to part ways (Plett, 2020).
The Circle as Transformative Pedagogy
Circle pedagogy is a powerful tool, especially for groups explorating complex topics, collectively transforming pain and conflict, and seeking collaborative solutions to wicked problems. Circles are not the only effective pedagogical approach, nor are they suitable for all learning goals or processes. But when they are applied to the right circumstances, and when they are designed and facilitated well, circles have the potential to support transformational learning. By transformational learning, yes, I am referring to the inner transformations that each individual can experience in circle. I am also referring to a shared transformative experience that the circle can offer.
Baldwin and Linnea (2010) refer to this circle phenomenon as ‘synergy,’ “the experience of interaction between elements or people that when combined produces a total effect greater than the sum of the individual parts” (p. 7). Some will refer to this as the magic of circle. One highly-esteemed colleague recently shared that for her it is a ‘Creator moment’ (Orr, 2024). My experience of it has also been profound…that moment when everyone in the circle pauses in silence and looks at one another in awe. This silence and awe are triggered because someone has just said something that resonates so profoundly none, not even the speaker, understands how that idea emerged so perfectly, at exactly the right time. That feeling that reverberates around the circle is beyond comprehension and also exactly what we all needed in that moment. The silence and awe that falls upon the circle may not be about words or ideas at all. It could be some seemingly unconnected yet incredibly congruent events, images, interruptions, or unexpected sounds that arose all at once or in rapid succession during a circle gathering, to reveal what can only be understood as serendipity, alchemy, divine guidance, cosmic alignment, or some such phenomenon beyond human control.
“Share stories, fill cold nights with the warmth of your connections; hear each other and be made more. That is the power of storytelling.”
(Wagamese, 2016, p. 100)