The Circle of Insight is a See, Reflect, Act process that moves us individually and collectively toward deeper liberation. It emerged as a result of researching various traditions, including indigenous peacemaking and healing circles, Aristotelian philosophical traditions, restorative justice processes, U.S. civil rights era peacemaking and social justice theories and strategies, Catholic social teaching, liberation pedagogy and theology, and social science inquiry. The center of the Circle is that toward which the See, Reflect, Act process moves, namely, deeper insight, interconnection, justice, peace, and transformative love.
The first phase of the Circle of Insight process, to see, requires us to gather the facts and carefully examine the reality in which we exist as social work educators and practitioners, to ask probing questions, and listen well to one another. Consistent with Freire’s liberatory, problem-posing approach to education (Freire, 1970/2000), the Circle’s process does not start with answers, but rather begins with questions, investigation, paying attention, and active listening.
For example, with respect to the issue of immigration in the United States, we might engage this first phase by listening to the stories of immigrants; interviewing organizations serving immigrants; researching immigration data and demographics; asking policy makers and immigration enforcement officials about their work; and investigating the effects of policies on immigrants as well as on the broader culture, economy, and society.
As part of our class, students engaged this phase as it related to immigration and university policy by interviewing university leadership, workers, students, and other members of the university community with respect to treatment and policies affecting immigrant workers and students. In doing so, they observed that the university had not taken a position on becoming a sanctuary school. In their opinion, this was inconsistent with the school of social work and university’s stated commitment to social justice.
The second phase of the Circle of Insight process invites us to reflect. It requires that we critically and constructively apply our learning, ethical principles, research, and multidisciplinary knowledge to the reality observed in the Circle’s first phase. This step explores the interconnectedness of theory and fact, each informing the other. The social work profession looks to NASW, CSWE, IFSW, IASSW and other association social justice principles, statements, reports, and standards, as well as social work social justice research, theory, and practice knowledge, to help shape our questions and reflection. Thus, learning and theory are both applied and cultivated.
To continue with our immigration example, in this phase, we might ask questions such as:
What do our NASW or IFSW ethical statements, or social work experience and research, have to teach us about immigration policy or treatment of immigrants?
What questions about dignity and equity do they require that we ask?
What are the implications for how we understand the issue of immigration in the U.S. in light of social work’s commitment to accompany the vulnerable, oppressed, and disadvantaged?
As part of our class, students engaged this phase by applying social work principles, research, and statements pertaining to social work’s core values and professional commitment to social justice, dignity and worth of the person, and importance of human relationships (NASW, 2017).
They also reflected on research and learnings from social workers, as well as liberation educators and social justice advocates, such as: Jody Williams, and her notion of empowerment, especially for women (Williams, Nobel Women’s Intiative); bell hooks, and her notion of caring for the souls of students (hooks, 1994); Thich Nhat Hanh, and his understanding of interbeing, our inherent interconnectedness with all persons and the environment; Desmond Tutu and Wangari Maathai, and their understanding of the African indigenous concept of Ubuntu, a belief in the universal bond that unites all humanity; and Dr. King, and his notions of agape/selfless love, and Beloved Community.
Students’ critical reflection, learning, and application of this learning, helped them understand that the university’s failure to declare itself a sanctuary school was unjust and inconsistent with its commitment to social work core values. It clarified the need for response, redress, and restorative action.
The third phase of the Circle, to act, builds on the first two. The Circle invites us to thoughtful and constructive action rather than impulsive and destructive reaction. It challenges us to refrain from acting until the first two phases of the Circle have been engaged. It takes into consideration the reality observed, in light of lessons learned and principles critically reflected upon, and only then is action considered.
Action is creative and unique in that it is informed by the stories and insights of a specific reality at a given moment in time, in a particular culture and context. There is no cookie-cutter response, no single act that will necessarily make sense or be appropriate in any or every given situation. In fact, political theorist Gene Sharp categorizes 198 methods of social justice, nonviolent action that have been used by individuals and peoples globally over the years. Thus, our capacity, our place and perspective, our resources, our experience, and the extent of our engagement with the first two phases of the Circle, all influence how we respond, what we choose to do.
With our immigration example, individuals and groups who work with immigrants and who have witnessed firsthand the harm of unjust practices and policies may choose to accompany, defend, or advocate on behalf of a particular group of immigrants. Other social workers may work with and through social work professional associations and organizations to craft or challenge immigration policy, or march for immigrant rights, or join with others to educate the public about the unjust effects of immigration policy.
As part of our class, students engaged this phase by deciding to educate and organize other students, and the university community, with respect to the issue of becoming a sanctuary school. They then sought a meeting with the administration to invite them to change university policy. In the end, they were successful, and our university is now a sanctuary school.
