Executive summary. In higher education, the all-knowing expert stance can block active learning in a world of complex, evolving knowledge. Inspired by David Hunt’s (2024) article on vulnerability in healthcare leadership, this piece reframes “I don’t know” as a deliberate, professional act that builds psychological safety and invites shared inquiry. It connects this stance to the learner signature across five dimensions—gnoseological, gestaltic, cognitive, mnemonic and attitudinal—showing how uncertainty can support meaning-making, problem-solving, memory and motivation. Practical classroom applications and a “constructive doubt” model (clarification, co-exploration, reflexivity) close the article.

Key takeaways

• A framed “I don’t know” is a strength: When intentional and contextualised, it increases psychological safety and encourages students to ask questions, take intellectual risks and learn collaboratively. 
• Personalised impact via the learner signature: Linking this stance to five dimensions (gnoseological, gestaltic, cognitive, mnemonic, attitudinal), helps reach diverse learners by supporting understanding, reasoning, retention, motivation, and resilience.
• Uncertainty must trigger a structured process: It works best when embedded in an explicit framework and followed by inquiry and reflection, for example, co-searching answers, open-ended case studies, debates, an “Unanswered Questions” forum, and moments of reflexivity around learning in ambiguity.

---

Introduction

In traditional representations of higher education, the teacher is often seen as the holder of knowledge, the master of their disciplinary field, delivering stabilised content. However, in an era of complex, dynamic, and interconnected knowledge, this expert stance can become an obstacle to active learning and co-construction of meaning.

Inspired by David Hunt’s (2024) reflection on vulnerability in leadership in healthcare, we propose here a pedagogical transposition of the act of saying “I don’t know.” This statement, often perceived as a confession of weakness, can become a powerful educational tool, provided it is assumed, contextualised, and integrated into a dynamic of psychological safety and active pedagogy.

Saying “I Don’t Know” As a Strong Pedagogical Act

Saying “I don’t know” in an academic context does not mean a lack of preparation or a loss of authority. It is an act of chosen professional vulnerability, positioning the teacher in a stance of openness, co-learning, and shared inquiry.

Hunt (2024) identifies vulnerability as a key to creating a learning organisational culture, based on psychological safety — that is, the possibility for everyone to speak without fear of humiliation or sanction. Applied to the classroom, this approach leads to environments where students can take intellectual risks, ask questions, propose ideas, or recognise their own uncertainties.

Pedagogical Benefits: A Reading Through Cognitive Dimensions

The effectiveness of this stance is strengthened when linked to the cognitive signatures of students, defined through five dimensions: gnoseological, gestaltic, cognitive, mnemonic, and attitudinal. Each reveals learning styles and relationships to knowledge that the vulnerability stance can activate positively:

• Gnoseological: the teacher who embraces their doubt embodies a model of meaning-making and progressive knowledge construction.
• Gestaltic: students with a global perception benefit from the perspective of uncertainty as a symptom of a complex system.
• Cognitive: analytical or creative reasoning unfolds better when invited to solve an open question with the teacher.
• Mnemonic: the emotional involvement in discussing an unresolved question fosters memory retention.
• Attitudinal: students perceive the teacher as an ally in the effort, which strengthens motivation and resilience in the face of difficulty.

Perceived risks and professional framing

Acknowledging doubt or a limit can be perceived as a danger to pedagogical authority. This fear is legitimate in a system still largely structured by top-down logics. However, as Hunt (2024) points out, the myth of infallibility is not only unrealistic but counterproductive. Provided this stance is embodied with professionalism, it does not undermine the teacher’s legitimacy but expands their role to that of a facilitator of knowledge.

Concrete Pedagogical Applications

Towards a Pedagogy of Constructive Doubt

Adopting a pedagogy of constructive doubt means considering uncertainty as a resource rather than an obstacle. This pedagogical stance is based on three fundamental pillars: clarification, co-exploration, and reflexivity.

First, the teacher clarifies their stance by contextualising their uncertainties: it is not about general ignorance, but a conscious positioning in the face of an open, complex, or evolving question. This clarification helps avoid misunderstandings and establishes a safe framework for students.

Next, shared uncertainty becomes a lever for co-exploration. The teacher does not renounce their role but enriches it by becoming a facilitator of a collective research process. This dynamic activates transversal skills in students: hypothesis formulation, source mobilisation, idea confrontation, and collaboration.

Finally, reflexivity is central. The teacher can punctuate the sessions with moments of reflection: what do we do when we don’t know? What are the effective strategies for learning in uncertainty? These questions lead students to develop cognitive autonomy and position themselves as learners capable of navigating ambiguity — an essential skill in modern professional environments.

Thus, the pedagogy of constructive doubt does not negate the teaching function; it transforms it from a figure of authority to a figure of trust, openness, demandingness, and inspiration. This stance is particularly suited to higher education, where the goal is not only to transmit knowledge but to train minds capable of thinking, doubting, and acting in complexity.

The “I don’t know” stance is not enough on its own. It must be:

• Situated within an explicit pedagogical framework.
• Followed by a structured process of inquiry or reflection.
• Anchored in a logic of dialogue and co-construction.

It thus becomes a tool for developing reflexivity, critical thinking, and the competence to learn — all key objectives in contemporary higher education frameworks.

Conclusion

In a transforming academic world, saying “I don’t know” becomes an act of pedagogical courage. Far from weakening the teacher, this stance strengthens their legitimacy as a guide, role model, and facilitator of knowledge in construction. It proves particularly relevant in a context of diversified student profiles, where adaptive teaching makes complete sense. By cultivating psychological safety, aligning with cognitive signatures, and embracing doubt as a driver of knowledge, the teacher embodies a new form of educational leadership, based on trust, cooperation, and humanity.

---

References

Hunt, D. F. (2024). Power of saying “I don’t know”: Psychological safety and participatory strategies for healthcare leaders. BMJ Leader, 0, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2023-000906