Response # 4

              Some ways of re-inhabitation and decolonization are: Uniting elders and youth aboriginals, inter-generational dialogue, community research on economic and social relationships, historical Albany river theme, skill building workshops, training in research skills, production of Zines (an Aboriginal magazine), remapping of key cultural and historical sides, they were given aboriginal names, exploration of land and historic territory, environmental aboriginal immersion. All of these ideas and methods are used to re-inhabit an decolonize the land. Most of these ideas are acted on in a project, which was invented to decolonize and re-inhabit the land. These ideas will help future generations to understand and practice aboriginal tradition and ways of life. The main idea was to return the sense of ownership of land back to the aboriginal tribes, re-establish aboriginal language and dialect, and finally, re-introduce the significance of the environment to the youth. Now, we will explore how I will use these ideas (Restoule, 2013).

              I can borrow using historical aboriginal names, teaching the curriculum’s Anglo-view and aboriginal-view, teach an aboriginal view when appropriate, provide an insight on aboriginal philosophy and history when appropriate, and lastly, encourage a positive connection to aboriginal culture and tradition. Hopefully, by using these methods I can encourage an interest in re-habitation, decolonization, aboriginal culture and knowledge, and understanding of the aboriginal perspective. Even if a textbook is Anglo-focused this does not mean I must only teach Anglo-ideas (Restoule, 2013).

References

Restoule, Jean-Paul. Gruner, Sheila. & Metatawabin. (2013). Learning from Place: A Return to Traditional Mushkegowuk Ways of Knowing [PDF]. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dI7wj8JcsOuMVHjWx1aKJy3XzCSoyYuc/view

ECS 210 Response #4

According to ‘common sense’, being a good student means following, practicing, and learning cultural conformity and knowledge (includes basic knowledge). From the articles, they highlight multiple different cultural differences. Those differences were articulated with a racist undertone. I think, reserved, liberal, majority race/ white, good at memorizing, non-developmental disorders (ADD/ADHD), non-creative and average students, and lastly, rich privileged students are privileged by this definition of good student; if a student practiced all of what is described as good it would be perfect. However, this is impossible because humans have flaws. Now, we will explore what is made impossible to see, understand, and believe because of ‘common sense’ (Kumashiro, 2010).

I think, the idea that humans are complex and varied, is impossible to understand from these ideas because it focuses on a formula. How do we illustrate a student’s experience and comfort into small theories? It is not possible. However, teaching the general concept and supporting the students, in developing their own understanding and methods will help. The whole written work explores theories to lower stress and control the students. However, this is only finding an alternative or easier method to control the classroom, instead of looking for better ways to teach, and sometimes learning negative and harsh realities, allow us to open up our minds to new ideas and knowledge. However, if we focus on comforting the students, this will be impossible to see or understand (Kumashiro, 2010).

References

Kumashiro (2010). Against Common Sense, Chapter 2 (pp. 19 – 33) – “Preparing Teachers for

Crisis: What It Means to Be a Student”. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kkJc7k2AyKB-Usl3pujiMAeWpfzmpZRK/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kkJc7k2AyKB-Usl3pujiMAeWpfzmpZRK/view

ECS 210 Response #3

The author, Henry Giroux, of Closing the Achievement Gap, talked about the No Child Left Behind Act and critiqued the problems it may cause. As an example, the emphasized focus on standardized tests in The U.S.A, the Texas miracle education [SIC], and differences in the poverty and upper to rich class privilege. However, the author does acknowledge that tests do sometimes benefit the poverty class, but with an extreme focus on test taking, less funding is going into teaching materials, and this causes the funding to be directed at test taking. There are some critiques of educators, being turned into technicians and commercial representatives because of bribing, depravity, and funding. Interestingly, there was a critique of Texas’s pride in standardized tests because of dropouts and racism, and in the challenges presented by reforming the educational system because of more tests, disadvantaged minorities, and higher education standards (Giroux, 2004, p. 213 – 228). Now, we know a brief summary of Henry Giroux’s argument. We will explore the next step.

The next step will be to pick a new author, Eve tuck or Bryan Smith, and topic, Critical pedagogy, and we will perform more research into these subjects. Hopefully, my topic and new author will conflict and disagree with Henry Giroux because it will add entertainment and curiosity. The library database proved useful, as a quick tool to find peer reviewed resources, so we will continue to use this tool, but my target arguments to summarize are conflicting arguments. Complimentary agreements maybe useful as a small break; however, conflicting arguments are more the focus and fun of this assignment. Also, it will help us to see and explore differing view-points and ideas. Academically and personally, this could be useful for further interest and motivation.

References

Giroux, Henry A, & Schmidt, Michèle. (Sep 2004). Journal of Educational Change.

Vol. 5, Iss. 3: 213-228. Retrieved from

DOI:10.1023/B:JEDU.0000041041.71525.67

ECS 210 Response #2 The theories of curriculum.

 Curriculum is a transmission, product, process, and praxis. Smith articulates curriculum as a complex piece of material, which is interpreted in many different ways. However, as Smith stated: we cannot assume that educators must adopt curricula theory and practice, but curriculum is still a useful tool because it is informative. Now, we know more about the four curriculum theories, how about we explore the benefits and disadvantages of all four (Smith, 2000, p. 1 – 2).

Curriculum as a transmission (Syllabus) is purely taught for the content, and thus, the content is where the main focus is. This causes less of a focus on a student’s development and relationship because of prioritizing content transmission. This unfortunately strictly, causes educators to plan with content considerations. However, using a Syllabus will provide better communication, organization, and structure for students, but a Syllabus did not inform or explain topic importance and order of study. Curriculum as a product functions like a factory because: objectives are decided, a lesson plan created, applied, and finally, graded outcomes produce products. The benefit of this theory is that it is well organized, structured, and systematic; especially, since it produces a clear notion of outcome. However, the disadvantages to this theory are: that the program is highly prioritized, the students lose a say or voice, the students follow a procedure, which is the teacher’s method, the students must meet behavioural objectives for lesson plan and student success, little to no opportunity for conversation and interaction (Formative) affect, and lastly, it can turn educators into technicians, which are judged by the results of their actions. Curriculum as a process is merely just the interactions between the instructors, students, and content or knowledge. This theory as a number of benefits: experimentation, different and dynamic experiences in the classroom, outcomes are no longer very important, and lastly, the students are not objectified for content absorbing. However, the disadvantages are: a lack in structure or uniformity, not enough attention is directed at the learning environment or context, too much of a reliance on quality educators, and finally, there is no explicit practical thinking being demonstrated or associated. Curriculum as a praxis (an evolution of the process theory) makes explicit connections to emancipation. This theory’s benefit is the reliance on action and reflection, which causes a passive improvement or change over time; this includes planning, actions, and evaluation being grouped into a process. However, the disadvantages are: a lack of focusing on collective situations, practices, and structural questions, no attention paid to commitments to instructor’s practice and values, and lastly, no exploration of an educator’s practice with their peers, so the main drawback is a lack of reflection, collective focus, and demonstration of a teacher’s values and practice. Now, we know more about the benefits and disadvantages, of the four curriculum theories. Let us explore some connections to the author’s life experience (Smith, 2000, p. 1 – 10).

The author experienced curriculum as a product and transmission. During elementary and middle years, the author experienced curriculum as a product. However mainly, curriculum as transmission was experienced in secondary and post-secondary education. When the author was in elementary, he found that the product theory helped organize and structure the classroom and content. However, there was an over reliance on ‘Summative’ assessment, and this caused a division between students achievement. Most of the students were under performing and were bullied by the teacher for it. The author found that this made content organization and presentation possible, but it was impossible for students to have a say, create an alternative or make changes for improvement, and lastly,  for students to develop and learn in their own ways. As an example, Smith described curriculum as a product: “was heavily influenced by the development of management thinking and practice.” In secondary education, the author found he experienced curriculum as transmission, and this made organization, communication, planning and expectations possible. However, the author noticed that content considerations were overly prioritized, educators were more concerned with content absorption, and finally, the course was static. In the end, curriculum as transmission made a dynamic and fluid classroom impossible (Smith, 2000, p. 1 – 5).

References

Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) Curriculum theory and practice: the encyclopaedia of         Informal education. Retrieved from www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm

ECS 210 Res. 1 Kumashiro’s perspective.

Kumashiro defines ‘common sense’ as ideas that are: unquestioned, pre-existing, familiar, and unchanged. Basically, those ideas or methods that we have practiced for a long time, and any noticeable change or alteration could appear scary. In a way, Kumashiro compares ‘common sense’ to tradition or ritual. This was obvious, when Kumashiro mentioned his lack of critical thinking for ‘American superiority’. It was ironic, when Kumashiro explained his story because of its criticism of Nepali tradition, yet it was enforcing its own American tradition or common sense onto Nepal (Kumashiro, 2009, p. XXXII). Now, we know Kumashiro’s definition of ‘common sense’. Let us explore more on why, it is important to recognize ‘common sense’.

It is important to pay attention to ‘common sense’ because without critical analysis we would never improve. No idea, method, or strategy is perfect, and as Kumashiro wrote, Nepal was using outdated and archaic methods compared to The United states of America’s standards. However, if we relied too much on ‘Hidden Curriculum common sense’, we would be causing inequalities and injustice, but Nepal’s outdated ideas and theories (by American standards) cannot be compared to The United States of America because of cultural differences. As an example, Nepal is a poverty nation, which has a more complex context than The United states of America. This does include many different situations and entities. As an example, a racial or sexual minority in a poverty school in The U.S.A will have a different experience with ‘common sense’, compared to a White majority (Kumashiro, 2009, p. XXXII) (Cappello, 2019).

References

Kumashiro. (2009). The Problem of Common Sense. Against Common Sense:

Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice ( XXIX – XLI ). Unknown: Unknown.

Cappello, Dr. Michael., & Hildebrandt, Katia. (2019). Proceedings from ECS 210: The

First Lecture. University of Regina.