Month: November 2021

In the reading “As a Sort of Blanket Term: Qualitative Analysis of Queer Sexual Identity Marking” by Kolker, Taylor, and Galupo, it discusses queer sexual identity marking and other forms of sexuality marking. It is stated that “sexuality marking serves as a way to assert one’s sexuality to others through language, behavior, aesthetics, and/or other non-verbal cues” (Kolker, Taylor, & Galupo, 2019, p. 1339). This is a term that I have never heard before, but I have always known that this concept existed and it is important to look into. We can see that there are many ways in which queer sexual identity marking is both similar to and distinct from other forms of sexuality marking. When it comes to heterosexual individuals, they “engage in heterosexual marking when their sexual identity is questioned, challenged, or suggested to be something other than heterosexual” (Kolker, Taylor, & Galupo, 2019, p. 1339). This involves making jokes that directly imply that they are not gay, which is definately something that I have witnessed people doing in the past. When we look into bisexual marking, we basically see the oposite of heterosexual marking. This involves acting against the negative stereotypes. Even though heterosexual marking and bisexual marking have different intents, they are both used to avoid having their identities misinterpreted. Now looking into queer identity marking, “because queer as a term has a unique history it is likely that queer sexual identity marking will also be unique” (Kolker, Taylor, & Galupo, 2019, p. 1340). It is stated that in their research, there were themes that came up regarding queer identity marking, including “(1) Using Queer as an Encompassing Label, (2) Using Queer to Avoid Explanation, (3) Using Queer Based on Who is Present and (4) Avoiding Using Queer” (Kolker, Taylor, & Galupo, 2019, p. 1346). In these trends, we see a similarity to both heterosexual marking and bisexual marking in the sense that queer identity marking happens when they want to remind people that they are non-cis and non-straight. An important idea is that “all forms of sexuality marking are used to inform others of a specific aspect of an individual’s identity, specifically their sexuality” (Kolker, Taylor, & Galupo, 2019, p. 1352). Unlike heterosexual marking and bisexual marking, queer marking is about belonging in a community and can be used to avoid defending their sexual identity.

In the article “Queering Curriculum Studies” by Sykes, it discusses the incorporation of queerness into the curriculum. It states that “a queering of curriculum studies has to deal with the White heteronormative imaginary that overpopulates curriculum studies and haunts queer studies” (Sykes, 2011, p. 29). This makes it evident that queerness in the curriculum “has to interrogate these logics of White supremacy so that it doesn’t slide into becoming merely the rehabilitation of White, Western lesbian and gay perspectives and bodies” (Sykes, 2011, p. 30). When it comes to integrating queerness into curriculum studies for me, I think this is very important to ensure that all students feel comfortable. I believe that this is not only about educating students on the topic, but it is also about the classroom environment itself. When it comes to my classroom, in terms of what this would look like, it could include having a pride flag in the classroom and moving away from separating students into groups according to the gender binary. For what this would sound like, language and terminology is very important. The students cannot be addressed using terms such as “boys” and “girls,” and instead, they can be addressed using terms such as “everyone,” “scientists,” or “mathematicians.” There would also be introductions using pronouns, by myself and the students, as well to expand on this, there would be meaningful discussions around this topic. In terms of what this would feel like, I would like it to be a welcoming space where everyone feels like they can be themselves. It will feel like a safe space where students should not be afraid to talk about their identities.

In the reading “Posy-gay, Political, and Pieced Together: Queer Expectations of Straight Allies” by Forbes and Ueno, it talks about allyship and the importance of examining allies from multiple different angles, including from queer people’s perspectives rather than from straight allies. It is mentioned that “although straight people may claim that they would challenge queerphobia through actions such as confronting a person using discriminatory language, researchers found that they do not always do so when presented with the opportunity” (Forbes & Ueno, 2020, p. 160). This is something that is interesting to think about, being that it is common to occur with many other things as well. The general conclusion here is “that the idea of allyship is not fixed but can vary within a marginalized population, having different meanings for different people” (Forbes & Ueno, 2020, p. 173). In knowing this, I can think of many teacher implications for allyship. As mentioned by Forbes and Ueno, it is important to know what allyship is, but also what actions are considered as being thoroughly impactful. A student in this study mentions how it is not enough for a teacher to simply ask for pronouns in order to be considered an ally. It is significant to see that “these insufficient actions tended to focus on interactional exchanges” (Forbes & Ueno, 2020, p. 169). This results in the understanding that as teachers, implications for allyship must involve moving away from this focus on interactions. We must actually engage in understanding the students’ identities. This could involve simply asking how we can be an ally and then continuing to follow through with it in the form of an action.

References:

Forbes, T. D. & Ueno, K. (2020). Posy-gay, Political, and Pieced Together: Queer Expectations of Straight Allies. Interpersonal Relationships and Social Networks Formation, 63(1), pp. 159-176.

Kolker, Z. M., Taylor, P. C., & Galupo, M. P.  (2019). “As a Sort of Blanket Term”: Qualitative Analysis of Queer Sexual Identity Marking. Sexuality & Culture (pp. 1337-1358).

Sykes, H. (2011). Queering Curriculum Studies. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 29-31.

There are many things to consider when thinking about the way that our lenses shape the way we read the world. In Chapter 7 of the reading “Against Common Sense” by Kumashiro, he talks specifically about examples of challenging oppression by changing what is being read and how it is being read within English literature. It is common for people to want to read only certain stories, with these stories being the ones that reinforce their understanding of the world. We see that “when students read literature by only certain groups of people, they learn about only certain experiences and perspectives, especially those of groups that have traditionally been privileged in society” (Kumashiro, 2009, p. 71). When considering how my upbringing/schooling has shaped how I read the world, I have realized that this is something I have never really thought about before. I, a white settler, grew up and went to school my whole life in a small town in which a majority of the community members are white. I was not often exposed to much diversity and with this being said, many of us had the same way of reading the world, which was generally “suggesting that an entire culture or a group is ‘like this’” (Kumashiro, 2009, p. 71). Ukrainian culture is very prominent to my family and community, so this has also had a major effect on how I read the world. This included doing things in school such as decorating Ukrainian Easter eggs in art class and making perogies or other traditional Ukrainian dishes in foods class. This was something that I just assumed everyone did, but when new students began joining my class from different towns or cities, I realized they were not familiar with these types of things. The biases and lenses that I bring to the classroom have all changed as I get older. In the past, I found myself strongly believing in the traditional ways of the classroom, being that we “often use lenses that reinforce the status quo” (Kumashiro, 2009, p. 74). I had a lot of biases towards people of colour and different genders when I was younger. I also held a strong belief that students all learn the same way through the traditional notes and test method. This led to me being biased against any other methods, such as group work. Being that I was also mainly taught through a Eurocentric viewpoint, I was also biased against learning through other knowledge systems. This resulted in me viewing everything primarily through a Eurocentric lens. As I have moved forward, specifically in university classes, these biases and lenses have significantly changed. I now read the world through a lens that is considerate of all biases that might be out there. We can unlearn/work against these biases by educating ourselves so that going forward, things can slowly begin to change. We must be open to analyzing and interpreting things in different ways than we previously have. While school has a major factor in creating these biases, school must also become the place where we work against these biases and learn to read the world through different lenses.

In the video “The danger of a single story” by Adichie, she discusses how dangerous it can be to hear only a single story about a group. It is mentioned that we are impressionable and vulnerable to stories, especially as children. She goes on to state that “the single story creates stereotypes” (Adichie, 2009). In this sense, they are incomplete, but even though there are these stories that might break dignity, they can also repair it, as Adichie says. There were many single stories present in my own schooling. In general, when I again think about the prominent Ukrainian culture in our community, this is a single story in itself when it comes to our school as a whole. People often associate our school with Ukrainian culture and that culture alone. This is assuming that every student in the school has ties to Ukrainian culture, which is definitely not the case. I also find that a very prominent single story in my schooling had to do with race. In particular, a single story of Indigenous peoples was very common. Their story was often referred to from the viewpoint of Europeans. There was never much consideration when it comes to the Indigenous peoples as individuals rather than as simply a part of colonization. This single story ends up reinforcing stereotypes that we have previously come to know. Another single story in my schooling was that of the students who were a part of a lower class. This grouping was often based on appearance or their physical belongings that they had at school. Being that this is all they were seen as, it was never considered that they could potentially excel in school classes or other things such as sports. It was as if because they were of the lower class, people did not think they were capable of doing good in other areas of life. A similar case of a single story could have also been seen with upper class white settlers in my school, being that they were often assumed to have an amazing life with no problems, even though this was not always the case. When it comes to whose truth mattered, we see power as being the dominant factor. As Adichie mentions, “it is impossible to talk about the single story without talking about power” (Adichie, 2009). We see the truth of the white settlers being dominant, specifically those of the upper class as they are seen as having more power and those who hold higher positions in the school. This is because of the traditional ways we have learned to view the world.  It is also the truth of history that matters in all of these cases, but it is important to consider all aspects of history and not only those associated with the European worldview.

References:

Kumashiro, K. (2009). Examples From English Literature. Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice (pp. 71-79). Taylor & Francis Group.

Adichie, C. N. (2009, July). The danger of a single story [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story?language=en

There are many different ways of interpreting the world, meaning forms of oppression and discrimination can be generated when these worldviews clash. Within the reading “Jagged Worldviews Colliding” by Little Bear, he discusses the difference between Aboriginal values and Eurocentric values, along with effects that colonialism has had on our worldviews. It is stated that colonialism is overall “suppressing the diversity of human worldviews” (Little Bear, 2000, p. 77). We see that there are many differences between the philosophy, values, and customs of Aboriginal cultures and Eurocentric cultures. When we come to understand this, we see how these worldviews clash and how the effects are present in education.

When it comes to my experiences of the teaching and learning of mathematics in terms of oppression and discrimation, as a white settler, I do not recall encountering any aspects that were oppressive or discriminatory towards me personally. My math classes definitely followed a more Eurocentric worldview. It followed a very linear system that is expected of traditional mathematics. There was always talk during math lessons about how math is satisfying because it typically has only one right answer. We had the traditional lesson where we would write notes, do an assignment, and then write a test. This method did not include much engagement or collaboration. With all of this being said about my previous math education experiences, it is possible that other students from diverse backgrounds who may require different learning approaches could have felt oppressed or discriminated against. When it comes to colonization, it attempted to destroy the Aboriginal worldviews, but instead it “left a heritage of jagged worldviews among Indigenous peoples” (Little Bear, 2000, p. 84). There are many different views that continue to try and take control. This is something that could potentially be seen in a math classroom. The Indigenous students potentially felt as if the ways we were learning and teaching math did not pertain to their values. My math classes never included any forms of actual experiences or storytelling and so it was often only the teacher who was responsible for our learning. By ignoring these aspects, this was a type of oppression and discrimination, being that Indigenous people believe that “education is a collective responsibility” (Little Bear, 2000, p. 81). There was the odd word problem that may have included aspects of the Indigenous culture, but this was just extra information stuck in the problem that was deemed unnecessary to solve the actual problem since all we cared about were the numbers. There were really no discussions or considerations in my math classes about how Indigenous people view math differently, or any culture for that matter.

It is very important to consider that mathematics looks different within other cultures. In the reading “Teaching mathematics and the Inuit community” by Poirier, there is a focus on Inuit mathematics and its many aspects. It is described that “mathematics is a cultural product that takes many different forms” (Poirier, 2007, p. 56). This is not something that we hear very often. The fact that I had very little to no previous knowledge about the different approaches to math says a lot in itself when it comes to this knowledge.

There are many different ways in which Inuit mathematics challenges Eurocentric ideas about the purposes of mathematics and the way we learn it. It is interesting that generally, we are often told that mathematics is a universal language, but now we see that this is being challenged, specifically we see this through understanding Inuit mathematics. Poirier states that “different cultures have developed different mathematical tools according to their needs and their environment” (Poirier, 2007, p. 54). Even though mathematics in all cultures might share similar general domains, each culture has its own way of approaching them. With this being said, after understanding a lot of detail about Inuit mathematics, we can see how it differs from Eurocentric ideas. One specific way that Inuit mathematics challenges these traditional ideas is seen within the purpose of math, being that their daily lives are completely separate from the math that they do in school. It is stated that “they do not perceive mathematics as something that can help them solve everyday problems” (Poirier, 2007, p. 55). In contrast, the Eurocentric ideas propose that math is directly related to our daily lives and we are taught that math will be used in our daily lives in the future. Another way that Inuit mathematics challenges the Eurocentric system is through their specific understandings of math, including things such as counting, localization, and measuring. They express numbers orally, they focus on developing a good sense of space, and their measurements are often done using body parts along with their calendar being based on natural events. These are all different from the Eurocentric ideas which are more linear and structured. Finally, another way that Inuit mathematics challenges Eurocentric ideas is through the teaching methods. It is said that “traditional Inuit teaching is based on observing an elder or listening to enigmas” (Poirier, 2007, p. 55). The traditional Eurocentric education system has a focus on note taking and practice done on paper rather than the ‘natural’ way Inuit children learn. After seeing all of these differences and how math can vary between cultures, we can see why it is important to stop viewing math as being a universal topic that is the same everywhere. We must find ways to demonstrate this to students.

References:

Little Bear, L. (2000). Jagged Worldviews Colliding. In M. Batiste (Ed.), Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision (pp. 77-85). UBC Press.

Poirier, L. (2007). Teaching mathematics and the Inuit community. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 7(1), p. 53-67.

When it comes to Treaty Education, unfortunately it is not often seen as being very important in terms of the incorporation of it in the classroom. This has been the case for a while now, being that Indigenous ways of knowing are often ignored or forgotten. Although, as we progress in education, we do see many improvements when it comes to Treaty Education. Within the readings and viewings, we can understand just how important it is to include these topics and forms of knowledge. This inclusion of Treaty Education and First Nations, Metis, and Inuit (FNMI) Content and Perspectives is necessary as a way of honouring the treaties today. In my past experiences in elementary and high school, there was often some kind of incorporation of Treaty Education, but the purposes of this were unclear to us at the time. We very rarely did a territorial acknowledgement, but if it was ever done, not many students knew the importance of it because it was just stated without any background information. The recognition of treaty territory and territorial acknowledgement is important not only for Indigenous people, but also for all of us who are settlers. This is why we, as educators, must make it a priority to efficiently deliver Treaty Education and Indigenous perspectives to all of our students.

This topic can be hard to approach, but the purpose of teaching Treaty Ed or FNMI Content and Perspectives where there are few or no First Nations, Metis, Inuit peoples is important to recognize if you are having a difficult time addressing this with students. In the video, “On What Terms Can We Speak” by Dwayne Donald, he describes how the situation we are in now should involve educators teaching Indigenous perspectives, but he states that teachers “are in a situation where they really don’t know anything about them” (Donald, 2010). This is only a small part of the problem seen today when it comes to Treaty Education. Donald also mentions how people rarely ever know what traditional territory they are on, which just emphasizes why there is the need to include these topics for the development of a better understanding. He says that there are still people who believe that Indignenous people need to “just get over it.” With this being said, there is also the “idea that aboriginal students don’t do very well in school because of culture” (Donald, 2010). This is because their success rates are often based on their culture. In the video, “ECS 210 8.2 – Claire Intro” by Claire Kreuger, she makes a similar point and says that “we need to stop making racism and colonialism our underlying curriculum” (Kreuger, 2017). It is as if there is the inability to comprehend Indigenous issues today. Upon understanding all of these problems that still exist in society today, Indigenous perspectives are seen as a curricular and pedagogical imperative. In this sense, it is important for non-Indigenous students to be aware of their position within it all as well. As explained by Kreuger, a majority of her students are white, so many educators took this as a way of avoiding Treaty Education because they didn’t see it as necessary if there were little to no Indigenous students, which is similar to what you are experiencing. I agree with Kruger, as she takes this situation of few to no Indigenous students as one that needs more effort into the cultural programming, teaching histories, and building relationships. With most of her students being settlers, they know very little about the concepts of Treaty Education, like your students. The Indigenous students are the ones who already have knowledge about their culture, so it becomes important for non-Indigenous students to understand this as well. This is something that you must do with great amounts of enthusiasm and detail to ensure students understand. This is the only way that we can see Indigenous peoples relations with non-Indigenous peoples progressing as we go forward, like Donald mentioned.

In terms of what it means for my understanding of curriculum that “we are all treaty people,” I see this phrase as holding a lot of importance. This statement is something that I have heard often in the past few years and it makes it clear that Treaty Education is not only important for Indigenous students, but it is important for everyone. It shows that we all have treaty rights and responsibilities which is what you need to introduce to your students. They must become aware of the role that they play in working towards a better future. It is important that you and I take the responsibility of understanding all aspects of Canada’s history so that as educators, we can continue to educate people on this topic. In regards to the curriculum, we cannot skip over the aspects that tend to Indigenous perspectives because instead, we must dive deep into it, no matter the cultural background of our students. In your situation, it is also important to help fellow educators understand the concept that “we are all treaty people” if they might have the wrong ideas to begin with. In the reading “We Are All Treaty People: The Contemporary Countenance of Canadian Curriculum Studies” by Cynthia Chambers, she states that “the treaties are a story we share” (Chambers, p. 29). I find this idea to be a good way of showing students how history and Treaty Education is important for us all to be aware of, being that it is something we share. Chambers mentions how we must listen to each other’s stories and learn from each other’s experiences to not lose the importance of concepts that are a part of Treaty Education. This is not only the history of Indigenous peoples, it is the history of all of us.

References:

Chambers, C. “We Are All Treaty People”: The Contemporary Countenance of Canadian Curriculum Studies, pp. 23-38, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RpFQAVShNlNLA9u6aXv7udGnzTGk5LNN/view

Claire Kreuger. (2017). ECS 210 8.2 – Claire Intro. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWY_X-ikmaw

Dwayne Donald. (2010, September 24). On What Terms Can We Speak? [Video]. Vimeo. https://vimeo.com/15264558