Here is my Summary of Learning video. Thank you all for the wonderful discussions and learnings throughout the semester!
Category: ECS203 (Page 1 of 2)
Mathematics is an interesting subject. Similar to the sciences, math is viewed as objective; everything is solvable using the correct formula and assuming the information required is provided. However, this introduces a form of oppressive learning into the classroom. I can recall multiple times in my AP Math courses where I would be marked incorrect for solving a question in an incorrect way, whether it be through using the wrong formula or by doing my work in the wrong order. A term I love for this is “task failed successfully.” This describes arriving at the correct conclusion by doing the incorrect steps. By describing learning in mathematics as objective, students that are able to develop an understanding in a different way are simply incorrect. Learning in math is set on a one-track mindset; everyone should learn and understand it the same way. Sometimes the best method is not the easiest method for some learners, so teaching only the “right” way is oppressive to other ways of learning.
Inuit mathematics takes an interesting approach to learning by challenging Eurocentric ideas about the purposes of math and the ways of learning math. Rather than the universal “standard” numeral system of base-10, Inuit mathematics uses a base-20 numeral system. Students learn math in their “mother tongue” for the first three years of their education while also learning in their cultural styles and ways. Inuit mathematics also challenges Eurocentric ideas by focusing more on the practical and applicable uses of math. For example, traditional learning in Inuit culture helps children develop spatial representation that differs from children living in non-Inuit communities such as Toronto. A significant amount of Inuit learning is focused on engaging with or observing elders. Elders share great knowledge and wisdom with students. Inuit teachers explain that they do not ask students questions that they think the student does not have the answer for. The focus is to allow students to express what they do understand and know and the teachers to know what the students understand.
Inuit education, particularly in mathematics, takes an alternative approach to Eurocentric ways of knowing and understanding mathematics. Inuit mathematics uses a different counting system, the base-20 system, and they pair words to describe numbers. For example, 21 (twenty-one) is the phrase “Avatillu Atausirlu,” meaning “And twenty and one.” Additionally, traditional Inuit ways use a different style of measuring than the Eurocentric ways. Measuring time using a calendar is much different; Inuit traditional ways are based around events. The word for September in Inuktitut means “when the caribou’s antlers lose their velvet” and the number of days changes based on how long it takes for the caribou to lose the velvet on their antlers.
Preserving culture is vital to decolonization. Learning and understanding Inuit and other Indigenous ways of knowing is incredibly interesting; being able to compare my understanding to others is eye-opening. The Inuit ways of knowing are very different from the “universal” and Eurocentric ways of mathematics. In most of the world, math is viewed as objective; there is one way of using numbers and applying math. Inuit mathematics takes a different approach that is much more practical and applicable to their personal and daily lives, while Eurocentric ways of math are different and not nearly as practical. We must understand that there are always different approaches to anything, and we must respect that others will use different methods.
Understanding how to engage multilingual students is an important aspect of inclusivity in the classroom. Students should be encouraged to express themselves, which includes speech and language. But how can we as teachers encourage and engage multilingual students?
Multilingual students introduce a strong personal and educational asset to a classroom. Multilingual students should be encouraged to research and write in both their own and the school’s language to develop a connection between the languages they engage with. As teachers, we can invite students to share some words from their home languages and explain what the words mean and why they selected those words. Students and teachers can learn new words from different languages and develop simple speech in different languages. Teachers can also organize community language meetings to encourage interactions between different languages and cultures.
Teachers should always promote the school as a safe and comfortable atmosphere for everyone. Students hold their own personal assets and skills. We can encourage students to share their knowledge and develop a connection between students’ lives and their education. By acknowledging the different languages spoken in a community, students are presented with the opportunity to explore and learn beyond the realm of the classroom and engage with different languages and cultures.
As addressed in the Saskatchewan Ministry of Education publication Deepening the Discussion, schools are a safe place where discrimination is not accepted. “Students who experience discrimination, whether it is based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, ethnicity or culture, have a legal right to be safe and protected in schools.” Not only is discrimination and oppressive behaviour unacceptable, but students have a legal right to be safe and protected in schools. However, the system itself is oppressive. Reports find that an alarming amount of students hear homophobic comments and rumours and witness or experience bullying relating to sexual orientation or identity. Although schools are supposed to be safe spaces for everyone, it is apparent that 2SLGBTQ issues (such as harassment) are still prevalent and are being improperly addressed. So how do we go about addressing these issues, as well as the issues sewn deeply into the education system?
One of the most forward routes to addressing systematic oppression in the education system is at the core of what we are teaching. We as teachers hold a powerful position in young lives; we can influence students very easily, so we should use this power to develop respect. We can express to students that there are different gender identities and sexual orientations and show respect to all students. Students must learn to respect everyone. As people, we can come together in unity not over similarities but over differences. One of the foundational points of confederation in Canada was strength in diversity, a point backed by George-Etienne Cartier. Although this point was in reference to building strength off the diversity of white French and English settlers, we can still use the idea today. We are stronger together than separated, and by teaching students that differences are not bad but rather provide opportunities for new views and values, we can encourage deeper connections between students.
There is still an issue rooted much deeper in the system. 2SLGBTQ teachers also experience oppression and discrimination. They are not heard; if they openly express their gender identities and sexual orientations, a wall is quickly built around them. They become an outsider, they become “the other.” It is an overall societal issue. Our society is under-educated about 2SLGBTQ people. Introducing queer education, or “queering the curriculum,” educates the next generation, the future, of our society. We should promote freedom of expression to older generations. Parents, grandparents, and students should be invited to these learning experiences so we can develop a wider understanding across our society. We should not aim to change others’ beliefs or values, but we should always attempt to educate others and develop respect and understanding for others.
As a student, I often heard other students say, “Why are we learning this?” One of the most common places to here this was in history; I understand why some students view history as a pointless subject, as the past is in the past. However, this logic is flawed. It is important for us as Canadians to understand the relevance of the past and the impacts the past has on the present and will continue to have on the future. Treaty education is vital for the future of Canada. It is important that we acknowledge the lands we live on and the history of colonization in Canada. Reflecting on the history of our nation is a major step toward decolonization.
I believe it is essential to identify the “why” when teaching any subject. For students to develop an understanding of new concepts, they must understand why they are learning said concepts. Treaty Education is a wonderful example of this; in the case of a community having few Indigenous peoples, students will inevitably ask, “Why are we learning this?” So, before introducing students to Treaty Education, educators should identify the significance of treaties to Canada and the history of the treaties, relationships built off of treaties, and the efforts to decolonize Canada. Teachers should also continue to learn and grow their knowledge about Treaty Education and decolonization to provide greater knowledge to students.
“We are all treaty people.” This quote inspires the discussion of Treaty Education. We, as Canadians in Saskatchewan, all live on treaty land. Saskatchewan is in Treaty 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 territories, and by acknowledging and understanding what these treaties mean, we as students, educators, and Canadian citizens can begin to work in collaboration with Indigenous and Metis nations to decolonize Canada. From my understanding, “We are all treaty people” means that we all interact based on the treaties made throughout the history of Canada. Treaties affect all Canadians, not only Indigenous peoples, and identifying this can help students and teachers alike connect with the idea of decolonizing. Acknowledging the treaties and the ways treaties affect lives in Canada works toward building relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples.
Julia Brook’s wonderful article “Placing elementary music education: a case study of a Canadian rural music program” explores the benefits of place-based education with a particular focus on social studies and arts. Brook explains that exposing students to ideas and traditions from nearby sources and their community can engage students and develop an understanding of the people and places around them. Place-based education presents an opportunity for students to engage with the local community and culture and encourages curiosity, personal expression, and reflective/critical thinking. Brook’s article explores the connection between place-based education and music education programmes in a rural Manitoba town. Creativity and active learning are emphasized for music education; students learning music by doing generate the opportunity to create and freely express the art of music as they learn. By incorporating local music, inviting local musicians, and teaching speech poems and folk songs, music education can directly engage with place-based learning. One distinguishing point of the article is that children demonstrate different cultures than adults; the age/generational difference creates a boundary that divides people by age, whether it is babies, toddlers, young children, teenagers, or adults. Engaging students with music from each of the “micro-cultures” in the community develop a representation for all. The engagement of the different cultures develops that sense of understanding for the community and the place they live in.
Place-based education is an incredible instrument for teachers who seek to engage their students with the surrounding environment. I thoroughly enjoyed Brook’s article because it presents ideas for me to utilize in my future classrooms. As a social studies major, I will have countless opportunities to actively use place-based education; history is all around us, and understanding the history of the place we live in deeply connects us to the roots of the land. Field trips, Indigenous knowledge keepers, and local figures can all provide to creating a sense of place for my future students. Saskatchewan has multiple monumental locations and historically significant sites that can engage students with the land they live in. Indigenous knowledge keepers can share their connections to the land and the place they call home. Local figures, such as mayors, farmers, etc., can provide specifically local history to Regina, for example, directly engaging students in learning about their direct surroundings. Geography is a significant topic in understanding the importance of place in society. Place is beyond the concept of a location; it is also about one’s physical, emotional, and mental attachment to that location and the specific culture and impact of that place on a person’s life.
I hope to integrate music into my classroom, whether it be playing in the background while students work or if I can directly engage with it. Saskatchewan is home to an abundance of amazing artists, such as Colter Wall and The Dead South, just to name a few. I want to expose students to local arts and the history of their craft in hopes of inspiring students. If not to inspire, at the minimum, it will educate students about the culture and arts of Saskatchewan and develop a connection to the land, culture, and history.
Brook, J. (2013). Placing elementary music education: a case study of a Canadian rural music program. Music Education Research, 15(3), 290-303.
A. A. Akom discusses the mind-opening concept of Critical Hip Hop Pedagogy (CHHP) in the article Critical Hip Hop Pedagogy as a Form of Liberatory Praxis. Akom’s ideas and analysis of “hip hop pedagogy” form his Critical Hip Hop Pedagogy concept. Still, as he describes, the two differ based on five factors the CHHP actively engages with. The five factors are:
- Foregrounds race and racism and their intersectionality with other forms of oppression
- Challenges traditional paradigms, texts, and theories used to explain the experiences of students of color
- Centralizes experiential knowledge of students of color
- Emphasizes the commitment to social justice
- Encourages a transdisciplinary approach
Akom’s approach to utilizing hip-hop in the classroom offers the opportunity to engage openly with non-white cultures. As he explains, “aspects of youth culture in general, and aspects of white and Asian youth culture in particular, underwent a Black reincarnation via the hip-hop aesthetic” (Akom, 2009, pp. 53). But what does this mean for us as teachers?
Music, in all of its forms, is art. Storytelling and connections through similar experiences create an expressive avenue to draw listeners from all cultural backgrounds, locations, and races. Hip-hop stands out in this category; hip-hop in the 1990s was used as a device to express social discontent to a mass audience. Akom talks about several artists, such as KRS-One and dead prez, who address dissatisfaction with the education system. Hip-hop is a massive part of black culture in America but is also a part of American culture as a whole. We can actively see the issues these artists describe in schools; issues of racism, poverty, misogyny, and incarceration, but these artists also express positivity through love, hope, and joy. Hip-hop is not a malicious art meant to attack the system, but rather a roadway to pave a clearing for change. The power to deliver a strong message across a nation, or globally, allows that message to be heard, examined and understood, so opportunities for change are granted. Rappers and hip-hop artists are able to convey a message that makes sense and speaks to groups that both do and do not relate to the situations they describe. The connection generated between listeners is deeper than the music; the promotion of social justice by discussing societal issues actively engages the students with lives they may or may not live and experience. Hip-hop offers listeners, children, adults, students and teachers alike the opportunity to engage with critical thought and consciousness. Students are encouraged to examine everything and think about the deeper meanings. Examining hip-hop demonstrates the different and/or similar experiences others live through. The expression of discontent, oppression, and mistreatment does not outweigh the love and joy that bonds the artist and the audience. The shared stories and experiences open the audience’s mind to a new realm of very real issues in the world that not everyone experiences.
Below I included the link to a song by rapper Hopsin. Hopsin discusses how the education system damages students’ ability to self-sustain because they are pushed into a world of social inequity and corporate greed that aims to outshine and shut down the general population to line their pockets. The main commentary focuses not on dissing education, the economy, or the government, but on outlining what Hopsin values but was not taught, and what he believes should be understood before students graduate high school.
Verse 2
“Man, can’t you see we’re robots who know not what we do when we got no shot – In the real world until we climb out of this ice cold box – Your whole life has been part of a whole plot to keep you at the bottom while they on top, stay quiet, then they won’t stop – They always tryna show us what we don’t got – They do it to all of us ’til we finally break and go cop a gold watch”
Article Reference
Akom A. (2009). Critical Hip Hop Pedagogy as a Form of Liberatory Praxis. Equity & Excellence in Education, 42(1), 52-66.
What is citizenship?
Citizenship to my knowledge is understanding the concepts of a society that one lives among. Citizenship goes beyond being a citizen of a country; I am a citizen of Canada, but does that mean I understand citizenship? No! My understanding of citizenship may vary from others, but this is what I believe to be citizenship. Citizenship is about the gathering of collective understandings and sharing of knowledge for the betterment of society. It is the sharing of interests and the development of understanding between differing people. Citizenship is the continuous growth of knowledge and education through civilization to expand the potential of the future.
As Joel Westheimer explores in this video, citizenship and education are very closely related. Joel explains that he wanted to teach kids that they played a role in history and society and that it is important for educators to identify this to students. As Joel states, “We have lost a historical purpose of public education which is to educate a democratic citizenry.” Joel heavily emphasizes the importance of educating everyone. As part of a democratic society, it is important that we teach students about politics and that differences are not bad. “We have to teach kids that intelligent, well-meaning adults differ on important matters of social concern.” Joel paraphrases a quote by Thomas Jefferson, saying, “If citizens are not well educated enough to govern their own affairs, the solution is not to take away that power of governance away from them, but to educate them.”
Mike Capello illustrates the importance of Treaty Education in this podcast. Capello discusses the concept of treaty education and relates it to ethical/treaty citizenship. He expresses the importance of engaging with decolonization, such as through Territorial Land Acknowledgements. As Capello explains Land Acknowledgements, “Those acknowledgements are not about the past, they’re in fact deeply about our future.” He further explains that we should not be saying land acknowledgements or engaging with decolonization because we have to, but because we have a vision for a greater future for Canada. Treaty Education plays a significant role in Canadian citizenship and the successful, equitable future of Canada.
In Ben Levin’s article “Curriculum Policy And The Politics of What Should Be Learned In Schools” he discusses how curricula are developed and implemented into the education system. Levin introduces the chapter by stating, “In this chapter, curriculum is defined as an official statement of what students are expected to know and be able to do” (Levin, 2008, pp. 8). With curriculum clearly defined, how are curricula developed and implemented?
Levin focuses heavily on the politics behind developing an official school curriculum. He says, “[…] curriculum developed by governments or other sanctioned authorities for standard use in schools across a state, province, or country” (Levin, 2008, pp. 7). Furthermore, Levin explains how public policies drive all rules and procedures of public sector activities, including education. Levin describes the development of a curriculum as “six general assertions” that guide the construction. These six assertions are voter interest, governments having limited control over the policy agenda, time constraints, “people and systems matter”, political opposition disturbances, and beliefs being more important than facts. Each of these assertions has a further depth that I would like to explore.
- Voter interest is the idea that public opinion impacts decisions made. This can cause complications because, as Levin puts it, “Education policy is particularly susceptible to this [input with lack of knowledge] situation as pretty well everyone has some experience of schooling and therefore opinions about how it ought to work” (Levin, 2008, pp. 10). Still, the government takes public thoughts into consideration to form curricula and policies.
- The government must choose to prioritize matters as they appear. Should a natural disaster occur or an economic downturn, the government must turn resources to address the immediate needs of the country. Therefore, the government only has limited control over the policy agenda. Issues that require immediate attention set back the rest of the agenda and can cause political discourse as setbacks worsen and issues become more complex.
- There is never enough time to do everything. The government is not immune to this fact of life and therefore must make tough decisions about what issues are most important. As Levin describes, “There is, consequently, never enough time to think about issues in sufficient depth” (Levin, 2008, pp. 12). The result of time constraints is quick or impromptu decisions, which is never ideal, but often there are no alternatives.
- People that hold critical positions often have a strong voice and input in politics. People in these positions hold significant power in what is made vocal and pushed toward policymaking. Additionally, the systems which are used to make these decisions are very important. “[…] the way in which issues come to decision-making bodies such as a Cabinet, and the kind of information that accompanies them are all important in shaping the way policies are constructed and delivered” (Levin, 2008, pp. 12). The structure of decision-making in politics is the core of making policies.
- Opposing political parties can cause disturbances in policy and decision-making. By introducing challenges and questioning each decision, both parties must make decisions based on what is believed to be best for the country and the people. However, challenging each decision slows down the development and implementation of such.
- The government caters to what the people want, sometimes more often than what they need. The idea that beliefs (wants) are more important than facts (needs) is a driving factor in policymaking. Levin explains, “I have had politicians tell me on various occasions that while the evidence I was presenting for a particular policy might be correct, the policy was not what people believed, wanted, or would accept” (Levin, 2008, pp. 13). Politicians play to the people; the people will be happier with the decisions they made/want than the ones the government insists are more beneficial but initially sound less appealing.
With all of these factors covered, what does this mean for the development and implementation of curricula? It means that the process is not as simple as “this needs to be changed, let’s do it.” Politics are driven by so many factors that complicate the process of designing policies in everything from the environment to finances and education to the justice system. Behind the scenes of politics are many more layers than the average person could imagine. Typically, decisions about curriculum are made under formal processes involving experts and sector representatives. By reviewing studies, examining the current curriculum, and addressing what must be changed, experts and government officials organize and develop new curricula to fit what is important for students to learn. There are multiple options on how to implement a new curriculum. As Levin explains, “Sometimes a new curriculum will be created and released to the system, while in other cases it may be released initially on a pilot basis and then revised to a final version” (Levin, 2008, pp. 17). The curriculum process can take several years from start to completion, but it is all in the means of developing a finished, revised curriculum that will benefit learners.
It is no surprise that developing and implementing new curricula can be convoluted. Prioritization is key in politics, and with all of the major difficulties a country can suffer, education typically is not put at the top of the list for revision and reconsideration. None of this is new to me; I enjoy studying politics and I fully understand why politicians must prioritize other events and issues. Like everything in life, some things are always going to be more important than others, especially when requiring an immediate response.
All of this leads to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Education’s 2013 article “Treaty Education Outcomes and Indicators.” Many connections can be made between these articles and the implementation of Treaty Education in Saskatchewan. Now understanding the complications that slow down the process of developing and implementing policies, one clear reason why Treaty Education in Saskatchewan is slow moving is due to the idea of education being lower on the list of prioritization. Therefore, the requirement to revamp the curriculum to address treaty education became a suddenly quick-moving issue, and as Levin explained, “There is, consequently, never enough time to think about issues in sufficient depth” (Levin, 2008, pp. 12). The lack of treaty education was rapidly addressed without deeply considering WHY treaty education is important. Treaty education feels empty, almost like it was thrown together to meet expectations, and often these expectations are not met in education. Tensions definitely played a role in the development of treaty education; the creation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada in 2008 probably impacted the decision to introduce treaty education. Another factor that added pressure and tension would be the beginning of decolonization in Canada, and more specifically in Education.
Levin, B. (2008). Curriculum policy and the politics of what should be learned in schools. In F. Connelly, M. He & J. Phillion (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 7 – 24). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Available online from: http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/16905_Chapter_1.pdf
Common sense is an interesting concept, as it is not as common as we believe. Common sense is objective; it is based on each individual’s background, upbringing, and culture among many other aspects. In education, many things seem to be common sense; as a student, it was common sense for me to walk into a classroom, sit down at a desk, and listen to the teacher. However, for some students, this is not “common sense.” As educators, we must analyze and reflect on these ideas of common sense in our society so we can provide quality, equal, and understandable education to our students.
Historically speaking, common sense has massively shifted. In the past, let’s say in 1942, it was common sense that if a student spoke back to a teacher or was disrespectful they would receive physical punishment. Today, this behaviour from a teacher is completely unacceptable and would result in severe consequences for the teacher. How does one define what a “good” student is, and what does it mean to be a “good” student according to common sense? In Kumashiro’s Against Common Sense, he discusses what it means to be a “good” student. Kumashiro shares his experience with a student he called “M”. M was a kindergarten student and was known to be troublesome. M was restless and had difficulties concentrating during times when he was expected to be seated and quiet. Kumashiro looked at M as a “bad” student, but as time went on he came to realize M was anything but that. M was not a “bad” student, but rather, found different approaches to learning and listening to be more effective. Instead of conforming to the “common sense” idea of being a “good” student, which Kumashiro describes as being able to passively take in information and silently listen to others share knowledge, M took the information in by asking questions and engaging with the learning. “I remember consistently feeling quite frustrated by such students, not only because I assumed that being a student required behaving and thinking in only certain ways, but also because I felt pressure from schools and society to produce this type of student,” (Kumashiro, pp. 21). It is unfair to assume each student will be the same and will conform to our understanding of common sense in learning, so we must adapt to their learning styles and teach in a way that can benefit all students.
Many writers and teachers share similar thoughts of common sense. In A History of Education by F.V.N Painter, he explains the ideas of education through his eyes. Painter’s book was released in 1886, nearly 150 years ago, yet the ideas similarly align with our common sense ideas of what makes a “good” student. The objective of education was to shape young thinkers into respectful, hard-working, considerate adults. “Thus, in its essential nature, education aims at developing a noble type of manhood; but it has also an external relation. Man has various labours and duties to perform in the world, which require special training, and a wide range of knowledge,” (Painter, pp. 3). Painter points out that “man” (speaking of humans, not exclusively men) must be prepared for future endeavours and work efforts. He is not concerned with HOW the students will learn, rather, he is only concerned with WHAT they will learn. The ideology behind this is extremely linear; students must learn “x” and if they are not understanding they are not “good” learners. Painter fails to recognize the variability in students, hence why I describe his thoughts as linear. Students that stray from his idea of a “good” student are the exact opposite. Unfortunately, this ideology is still present in today’s learning environment; many educators fail to understand how students learn in varying ways and how to adapt their learning styles to new and different teaching styles.
Students that are capable of sitting, listening, and understanding just by reading and hearing hold an enormous advantage. I, personally, am one of these students. I have the privilege of being able to sit in a classroom and listen to a lecture for two hours and recall most of the important points. However, I know many people who do not learn so easily. I have friends who could not learn the same way as me and teachers that could not adapt to their learning styles. The outcome was often poor grades and poor relationships between the students and teachers. Today, those friends are exceeding in hands-on jobs such as mechanics and welding. I find it unfair that students like them suffer because they are viewed as “bad” students when they are wonderful learners that struggle to adhere to the norm.
Educators need to recognize these patterns and break free from common sense understandings. Students need to receive attention at different levels, and every student should have an equal opportunity to learn whether they fit the common sense understanding of a “good” student or not. No student is a “good” or “bad” student so long as they are given the opportunity to learn and grow their mind.
Recent Comments