Author: Jenna McAuley (Page 1 of 2)

My upbringing definitely had a part in shaping how I read the world. I am white and I grew up in a small town in Saskatchewan. I was surrounded by family members that had very conservative views and racist mindsets. I have had to grow and learn a lot to work against the ideas and behaviours that I was taught as a child. I am still having to actively work against biases that were ingrained in my mind at a young age. I recognize that my schooling never really offered any other perspective other than a Eurocentric one and this also affected how I read the world. It was not until University that I was really able to learn about new perspectives and challenge my personal biases. Over the years, I have grown and learned more about myself and what is happening around me, and while I feel that this has helped me unlearn some of my previous biases, I recognize that this has also created new biases. I realize that I now have political biases, which I believe are partly due to listening to the way my family can talk sometimes. I have had to fight hard to have my personal beliefs heard in my home and this means that it might be hard for me to work against these biases when I am teaching. I realize that being conservative does not mean you are a bad person, but my own past experiences have created that bias against conservatism. I think the best way to unlearn or work against biases is to research and learn about as many sides as possible. It can be easy to fall into a comfortable place, especially online, where everyone agrees with you. But it is important that we look for different opinions and perspectives to try to learn more about another side of the conversation.

Single stories can be a dangerous thing. We have learned many times in our education courses that it is incredibly important to learn about multiple perspectives. Chimamanda Adichie mentioned how her friend at University was shocked that she knew how to use a stove or had access to American music because she did not believe that Africa could be similar to America in any way. This struck a chord with me because as I was listening, I realized that my schooling had also helped create that single story in my mind. I never learned that Africa was in any way similar to Canada or America and it was always ingrained into my head that these places were not as progressive or as accomplished as Canada. It matters that students receive all the sides of a story because, as a student, I would have been able to question the things I was seeing and hearing in class. However, the Eurocentric truth was the only one that my school cared to show us. The European truth was the only one that mattered. Adichie also stated that if you start the story with the arrows of the Native Americans and not with the arrival of the British, you will have an entirely different story. This single story was also present in my own schooling. Our history lessons always started with the arrival of the British. We never actually learned about Indigenous peoples before the British arrived. My education never considered another side or another truth. It only ever focused on the European side of history and it is important to me that I do not do this with future students. I want to try my best to discuss other sides of the story. I want to do my part to make sure students do not only receive a single story.

My history of mathematics education focused entirely on Eurocentric mathematics. We never learned about anything other than Eurocentric mathematics. I do feel that this was oppressive and discriminating for other students in the class. We were forced to learn this way of math without ever considering the different ways that math exists in other cultures. Our math program did silence and suppress other perspectives and we were never given opportunities to look at different sources of mathematics. Even if we did projects including other cultures, such as Indigenous culture, we always had to relate it back to Eurocentric mathematics. We never actually learned about other sources of mathematics and this helped maintain the singular social order that Leroy Little Bear mentioned in his work. This expectation of knowing and excelling in Eurocentric math most likely made it much harder for students in my school who had come to Canada knowing a different source of mathematics.

One way Inuit mathematics challenges Eurocentric ideas surrounding mathematics is their system for expressing numbers orally. They do not have another way of representing numbers since their symbols were borrowed from the Europeans. However, each number can be expressed orally in different forms depending on the context. This means that the Inuktitut speaker must be mindful of being understood by others since the form of the number can change to show the context in which it is being used. With Eurocentric ideas of math, we do not have a way of changing the form of a word orally to show the context. Inuit mathematics also challenges the Eurocentric ways of learning about measuring time. In European mathematics, we measure the time using a calendar, such as the Gregorian calendar, that has set days and months. Inuit mathematics shows a different way of measuring time; they use a traditional calendar that is “based on natural, independently recurring yearly events” (Poirier 61). The names of the months come from animal activities or nature and the length of each month depends on how long that event takes. Their way of measuring the months is entirely different than the European way of doing so. A third way that Inuit mathematics challenges the Eurocentric ideas of mathematics is how they measure length. In European mathematics, tools such as rulers would be used to measure the length of something. This would give a precise measurement using centimetres or millimetres. However, Inuit peoples tend to use parts of their bodies, such as fingers and palms, to measure. This article also only mentions measuring length in practical situations, such as making clothing. This shows that Inuit mathematics is used in more practical and real-life situations than European mathematics. In fact, when discussing the use of European mathematics in Inuit communities Poirier stated that “they do not perceive mathematics as something that can help them solve everyday problems” (55). Poirier also stated in regards to Inuit mathematics that “different cultures. . . developed different mathematical tools according to their needs and their environment” (54). European mathematics has little practical use in one’s day-to-day life but Inuit mathematics was specifically designed to be useful in the day-to-day lives of Inuit peoples.

Treaty Ed is such an important part of any Canadian student’s education. We all live on treaty land so it benefits us all to learn about the history of treaties. It is important to help students and other teachers realize just how important it is for all of us to include FNMI content and treaty education. I would recommend sitting down with your coop teacher and having a conversation about the importance of learning about treaty education and FNMI content. I will mention some resources that may help you strengthen your reasoning for teaching this content to your students.

Every student can benefit from learning about FNMI content and perspectives even if none of them are First Nations, Metis, or Inuit peoples. In Dwayne Donald’s lecture, “On What Terms Can We Speak?”, he mentions that if we want to think about the future, we have to work backwards and carefully understand the past. We cannot move forward without looking back and a large part of Canada’s history involves FNMI perspectives as Canada is their homeland. This is why we don’t teach about other cultures and perspectives as much; they still have a homeland somewhere else that connects them to their heritage and culture. If we refuse to teach about FNMI perspectives and content then we are creating a separation between their homeland and their culture. As Claire Krueger discusses, teachers impress upon students who matters and who does not matter. If we only teach a white perspective, we are telling our students that FNMI perspectives do not matter and are not important. This affects students for their entire lives and creates a prejudice against FNMI peoples and their cultures. We help mould students as learners and as people. By not bothering to include FNMI content, we are teaching them that FNMI perspectives do not matter. FNMI content is important to teach no matter if there are few or no First Nations, Metis, or Inuit peoples in your class because cultural programming does not need to be aimed at students who already know all about what is being taught. Students who are not First Nations, Metis, or Inuit peoples should know and understand the things they know and understand.

We are all treaty people. We all live on treaty land so we should all do our part to learn about the history of treaties. The history of treaties is the history of Canada and we have a duty to our students to teach them about Canada’s history. If we are all treaty people, then our curriculum should reflect that and it should not be a choice to teach one perspective instead of another. All voices need to be heard and valued and that is what our curriculum should work to achieve.

Culturally relevant pedagogy is an important thing, especially as classrooms become more diverse. In my future classroom, culturally relevant pedagogy will have a strong place. I will find ways to have my students discover and learn about cultures that are different from their own and I will have them relate it back to their own culture by asking themselves questions like “how are they similar?” and “how are they different?” I will make it a priority to teach students about the experiences that people from racial groups different from their own. I will decorate my classroom with things that represent my students. I will allow them to discover things about their own culture and put them up for others to see if they wish to. Language is a large part of culture so I will do my best to incorporate languages from other communities in my teaching and I will expose my students to languages different from the ones they use. If I have students who speak another language, I will have things in my classroom that are in their other language to allow other students to learn more about it. I will adjust what I teach to make sure students learn about more than simply what they are comfortable with. If I have a classroom that is mostly white students, I will help them learn and understand more about other places and people of the world.

In order to contribute to the sense of place for my future students, I want to help students develop a sense of place through engagement in the lessons I teach and the relationships they create. I want them to learn through experiences which will help them create a deeper understanding. I will help contribute to the sense of place for students by giving them many opportunities to work and interact with each other in supportive ways. I will allow students input in as many lessons as I can and I will find ways to create learning opportunities from their own ideas. I will do my best to connect the lessons I teach in the classroom to their lives and community outside of school. I would make sure to respect the beliefs of the students and their families while also creating connections between their beliefs and the lessons in order to engage students. I will never force students to participate. If they are uncomfortable, I will try my best to never make them feel like they are required to participate. I will incorporate teachings from different cultures to help broaden students’ knowledge and experience. I will do everything I can to create a place for students that celebrates diversity and give a voice to diverse ideas.

I never thought of hip hop as a tool used in classrooms to promote social justice and youth activism, but reading this article really opened my eyes to the ways that hip hop can be beneficial in the classroom. Akom’s article argues that “the use of hip hop as a liberatory practice is rooted in the long history of the Black freedom struggle and the quest for self-determination for oppressed communities around the world” (Akom, p. 53). Hip hop connects to the history of black minority students. It allows them to learn about their own history through a medium that engages and interests them. Akon also mentions that hip hop is used to “[illuminate] problems of poverty, police brutality, patriarchy, misogyny, incarceration, racial discrimination” (Akon, p. 54). Hip hop artists use their medium to highlight problems within society that affect minority communities to this day. This is how it works to promote social justice. It creates a call to action for people viewing these artists’ work by encouraging them to do what they can to work towards social justice. Since this content appeals to students it leads to students learning more about social issues in the world and hopefully striving to make changes to make the world better.

Hip hop is related to the development of critical consciousness amongst students. Akon states that through the use of hip hop in curriculum, students will be participate in a curriculum that focuses on “youth culture and resistance, racial identity and social reproduction, and counter-narratives” (Akon p. 55). They will gain multiple perspectives of their world and “students of color [will be] able to provide alternative explanations of school inequality” (Akon, p. 55). It allows students to be exposed to different perspectives and contradictions within a system. It will also allow them to achieve a deep understanding of the world and the social issues within the world. They are taught to “confront unjust social and economic conditions,” through engagement in the real world issues that affect them in their everyday lives (Akon, p. 57). Using hip hop in the classroom allows students to relate deeply to what is being discussed and allows them to create connections between their lives and what they are learning.

References

A. A. Akom (2009) Critical Hip Hop Pedagogy as a Form of Liberatory Praxis, Equity & Excellence in Education, 42:1, 52-66, DOI: 10.1080/10665680802612519

I do not remember receiving much education on citizenship from my K-12 experience. For the most part, I remember being taught basic definitions of what a good citizen is in social studies. Every year, we would go over the same definition and we would never really expand on it or go beyond the basic things a person can do to be a good citizen. It was also never discussed in any other subject, only social studies. The types of citizenship we explored in class were mostly the participatory citizen and the personally responsible student. The personally responsible citizen was the one we discussed the most though. We would discuss how obeying laws, working and paying taxes, and being involved in the community by organizing or participating in community efforts were ways to be a good citizen. However, we never really discussed the justice-oriented citizen. We were never taught to look at why injustices happen and how to effect systemic change.

This approach of focusing on the personally responsible citizen has made certain things impossible in regards to citizenship. One of the things it has made impossible is leadership. Or, at least, the desire to lead since the personally responsible citizen focuses on participating in things that are already happening and focusing on making sure that I, as an individual, am being a law-abiding citizen and have good character. This approach also makes it impossible to create lasting change in systems because I am only worried about what I am doing and I am not actually looking at the root cause of problems in society. However, this approach does makes things possible. It makes it possible for me to get involved in my community by volunteering in times of need. It also makes it possible for me to focus on my own personality and character.

The approach we take to citizenship education says a lot about the place, what is valued, and what citizens the curriculum makers wish to create. It says a lot about the place, such as the political stance of the majority of the community. Places that are more conservative will most likely focus on only teaching the personally responsible citizen and some things about the participatory citizen. It likely will not focus on the justice-oriented citizen. Whereas more liberal places will probably focus on justice-oriented citizenship. It also says a lot about what curriculum makers value and what citizens they want to produce. If the curriculum makers focus on the personally responsible citizenship being taught, it most likely means that they value good character and behaviour over changing corrupt systems. They will want to create citizens that focus on the things they can do as an individual. They want citizens that will obey the law and never question anything. They will not want to create citizens that will question the people in power and try to change corrupt systems.

Curriculum may be the fundamental framing of schooling, but the decisions around curriculum are part of a larger conversation that extends beyond education. While it seems that deciding what is on a curriculum should only be influenced by education and nothing more, the decision of what is on the curriculum is often influenced by many other considerations and is actually very political. Educators do have a role in deciding what is on curriculum, but this role is not as large as one would think because there are so many other people and organizations that also have a part in it, including the government. In the first reading, Ben Levin highlights the relationship between politics and the curriculum. He states that the politics of curriculum involves two kinds of discussion, “the first concerns the overall shape of school curricula. . . . [and] the second kind of debate is over the content of particular subjects” (Levin 14). This means the curriculum can not only determine what subjects are taught in schools, but also what is taught in those subjects and when that curriculum is heavily influenced by politics and people in power, it often means that students will be presented with a set of ideologies and qualities that society and the people in power deem important. So even though school is often expected to allow students to create their own opinions about things, the reality is that the curriculum sometimes makes that challenging.

Curriculum is a complicated thing. Curriculum exists not only in the explicit form of a written out document but also in the hidden form that involves expectations of students’ behaviour and ideologies. As I stated in the last paragraph, curriculum can have a heavy influence on what students are taught to think and believe, especially in a political sense. This is part of what makes curriculum complicated. A teacher also has a heavy influence on the interpretation of lessons and what is taught in a day based on their own interpretation of the curriculum document. Based on my personal experience, I know that all teachers that teach the same subject will not teach it in the same way. Different teachers will interpret things differently and a teacher’s interpretation of and decisions on the curriculum will influence what the students will learn and what they will not learn.

The system that we teach in is inherently homophobic, transphobic, biphobic, and oppressive towards queer and trans people. The system stems from a long history of excluding and harassing people who do not fit the mould of a straight cis-gendered person. It is so important that, especially in today’s society, we are consistently moving towards a more accepting and inclusive way of teaching that allows for all students to succeed. One of the ways that we as teachers can begin to address the problems with our system of teaching is by noticing when heteronormative assumptions are being made, such as assuming all students are straight or have straight parents. By noticing when these assumptions are being made, we can actively avoid using and promoting them in our classrooms, whether it is with our own actions or sources we use in class. In “Deeping the Discussion,” they mention some examples of ways heterosexual privilege is recognized in schools:

• “assuming that students and their families are heterosexual;
• lacking policy to support students who are, or who are perceived to be, gender or sexually diverse;
• and, reinforcing heterosexism in curriculum, teaching (e.g., avoiding resources that depict same-sex families), environments, expectations, policies and laws by excluding the needs, concerns and life experiences of students and/or their families who are gender and sexually diverse” (p. 17).

By acknowledging these things and putting supports in place to help gender or sexually diverse students, it can help lessen the heteronormative assumptions that teachers and students can have, and the heterosexual privilege in the classroom.

To me, integrating queerness into curriculum studies means recognizing our own biases and privilege that have come from our previous education, and working to raise the voices of those that are excluded and discriminated against by listening to what they have to say. This can be done by ways that I mentioned in the previous paragraph, such as using videos and reading materials from queer authors that focus on queer topics. It also means incorporating it into everyday life in the classroom with visuals like posters or flags. It should become something that is not seen as out of the ordinary.

In my opinion, it is extremely important to provide the duty of care for all students, rather than maintain a classroom free from any notion of sexuality. When kids are young, they are just figuring themselves out and if they do not have someone there to guide them and provide support for them it can cause them to feel alone and completely lost. I believe all students should be able to learn about sexuality and identity because it is important to provide students with all the knowledge they need to make decisions about themselves. No student should ever feel wrong for speaking out about their sexuality because it is a part of them. Educating students can help create a safe space for all students where they feel they can express themselves freely as they grow and learn more about themselves. Keeping a classroom free of sexuality would simply create a space where students feel silenced and neglected and it is a teacher’s responsibility to make sure a student always feels welcome and accepted in life.

In order to be a “good” student according to commonsense, one must do what is expected of them by the school. For example, they need to listen quietly in class, follow instructions well, and perform well on exams. A “good” student is a student who does not question why things are done the way they are. As Kumashiro describes “learning meant completing certain assignments and repeating on exams the correct definitions or themes or analyses in a strong essay format, and the closer a student got to saying the right things in the right ways, the higher the student’s grade would be” (Kumashiro 21). “Good” students are the students who, when asked to, can best replicate the procedures and ideas taught in class.

There are students that are privileged by this definition of a good student. However, because of this definition, there are many children that will be labelled as a “bad” student for things that they may not understand or be able to control. Kids who benefit from this definition are the ones who can sit quietly without fidgeting, follow instructions easily with little help from the teacher, and can do well on tests and exams. This means that kids who tend to fidget or have trouble paying attention in class, such as kids with attention-deficit disorders will be deemed a “bad student” just because they may need a little bit more help than other students. Also, even if a child knows the material, if they do not perform well on tests or exams they will be deemed “bad students.” Kumashiro also mentions another reason that students will be seen as “bad.” He says, “addressing the unique learning styles, needs, and desires of students is important” (Kumashiro 22). Not all students learn the same way and students that do not learn well from lecturing will likely be left behind as that is the method of teaching that is most present in a lot of classrooms.

The idea of a “good” student has always been shaped by many historical factors. In the past, education was something that was only for white, English males. Woman were not allowed to receive an education and people who were not white were not seen as civilized enough to receive one either. Society wanted to create someone who could easily fit in with the rest of society and perform any job that was required of them. Painter proves this when he says, “education aims at developing a noble type of manhood. . . . Man has various labors and duties to perform in the world, which require special training, and a wide variety of knowledge” (Painter 3). School and knowledge was simply a way to train young men in order to make them working members of society, but since they wanted to create a noble man, anyone who was not white was deemed unfit for an education because it was believed they could never be civilized enough to be noble, working, members of society. This way of viewing a “good” student does still have an affect on education today because students are still expected to learn how to be functioning members of society and if teachers believe that they cannot do this, they are deemed a “bad” student.

Works Cited

Kumashiro (2010). Against Common Sense, Chapter 2 (pp. 19 – 33) – “Preparing Teachers for Crisis: What It Means to Be a Student”

Painter (1886). “A History of Education.” (pp.1-21)