Author: Jonathon

I grew up going to a Catholic Elementary and Middle school, and for quite some time my views were quite narrow. I was taught religion, religious duties, and the perspective of the Catholic/Christian. In High School this changed, but with working at a Bible Camp in the summer, my views were continually justified for quite some time. I reaffirmed my taught narrow point of view by staying heavily involved in religion and its practices. It was only in my last year of High School where I began questioning what it was that I believed and questioning my own perspectives.

University further challenged my perspectives, and at this point in my life, I would no longer consider myself religious, conservative, or traditionalist, which is the perspective I had for most of my life. What I have learned through my studies, either for class or personal, have changed my mind on where I used to sit on my personal beliefs. My single story has now become two, which I greatly value and hope that it can be utilized in my classrooms.

I am a major proponent on challenging one’s beliefs, as once my beliefs were challenged, I was able to go through tremendous amounts of personal growth. By challenging your own beliefs, you are able to dig deeper into why you believe the things you do and understand why you believe them or if you ever did believe them in the first place. If a student can generate this personal growth and create understandings, then I believe one of my roles as an educator would be completed. For myself, my growth came from an understanding of history, and I would very much so like to pass this process on to others so they are able to find their own path in life, just as I have done.  

Leroy Little Bear states in his article that colonialism ‘tries to maintain a single social order by means of force and law, suppressing the diversity of human worldviews’. This statement is true and has been proven in a historical sense. What many do not realize is how deep the effects of colonialism are, and just how deep it penetrates our institutions, lifestyles, and culture. One way that this is present is through mathematics education. For my time in grade school, I never excelled at math. I did well enough, but it was a continual struggle for me. Math is called a ‘universal language’ with one way to get proper answers, but in my experience, I could never find a way to fully understand and interpret this language.

I realized math was not my strong suit early on. I struggled through assignments and usually handed them in last or late, I lagged in lessons, constantly had to take work home, and I dreaded answering questions on the board. I remember one Grade 3 class where I broke down crying at my desk after redoing a question on the board three times and still not getting the proper answer. I hadn’t reached that question in the handout, but my teacher insisted I do it on the board. Instead of assistance after this breakdown, I was told to do it at home. How does this help? Struggling through an assignment is one thing, but when a student cannot grasp core concepts and is always behind, how does making them do it at home help when the ways and methods my parents learned was phased out? All it did was make me feel as though I was dumb and make my peers mock me. There was no real attempt to help me or others who struggled with the content, as we were just supposed to ‘understand the content based off of how it is explained because there is only one right way’. In actuality, there are multiple ways to explain a question in mathematics with different approaches to achieve an answer, but by doing this there would be an upset in the classroom, as other practices of mathematics were deemed outdated and retired, so taking home an assignment could actually be more harmful to a student’s grades than by getting help by the teacher at school.

Shifting focus to a group that has challenged the colonial narrative in education, the Inuit people have challenged the ideas of mathematics being universal. There are some cultures and peoples, such as their own, that have different numeration systems that are not universal as well as worldviews and understandings that challenge the norm. Students are faced with two different numeration systems, a transition in language after a period of time, and cultural differences. The difference in culture is the largest and most prominent example in how the Inuit learn and understand mathematics, as culture dictates how one views the world, interacts with the world/others, and how they learn. With two clashing cultures, students are caught between two understandings and penalized for it. By allowing students to continue learning in their own language with their own cultural knowledge and systems prevents the significant culture clashes that take place and provides a more relevant and contextually accurate education for the students. Practices like this that challenge colonial thinking are increasingly important, as the colonial approach does not work for many, especially those who were victimized by it in the past.

The reach of colonialism is ever present and far reaching. As future educators, it is our job to challenge these approaches and find a way to teach that allows a multitude of understandings, beliefs, and cultural backgrounds to find relevance in education.

We are all Treaty People. Even if you live on unceded territory, Treaty still affects us all. Treaty laid out the framework for establishing a settler dominated society and forcing the Indigenous Peoples into small sections of the land they had previously been able to roam and live on freely. This is even worse on unceded territory. Education about Treaty and its people need to be taught because, like it or not, it is Canadian history which subsequently makes it all Canadians history.

To believe Treaty education and Indigenous/Métis/Inuit perspectives, ways of knowing, and worldviews as only something valuable to Indigenous students is providing a disservice to students. My own personal growth and understandings happened when I learned about Treaty, Indigenous History, and Indigenous ways of knowing. It was uncomfortable, challenging, upsetting, and made me incredibly frustrated. For awhile I resisted, which was natural, but once my Prof emailed me about a reflection imploring me to reread the chapter and actually listen to it, I was able to understand why this content and information was so relevant to education as a whole. It deconstructs the image of Canada that is engrained in students from the start of their educational journey.

As a Social Studies major, and an avid reader of history, I find it imperative that students learn about Treaty. Treaty gave way to the Reserve system (which has an interesting history to it and provided dangerous inspirations for a world leader during the Second World War), the Residential school system, the high rates of poverty seen in Indigenous populations, the Indigenous suicide endemic, and so many more ripple effects. It created the injustices in our society and the stereotypes that are peddled as truth. Treaty education, Indigenous/Métis/Inuit education, Indigenous ways of knowing education, etc. should be taught in schools and the Social Studies curriculum at least to challenge and break down these racist and ethnocentric views and ideologies that many people still believe to this day.

By introducing Treaty education and its counterparts, educators can challenge and deconstruct prior knowledge. While this type of learning is uncomfortable and faces resistance, it is necessary to help the next generations understand their history and the part everyone must play in Truth, Healing, and Reconciliation. While we may never be able to properly atone for the mistakes of those who came before us, we can help start the healing process. Treaty affects us all, and only until it is taught to those who do not believe it affects them can the restorative process occur.

As a student of history, I have always been fascinated by culture. With my specialization in Social Studies in my Education degree, I am privileged with being able to learn about past and present societies and cultures as well, which has added knowledge and ways of thinking to my daily life. Since starting my Education degree, I have thought of different ways to make my classroom more open, accessible, and relevant for any student who could come through its door.

I believe that all people should dig deeper into different worldviews to broaden their own understandings. This would be a priority in my classroom, especially since high school social studies and history courses revolve around cultures and oppression of culture. By imploring students to understand the cultures they are learning about, they can be more culturally aware and realize how relevant other perspectives outside the majority truly are.

Broadening understandings is a good start, but ultimately what I would like to achieve in my classroom is the challenging of preconceived beliefs and going beyond superficial cultural knowledge. By starting off with a basic understanding, students can begin to challenge themselves and others in a respectful and healthy way, which promotes a community of openness and continual learning, which I believe is conducive to a student’s personal growth. From this point, a student can begin the process of critiquing and analyzing the world and its systems, which would hopefully encourage them to enact social change.  

In all honesty, I do not know what my classroom will look like with my implementation of cultural relevance and encouragement of challenged ideals and preconceptions. There is lots I would like to do, but it is difficult to put into words. What I do see my classroom as in the future though is this: a place for students from all walks of life and lived experiences to share, discuss, and learn from each other, and this starts with students making meaning out of learning about and from other cultures and cultural histories.

Community and land connections are hugely important for students. For myself in high school, I was apart of the Outdoor Education program, which worked with local groups such as Kiwanis Club and the Salvation Army. We would also promote land and environment protection and maintenance, which we would promote through trip updates and our community involvement (use of recycled materials containers, pack in pack out, sustainable recycling, etc.). For myself, I’d like to be apart of a group similar to this as a teacher, as promoting this type of environmental and community connection is huge for all students.

Connecting to the land and where you live also helps a student grow and can help with learning. For a history class, especially history 12 in Saskatchewan, I would want to discuss with students the past of Treaty 4 land around Swift Current (if I end up teaching in Swift Current). By understanding the past and what happened, as well as learning about the people who lived in the area before us, I believe students could be able to understand their place in the world around them and be more observant and respectful to the land we live on.

How would a progressive educator go about implementing proper change in a system that is not generally trusted by the masses? Or a system that the public believes runs rampant with misinformation and remains immoral? Or a fractured institution? What about a system that achieves no common good? This is the struggle progressive educators face with implementing the internet into schools. There is no clear morals to the internet, as anyone with any belief can share their views, no matter how racist, intolerant, despicable, or false the statements may be. That is part of the struggle progressive educators face.

This type of shift has happened before, and it occurred about 120 years ago during the industrial revolution. For educators in that time, they were facing a factory style environment, as families had been industrialized and were lacking a connection with more ‘natural’ skills that had used to be commonplace. Students did not have a ‘real-life’ experience, and schools were the last place to create this, which was eventually adapted into the classroom by educators as a measure of self-preservation and defense.

With how prevalent the internet is, and the wealth of knowledge that comes with it, teachers nowadays are facing a major shift as well. To provide best for their students, teachers need to include technology into their classrooms, even if the internet is a maze of misinformation and information. By not allowing students to use technology, the internet, etc., teachers would be inhibiting their students from succeeding in the real world, as technological literacy is a must. Educators are in a tough, but similar spot as their counterparts in the late 20^th-21^st Centuries.

So, how do progressive educators implement a system that is as divisive, extremely useful, and important, yet equally dangerous and untrustworthy as the entire Internet? The global network is tricky, for reasons stated previously, and with the internet being a morality battleground, and each province in Canada having their own democratic aspirations as well as their own morals, there is no real cohesive answer as to how to approach this issue. Do school systems censor information, or let students see all of it? Is this morally sound? Is this oppressive? If you ask the internet, there would be a large amount of varying answers.

What is certain, is that we are in the midst of an era of needed change in education. If online literacy is not implemented, our students and next generation will suffer. There is no right way to implement online and technological literacy, as education, curriculum, and teaching is mired by politics and hidden agendas, and in regards to information and the idea of providing limitless amounts of it to students, whether it is good or bad, will be a battle that will unfold in front of educators for quite some time.

This blog post was inspired by Leonard J. Waks essay ‘John Dewey and the Challenge of Progressive Education’ in the International Journal of Progressive Education.

Citizenship education for myself is a bit disheartening, to say the least. At the time, when learning how to be a ‘good’ global citizen, I was taught to ‘reduce, reuse, and recycle’ to help the Earth, as well as ‘treat everyone the way you would like to be treated’, which we called the ‘golden rule’. There was also WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) displayed in every hallway of my Catholic Schools. The ideas expressed were more about being active community members, doing what was morally (and biblically) right, as well as being active in society. One aspect I was never taught was the justice-oriented citizen, which I now find odd as I was taught that the Saints and religious groups were fixing the issues of our world. Us, as students, were never taught that we could try to address change and look at long term solutions.

While I went to a Catholic school and worked at a Bible Camp for quite some time, I am no longer religious. I am stating this now because this may help explain my personal experiences with being a global citizen.

By intentionally leaving out justice-oriented citizen education in my K-8, as well as a strong emphasis on Christian values, I found myself very resistant to things that were deemed ‘progressive’ and, honestly, things that would benefit the general population. For about nine years I had been taught to be a good citizen within the Church community, and the global Church community. I had not been taught how to be a good citizen in the global community. This is due to the Catholic school system I was apart of having their own beliefs that they wanted to instill in their students, which I understand. I was molded into the citizen they wanted me to be. A Christ following, Church supporting, believer.

This changed in high school, or rather, my last year of high school. I had opened up a bit to other ideologies and wasn’t as dismissive of others, which was inspired in large part due to my History and Biology classes. They helped shake my core Christian beliefs and opened me up to other perspectives. Conversations late at night after rehearsals also gave me time to talk with my director, who was and still is a role model and friend I have. His encouragement to find out what it is I honestly believed is what pushed me to explore the foundational issues that affect not just myself, but the community and world around me. This one question by him started me on the path that I am on today, with me becoming more actively involved in politics, social issues, and seeking to understand issues as well as be a partner in finding solutions for these issues.

What these two approaches do is quite different, but both are understandable. My original citizenship approach was a very Conservative and Christian one, and the one that I am now apart of is a very Progressive one. Both approaches have an agenda they want to promote, and that will always be the case in education, but I believe that the lack of a justice-oriented citizen education is a huge detriment to a student because it doesn’t teach them that they can be instrumental in addressing things that they try to help alleviate or address.  

Everything is inherently political, and politics is a struggle between ideologies and power. Even to claim something is apolitical is a political act. Nothing escapes politics, as our world is shaped by ideologies and politics.

Curriculum is a difficult thing to construct, as everyone wants a say in how and what their children are being taught. This often results in ideological clashes, debates, and arguments to make sure that those deciding on what gets implemented in the curriculum meets their standard. Personal beliefs and agendas, as well as political alignments can strain this process even more so. The curriculum is a product of compromises between those designing it, and it is then left to the teachers to teach what is now included in the document.

What teachers teach in the curriculum is important, but what they tech outside of it is also greatly important as well. What is and is not planned, how every student interprets the material in front of them, and how the content affects interactions all play a role in what a student learns in the class. From personal experience, I have learned quite a bit about Canadian and world history from outside of class discussions with my former high school history teachers, which were instigated by curricular discussions in class. Most of these discussions were deeper dives into more intricate ideas and pushed me to questioning my own worldview, and when digging deeper, I often expanded my understandings and shook my own ways of knowing. Extra-curricular discussions can have a more profound effect than preplanned lectures and discussions, as they are freer flowing and are unrestricted by curricular constraints.

There will always be a place for curriculum, no matter how much it is influenced and politicized by those who want it to serve themselves, push an agenda, or even want a better future and broader understandings. It is not inherently bad that curriculum creation is political, what is bad is how politics can be used to create and construe something for other purposes. Past this, there will always be a place for extra curricular discussion and debate in the classroom, as it doesn’t have to follow the rules associated with curriculum building, and can often lead to deeper understandings made impossible by the extremely political document that is the curriculum.

For a complex topic such as this, with multiple approaches as well as interpretations, it is only fair that a longer discussion is warranted to take the proper time to unpack this topic.

To begin, it is important to understand that Queer students, educators, and parents will face immense challenges compared to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. Queerness is not represented in many cultural facets, and for a long time has been promoted as ‘taboo’. Queerness is not taboo and is entirely natural and healthy. Heterosexuality and being Cisgender are also natural and healthy, but have been promoted as the norm, which intentionally ostracizes those do not identify or conform to the created narrative of acceptability. Because anything other than being cisgender and heterosexual was promoted like this, anti-queer sentiments are all too common in our institutions, especially education. Queer students feel as though they are outsiders and are not allowed to share who they actually are with others, which is severely damaging to social development, self-acceptance, self-determination, and positive self-esteem/image. Deepening the Discussion, the source for this information thus far, has entire appendices devoted to how to make schools queer friendly and what type of oppression queer students/adults face daily in education. By including these appendices, educators in Saskatchewan can identify their own oppressive behaviour and in others, as well as understand what they can do to make their classroom a safe space for their queer students. By actively addressing oppressive tendencies and actions, while also finding ways to make the classroom safer and comfortable for all, schools can begin finding other ways in which to incorporate this type of safety and comfort into other aspects of education.

I have tended not to use possessive language in these posts and discussions, but for this section I will. The article Queering Curriculum Studies by Heather Sykes discusses what she has learned about heteronormativity, whiteness, and her beliefs of queerness in the classroom and how her privilege affects it as well. It’s a short piece, but important and filled with information.

So where do I come in with all of this? Well, first of all, I have to say initially that I will never be able to fully comprehend the struggles of someone who is queer, as I am a cisgender, heterosexual, white man who has never experienced true oppression or hatred from others about things that I could not change about myself or things that related to my sexuality, race, or sexual orientation. With all of this being said, I will continue to listen to those who are oppressed and who have been. I believe in respect and equality, and if these two basic things are not met in my classroom, I will make sure things change so that they are. I am also of the belief that someone’s race, sexuality, and sexual orientation will never negatively affect my life or anyone else, so why should I or anyone actively seek to oppress and harm those who are in the minority? I also want my students to be comfortable in the classroom, with their preferred pronouns being used, and the ability to learn from mistakes. Everyone will mess up at some point, so instead of getting angry, a gentle, knowledgeable, and friendly correction is something that I believe will go a long way for many, and myself included. To conclude this portion, I envision my classroom as one where students can be comfortable with themselves and who they truly are, and students are able to make mistakes and learn from them without being judged for it. Queerness is becoming more and more discussed in society, and while I may never understand what a queer person will go through, I want to do my part to make them feel comfortable and safe, as well as educate myself on how to be a better and stronger ally.

  I feel as though I have made it clear that I am willing to learn and accommodate for all students, which leads me to my last talking point. I believe educators are required to provide the duty of care for all students, as students from K-12 are developing physically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually, etc. and need as much support as possible to be comfortable with themselves, learn about themselves, and understand themselves. It is an educator’s job to help students learn, and to ensure they are in an environment that is conducive to learning. To create this type of an environment means that educators need to provide the best possible duty of care for their students, rather than suppress ways that they can express themselves.

To conclude this long discussion, the main point to bring away from these topics is simple: treat others with the respect, love, appreciation, patience, and understanding as you would expect to receive from others. Everyone is different, and that should be celebrated, not condemned. Queering the curriculum is about creating a safe, sustainable, non-oppressive learning environment for all, and this should be the priority for all, not just a few.

The idea of common sense and what makes a ‘good’ student have been prevalent in education for over 100 years. In The History of education by F.V.N. Painter his idea of a good student is a godly, intelligent, and hard working student who accepts the ‘right kind of knowledge’. In Kumashiro’s book, which I have referenced in previous discussions before, he describes his experiences working with students that didn’t fit his preconceived ideas of a ‘good’ student. Kumanshiro believed at this point in time that the ideal student accepted the ‘learning standards’ that he had set, as well as a student’s ability to complete and master the content and concepts in the syllabus. Both ideologies are set in a curricular belief that affects all beliefs or interpretations of curriculum, and that is curriculum as a product.

Curriculum as a product is inherently apart of all interpretations of curriculum, but the sole belief of curriculum to create a product is designed to help only the privileged to achieve success. With roots in Herbartianism, education as a product was originally designed to teach the English Canon and build strong, moral characters with classical knowledge. Only the elite could attend this type of schooling, and the context of what they were learning fit the people it was designed to teach in its era. When these beliefs were applied to universal schooling, its effectiveness collapsed due to the wider groups of students with a multitude of different backgrounds, and the system could not accommodate them. It simply does not fit the needs of every student. While not as evident today as it was in Painter’s time, Kumnshiro points out how he still believed the model student is one who follows instructions and the syllabus properly in line the teachers set goals. Both beliefs were challenged by some of Kumanshiro’s students, who challenged his way of thinking outright and made him question what he believes. Conformity and structure in product-based education doesn’t always work for a student, which means that students who cannot learn in the ‘common sense’ way that many people view education struggle more and more throughout their years in this type of education, when really, what they most likely need is a different approach to the same type of content, which is what Kumanshiro learned with his students M and N.

 Education is always changing and evolving, and it is important to learn that context will shape a student’s experience. Students will all learn in their own ways, and that the old ideology of common sense and what a good student is simply do not exist in a world that is attempting to be post-colonial.   

Decolonization is a difficult topic. Many do not understand what it means, or why it is necessary. As a student of history, I have paid close attention to decolonization and its current effect on what we would call a ‘postcolonial’ society. This ‘postcolonial’ world we are living in is not as decolonized as many in the media would like the general population to believe. We, as humans, still have a long way to go if we truly want to decolonize and revitalize multiculturalism in our education system, in our workforces, in our institutions, and in our general society. A section from The Decolonisation of the Curriculum Project mostly discusses the issues South African students faced and what decolonization means to the people there, but, there are many parallels with how both nations being former colonies of the British Empire and the issues the Black population faces there and what Canada’s Indigenous population faces here.

One major view that many African students shared was a lack of representation. In South African schools, a large portion of the student population was Black in 2015, while about 73% of teachers and professors were white. The lack of representation, and lack of shared experience between students and staff was polarizing for many students. Students also protested in 2015 and 2016 for the #Rhodesmustfall agenda. These protestors demanded the statue of Cecil John Rhodes, an imperialist, removed from the Cape Town University, which had a predominantly large Black population. They viewed this statue as a symbol of systemic/institutional racism and the exclusion Black students faced at the University. The students pushed for change and for visual decolonization, which set in motion institutional decolonization in the form of free first year of higher education across South Africa for families who made under R350 000. These were major steps toward further decolonization and reincorporating Black African experiences, perspectives, and culture back into a formerly colonist approach.

The protesters used their momentum to make change in their system. They had effectively addressed the major visual and institutional aspects of colonization, and then they set their eyes on the smaller but still impactful aspects of colonization: micro-aggressions and exclusions. In the words of one student: ‘It is also about laying bare the failures of the heterosexual, patriarchal, neoliberal capitalist values which have become so characteristic of the country’s universities.’ The protesters had addressed the inequalities and intricacies of post-apartheid Africa, and made it clear they wanted the failures of the system to inspire change for the system. They proved decolonization can work if the effort is put in. While there were many successes, this does not mean racism and discrimination are gone in South Africa, but it does mean that there is an active body combatting it and trying to change it.

This section of The Decolonisation of the Curriculum Project shows just how widespread the issues of colonization truly are in the former colonies and colonizer states. Canada is having issues with controversial founding figures in the same way South Africa did. There is also a lack of representation in education and in society for Indigenous Peoples just as there is in South Africa for their Black population. If Canadians are serious about decolonization, they should look at countries that have made progress towards it. In many cases, there is protest. Large, organized protest towards bourgeoisie and the ruling class, as they uphold the status quo and have the most control. In South Africa, the students protested and reclaimed the power they had lost. They found a way to shift the focus in a postcolonial society from colonialist ideologies and to a decolonized vision for the next generation. Canadians may approach the issue of decolonization differently that the people of South Africa, it is certain that there is a growing call to decolonize our society, and the first steps have been taken with the acknowledgement of a need for change.

Source: The Decolonisation of the Curriculum Project. (2019). AOSIS.