Kumashiro (2009) begins this section of Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice by describing the differences he experienced while living and teaching in Nepal compared to the Western World experiences. With this explanation from Kumashiro (2009), it is very clear that part of his definition of common-sense is that it is dependent on environment or culture. ‘Common-sense’ is not universally designed, but it is based around traditional ways of knowing and acting.
Additionally, Kumashiro (2009) explains that “common sense is not what should shape educational reform or curriculum design; it is what needs to be examined and challenged.”. This is one of the important reasons to pay attention to the common-sense items around us. There are many things we do or say in a school setting that aren’t necessarily inclusive due to our traditional sense. For example, oftentimes when a teacher requires help moving something considered heavy, they will ask the class “I’ll need some strong boys to come help me move these chairs”. What is this common-sense statement teaching our students? One thing that this obviously points out is a view that girls are not as strong as boys. Additionally, it can also provide this view that boys need a ‘break’ from their studies because they are active and louder while girls tend to be quieter and don’t need a break from the classroom setting. With this example, I’m hoping that it points out the fact that by paying attention to the common-sense sayings or actions in the classroom, we can make progress in creating an anti-oppressive classroom. As Kumashiro (2009) explains, “schools are always and already addressing oppression, often by reinforcing it or at least allowing it to continue playing out unchallenged, and often without realizing that they are doing so”. By being aware of these common-sense items, we can then begin improving the quality and experiences of students that are typically harmed by ‘common-sense’ in our schools. It is much easier to criticize ‘common-sense’ from a different location in the world, and to begin raising concerns because it doesn’t align with our own idea of what ‘common-sense’ should consist of. By critically examining our own ‘common-sense’ understandings, we can begin raising questions about whether they are useful, effective, or even have a purpose.
I believe that most of my educational experience from Kindergarten to Grade 12 was based around ‘common-sense’ ideas surrounding curriculum and pedagogy. In almost every class, it was taught as the traditional teacher at the front of the classroom lecturing about a topic from the curriculum while students wrote notes. After the designated unit was taught in this way, we were then expected to write a test or do an assignment that would help us demonstrate our knowledge. Although this pedagogy seems like ‘common-sense’, there is so much research to support that this is not the most effective way of teaching student’s information. Furthermore, the curriculum is what has been determined by the government and is what is required to be taught. As Kumashiro (2009) states, “curriculum has ‘traditionally’ consisted of these things. We do not often need to be told that teachers should teach in these ways and not those ways”. Curriculum is a ‘common-sense’ item that is quite set in stone as an expectation to be considered a professional and successful teacher.
Kumashiro. (2009). Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice, pp. XXIX – XLI