Below is a video that describes what I have learned and how I have grown throughout this semester in ECS 203! I’m grateful to have had the opportunity to learn so much, and I am excited to continue on my path of becoming an aware and anti-oppressive educator:)
Author: Johnna Hertlein (Page 1 of 2)
As stated in “As a Sort of Blanket Term”: Qualitative Analysis of Queer Sexual Identity Marking, “Sexual orientation is a multi-faceted concept that reflects an individual’s personal romantic and sexual interests.”. Throughout the few readings, this has been highlighted and explained in a variety of ways that mark the importance of understanding why queerness is important topic to integrate into the classroom.
One of the important items to realize about identity is queer sexual identity marking. As described in “As a Sort of Blanket Term”: Qualitative Analysis of Queer Sexual Identity Marking, “Sexuality marking serves as a way to assert one’s sexuality to others through language, behavour, aesthetics, and/or other non-verbal cues”. In terms of heterosexual indivdiuals, they often choose to engage in heterosexual marking in cases where their sexual identity is questioned, challenged, or suggested to be something other than heterosexual. Simply put, this type of marking is done when a person would like to express they are not gay. Another type of sexuality marking is bisexual marking. This is characterized as, “being postured against negative stereotypes of bisexuality as unstable or a phase”, it also is against the idea that bisexual individuals are unable to be in commited partnerships. Before discussing what queer sexual identity marking is, it is important to understand what queer means. Historically, queer meant strange, odd, or suspicious, but this term now is an umbrella term that can be used to describe non-cisgender and non-heterosexual individuals or those that are considered outside traditional gende roles or sexual binaries. Although queer marking has similarities to other types of sexuality marking as it can be used to reference one’s sexual identity, it is a unique term. As stated in the paper, “With queer being a term that has no precise definition, using queer to mark one’s sexual identity does not disclose to others what one’s exact attractions are”. Due to the limited transparency this term gives, it allows for individuals to escape gendered sexual identity labels.
The next paper, Queering Curriculum Studies, the author discusses integrating queerness into curriculum studies. In the paper, Sykes describes this process as “A queering of curriculum studies has to deal with the White heteronormative imaginary that overpopulates curriculum studies and haunts queer stuies”. Important aspects of integrating queerness into curriculum studies is for it to occur as soon as possible, even if there are no “openly queer” students in the classroom. Doing this would look like having a pride flag openly in the classroom, introducing myself with pronouns, and avoiding grouping students by gender. This would sound like not using gendered terms like “guys” or “boys and girls” in the classroom and replacing it with terms like “everyone”, “grade 10s”, or “scientists. Additionally, it would also sound like stopping students from using discriminatory terms or speaking out about current news (positive or negative) that is about the queer community. Lastly, integrating queerness into my classroom will feel like an inclusive and safe place for students to be their authentic selves. Students will feel safe and able to talk to me about anything that concerns them or relates to themselves.
The last paper, Post-gay, Political, and Pieced Together- Queer Expectations of Straight Allies, discusses how allyship is not a fixed idea within the queer community. The variance of allyship comes from the variety of marginalized groups and the meaning that comes from that. In the paper the authors state that, “the term ‘allies’ refers to members of privileged identity groups who advocate for the rights of marginalized groups”. However, due to the multiple categories that queer indivdiuals fall in, those who are “othered” in additional ways will face more challenges and often expect different actions from their allies. In terms of being a teacher and showing my alliance for students, the paper speaks out on a great point, “Using an intersectional lens is key to examining how a constellation of social identities contributes to why queerness becomes more important to the self-concept for some people, whereas others, it is less so.”. To be an ally as a teacher is being able to understand how each student conceptualizes their queerness. If we fail to understand what the students expect due to their conceptualizations, we may be viewed as someone who isn’t an ally. Having open and honest communications with students will allow for determinations of how to properly support queer students. As described in the paper, “allyship has almost been reduced to an identity while it should be an action or a process”. One of the participants in the study explained that when teachers say they are an ally then proceed to only ask for pronouns, this isn’t enough to be considered an “ally” as using correct pronouns is just a necessary part of allyship. It is important as a teacher to “reduce cultural biases and institutional inequalities through actions”.
By reading these papers, it has helped me realize the importance of my role as a teacher and an ally to the queer community. I am so excited to get the chance to integrate these items into my classroom and continue to learn more on how to be the best ally for my students!
After reading through Chapter 7 Examples from English Literature by Kumashiro’s Against Common Sense, my upbringing/schooling shaping how I read the world and the biases and lenses that I bring to the classroom seem to be more apparent. I grew up in a small, extremely Christian based, white majority town and that definitely influenced parts of our education and student’s responses. I entered the world with a lot of biases towards people of colour, none that seemed to be a ‘problem’ in my own mind. Small stereotypes that seemed to be confirmed through my experiences after high-school, but as I grew and learned more, I realized how problematic some of these lenses are. One point that was definitely present in my classroom was the prevalence of Western literature in each classroom. As Kumashiro explains “When students read literature by only certain groups of people, they learn about only certain experiences and perspectives, especially those of groups that have traditionally been privileged in society.”. This was definitely the case in my classrooms which influenced how I looked at the world. Through a lot of educating myself, I was able to break through most of these single-sided biases that were created during my high-school experience. Also, a lot of the classes I have taken throughout my university experience have helped me challenge biases and lenses that I didn’t even know that I had. For example, I’m currently enrolled in ECS 303 and we had a reading about fat-phobia and how it affects students and their lives. I didn’t realize how biased our world is towards individuals who are ‘thin’. Keeping an open mind and working towards realizing how there are so many biases we can bring into the classroom is definitely one of the easiest ways to unlearn and work against these biases. If we continue to believe that what we currently know is always the right thing, we will never realize how biased these thoughts can actually be. It’s important to simply work on educating yourself everyday to learn what biases we may have and how we can unlearn them.
In Chimamanda Adichie’s talk, The Danger of a Single Story, she discusses how harmful the single story narrative can be. Single stories create stereotypes through incomplete stories which rob people of dignity while emphasizing how we are different rather than how we are similar. I think one of the most prevalent single stories were those surrounding Indigenous peoples. We often learned about their story through western literature which presents a completely different story than using literature from each perspective. The truth that mattered was the colonizer perspective because everyone in our classroom was part of settler families. Through our teachings of Indigenous peoples, it reinforced stereotypes and partial stories of them, placing the emphasis on how we are so different from ‘them’. Instead of using stories to empower and humanize the Indigenous population in Canada, they were used to emphasize and renew the stereotypes about this culture. I am definitely grateful that I have worked to unlearn these biases that were taught to me, but due to the complex and engrained nature of this single story in our country, I have so much more unlearning to do. I also have the responsibility to help students unlearn and relearn more than this single story narrative that is being told.
The reading by Leroy Little Bear titled Jagged worldviews colliding described the power of colonialism on the worldviews of society, including education. The teaching and learning of mathematics simply occurred through the lens of western education. The content we learned was strictly related to Western society and the way we were taught the information was very colonial. When we were learning, it was typically done in the “teacher stands at the front and lectures while students sit in neat tidy rows writing down the important information”. Directly after our learning period we would be sent to work on our assignment or practice questions, in an individual nature. This method of teaching was used throughout the entirety of math courses from Kindergarten to Grade 12 Calculus. The downfall to this method is that the majority of students have an extremely difficult time learning this way. This led to a pretty widespread hatred towards math. However, there is a simple fix to most of this methodology towards teaching mathematics. Including more interactive and engaging lessons, and allowing students to experience their learning through a variety of hands-on-activities. Instead of simply focusing on the objectives of teaching (quantity), there needs to be a switch to teaching quality lessons.
Additionally, in some of the higher-level mathematics courses we learn how to apply math to our current westernized society. At no point did we have any discussions surrounding Indigenous ways of knowing and understanding of mathematics. In all honesty, I didn’t even think to realize that there was a different way of understanding math. Due to colonization, I believe that we took on this view that Eurocentric knowledge of mathematics was the only way of knowing math while the fact is Indigenous groups have their own understandings of mathematics. Lastly, I would like to bring up the fact that singularity holds a strong grip over mathematics. Oftentimes, mathematical knowledge is presented as there’s only one answer and only one way to get that answer. It’s a simple and linear approach to achieving the goal: getting the right answer. In most cases, math isn’t that simple and there can be an entire variety of approaches that will allow students to arrive at the correct answer, even if it’s not “the teachers way”.
The second reading, Teaching mathematics and the Inuit community, by Poirer, introduced myself to understanding how different mathematics can look in other cultures. Specifically, this reading focused on the learning processes and understandings of math by Inuit peoples. This outlines many ways that Inuit mathematics challenges the Eurocentric ideas about the purposes of mathematics and the way that we learn it. Many of these differences occur in the ‘counting’ understanding of math. In Inuit teachings, math was traditionally an oral subject and in order for expression through characters, they had to borrow from the European numerical system. To further this, the numerical system is a base-20 numeral system with the numbers 20 and 400 being pivotal numbers. Due to the oral nature of mathematics, there are very precise languages used by the Inuit to describe the context in which a number is being used. For example, three objects are referred to as “pingasut” while the number three is referred to as “pingasuk”. The second understanding of math that differs between these two cultures is localization or spatial awareness. We often think of spatial awareness in different ways across cultures, but this isn’t something highlighted in the current education system. Inuit students learn about spatial awareness in ways that highlight their locations, such as being able to locate themselves in cases of survival. For example, in the case of a snow storm or limited visibility, students understand how they are able to locate the nearest point of safety. Lastly, another main point of differing understanding is through the measuring of different systems. In the western world, we are very definitive about our measurements, whether that is time or distance or clothing sizes. We use defined months and other defined times of measurement. However, in the case of the Inuit peoples, they have their own definition of measurements. For example, their year is measured by months, but the months are based around natural, independently occurring events. These events may vary in their length, such as the caribou shedding the velvet off their antlers. The time this takes may vary, but there is a mutual understanding of this measurement of time.
It is wrong for us to believe that mathematics is understood universally, and as future educators, we must take the time to learn and know other culture’s understandings of mathematics. It is also our duty to help convey this message to students through a variety of learning experiences.
Resources:
LittleBear, Leroy. “ Jagged Worldviews Colliding: Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision.” UBC Press, 2000, LittleBear2000JaggedWorldViewsColliding.pdf – Google Drive. Accessed 4 November 2021.
Poirier, Louise. “ Teaching Mathematics and the Inuit Community.” Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, vol. 7, no.1, 2007, pg. 53-67, Poirier(2007) Teaching mathematics and the Inuit community.pdf – Google Drive. Accessed 5 November 2021.
Learning about the importance of teaching Treaty Ed or FNMI content and perspectives’ importance became extremely apparent after the readings and viewings for this week. In Dwayne’s lecture, he brings up the current situation and history of disconnect between Europeans and Indigenous people that has led to Indigenous peoples having to face continued effects of colonialism. Additionally, the clear line of disconnect between these two groups needs to be realized and challenged by both Europeans and Indigenous peoples in order to begin building relationships and understandings of one another. In Chamber’s We are all Treaty People, it speaks to the importance and ways we can address these current issues. We must use decolonization and Treaty Education to bring down these barriers. Additionally, through these processes, Europeans must not forget to not only identify but confront the hold colonialism has in our current systems. In regard to the importance and purpose of ensuring that Treaty Education is taught in locations where there may be little to no Indigenous students present, it has to do with informing European students. It is crucial that students with European backgrounds understand this issue, how they are upholding colonialism, and how to deconstruct the dominant narratives in the world around them. By taking the time to educate these individuals on their role in treaties, we can push society to a place where we actually uphold our Treaty promises to Indigenous peoples. Additionally, as Dwayne explains, by doing this we can help repair the relationships that have been broken by the current and past parts of Canadian culture.
“We are all treaty people” is a common phrase and is a main goal of understanding for a few of the education classes at the University of Regina. The interactions and meanings that come along with this phrase are immense. It’s not simply words strung together for a type of pretend meaning or flashy statement when saying this it holds a lot of meaning. For me, being a treaty person has to do with my ties to European heritage. I have a responsibility to uphold my end of the treaty. Additionally, Indigenous peoples also have responsibilities that come along with the treaties. As stated, treaties are “a shared relationship from which both parties benefit and for which both bear responsibilities”. A large part of representing myself as a treaty person includes being educated in all of Canada’s history; furthermore, my responsibilities now lay farther than that as a future educator. I hold myself accountable for ensuring that I teach students, European and Indigenous, about the true and full history of Canada through Treaty Education. It also means that when an outcome in the curriculum has an indicator for Indigenous knowledge to be incorporated into teaching, that I won’t just glaze over it and label it as “unimportant” knowledge. I also have responsibilities to make Treaty Ed a priority in my classroom by incorporating other Indigenous ways of knowing into what the students will learn. This can easily be done by adding or modifying current indicators in a way that is suitable for students to still reach the outcome.
Chambers, Cynthia. “ We are all treaty People: The Contemporary Countenance of Canadian Curriculum Studies”, URCourses, Chambers_We are all treaty people.pdf – Google Drive
On what terms can we speak? Hosted by Dr. Dwayne Donald, 2010, Dwayne Donald – On What Terms Can We Speak? on Vimeo
In the article Culturally relevant pedagogy and critical literacy in diverse English classrooms: A case study of a secondary English teacher’s activism and agency it clearly outlines the important aspects of culturally relevant pedagogy while explaining what it could look like, sound like, and feel like. To begin, it’s important to note that one of the most important of using culturally relevant pedagogy is to want to create a socially just society. In the reading, Lopez explains a secondary highschool English teacher and how she used culturally relevant pedagogy. This teacher had her students engage with performance poetry while encouraging each student to share their thoughts about topics surrounding the social issues that students in their school face everyday because of their race. My future classroom will be a secondary science highschool setting, so introducing culturally relevant pedagogy will definitely pose a slight challenge. I think that allowing each student engage in a variety of cultures is vital to their success and their sense of belonging. In science classes, I believe it will be very important to include the Indigenous narratives of science, and to push that their way of knowing has just as much value as the Western ways of knowing. It’s important to teach students in meaningful ways, and to include a culturally diverse way of understanding the world around us, is just as important as the Western scientific way of knowing. Hopefully, this will allow students to feel more comfortable with their identities and view their culture in a positive light.
The second article that I read was Placing elementary music education: a case study of a Canadian rural music program. The author discussed the importance of place-based education and looked at this through the lens of music education. In the article the author explains “Connecting to the local gives students agency to showcase positive aspects of their places to the larger world, thus strengthening their connection to their local place and strengthening their connections to the various performance places”. The importance of including place-based learning is imperative to creating a sense of place for students. Although this article used music as their lens, I would like to consider this through the lens of a future science teacher as well. Luckily, science is all about learning about the world, so what better way for students to understand the world around them then actually experiencing their community and surrounding areas. Including items such as field trips and even just doing classes outside will help students create a better sense of belonging in their community. Additionally, combining culturally relevant pedagogy with place-based education will allow students that are culturally diverse to get an even deeper sense of connection with the material and the land. It’s beyond important to give students the chance to feel connected with their communities in ways that supports each students’ diverse background.
References:
Brook, J. (2013). Placing elementary music education: a case study of a Canadian rural music program. Music Education Research, 15(3), 290-303.
Lopez, A. (2011). Culturally relevant pedagogy and critical literacy in diverse English classrooms: A case study of a secondary English teacher’s activism and agency.English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(4), 75-93.
After reading John Dewey and the Challenge of Progressive Education, there is a lot to realize about how educational trends relate to the global network. A good way to view this trend is by beginning with the Industrial Revolution global context. During this time, education was formed and shaped to create good workers which meant that classrooms were designed similar to a factory setting: desks are in rows, a focus on authoritarian settings, and enforcing passive activities. While this education system was effective for its goal, Dewey had greater aspirations for what the classroom could look like. He says “A progressive education would thus require a thorough transformation of space and time utilization, authority relations, and design of school plants and learning activities”. Furthermore, his vision was a school design that focused on social and environmental factors with a wish that teachers would then criticize and redirect rather than instruct and monitor students. Unfortunately, due to the global network context at the time, this school system was never able to be implemented fully. Even though Dewey had a large influence, the only changes to the system often were to incorporate “active learning” practices by teachers. There were some changes to the education system, but these changes often came with new technological advances in society. For example, we now are able to use technology in the classroom as a tool for student learning. Using technology in the classroom does hold some criticism as there are individuals who feel as though when used too much, students are missing out on valuable environmental learning. These changes that have happened in the education system only “succeeded only in bringing education into line with the antidemocratic, hierarchical structures of industrial society”.
As stated in the paper:
“Economic globalization, information technology networks, and postindustrial “knowledge” workplaces have prompted new trends in education – cooperative, collaborative, and other forms of active learning; interdisciplinary group projects; Internet-based curricula; charter schools, and even virtual schools, school districts, and universities.”
As economic globalization has changed, so has the education system. However, due to the corporate nature of the Westernized world, there seem to be some developmental blocks in the education system. We know that “Schooling as a public enterprise advancing common goals is getting shoved aside by a neo-liberal regime seeking to privatize public education and impose corporation-operated charter schools emphasizing rote learning and standardized testing”. If we allow the global network to completely take over the education system, we will be denying individuals who live in poverty or simply can’t afford a privatized education system a chance to be a part of it. The education system is greatly influenced by government factors, but unfortunately there is a new trend where we choose to overlook the influence that corporate powers have over the government and therefore the public. Since we know that those in power have great influence over the education system, we also know that these are the individuals who need to be convinced to make positive changes within it. All current and future educators need to band together to ensure that the school systems are able to reform and develop in positive ways, rather than taking steps back.
Waks, L. (2013). John Dewey and the Challenge of Progressive Education. International Journal of Progressive Education, 9(1), 73-83.
As Levin explains in his paper Curriculum policy and the politics of what should be learned in schools, “Curriculum decisions and choices are shaped in large measure by other considerations – ideology, personal values, issues in the public domain, and interests”. To begin, Levin offered a description of what curriculum is: “Curriculum is defined as an official statement of what students are expected to know and be able to do”. With this definition in mind, we are able to look into all of the considerations and inputs that the government and public has on policies. One of the quotes that stuck out to me was Lasswell’s definition of politics “Who gets what?”; furthermore, this means that the political world is all about power and this power means they must determine who gets what and who doesn’t receive their request. In terms of education and curriculum development, this means that in some cases there may be funds removed from this area to give more attention to a different area of government. Each of our elected governments are pressured and also constrained by many things including the voters preferences, the timing of the election, and the views of key interest groups. Levin goes on to explain that “When a government does something people do not like, whether popular or not, it tends to get labelled as ideology rather than political will”. This then means that every step a government takes is scrutinized by the public eye, so they must pick and choose which items they truly want to pass. Additionally, educational policy is under a higher watch due to the fact that the majority of the public has been through the education system. This then causes people to form strong opinions without a large understanding of how the education system and policies should be working. Furthermore, The preferences given by the public may not always align, for example, in education people may desire more testing and more creativity or thinking they want tougher standards and more individualization all at the same time. Governments must find a way to accommodate these inconsistencies in some way. The media also has a large influence on government policies, as things that are played up in the media, whether it’s true or accurate, must be addressed quickly by the government and may lead to a policy or plan created.
There is also a belief that education policy should be based around the knowledge and experience of educators themselves. Unfortunately, as Levin explains “from a political perspective, however, evidence and experience are not enough to drive decisions, and they may be among the less important factors”. There are a lot of factors that go into curriculum politics due to the discussions surrounding what subjects should be included and the content that should go into those subjects. There is also increased interest for schools to be teaching students about types of social ills, bullying, equity, and many other societal interests. Oftentimes, people hold a belief that experts should be the creators of the curriculum; however, Levin explains why that isn’t the best idea. By using experts on a subject in the creation of curriculum a problem can arise. This problem is that the product may only be used by people with high levels of expertise, but most teachers will only have a limited background in that subject. I hadn’t given much thought to this previously, but what Levin is explaining makes complete sense. Teachers, especially those in elementary education, teach a variety of subjects which doesn’t allow for the expertise necessary to teach a curriculum created by experts on a subject. I previously thought that the creation of curriculum policies and education policies couldn’t be “that hard”, but after reading this article, I have realized that there are so many pieces that go into a slight change it seems impossible that curriculum reform and updates are even able to happen. There’s pressure from the government, experts, the public, and teachers which may not ever align with each other. It’s hard to choose who is “right” or what mix of ideas would make the best learning experience for students.
In The Saskatchewan Way: Professional-Led Curriculum Development there was a lot of discussion about the best way for curriculum to be made, and contrary to Levin’s beliefs, the Saskatchewan way believes that curriculum success lies in the hands of teachers. As it was put in the article, “The success of curriculum reforms largely rests on the shoulders of teachers, since they are the ones who put reform ideas into practice … [and] successful implementation of reforms depends on teachers’ ownership of and their knowledge and reform ideas”. This explanation makes a lot of sense considering the curriculum is the tool that teachers use in their classrooms to guide almost every lesson. They go on to explain that the degree of success that a curricula reform has is dependent on how involved the teachers are. The collaboration between teachers and other professionals in the development of curriculum allows for teachers to visualize that curriculum isn’t simply a “decision made from above”, but instead that it is a dynamic and relevant document that holds value in their classroom.
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.
The Saskatchewan Way: Professional-Led Curriculum Development. Available on-line from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FwQqfod6RqG_c73DP7a2kZGttSjDwghP/view
After going over the two readings: Kumashiro’s Preparing Students for Crisis: What it Means to be a Good Student and Painter’s A History of Education, there is a lot to think about in regard to what a “good” student is according to commonsense, who is privileged by this definition, and how is the “good” student shaped by historical factors. From my own experiences in elementary, highschool, and university the “good” student in the classroom is the student that actively engages in a lesson without being disruptive, gets good grades, and behaves according to what society wants.
Kumashiro explains that a “good” student is one that adheres to the values that mainstream society chooses to place on specific types of behaviour, knowledge, and skills. In examples from his previous teaching years these behaviours are exemplified. His student denoted ‘M’ was a stereotypically “bad” student because she didn’t enjoy conforming to the structure that the classroom often brings. She had a hard time sitting down and being quiet during class times, often would speak out of turn, and not want to share with other students. Stereotypically, she was a “bad” student. However, she is only considered a bad student due to the societal expectations of what a “good” student should look like. Additionally, good students and educated students can be viewed in a very similar manner. Kumashiro states: “educated students were those who ended the school year with more than they began, and effective teachers were those who helped fill students’ minds. Learning was about learning more.”. This often leads to the assumptions that teachers must only fulfill the expectations of having students develop more knowledge and learn more than they already knew. In the paper, Kumashiro goes on to discuss the feeling of discomfort when learning. Students come into the classroom with prior knowledge about concepts and situations, and there may be times when this prior knowledge may be challenged by what is being taught in the classroom. A “good” student would be one that acknowledges and desires to understand concepts to the expected or ‘status quo’.
The students that are privileged by this definition of a “good” student, are those that often are part of the status quo, or those who do not fall into the categories of the oppressed. Unfortunately, “whether in or out of schools, students were and are learning things that reinforce an oppressive status quo”. This statement by Kumashiro reinforces the idea that students, and even educators, that come from a place or a background of privilege are the ones that gain advantage from the current education system and are reaffirming oppressive narratives. Additionally, the definition of a “good” student also supports students that don’t have exceptionalities in the classroom. One example of this would be a student who has behavioural problems; furthermore, these students may attain amazing grades, but due to them not reaching the expectations of society for behaviour, they would be considered a “bad” student.
Historical factors have definitely shaped what a “good” student should look like in today’s society. As Painter explains, “education does not aim to develop a perfect man or woman, but to prepare its subjects for their place in the established order of things”. Although this quote doesn’t directly mention mainstream society or the status quo, it does mention that education is meant to be a preparation to enter the “established order of things”. Education has been viewed for a very long time as a way to prepare the younger people in civilization to enter society as functional members that are meeting the status quo. Painter is quite critical of other societies and how they chose to historically prepare their students to enter society, but fails to realize that Western cultures continued to approach education and creating the “good” student or functional member of society for decades.
Throughout this detailed exploration of what makes a “good” student and how the definition of a “good” student provides advantages to certain groups and was shaped by historical factors led to some large realizations. An educators job is not simply to create students that fit into society, it is an educators job to help students critically analyze the world around them and guide them towards challenging the status quo.
While looking through the scholars and the concepts available for this assignment, I decided to use Arlo Kempf’s book The Padagogy of Standardized Testing the Radical Impacts of Educational Standardization in the US and Canada. Specifically in this book, the chapter The School as a Factory Farm: All Testing All The Time caught my attention (https://link-springer-com.libproxy.uregina.ca/chapter/10.1057/9781137486653_2).
Kempf begins this chapter by discussing the fact that “testing is not the only important development underway in education”. This chapter continues by explaining that testing should be viewed as a technology that is available for use by teachers; furthermore, there are three ways that standardized testing can be understood. The first way describes standardized testing as an impartial neutral tool used for assessment while the second understanding revolves around the idea that it is an accepted value of society with particular biases. Lastly, standardized testing can be viewed as a critical approach that believes that the politics behind its development are equally important as its application. Kempf then goes on to state “All policy, all technology, and all curricula move in a particular direction and represent a certain political and/or ideological approach”. The quantity of standardized testing in Canada between grades three to twelve is on average three to five standardized tests. The more standardized testing practices in place result in more classroom time spent preparing for these tests and higher costs for the tests, and the United States has significantly more standardized tests than Canada.
In order for standardized tests to be objective they must be clear, accurate, and must be value-free (ensuring that social identity does not give advantages or disadvantages to students). Determining the objective of the test leads to the conclusion that they were not created to measure the quality of learning or teaching; however, they were designed to “the main objective of these tests is to rank, not to rate; to spread out the scores, not to gauge the quality of a given student or school”. It’s agreed that standardized testing fails to meet the standards of reliability and validity due to the norm-referenced design. Unfortunately, standardized testing practices fail to recognize differences, such as economic or cultural, amongst the student population. There seem to be direct correlations between low test scores and low income areas. Additionally, standardized testing is simply used to measure achievement which does not help teachers “plan a path forward”. The main idea behind standardized testing is the accountability it places on teachers, curriculum, and students to reach certain goals; however, there is no proof that it actually accomplishes these goals. Furthermore, school systems that are increasing the use of standardized testing are seeing a decline in academic performance.
My next steps for this assignment will be looking through the list of the authors and topics again to choose two more sources. I’m hoping that I will be able to touch on discussions about place-based curriculum as an alternative to a focus on standardized education. Additionally, I would also like to relate this critical summary to reconciliation and the curriculum or gender and the curriculum. I feel as though including these three as my focus for the critical summary will create connections of similarity and dissimilarity.
Kempf, A. (2016). The Pedagogy of Standardized Testing The Radical Impacts of Educational Standardization in the US and Canada (1st ed. 2016.. ed.).