Post Discussion Kumashiro Reflections

After discussing Kumashiro (2004, Against Common Sense) I have some added perspectives on Kumashiro. We covered a few aspects related to passion, anger/resistance, and learning to make personal choices.

Passion – “We train who we are” was the comment from one participant, who used the analogy of training as a canoer–begin entirely consumed by training, nutrition, etc. What I remember most vividly was his description of the first time he went into the water each summer. I connected to that sense of passion, because I am much the same way when consumed with a passionate pursuit. I tend to throw myself completely into what I am doing, and shut other things out. The danger in that, for me, however, is that in my passionate pursuits, I get so focused that I don’t hear what others might be trying to say to me. Reflecting on it, I realize that my antennae needs to be up continually, so that I don’t shut out other voices around me.

Anger/resistance — Another participant shared her resistance and anger when discussing anti-oppressive education in university. She said it has taken a few years of the message to incubate/percolate, and now it is starting to make sense. It definitely took her out of her comfort zone. 

Learning to make personal choices — A comment that came up was that we as teachers are “control freaks, that’s why we went into teaching!”.  We discussed how important it is to allow children, for example, to make choices from an early age, or they do not know how to handle freedom when they are presented with it. We need to focus on the critical thinking skills so our learners can make their own choices.

Kumashiro Reflections

I have jotted quite a number of notes in my copy of Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice by Kevin Kumashiro (2004).  It took me some time to wrap my head around what the author was meaning by “common sense”, but I have interpreted it as the dominant feeling toward what makes effective education. While the book is primarily about education in the U.S., there are some similar leanings in Canada.  Recently, for example, I have heard a few radio talk shows on whether teachers should be monetarily rewarded for effective teaching, rather than receiving increments based on years of experience.

Kumashiro suggests that many times we are bound by “tradition, professionalism, morality, and normalcy” (p. xxxv). When he gives the example of why we believe schools should be open from September through June, I was reminded me of the furor we had in Manitoba when it was decided to always begin the school year after Labour Day. The reasoning was that this was holiday and family time, and therefore should not be disrupted by school. There was a huge resistance to having any less than 200 school days, even to the point of suggestions that the school day be extended by 15 minutes a day, that teachers attend Professional Development on Saturdays, etc. so that not one minute of the school time table would be diminished. I was very surprised that there was such a huge reaction to a seemingly small change.

Paradigm shifts always start with conversation. As more people enter into the dialogue, ideas gain momentum, bring more public awareness, and eventually, change. For this reason, I think the conversation about anti-oppressive education is needed. There is no doubt in my mind that many of my adult learners have experience oppressive education. An example is a personal experience that one of my learners had a few years back. He had moved into an urban community, and was in his first day in a secondary setting.  He was a First Nations student, and an East Indian student also started school that same day. Upon entering one class, the teacher took a look around, and told the two students that they were in the wrong class–they should be in the special education class. The learner shared with me that he had been one of the top students in his own school, and this was a severe blow to his confidence and his motivation. In this case, his educational experience clearly was oppressive.

The above example is probably extreme compared to most of the teachers Kumashiro is discussing who believe they are effective, inclusive, and professional, and who would never overtly act in that manner. He suggests, however, that we have more hidden curriculum than we think we do. I have to agree with him on that point. Because I teach mostly Aboriginal learners, I have to be very aware of word choice, biases, how material is presented, etc. I have had to use the critical and sociocultural lenses in working on my action research project. My comfort zone in teaching has been challenged through many of the articles I have read. I still am not sure how comfortable I am with the “activist” approach.  If Kumashiro is defining an activist as someone who acts to bring change, then I hope I am an activist. If his definition means deliberately choosing to take political stances and take an aggressive activist position, I am not sure how I feel about that. There was certainly much activism in the 1960’s, when political protests and rallies were common, in high school settings, but more often on university campuses.

Activists that inspire me are those students who follow their passion to bring change, such as the two young people who started in a small way, and have now gained national status as people who have taken action (see http://www.ryanswell.ca/; http://www.ladybugfoundation.ca/). I was very moved by both of these stories, and I always tell my students that one person can make a difference. Perhaps we could also take the positive stance of “empowering education” rather than just approaching it from the adversarial connotations of the term”anti-oppressive”.

Who is in my pocket?

My rock

We talked about our favourite things,

shared  stories . . .

I wanted to know about them.

who were these learners?

 

I remember telling her

she sounded like the rock in her family,

the person everyone looked to . . .

solid.

 

The phone rang . . .

She was no longer with us.

 

I was shaken.

 

Now she represents the rock

That instructs me,

tells me not take anything

or anyone for granted.

 

What is the hidden curriculum

my learners bring with them?

What can I learn?

How can I listen?

 

More questions than answers,

but I was awakened,

alerted to look beyond

a smiling face.

 

A rock of remembrance

We will not forget you.

 

*Deconstructing Engagement [Assignment Submission]

Journal response to article by Ann B. Vibert & Carolyn Shields, “Approaches to student engagement: Does ideology matter?” in McGill Journal of Education, Spring 2003(38) p. 221.

The authors have taken an action research approach to the whole idea of student engagement, and have raised some interesting questions around how we view student engagement using the methodology of critical and sociocultural theory. Their stated purpose was to challenge teachers to examine their own ideological lenses, or as I interpreted it, to expose the hidden curriculum that was part of their theory and practice.

I found this article very interesting, because it identified three lenses that are commonly used, and I could immediately pick out various aspects that relate directly to my Adult Basic Education (ABE) practice. For example, the “rational/technical” lens, according to the authors, describes the main purpose of education as “preparation for participation in the world . . .  and a successful competition in the labour market” (Student Engagement From Different Perspectives, para. 2). Our ABE Level Three Communications curriculum document (June 2004)  states that “ . . . the reasons adults provide for returning to school are . . . to obtain academic certification in order to access further training, to increase employability, and for personal satisfaction” (p. IV). The following page references all the skills that are required to be employable. At the same time, the document also states that it is working at viewing curriculum through a “multicultural” or “anti-racist lens”.

The second lens described, the interpretive/student-centred lens, is the one I discovered related most closely to the questions that I raised in regard to my teaching practice. In my action research, I have reviewed literature that uses this lens, but have also researched critical and socio-cultural theory. I find myself reacting to the idea that I am required to be a change agent as suggested by Friere (Pedagogy of the Oppressed), and yet, it is often the approach to which I am most drawn. My difficulty with the concept is that it still makes assumptions about what would be best for the oppressed. I think only the oppressed can really make that choice, although I also believe that much oppression is systemic, and requires political will and outside support for it to change. The whole discussion reminds me so much of the activism of the 1960’s. I was not complacent in those years, but I did not feel I needed to be out their waving placards.

That was the era of the rise of feminist thinking. I remember giving the whole issue a great deal of thought to see where my values and beliefs fit. My conclusion was that the most effective feminists were those who went ahead and did what they believed in without feeling they had to prove anything or get onto a platform. They acted on their beliefs and did amazing things. One such person was Mother Theresa.

The article has challenged me in the area of using a critical lens approach. I have an inner resistance to the radical elements, the activism. There is a radical side to my nature that bucks the status quo, but it has been tempered by life experience. To completely immerse myself in a critical mindframe involves constant deconstruction, re-evaluation, and to some degree, cynicism, which can focus too much on the negative (in my opinion). I like the concept of “hopeful practice” that has come up in the classroom discussion a few times this week. I also have been reminded of the need to focus on strengths rather than on deficits (Battiste, M., 1998. Enabling the autumn seed: Toward a decolonized approach to aboriginal knowledge, language, and education. Canadian Journal of Native Education 22 (1) p. 25).

Ultimately, I believe that ideology does matter, in the sense that you have to be aware of your values and beliefs, and realize that they will influence your teaching, regardless of how neutral or objective you might think you are. The learners in my classroom act as a filter to help me sort through where I am in my thinking, as long as I am willing to listen, and allow them to challenge me. I think I am edging toward using the critical lens more often in my instructional approach, and my research and reading has certainly made me more aware.

Heart to Heart

From July 5, 2011

Journal response to “The Heart of the Teacher” by Parker J. Palmer. Change. Nov/Dec 1997. Vol. 29, Issue 6.

I can identify with the author’s feelings about how  “ . . . command of content . . . always eludes our grasp”. . . I remember how I envied the 16th century writers and teachers who had much smaller bodies of work to deal with.  The absolute mass of writing out there boggles the mind. The idea of knowledge being content has become obsolete.

The whole concept of the teacher’s “heart” and the students’ “hearts” being central to teaching is one to which I adhere.  My classroom journaling activity this year was especially insightful in that it really helped me develop deeper relationships with my students—we looked forward to that daily interaction.  The concept of “relationship” also came through in my research on Aboriginal best practices.

In my opinion, a relationship embodies the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual—it fits in with my spiritual beliefs about having a vital love relationship with God.  My personal faith revolves around that relationship, and it is that relationship that gives me the desire to love people around me.  I believe true love for others involves all aspects of who we are as physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual beings.  We care for the whole person, not just one part.

That idea of joining student and teacher together in the “fabric of life” (Teaching Beyond Technique, para. 6) in a student -teacher connection is consoling. Many times I feel I have not spent enough time preparing, or I feel that I have not incorporated enough differentiated instruction. Palmer’s observations relieve me of some of that ‘ angst’.

When Palmer shared stories about his most outstanding teachers, I had to think about those who stood out for me. One was my Grade 3 teacher, who truly identified each of our individual gifts, and celebrated them along with us in our classroom. She nurtured us emotionally, and inspired us to excellence, while also feeding our spirits.  Another teacher was a high school Language Arts teacher who placed eight of us in a study, along with a tape recorder, and let us loose with Shakespeare. We laughed our way through Macbeth, and she told us that some of our most insightful comments came out of those moments of laughter.  She placed trust in us and our abilities, but she wasn’t always easy on us. One day she told me she marked a piece I had written in the evening, but in the cold light of morning realized my writing really had little substance, and revised her mark.  She was passionate about Language Arts, and I knew she cared about her students, so I could accept her criticism and learn from it.

Palmer’s description of educators’ emphasis on being “objective” is very much the experience I had in school, but changed by the time I was in university, where postmodern influences deconstructed the whole concept of objectivity. It is a relief to be able to say “I” in our AR projects.

Continued after Group Discussion July 6, 2011

We discussed a section from “When Teachers Lose Heart” about how we distance ourselves from students and from our hearts when we forget who we are.  Somehow we got into the idea of how art allows you to connect with your inner person, and Nancie talked about how some of her art students who felt they were not “artists” ended up being very surprised at what came out in their work.  We looked at some of their artwork (on Nancie`s computer), and it truly was amazing.

I had some questions about the section “Listening to the Teacher Within”. In the seventh paragraph, the author discusses how the student’s inward teacher is ignored.  I was confused as to whether the author was suggesting we all have a teacher within, and if so, how then is the teacher in us any different from the teacher in the students. We discussed the concept of each person having a vocation, and listening to the teacher within would be to listen to what your heart tells you to do.  Karen gave the example of her husband’s “job”, which he does during the day, and his “vocation”, which is what he truly loves to do, but which does not put bread and butter on the table.  Nadine suggested that through teaching, even if learners are not motivated, through the teacher’s passion, they begin to gain a new perspective.

We thought paragraph 13, in the same section, a bit extreme at first, but upon reflection, and sharing experiences, we agreed that the author’s analysis of being silenced or going into a deep depression (suicidal, is my interpretation) are both possibilities. I had to think about the high rate of suicides in Aboriginal communities.

I found the section “Institutions and the Human Heart” disturbing in its metaphorical language about wars. I felt that the author was writing out of a different context than mine, and therefore, his personal experience as a teacher may have been very traumatic.

In the end, what I took away from the reading were three main messages: to be open to your potential, to be willing to listen to yourself and your students, and to stay true to who you are.

Clearly confused

July 8 a.m. entry re class discussion:

Starting with the last first: It is clear that everything is still unclear about engagement. I enjoyed the fishbowl strategy that we used this morning. By participating in these different strategies in class, I am thinking of ways that I can adapt them and use them with my students.

I found the discussion around beliefs very interesting. There were some great suggestions around portfolios and job interviews. The think/pair activity was a good idea for getting us to move out of our comfort zones a bit (although as some suggested, it wasn’t a big stretch!). Both my partner and I picked relationships as our #1 foundation for teaching. We had two very diverse ways at looking at many of the other aspects, however. There were many new ideas, and my page is full of notes I jotted down from all the discussion this a.m.

Empathy — I had never thought of it as a skill before, but more in terms of a trait.  Skills, to me, are learned things, so, yes, we can learn to be emphathetic. The whole idea of nature/nurture comes out here.  Are we born with the ability to be empathetic, or is it a learned skill/trait.  I think it might be both.  Some of us are more sensitive to others naturally, I believe, based on our personalities. Others have to work harder at it. However, there is validity to the discussion about how our life experiences, family, environment shape us and bring out certain values in us.  In retrospect, I believe that empathy is more a learned skill, rather than an inborn trait. When people around you emphasize or model it from when you are young, it seems to be “natural”, when in fact, it is learned.

Choice/voice — My whole AR project is around bringing out student voice, and my awareness of this whole area has really increased through the action and research that I have already done. My challenge to myself at this time is learning more technical tools, such as incorporating music, sound, etc, doing more with videos and digital recordings. The last class  was a learning curve, and the learning is continuing. I would say that the nature/nurture thing also applies to technology! Those who are a younger generationwho have grown up with it, seem to find it almost as natural as breathing. I, having grown up old school, have to work at everything, and it takes me longer to learn it.  I still have huge privacy issues around it . . . but I will have to let go . . .

That’s all for today.

Back for class

I took a complete break from studies until returning. Reading over some blogs, as I finished reading Kumashiro for tomorrow. Will save those comments . . . we were told to just read . . . and checking to see if I can still blog!