“Violence is initiated by those who oppress, who exploit, who fail to recognize others as persons – not by those who are oppressed, exploited, and unrecognized” (Freire 1970 – Pedagogy of the Oppressed – 55).

The teaching practicum workshop held on November 10, 2006 could be considered as a discussion of ethics, or power, or pedagogy – any of those could work – and all of them were discussed in a kind of flow that would be expected with roots in Freire.

The facilitator of the afternoon did a fine job of conveying her message in an interactive – dynamic manner that worked well to bend and stretch and challenge the beliefs and baggage we, as students and learners, carry around with us in our inflated self-disillusionment.

The first thing we did was STAND UP – get the blood flowing – walk around – mingle – anything but sit In rows and listen to some know it all impart knowledge from the pulpit on the great unwashed, us, students of the practice of teaching. NO – we stood up, we used our bodies to describe where on a continuum we felt we were in regards to questions about our own personalities and preferences. Questions like; “are you a listener or a talker?” - to which we would respond by standing on one side of the room or the other – or in between if we felt we did each of these options an equal amount. Q2; “Do you prefer to work in groups or by yourself?” – Again we, the bodies in the room, would shuffle in one direction or another. During this exercise I found myself standing still a great deal a lot. Even during questions such as; “Are you a ‘shit disturber – or would you rather keep the peace?” – I still stood in the middle – perhaps subconsciously realizing and acknowledging that these options did not present or represent necessary binaries – and the fact that these questions were being asked sans-context. The issue of context was raised after the exercise, and yes, we all passively agreed that under differing circumstances we would likely act in a different manner. The issue of binaries came up as well, in terms of, considering the questions as more ‘than’ simply binaries. The questions would instead represent abstractions of continuum poles. There is no black and white – context needs to be established – and the choices presented too narrow of a range for a representation of anything but an illusional artificiality.

The next activity continued in a similar manner – there was a paper placed on the floor as representative of the center of our group’s circle. The object was to stand and move once again – in and out – sliding on a continuum. This time the questions were a bit more specific. I.e., “Would you feel comfortable teaching a class?” (Keep in mind that this is a teaching practicum workshop – most of the participants have done little or no formal classroom teaching) In response to this question we were to place our foot on the paper if we felt comfortable – however if this proposal stimulated anxiety in us, we would stand back – away form the paper – once again if you had some reservations, but were kind of comfortable you could stand in the middle. As for me – I stood on the paper, since for the last few months I have been mentally preparing to teach a class as a guest lecturer for my respective supervisor. Although, in fact, yes, I do have some anxiety, by standing on the paper it was my way of trying to convince myself that I don’t have any fear or anxiety, when in fact I do, I’m kind of scared, mostly I’m scared about being that guest lecturer that totally sucks, and is boring and nobody really wants to listen to. I guess I’m just most scared of being a cliché’ of myself. I want to be that teacher or that lecturer or that interactive learner who is comfortable – knowledgeable – but most importantly – flexible and reflexive. I want to be the cool teacher who people like and have fun with and are excited to be in class with. I want to challenge others to want to take part and be active in their own learning. So I guess I should learn to be more honest with myself and show that in fact I’m not entirely comfortable with teaching a class – yet – but maybe I can learn to be comfortable and prepared and engaging and exciting. This is probably why I have such a heavy focus on visual culture – because I feel that we are all so knowledgeable about the world we live in, as a built mental and physical environment – engineered for our consumption – opinions are the right of all who traverse these lines.

Later on in the workshop we actually did sit down after slightly too long of a time standing up. We moved onto the Power Flower. The power flower is basically another exercise in self-reflexivity on the road to examining one’s own conceptual baggage. Imagine a simple drawing of a flower – with a centre – from the centre a person is asked to draw petals – the petals are then considered as mini-continuums – the closer on the petal to the middle the more POWER is assumed – inversely, the farther from the middle- the less power. My flower looked something like this.
For gender = Male > Female
Sexual Orientation =
Class = Privileged > Poor
Relationship with Professor (As a TA) = LessLess (students)
Body Type = Upright/Bipedal > Immobile
Ability = Artificially, temporally Able > Disabled
Race = Fish n Chips = Of Color

After filling in these parameters the goal is to realize the amount of ‘power’ one has been privileged with or afforded. In my case I could clearly see that I have a boatload of power within the parameters of these questions. A main point was raised about ‘being white’ when you are white – it is the easiest thing in the world to ignore – you never really think about your whiteness – if for example you are not white – you may more critically be aware of the fact that you are not white. The privilege that is afforded a person because they are white is not ever realized from their position.

How does it feel being in the powerful positions?
Power = Guilt – the guilt of being ‘within’ any of the categories presented – this is a useful consideration – but probably not very productive – indeed one should be aware, but guilt may only work to reduce a persons ability to overcome.
Instead it was discussed that Power should not be seen or considered as a necessary point of guilt but rather it should be viewed as a RESPONSIBILITY.

Also while doing the POWER flower exercise it is useful to consider what petals you may willingly or unconsciously ‘neglect’ to include. The ‘blind spots’ of who we are, often it is within these categories that we posses the greatest power. (Categories of Privilege.)

In addition we need to be aware of the visibility and invisibility of the categories in whatever situation we are part of.

Part of the purpose of the Power flower exercise was to introduce the next topic; THE Power of Controversy.
I.e., in the classroom (for our contextual purposes).
-The conversation continued in the course of discussing how to handle or mediate or facilitate a controversy in the classroom and turn it into a real learning experience. The problem was presented; “Have you ever been present in the classroom where a real controversy broke out, and how was the situation handled, or not handled?”
In response to this question some of the participants in the room regaled us with some classroom horror stories, essentially highlighting ‘bad’ experiences. Thus as a group we sat and discussed and theorized the ways in which particular situations could be handled better – more effectively – equally – responsibly – in mind of bias – considering safety and confidentiality.
Some suggestions were; that an initial class should be the time and place for a critical reflexive discussion with the class about what is appropriate and not appropriate conduct in ‘this’ classroom setting. The issue of safety was of much concern – creating a ‘safe’ place, in which a ‘dialogue’ could be established, a dialogue which invariably is the crux of learning from this perspective. Knowing how to resolve disputes – by facilitating discussions that may become rather heated – especially among sensitive topics – (sensitive in the fact that the issue may be difficult to discuss because it causes pain of some sort to the participants).

At the end of the short 1.5 hour workshop I was left with a point of interest and importance that I was previously naïve towards; Identity affect the way that others interact with you – or feel comfortable with – or not comfortable with – the point being that self-reflexivity is very important and one should constantly be aware of their own identity and presumptions in any situation.

Additional resources:

http://www.edchange.org/multicultural/resources/self_critique.html

20 (Self-)Critical Things I Will Do to Be
a Better Multicultural Educator

Compiled by Paul Gorski for EdChange and the Multicultural Pavilion

1. I will learn to pronounce every student's full given name correctly. No student should need to shorten or change their names to make it easier to pronounce for me or their classmates. I will practice and learn every name, regardless of how difficult it feels or how time-consuming it becomes. That is the first step in being inclusive.

2. I will sacrifice the safety of my comfort zone by building a process for continually assessing, understanding, and challenging my biases and prejudices and how they impact my expectations for, and relationships with, all students, parents, and colleagues.

3. I will center student voices, interests, and experiences in and out of my classroom. Even while I talk passionately about being inclusive and student-centered in the classroom, I rarely include or center students in conversations about school reform. I must face this contradiction and rededicate to sharing power with my students.

4. I will engage in a self-reflective process to explore the ways in which my identity development impacts the way I see and experience different people.

5. I will invite critique from colleagues and accept it openly. I accept feedback very well until someone decides to offer me feedback. Though it's easy to become defensive in the face of critique, I will thank the person for their time and courage (because it's not easy to critique a colleague). The worst possible scenario is for people to stop providing me feedback, positive and negative.

6. I will never stop being a student. If I do not grow, learn, and change at the same rate the world around me is changing, then I necessarily lose touch with the lives and contexts of my students. I must continue to educate myself—to learn from the experiences of my students and their parents, to study current events and their relationship to what I am teaching, and to be challenged by a diversity of perspectives.

7. I will understand the relationship between INTENT and IMPACT. Often, and particularly when I'm in a situation in which I experience some level of privilege, I have the luxury of referring and responding only to what I intend, no matter what impact I have on somebody. I must take responsibility for and learn from my impact because most individual-level oppression is unintentional. But unintentional oppression hurts just as much as intentional oppression.

8. I will reject the myth of color-blindness. As painful as it may be to admit, I know that I react differently when I'm in a room full of people who share many dimensions of my identity than when I'm in a room full of people who are very different from me. I have to be open and honest about that, because those shifts inevitably inform the experiences of people in my classes or workshops. In addition, color-blindness denies people validation of their whole person.

9. I will recognize my own social identity group memberships and how they may affect my students' experiences and learning processes. People do not always experience me the way I intend them to, even if I am an active advocate for all my students. A student's initial reaction to me may be based on a lifetime of experiences, so I must try not to take such reactions personally.

10. I will build coalitions with teachers who are different from me (in terms of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, religion, first language, disability, and other identities). These can be valuable relationships of trust and honest critique. At the same time, I must not rely on other people to identify my weaknesses. In particular, in the areas of my identity around which I experience privilege, I must not rely on people from historically underprivileged groups to teach me how to improve myself (which is, in and of itself, a practice of privilege).

11. I will improve my skills as a facilitator, so when issues of diversity and equity do arise in the classroom, I can take advantage of the resulting educational opportunities. Too often, I allow these moments to slip away, either because I am uncomfortable with the topic or because I feel unprepared to effectively facilitate my students through it. (I often try to make myself feel better by suggesting that the students “aren't ready” to talk about racism or sexism, or whatever the topic might be, when it's more honest to say that I am not ready.) I will hone these skills so that I do not cheat my students out of important conversations and learning opportunities.

12. I will invite critique from my students, and when I do, I will dedicate to listening actively and modeling a willingness to be changed by their presence to the same extent they are necessarily changed by mine.

13. I will think critically about how my preferred learning styles impact my teaching style. I am usually thoughtful about diversifying my teaching style to address the needs of students with a variety of learning styles. Still, I tend to fall back on my most comfortable teaching style most often. I will fight this temptation and work harder to engage all of my students.

14. I will affirm and model appreciation for all forms of intelligence and the wide variety of ways students illustrate understanding and mastery of skills and knowledge.

15. I will reflect on my own experiences as a student and how they inform my teaching. Research indicates that my teaching is most closely informed by my own experiences as a student (even more so than my pre-service training). The practice of drawing on these experiences, positive and negative, provides important insights regarding my teaching practice.

16. I will encourage my students to think critically and ask critical questions about all information they receive including that which they receive from me.

17. I will challenge myself to take personal responsibility before looking for fault elsewhere. For example, if I have one student who is falling behind or being disruptive, I will consider what I am doing or not doing that may be contributing to their disengagement before problematizing their behavior or effort.

18. I will acknowledge my role as a social activist. My work changes lives, conferring upon me both tremendous power and tremendous responsibility. Even though I may not identify myself as a social activist, I know that the depth of my impact on society is profound, if only by the sheer number of lives I touch. I must acknowledge and draw on that power and responsibility as a frame for guiding my efforts toward equity and social justice in my work.

19. I will fight for equity for all underrepresented or disenfranchised students. Equity is not a game of choice—if I am to advocate education equity, I do not have the luxury of choosing who does or does not have access to it. For example, I cannot effectively fight for racial equity while I fail to confront gender inequity. And I can never be a real advocate for gender equity if I choose to duck the responsibility for ensuring equity for lesbian, gay, and bisexual students. When I find myself justifying my inattention to any group of disenfranchised students due to the worldview or value system into which I was socialized, I know that it is time to reevaluate that worldview or value system.

20. I will celebrate myself as an educator and total person. I can, and should, also celebrate every moment I spend in self-critique, however difficult and painful, because it will make me a better educator. And that is something to celebrate!



and



http://www.hrea.org/erc/Library/print.php?doc_id=2815&direct

Suggestions for teaching and learning about human rights in schools

Oct 19, 2006

Marking Essays

In essence, to leave a mark, your mark upon the page of a student.

As graduate assistants we are often found in the critical position of acting as an extension of a person, usually a professor. The key here is that, though we are charged to do the best we can in the most consistent and accurate way possible, the professor is ultimately the one with the real power. It is however our responsibility to ensure that we make the necessary arrangements and considerations to complete the task in a manner that is endorsed by our mentors.

It may be quite useful to meet with the professor after the papers have been handed in to work through a few essays together. In this way a discussion of relevant issues may be raised within the context of the particular papers at hand. Also, a sense of coherence and alignment may be established between those individuals who will be marking, usually separately, the stack of student written papers.

There may be instances where marking is made easier, such as easily quantifiable exams with multiple choice, fill-in-the-blanks, or even short answer. The issue at hand though, is the myriad of responses that are likely to be generated from questions that require an essay format.

Main concerns that have been raised regarding issues of paper grading have been; accuracy, consistency, fairness, and the detection of plagiarism. These issues were common among all who participated in our discussion of these issues. It seems that because these are major issues of concern for all who are involved in the process of granting grades, these issues must, for the marker, be constantly evaluated. In this sense it may be useful for the marker to address these issues prior to jumping right in. In my opinion, if these topics are considered and re-considered with regularity, they will be points of reflexivity, positively affecting the marker as they attempt to navigate their way through the marking process.

It has been said that marking essays that are subjectively and contextually ‘good’ or ‘bad,’ on either extreme on the continuum are ‘easy’ to grade. This is likely because they are distinct as being located within the tips and tails of the bell-curve. Due to our role as students, the opportunities that we have been afforded, and the ways in which we have been taught and conditioned to recognize certain characteristics, it is by these virtues that we ‘ought’ to be able to recognize ‘good’ and ‘bad’ essays from twenty paces away. If by some process of magik that we have arrived at this point in our academic careers without being steeped in this form of judgment then we may hold a ‘questionable’ or perhaps ‘queer’ position (apologies, that’s enough anti-hegemony for now).

The heart of the matter is, that great mass of writing that lay before you may present a more detailed challenge. This is the writing that is neither simply ‘good’ nor ‘bad,’ rather it is more ambivalent and difficult to categorize.

These difficulties arise due to the fact that the writing here may be less consistent regarding the general and widely ‘accepted rules’ of writing, while employing the English language. The issues of importance here are reflected in the authors command of these elements; Introduction, argument, grammar, spelling, flow, and conclusion. In regards to this quasi-definitive list of what’s important in a paper, the debate becomes quite contentious when attempts are made create a hierarchy of significance. While some may argue that grammar and spelling are of greatest importance, others may argue that argument and flow are to be considered over the other considerations.

The next major area of consideration for the marker is feedback: the issue of how to create feedback that is of use to the students. In this regard there are as many tactics of writing feedback as personalities producing papers. Individual writers often need individual responses; the comment, ‘good’ does little to engage the writer. A comment that asks the writer for an ‘expansion’ of a ‘good’ point may offer the writer a doorway into a deeper field of realization and critique.

In some instances it may be helpful to establish a grading chart to be used with each of the papers that are marked, in this way the inexperienced marker may use a tool to assist them to maintain those characteristics that were established above; accuracy, consistency, fairness, and the detection of plagiarism. In this way, introduction, argument, grammar, spelling, flow, and the conclusion, may be more easily identifiable, meaning that, for the marker it may become more easily quantifiable, also resulting in a feedback-system that becomes more easily justifiable for students wondering what areas they may have done well or not so well in. The importance here is to provide a system of support for students writing papers at any level, the assumption for the marker is that the student has a desire to learn and improve. It is imperative that these standards be established, implemented, regulated, questioned, improved and made into good practice by a marker.

In the end, after much difficulty and pain, the expectation is that the marker has procured a list of names with grades attached. The marker has had to make important decisions in each case regarding a) what grade the paper deserves, and b) why the paper deserved a particular grade. These questions are elemental to the process of marking assignments with the intent of establishing grades. The professor should be implored to ensure that their marker has done an accurate and fair job and ultimately approve the grades assigned by the marker. Thereby, at this stage of the game, should a major issue arise between the student and the grade that has been provided, the marker is protected by their justification of the two questions above, and if for some reason those do not seem to carry enough weight, the professor may need to intervene and carry out the process once again to ensure accuracy. In the end the final word shall be made by the individual in power, the professor.

Oct 10, 2006

Teaching Practicum Workshop: 1 October 5: 06

Teaching Dossier | Teaching Philosophy

The teaching dossier is a document that is written by – teachers, educators. Within a teaching dossier is ‘the’ deeply embedded personal manifest otherwise know as a teaching philosophy.

On a more linear level, the teaching dossier is a document-ing of one’s own accomplishments and contributions the active participatory embodiment of teaching/learning. Since this document is a reflection of a constantly evolving, temporal and subjective experience it ought not to remain is fossilized as many ‘documents’ tend to. Rather, the Teaching dossier shall be referred to as the ‘ever evolving’ mutable document.

As for the logistics: ten pages long (obviously for a person with less or more experience the length may vary). Other pertinent documents may also be appended following the main body. Teaching Philosophy| Carlos Torres: " There is one thing that Paulo has said over and over again, which is, 'You don't have to follow me. You have to re-invent me.'" (http://www.edb.utexas.edu/faculty/scheurich/proj3/giroux6.html)

“Banking education, which emphasizes the teacher's role as the active one in the teacher-learner relationship is an anti-dialogical approach. It serves the oppressor by denying the learner an active role in the learning. Paulo Freire felt that for the learner to move from object to Subject, he or she needed to be involved in dialogical action with the teacher. Dialogic action has two basic dimensions, reflection and action”(http://www.edb.utexas.edu/faculty/scheurich/proj3/freire4.html).

The tasks for progressive educators in Freirian theory are:

1. "...to unveil opportunities for hope, regardless of the obstacles" (p. 9).
2. to accept the political and directive nature of education.
3. to express respect for differences in ideas and positions.
4. to respect the educands, never manipulating them.
5. to be tolerant, open, forthright, and critical, teaching is not simply the "transmission of knowledge concerning the object or concerning the topic"(p. 81).
6. to teach so that educands can learn to learn "...the reason-for, the "why" of the object or the content."
7. to challenge educands with a regard to their certitudes so that they seek convincing arguments in defense of the why.
8. to respect popular knowledge, cultural content...this is the point of "departure for the knowledge (that educands) create of the world.
9. to understand that the "perception of the why of the facts...lead us to transcend the narrow horizons of the neighborhood or even the immediate geographical area, to gain (the) global view of reality..."(pp.87) (http://www.edb.utexas.edu/faculty/scheurich/proj3/freire5.html)

For me the purpose of including these quotes is for the purpose of exercising background reading. My own interpretations of a teaching philosophy may be informed in part by outside sources, theorists and practitioners, though a personal philosophy is a subjective amalgam of collective influences. As for me I imagine myself employing that which I have read of Friere and Giroux to enlighten my own future experiences. I enjoy the fact that a teaching dossier laid atop a foundation of a teaching philosophy is in its actualization, an act of self-reflexivity. This process of self-reflexivity is of paramount importance, perhaps a necessary ingredient for anyone partaking in the act of dialogical learning.

A