Now Available in PDF Here
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Contents Introduction by/par CDHE . 4 “Pedagogies of Discomfort: Inviting Emotions and Affect into Educational Change” by Megan Boler . 9 “Are we capable of Inclusive excellence?: Making the case for teaching with cultural intelligence” by Michael Goh . 15 “La (re)définition identitaire en enseignement/apprentissage des langues” par Valérie Amireault . 19 “Teaching about Feminism and Anti-Racism: Can a Racialized Muslim Teacher Speak?” by Leila Bdeir . 20 “Political (Il)literacy and Living in a Society: Is There Room for a Critically-Engaged Education for Democracy? or ‘I used to read poetry . before I became radicalized’” by Paul R . Carr . 24 “Yo (White) Teacher Lady: Interrogating and Decentering Whiteness in the Classroom” by Robyn Diner . 32 “Moving beyond accommodation: Lessons learned from educators working with trans and gender-nonconforming students” by Hélène Frohard-Dourlent . 35 “Dissipons un « énorme malentendu »” par Philippe Gagné, Maria Popica, et Martine Thibodeau . 39 “Pedagogical Considerations for the Linguistically Diverse Classroom” by Eve Haquez . 41 “Where Is the Love? How and Why Black Queer Bodies Provoke Masculine Anxiety in Urban Communities and Schools” by Lance McCready . 44 “Inhabiting critical spaces: Teaching and learning from the margins at Ryerson University” by Nicole Neverson, Doreen Fumia, Camille Hernandez-Ramdwar, Amina Jamal, Melanie Knight, Azar Masoumi and Adwoa Onuora . 47 “Engaging with Diversity in the Classroom: A Reflection on the First Decade” by Bethany Or . 51 “La pédagogie et la diversité de genre dans un cégep francophone : vers une culture institutionelle d’inclusion” par Catherine Rouleau . 53 “Decolonizing College Education: A Métis Perspective” by Michelle Smith . 55 “Not at Odds: Teaching about Sexual Diversity in a Context of Religious Diversity” by Jacky Vallée . 58 Abstracts / Résumés . 63 Case Studies / Études de cas . 70 Biographies . 74 Contributions . 79 3 INTRODUCTION Sophia Grabowiecka Kim Matthews Katri Suhonen Alan Wong CDHE, Vanier College On May 17 and 18, 2017, The Critical Diversity in Higher Education (CDHE) research team at Vanier College hosted a two-day bilingual conference exploring issues of diversity and inclusion in the Cégep system. Funded by a SSHRC Connection grant, the conference, titled (Dis)Comfort Zones: Negotiating Tensions and Cultivating Belonging in Diverse College Classrooms in Quebec, brought together students, college educators, and experts on different forms of diversity and pedagogy. The multi-vocal participatory workshop (MPW) approach to organizing the conference sought to identify and exchange strategies for effectively negotiating tensions and discomforts that may emerge in the classroom and to redefine the discussion around the topic of diversity and inclusion in higher education. (Dis)comfort Zones was designed to deepen the understanding of the (dis)comforts students and faculty experience in their college lives and to develop a greater awareness of issues of belonging in classrooms along with better practices to address them. To this end, four different identity-based panels—Race and Ethnicity, Culture and Religion, Gender and Sexuality, and Language—were formed. In addition to their own individual presentations, panelists addressed case studies relevant and appropriate to their respective panels that were developed in concert with student co-researchers from Vanier College, who also served as panelists. The theoretical basis for the conference was Megan Boler’s (1999) concept of “pedagogy of discomfort,” which comprises the last chapter of her acclaimed book Feeling Power: Emotions and Education. This concept invites students and educators to work together to examine how modes of seeing have been shaped specifically by the dominant culture of the historical moment (p. 179). The challenge is to face difficult situations directly rather than letting them pass without reflection. Such moments, while difficult, are also excellent opportunities for deeper understanding. The emotional response to the discomfort that occurs in a classroom are spaces in which effective learning may occur if managed in a way to encourage critical reflection. If ignored, there is a risk of “poisonous pedagogy,” defined as the systematic ways we teach young people not to notice the cruelties and injustices inflicted upon them (Miller, as cited in Boler, 1999, p. 192) and, arguably, upon others. As Freire (1985) notes, “[W]ashing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral” (p. 122). A pedagogy of discomfort calls not only for inquiry, but also, at critical junctures, for action—action hopefully catalyzed as a result of learning to bear witness (Boler, 1999, p. 179). Witnessing is substantially different from spectating, insofar as spectating permits “distance and separation...and abdication of any possible responsibility” (184), while as witnesses “we undertake our historical responsibilities” by asking, “[W]hat are the forces that bring about this ‘crisis?’”(p. 186). By deconstructing the conditions underpinning discomfort in the first instance, diversity may be activated as a tool for positive change (Pitt and Packard, 2012). The engagement of students in this process is essential to their development and empowerment. With this in mind, here is a summary of some of suggestions and recommendations that emerged from the conference, highlighting particular considerations, approaches, and strategies that teachers should be mindful of in the classroom when uncomfortable situations based on identitarian tensions arise. 4 Teacher’s Role A key recommendation from student panelists, in general, was that students must be given the space to take a stand when inter-identity conflicts occur in the classroom. However, while some students have the ability to speak up, they should not be obliged or pressured to do so, especially in cases when they have been targeted by negative comments. Expecting the targeted student to take a stand and, in effect, teach the class is problematic ethically and may make matters much more difficult for them (and others in the class). Students on the Culture and Religion panel said that it is important that students know that the teacher “has their back,” so to speak. The teacher needs to point out and call out transgressions in the classroom because not doing so could create and/or perpetuate pain, inequality, marginalisation, and the spread of misinformation. Prevention A key suggestion that emerged from all of the discussions concerning the case studies was that many of the difficulties described in the scenarios could have been avoided from the outset. Setting standards of conduct for respectful interaction or communication on the first day of class was recommended. While conflicts may still arise, the teacher could defuse such situations by pointing to the expected standards of behaviour and rules that were set forth at the beginning of the course. Once the standards are set, it is important to enforce them consistently. Training students in how to interact and discuss issues respectfully would also help to prevent and/or address tensions that might bubble to the surface. Another suggestion to circumvent the occurrence of contentious events was to provide students with specific requirements and rubrics for assignments that might pre-emptively counter any perceptions of unfair bias or prejudice in their assessments by their teachers. For example, in the case of the Language panel, the students would have better understood why the Indigenous student featured in the case study was selected for the French competition (see Case Study 1 on Page 70). Guidelines make the expectations clear for everyone, including the teacher, and facilitate decision-making based on specific accomplishments rather than subjective assessments. In addition, deploying institutional leadership in the form of college policies focused on such areas as anti-harassment, anti-discrimination, and anti-oppression would address some potential disputes in a consistent rather than ad hoc fashion. For example, in the case of the transgendered student (see Case Study 2 on Page 71), existing accommodations might have prevented the problems raised in the case study in the first place. Moreover, institutional leadership provides the members of the community with a clear understanding of the values of the College as well as the means to manage various issues from the outset. Finally, using the resources at the educational institution for assistance when needed was also proposed. For example, reaching out to the Counselling Department and U.M.B.R.E.L.L.A., Vanier’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer (LGBTQ) student group, was recommended Effective Teaching Moments When a moment of discomfort arises, it was suggested that the teacher help to create a “teachable moment.” It is important not to belittle or embarrass the person who elicited the issue in the first instance. The approach needs to be as non-threatening as possible and the event in question presented as an opportunity to explore and analyse. The analysis may take many forms, including asking the question, 5 “Where do these ideas come from?” Linking students’ positions on and assumptions about various social groups to structures and consequences is another tactic. The above are some general recommendations gleaned from the conference as a whole. What follows now are the more specific papers presented by many of the panel experts