I was recently involved in a discussion of The Help, a bestseller book that's been made into a movie about the African American women who served as the hired help of white women in 1950's Mississippi. The book, written by a former southern white woman whose parents had a hired African American woman, is told from the perspective of a white woman and three African American women. The controversy arises from the point of view and the fact that a white person wrote the book which shows the perspective of African Americans fifty years ago. Specifically, African Americans are questioning the authenticity of the voices of the African Americans depicted in the book. And rather than focusing on the story, the controversy arises from the perspective, the point of view, the authenticity.
So I started to apply that to something about where I work: the teacher education department. Here's a direct quote from the catalog description of this department:
Based in part on the research by Martin Brooks and Jacqueline Gennon Brooks and the wisdom of the elders, the conceptual model and mission statement provide a strong foundation for the education of future teachers.
By placing the student in the center of the framework, one must realize that the knowledge, skills, and beliefs that students bring to the program must be honored. By building on the students’ prior knowledge and experiences, future teachers are provided a culturally-relevant model that will allow them to pass this honoring on to the students that they will teach.
Culture is the second component of the framework. Through an understanding of one’s own culture, other cultures can be respected. Modeling culturally-relevant pedagogy in the Education Department’s courses is a key factor to the satisfaction and success of Sinte Gleska University graduates.
When the idea for a conceptual framework was being considered, it was understood that there had to be a specific process that reflected the Lakota culture and values in the development of the program, the teaching of the courses, and the field experiences and internships that students would be required to complete. The content was expected to be culturally-relevant and based upon the traditions of the past, their connections to the present, and the implications for the future, as is stated in the department’s mission statement. This meant that cultural values and teachings had to be incorporated in traditionally western European thought taught in textbooks.
By looking at a process in which students would be held responsible for their own learning, for modeling the Lakota values, and for the realization that learning is a life-long journey, the constructivist model became the fourth, and outer circle, of the framework. This conceptual framework and mission statement provide a strong foundation upon which the program is structured.
Now let's put that into context. Of the current twenty-one classes listed in the Education Department's Fall Schedule of Classes , only three are taught by Native American (specifically Lakota) instructors. Of course, students in the education program must complete a selection of core courses. Of the core courses that education students must complete (47 total hours max), only 24 of those credit hours are taught by Native American people, and that's if they try really hard to get into a class taught by a Native outside of the Lakota Studies department (and let's face it, two of the instructors in the Lakota Studies department are white, too). So, in total, 125-132 credit hours are required for a student to receive a Bachelor's degree in elementary education (the single largest program in our University). Of those 125 hours, only a maximum of 24 credit hours will be taught by a Native American person.
Why do you brag about having such a culturally-relevant center and focus if your students are mostly going to be taught from the perspective of white people? Why do you wax on so eloquently about how many of your graduates go on to teach in local schools where we have 99% Native American students when they've only had contact with Native American instructors twenty percent of their entire college years? How can you certify these are culturally-relevant practices and education when you are not a Native person, don't teach from a Native perspective, don't hire Native instructors, and don't require your students to take more courses from Native instructors?
Yeah, it is about perspective. About point of view. About authenticity. You really should lose your accreditation and your certification and your job. You suck.
"If human equality is to be forever averted--if the High, as we have called them, are to keep their places permanently--then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity." George Orwell, 1984
I've been reading a lot of dystopian fiction lately and thinking how it's research for this story that wants to come forward. The only problem is that the dystopia I live in interferes with the natural flow of other stories' ability to emerge.
0 comments:
Post a Comment