My upbringing and schooling both affected me and how I read the world greatly. My upbringing however, was quite a bit different then my schooling. My schooling consisted of going to catholic school from grades 4 until 12 and I was mainly surrounded by other white people. My schooling was very European dominant. When I say this I mean that we did not spend that much time on things like treaty education or learning about diversity. Instead, we learned about the Catholic religion and its history and we learned about mainly white washed history. I was lucky enough to have teachers who recognized the importance of treaty education and teaching about diversity, but many kids in my class were truly mean about these things. Students would openly say that they did not care or it did not matter. I heard another students say once in grade seven that he would kill every ‘Indian’ in the world if he could. This was truly horrifying when I look back on it and even in grade seven I knew it was wrong and it made me very angry. So, this is how my schooling affected how I read the world. It focused on mainly white European history and tradition and because of this I had a great deal of biases and did not realise there were other ways to do things. One bias would be that everyone just has to work hard to succeed, I didn’t realise that not everyone started from the same spot in life. I never thought about how the racism in our country hinders people’s opportunities. I didn’t realise that there is systematic racism in place here.

On the other hand, my upbringing taught me some different ways to view or read the world, and it helped to break down some biases. My upbrining was quite different from many people. For starters, I grew up in North Battleford. This meant that I saw more poverty, diversity,    and racism than a lot of people do growing up. Unless you were a farmer who did not spend much time in the city, it was impossible to not see the poverty in the city. There was constantly drunk homeless people or people on things other than alcohol wondering the streets. They would wonder all over the city and these people were often Indigenous. This caused a lot of racism in the city and I must admit that it impacted me to. It made me have racist thoughts on many occasions. I now work very hard to catch these thought and to shut them down immediately. I always saw racism and poverty and I had friends who lived in poverty when I lived in North Battleford. This was enlightening for me because I came from a middle-class family. It was another thing that helped break down some biases for me and allowed me to keep an open mind.I was also fortunate enough to grow up with Indigenous step family. My step mother is Indigenous and she has 3 kids who are all Indigenous. So I grew up in a household that was half white and half Indigenous people. This greatly helped me break down my biases or racist thoughts. It allowed me to be open minded and aware of the social and justice issues that surrounded the Indigenous people in the Battlefords area.

I will continue to work on breaking down my own biases. Everyone has some biases and it is important to work hard to recognize and break them down. Some ways we could do this is by stopping ourselves when we have a racist thought, or whatever it may be, and recognizing that it is simply a bias and probably not true. This is how I work towards breaking down my biases and stopping any racist or biased thoughts that go through my head. Another way to break down biases is to get educated. Find out why a population or community struggles so much. Figure out the history that led to generational trauma. These are things we must do to break down biases.

The single stories that were present in my own schooling were generalized biases. One single story I believed and was presented in my schooling was the same one that Chimamanda Adichie talked about in her TED talk. This was viewing Africa as some third world country full of tribes and lawless. I really didn’t know anything about what life was like there and I just believed it was like the stories we heard in school or the ‘tribes’ we would read about or see on TV. The only truth that mattered to me at the time was that of the media and that of the teacher, or my parents when I was at home. In school for a long time, until about grade 7, we only saw one side of Canadas history as well. We only saw the European narrative. This made people believe what was commonly heard about Indigenous people. They were viewed as savages or crazy because they didn’t believe in God and the catholic religion. This was a single story that was perpetuated in my schooling. I was lucky enough to have parents who broke these biases down for me and I was lucky to have Indigenous step family that kept me grounded when it came to this stuff.

In my k-12 schooling experience I don’t think I had much education when it comes to citizenship, but there are a couple of lessons I remember. I don’t remember to many direct lessons about citizenship, but I do remember one lesson that stuck with me. In my grade 7 year we did a mock election. Grades 4-7 all voted in the mock election and it was actually quite fun. Before everyone voted teachers were tasked with teaching us students about the different political parties, what their platforms were, and what platforms actually were. Everyone in my class seemed to actually start paying attention to the election that was really going on. I remember watching the news with my parents a few times in an attempt to follow the election and become more informed about it even out of school. This is just how much this subject interested me and got me engaged in the topic. To this day I enjoy politics in many ways. This lesson would have focused on the participatory citizen model. We learned and were encouraged to participate in the voting experience. This is participating in civic affairs and being a responsible citizen who is active in the community. This is something that is important to encourage in schools, especially since voting numbers have been steadily dropping. Less and less people, especially young people, are voting these days and this is a serious problem. As citizens we all have the right to vote, but we also have the responsibility to do so and this is what that lesson taught me. This made it possible to recognize what a participatory citizen does. It made me interested in politics and helped me develop an appreciation for the need to vote and being able to make your voice heard. It made it possible for me to be a participatory citizen and a responsible citizen.

In high school I also remember doing an activity on the three types of citizenship in english class. I believe it was my grade 9 or 10 year. We read several situations. In some cases in the situation that we were reading people were faced with moral dilemmas and then they would either make the moral or immoral decisions and then we had to say why they might of made that decision and what kind of citizen they were. This lesson did stick with me afterwards because I thought it was important to recognize the different types of citizens and it made me think about what kind of citizen I was. The lesson mostly focused on the personally responsible citizen and the justice orientated citizen. We discussed different kinds of citizens and why it was important to be aware of your citizenship and responsibilities as a citizen. We also discussed what kind of citizen we would want to be. This made it possible for me to examine myself and to figure out what kind of citizen I was and what kind of citizen I’d like to be. It also made it possible for me to see that different kinds of citizens are all necessary in different scenarios. I realised that a truly ‘good’ citizen will have some aspects of all three kinds of citizens. A person should be a participatory citizen, a personally responsible citizen, and a justice orientated citizen. To help society to the fullest a person needs to have some aspects and understanding of all three kinds of citizens. 

All of this education that I got on citizenship made it possible for me to be a well rounded citizen. It made it possible for me to become more introspective and to analyse what kind of citizen I wanted to be. I knew it was possible for me to become any kind of citizen I wanted to and that I could help my community. I knew in grade 7 that I had a responsibility towards my community in many different ways. The mock vote was probably the most impactful lesson in regards to citizenship for me because it also made me excited to vote in the future and is a big reason why I have participated in elections.

1.    This is a topic I am particularly invested in. As a social studies major who has a passion for subjects like sociology and having a background in social work I feel I have a decent understanding as to why this subject is so important. To me this topic is important for everyone, not just Indigenous people themselves. It is a topic that is critical to furthering people’s understandings of our country’s social issues and it applies to many other countries as well, for example America, which was also largely colonized. People may not think the topic applies to them if they are non-Indigenous, but it really applies to all people equally. Non-Indigenous people should know about this topic to be the best possible citizens they can be. It would make people more open minded and give them different perspectives that they would not get otherwise. There is very important history, the history of our country, behind this topic. It is important for all because it actually affects us all.

One way that this becomes important for everyone is because Indigenous living conditions affect the entire country and the communities that surround the Idigenous ones. If Indigenous communities aren’t succeeding then the communities around them will suffer as well. Not only does this become sad for the Indegenous people then, but it also makes life harder for all. If addiction is a serious issue on the reserve that is 15 minutes outside of the city then you will see the issue in the city. Crime rates will relate to the drug issues of the reserve because the drugs and the crime surrounding them will then be in the city. This issue goes both ways. The toxicity of the city then finds its way onto the reserves as well. Another example would be if Indigenous people are having trouble in general with their health then this puts a strain on everyones health care. So the next time people are complaining about long wait times in the emergency room, consider why we have so many people in need of the emergency care. Perhaps it is because nearly 100 reserves don’t have clean drinking water as seen in Claire’s presentation. 

2.     When we say that we are all treaty people this is because the treaty applies to everyone who lives in Canada or on treaty lands to be more specific. Even though non-Indigenous people do not get to claim reserve lands, do we not all have to respect what is reserve land? Is it not every citizens duty to honour the treaties? The treaties are legally binding documents which we are all subject to and they truly do affect us all. Our communities can’t truly succeed unless everyone in them are being treated fairly and are receiving what they need to thrive. Not to mention that almost everyone who lives in Canada lives on treaty land or land that used to be inhabited by Indigenous people. 

    Many people do not understand that we are all treaty people despite not being Indigenous. Some people also argue that we receive nothing from the treaties as non-Indigenous people, but when we look at the history this is not true. The Canadian reality could be drastically different if the treaties were not signed. Years of war would have likely been the alternative. This would have meant many deaths on both the British side and the Indigenosu side. The reality is that the land we live on now had been lived on and thrived off of for many years before the European people came and colonized it. The Indigenous people had fully developed societies before being pushed out of their lands. So, to yield so much land to the European people and to partial up pieces of land for Indigenous people this benefits us settlers greatly now. But land was officially yielded when treaties were signed, generally. So do we not live on treaty land? Are we not all treaty people or people of the treaty? The point I’m trying to make is that we all have to respect the treaty and we all have a responsibility towards the treaties, and we are all apart of the treaties, even if it isn’t in such a direct way.

Ultimately I would like to use all of this in a response to the email that Mike had received. I would give the advice to try and put the kids in the shoes of the Indigenous people. You could have them do a blanket exercise which can be very moving and I’ve seen people in tears when doing these. You could ask students to try not to take any water breaks during class to experience a fraction of what it’s like to lack clean drinking water on reserves. And something I always ask people is how would you feel? This isn’t always effective, but it is more often than not. Asking kids how they would feel if their freedom was taken away or if they were taken from their parents by force, for example, can be an effective method of teaching in its own way. I would try to shed light on all these things in as many ways as possible. Children need to know how treaty education and Indigenous education affects them in their everyday lives. If you can get kids to relate or to make connections through their own lives then they will become more engaged and interested in the topic.

Sources:

Cynthia Chamber’s We are all Treaty People.

Dwayne Donald’s lecture  “On What Terms Can we Speak?”

Part 1 – According to the Levine article school curricula is developed and implemented by government officials, experts in the area or areas of the curriculum, teachers, parents, and companies like textbook companies. This reading provides readers with information that most people would not know. This information is regarding the curriculum and how it is formed. Curriculum development is a huge process and takes a lot of time and certain groups dictate what will be included or not, despite what the people who write it would like to have included. I did not know just how much work went into making the curriculum. I always assumed that it was a massive project to work on and it would take a long time to do, but reading about it in more detail and seeing all the different parties involved in the creation and implementation of curriculum was eye opening for me. The thing that concerns me the most regarding what I’ve read in this article is the importance that politics receives in terms of curriculum. In my opinion political agendas have no place in the curriculum and no place in our schools. We need to teach about politics and the importance of our government and all of its complex systems, but politicians should not have much of a say in education. Experts, teachers and community members should be the main contributors to curriculum and maybe even students. This is talked about in the article and it is actually surprising to think about how much curriculum affects students, yet they get no input on what is included in it. 

Part 2 – The first connection I made between the first document and the second one is that Levine says who contributes to the writing and implementation of curriculum and the types of people are very similar. Those who contributed to the treaty curriculum are also mostly government officials or political figures and experts. The treaty curriculum was also influenced by elders of Indigenous communities, which is different from what we saw in the first article and is something we wouldn’t necessarily see when building the overall curriculum for Saskatchewan. Another connection I made was the political agenda of both curriculums. The treaty curriculum is focused on the treaties that were signed so many years ago between the Indigenous people and the crown. The treaties themselves are a political document, so it becomes very hard to avoid any political agenda in the curriculum. I would imagine that there were many tensions surrounding the development of treaty curriculum. Residential schools did not totally shut down that long ago and that right there causes tension around anything to do with Indigenous people, government and education. Because of residential schools many Indigenous people have very negative views about education. This all causes a great deal of tension regarding creating a treaty curriculum. Perhaps something else that would have created tension during the creation of this document would have been who would be involved. The government may have had certain ideas about who would have to be involved, while Indigenous people may have had other ideas. I see that two elders helped to create the treaty education curriculum and I wonder if there was any opposition to that or tension there. There is also the whole idea of Indigenous people signed to treaties being sovereign, but were the Indigenous people allowed to write this curriculum with no approval needed from the Canadian government? I would imagine that there were many more moments of tension while this document was being created.

You see both reinhabitation and decolonization all through out this narrative. You see reinhabitation many times in the article. It is talked about in the narrative several times when youth are speaking about what is important to them and what they had been taught. It is also present when parents and elders talk about teaching the youth why the land is important for them. They explain the importance of the land and the connection between things like the flow of the river to the flow of life. The concept of decolonization also pops up several times in the narrative. The process of decolonization happens slowly over time thanks to processes like the one studied in this narrative. The concept of the study displays decolonialism.

I would try to adapt these concepts in everyday interactions, self reflecting and at all times while I’m teaching in the classroom. Reinhabitation is something that’s important for all to keep in mind, as humans by nature rely on the earth. None of us can live without nature and the natural resources we pull from the earth, so it would only make sense to learn about it and how to treat it and live alongside with the rest of it. Decolonization is also something that people should always support and always promote. Teachers should strive toward decolonizing their classrooms and parents should try to teach children decolonized ways of thinking. In reality decolonization is a very important step toward reconciliation with the Indigenous people in Canada and in creating a less judgemental and hopefully more accepting society. 

To be a ‘good’ student, according to the commonsense, is to do as you’re told, to memorise the information that is given, and to sit quietly. If a person wants to be a ‘good’ student then they have to go along with what the teacher says, or go along for the ride. You have to be attentive in class and do all of your homework. A good student shows up on time and leaves on time. They don’t necessarily ask extra questions and a good student definitely wouldn’t challenge the teacher. The commonsense dictates that students should basically just listen to the teacher and do the work that the teacher assigns. 

    The students who are generally privileged by this definition of a good student are middle to upper class white students, especially males. These students generally come with a mind set of, listen to authority and do well in school. Another reason that these people have an advantage at being good students is because the curriculum generally applies to them. For example, history class is totally white washed to cater to the European-white legacy that has been built by Europe and built on in the West. This empowers white students, while alienating non-white students. This can make non-white students uninterested and unengaged in class. Some non-white students would perhaps even reject the history that is taught and therefore these students become ‘bad students’ according to the commonsense. This is a major issue in our schools today and has serious negative effects on students.

    The commonsense makes it hard for the majority of people to imagine any other type of education that isn’t the product based model that they experienced. The commonsense is based on what people experienced in their own lives and what their parents experienced and were told, and so on. The commonsense is pushed by many figures in society and is even pushed by society itself. This makes it very difficult or nearly impossible to break the cycle of our current education model. It makes it almost impossible to imagine something new. It also makes it almost impossible to think critically about things that we already possess a common knowledge on. It makes it hard to critically think in general because there is basic and widely accepted knowledge in society, that is known as common sense or common knowledge. 

I found the article, When Schools Become Dead Zones of the Imagination: A Critical Pedagogy Manifesto by Henry Giroux.

The first big point that Giroux makes is that the current pedagogy in schools is harmful to students. He makes several different points on this matter explaining the different ways that it negatively affects youth who are subjected to it. Giroux even compares our schools to prisons in his article. He also continues to say how schools prepare students for the life of prison or strict work, instead of teaching critical thought and morals. He compares the time regiment and the discipline methods of schools to prisons. Giroux makes several connections between schools and prisons. The second point that Giroux makes is how the current schooling is deskilling teachers. This is a common theme when discussing a product based pedagogy.

The third and final point that Giroux makes is regarding the 1% of wealthiest people in America or in the world as a whole. He believes that these people are the reason behind this negative product based pedagogy. Giroux says in his article that these people have the majority of power in the world and they purposefully create this pedagogy and encourage it in all aspects of life. Prisons and schools are a good example. These people want to create a work force, not morally educated critical thinkers. He shows a great dislike for these wealthy people and ultimately blames them for the short comings in the public school system and, in part, the failings of society as a whole. 

Going forward I’ll have to develop my summary some more. I’ll probably spend time refining these points. Next, I will definitely expand on all the points here. The summary will go from two paragraphs to at least three larger paragraphs in the summary. I’ll have to find the couple of extra sources that were asked of us for the assignment. These articles will be relevant to the topic and either prove Giroux’s arguments or disprove them, depending on what side I take as the one doing the critical summary. I’ll continue to do research and most likely re-read the article by Giroux a couple of times.

In my own schooling experience I definitely experienced the Tyler rationale. I experienced this mostly only in classes like math or science where we did not focus on education about social values, norms or any type of behaviour or opinion. Some things were just all about memorization or formulas which leave little room for politics or morals. This can have both positive and negative effects on students and teachers. This approach allows students and teachers to focus on one thing, what is directed to the teachers to teach. 

The tyler rationale allows students to focus on only school subjects and ignore the social and political influences that they bring. This can be a positive thing because it provides students with the opportunity to focus and potentially achieve very high grades in school. For some students who may be socially awkward this would also be a positive thing because they could focus on the pure scholarly aspect of school, which for some would be a relief. Another upside to this approach is that it allows teachers to focus on specific subjects lets them not worry about teaching things that aren’t directly in the curriculum or syllabus. Even with these positives of the Tyler rationale it can do a lot of harm to children and youth. 

If schools focused completely on the Tyler rationale then they would start to miss out on one of the most important aspects of school. This aspect is the social aspect. School provides students with the opportunity to be exposed to all sorts of different social aspects. These vary from social norms, values, politics and more. Teachers do influence all of these things whether they try to or not and in some cases some of it is even in the curriculum. One example of these types of social educations would be how teachers teach students to be creative or how kids are taught to share. If kids weren’t taught things like don’t hit or share then people would develop into very different adults and society would be very different. So while there are upsides and downsides to the Tyler rationale it could not be the complete package of education. The Tyler rationale has to be used in mild doses otherwise the social downfalls would be far greater than the few upsides.

Kumashiro defines common sense as widely accepted ‘knowledge’ in any given society that is often harmful to young people for many reasons. It seems to me that the author almost makes a connection between common sense and stereotypes. When the author talks about common sense they are not just talking about things like, “wash your hands after you use the washroom”, they talk more about a societal common sense such as, “american education is better than that of nepal”. The author warns us against the dangers of common sense. The author also says that common senses are in every society and differ based on where you live.

    It is so important to pay attention to the common sense because it can create shortcuts for knowledge, but it can also create shortcuts to negative or harmful ideas. As we see in the article commonsense creates ideas in a whole society. The people in the schools of Nepal decided that there way of school was the only proper way, and this was common sense to them. On the other hand the peace corps teachers from America believed that there was of teaching was the newest and best way to teach. The American teachers in Nepal believed that Nepals way of education was outdated and not as good as the American way. To them this was common sense. So, it becomes obvious that both sides have their own set of ideas. Both sides neglect to think that other ways could be better or that other countries have quality education despite differences. People also forget that what is common sense in one area is not common sense in the next. An example of this would be rich, primarily white neighbourhoods versus poor and primarily black neighbourhoods. What is common sense in one of these neighbourhoods will be greatly different based on different everyday needs. So the real danger of the commonsense is creating different forms of ignorance in a persons mind based on their ‘commonsense’.