Journal #3 🚩

Journal #3

In responding to this Topic Block’s article by Hare (2012), I wrote the following that bears reiterating:

“I must consider who my learners are, and to ask whether or not my plans are culturally relevant; whether or not my students will see themselves in the things we read and the work we do.

I need to recognize that the dominant school model of literacy learning – reading and writing activities, for the most part – is not necessarily effective even for students of the dominant culture. Students from all backgrounds benefit from a multiplicity of learning forms. I will incorporate more indigenous learning modes by emphasizing oral storytelling, and by acknowledging and encouraging oral play in students.”

I have recently had the opportunity to take my class to Uvic’s Legacy Art gallery. This year’s exhibit, We Carry Our Ancestors, was another well-curated show, and held poignant lessons for students about cedar, about intergenerational learning and teaching, about honouring and respecting nature, and about patience, perseverance, and pride in one’s work. What was most relevant to this topic block, though, was art itself, and the narratives held within the woven designs of the cedar basketry on display. It was a reminder to me that the First People of the Pacific Northwest had, and have, a rich storytelling tradition, and that a culture does not need a written language in order to be rich in literature.

The presenters of the show begin with a Sharing Circle. Passing a red cedar sprig around, each student was invited to tell about who they are, and about their ancestry. It was really surprising to me how few of my two dozen charges were able to identify where in the world their ancestors originated. The vast majority of my students are most likely of European descent (their white faces and European-sounding last names being the most outstanding clues), yet only a few of them were able to say so. Notably, a student of Chilean ancestry, and another of Vietnamese descent readily identified as such. No one identified indigenous ancestry.

I look at this development in two ways. First, with disappointment. How can I deliver culturally relevant pedagogy if my learners and I do not know even that most basic building block of their cultural identity?  In another school in another part of town, I think students would have a better idea of who they come from. When you are visibly or linguistically not part of the dominant culture, I suspect you are more likely to learn from your family who you come from. But, as most of my students are of the dominant culture, their parents may feel that explaining who they are to their children might seem less important. There is no need to explain to children why their skin is a different colour, why they speak another language at home, why their food looks, smells, and tastes like it does, why they go to a temple and not a church.

Hare notes that indigenous knowledge and language learning happens through the social relationships inherent in the family and the community (p. 393). I think it is fair to say that family and community can and should have bearing in all knowledge and language learning, indigenous or not. In this context, an understanding of who your people are and where they come from is crucial.

So I see opportunity in the fact that my students do not know where their ancestors came from. There exists flexibility enough in our curriculum in BC to build a unit or a project on students’ ancestry. As no two students (except the twins in my class), have the same parentage, everyone’s origins will be just a little different. 

Here is a way to step into personalized learning! Each student should immediately find relevance: this is the story of themselves, after all. Who you are and where you came from are questions for which humans all eventually seek answers. An ancestry project could easily check off several boxes of the CREATIVE framework (Tobin), and has elements of personalized learning. It certainly encompasses Inquiry. It gives students Choice – “which ancestral line would you most like to pursue?” And, “How would you like to present your learning?” It allows for Technology, both for research and for presentation. Assessment could be negotiable. Pacing could be flexible. And students are given a Voice; they will eventually share their learning, and the next time they sit in a Sharing Circle, they will be able to say proudly who they are, and who were their ancestors.

Hare, J. (2012). ‘They tell a story and there's meaning behind that story’: Indigenous knowledge and young indigenous children's literacy learning. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 12(4), 389-414. doi:10.1177/1468798411417378

Tobin, R. (n.d.). CREATIVE Framework for Personalized Learning. Course material, EDCI 591 A01 - PERSONALIZED LEARNING IN LITERACIES.