In this Part One of a two-part series, we will examine what guiding principles need to be fostered and in place for culturally relevant caring to flourish and benefit our students.
“Caring for students is a moral imperative, a way to take steps toward justice for historically underserved children.” (Bondy and Hambacher, Educational Leadership, September 2016). But do all of our students perceive caring in the same way? In the 5 Languages of Love by Gary Chapman, the author of the #1 Bestseller informs us that people do not always show love in a way that the recipient hears it or feels it. This holds true for the theory of “care” in our classrooms as well.
Jacqueline Jordan Irvine (2001) states that a teacher’s challenge is to investigate the complexity of a term, like “care”, which seems so simple. In Let Care Shine Through, Elizabeth Bondy and Elyse Hambacher explore the theory that “care,” not unlike beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. They continue by saying, “People’s perceptions of what care encompasses, and the purposes of caring, aren’t universal, which means that students’ diverse backgrounds, perspectives, and circumstances can challenge teachers’ ability to show caring in a way that truly gets through.
An awareness of students’ cultural and social conditions can help us navigate those complexities. This way of thinking ties in with the work of scholars of color, who describe educators’ care for marginalized students as an act of social justice (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2005). Such caring is culturally relevant, it must be, because teachers learn about and respond to the values, knowledge, and histories of their students’. This is critical because it shows insight into the sociopolitical realities of students’ lives, particularly a history of injustice that shapes their educational experience and opportunities (Bondy and Hambacher, 2016).
As usual there is an acronym that has arisen in this conversation around showing and demonstrating culturally relevant caring toward and for our students. It is “Culturally Relevant Critical Teacher Care” or CRCTC and was coined by Mari Ann Roberts (2010). It is that way of thinking about caring for our students as a moral imperative, a way to not only offer care and support in our classrooms, our schools, our districts, but to also take steps toward justice for historically underserved children.
But formulating a term and coining an acronym are one thing. Educators need more than theory. Educators need something concrete that will stand up to the rigor of teaching in today's classrooms. So, what are the concepts that provide fertile ground for CRCTC to take root in a classroom, school, or district? What are the guiding principles?
In order to grow CRCTC and see it take root in educators, we must develop Political Clarity, Critical Hope, and Asset-Based Thinking.
Alice McIntyre (1997) described Political Clarity as that recognition and awareness that there is a widespread existence of societal injustice, recognize that injustice is typically reproduced in schools, and maintain a commitment to an active struggle for equity of educational opportunity and outcomes. Educators with political clarity do NOT pity their students, blame them for behavior they may view as unruly or unacceptable, and attempt to “save” the students from their own or their families perceived deficiencies. In other words, lose the judgmental and/or “savior” mindset. Educators serving students with political clarity do not shy away from naming inequities their students encounter in and out of school. They seek to help them develop strategies to navigate and succeed in the face of obstacles.
For example, I teach at a wonderful K8 school on an Indian Reservation. My students are well aware of inequity, both in their daily lives and in their educational experience. My building is filled with fierce advocates who do not “shy away” from calling out examples of inequity. That may be instances outside of the school building but it may also happen when they see inequities in our own district – inequity between buildings, services, staffing, opportunities, you name it and it gets called out. These educators are working hard because they know their students will have to walk in two worlds – one is the world of life on the Reservation and the other is the mainstream world up the hill and off of the Reservation.
In his book, Pedagogy of Hope, Paulo Freire (2002) explained, “I do not understand human existence, and the struggle needed to improve it, apart from hope and dream…I am hopeful, not out of mere stubbornness, but out of an existential, concrete imperative to transform the world. Critical Hope is, therefore, a profound sense of responsibility for the “collective” wellbeing of humanity. It is a sense that you must work to transform the world, anything less and you are shirking your duty to mankind. This can take the shape of that audacious hope that spawned the analogy of a rose growing out of the cracks in concrete. That rose as the strength, tenacity, and resiliency – indeed, the absolute nerve – to reach for the sun. Educators with critical hope foster and feed their personal vision of a more just society and they wrap their arms around their personal responsibility to educate students who will, in turn, work to transform the world into a more just place.
Asset-based thinking is not a new term. But it is a mindset necessary in setting the stage for culturally relevant critical teacher care. Asset based thinking is a respect for students’ knowledge, resources, and the ability to excel. Included in asset-based thinking is the work being done on “funds of knowledge” that maintains “people are competent, they have knowledge, and their life experiences have given them that knowledge” (Gonzalez, Moll, and Amanti, 2005). Our students come to us with a backpack brimming with cultural wealth. When educators focus on those assets, rather than deficits, student success increases (Comber & Kamler, 2004). As educators, we need to check our privilege and also our mindset to avoid allowing deficit-based thinking to creep into our minds or our classrooms.
In a beautiful example of asset-based thinking, the Salish Kootenai College in Pablo, Montana has incorporated a new course of study for education majors called “Integrated Perspectives in Science for Educators.” This program is preparing teacher candidates to include Native American knowledge in their lessons. Native Americans, since Time Immemorial, have kept close tabs on their environment doing things such as watching larch trees change color to predict when bull trout would begin coming upriver and studying wild roses to know when the bison would be calving. There is no deficit in learning or deficit in science knowledge for students raised by families and communities who are stressing science of this nature. Knowledge of this kind brings nothing but deeper learning to a classroom. But asset-based thinking is what will set the stage for incorporating this broad fund of knowledge into classrooms.
Guiding principles are the conditions that must be in place for practices and solid strategies to take root. In Part Two of this two part series, we’ll examine those educator practices that support culturally relevant critical teacher care for our students.
Komentáre