Diversity and Inclusion in Innovation, Teaching and Learning

What Should We Do with a Feminist Educational Theory When We Have One? A Response to Audrey Thompson

In this article American feminist and philosopher of education Jane Roland Martin discusses what she calls the “cultural wealth approach to education” (Martin, 2015, p. 67) that she defines as the “stock a culture possesses” or, in simpler terms, the cultural wealth or heritage. Martin ponders over how such stock (that I interpret here as a vast array of knowledges, in the plural) is preserved for transmission to future generations and/or whether it is forgotten and hence lost in the process of preservation. She then introduces the idea of a preservation continuum (that I see as a kind of measuring stick) with which we can calculate whether cultural stock – say a play or a poem – should be considered a dead relic therefore of little value and undeserving of future transmission or a living legacy a concept that is self explanatory. Martin illustrates this concept by stating how Romeo and Juliet is still considered a living legacy today, while Titus Andronicus would be seen as a dead relic.

Upon reading this explanation, I quickly began to reflect on the articles I have just read on Canada’s First Nations. And I began to wonder if this preoccupation with the “official” preservation of cultural wealth is not a Western problem? And I also got to question the notion of dead relic. When I think of Jessica Ball’s article that speaks of Generative Curriculum, where Elders are invited to actively participate – through their storytelling, their songs or their dances – in the learning of their community’s youngsters, I tend to think that the “stock that a culture possesses” does not need to be in an archive or a museum for it to be preserved, but it should be lived, remembered, evoked whenever there is a particular need to transmit that knowledge or those principles. Founded on a prodigious oral tradition, the knowledge emanating from Canada’s First Nations is anchored in the heart and in the memory of a people, a community. Their stories are preserved and kept alive because they are recounted year after year from one generation to the next. This, for me, is the continuum that truly matters. 

I have just had this sudden flash: I think I may be more interested in any kind of authentic learning… there is a non-ending font of innovative and creative authentic learnings. But they first must be AUTHENTIC.  

As strange as this may seem, I believe that essential knowledge/cognizance is universal and everlasting. By this I mean, that what is really important for the survival of an individual, a society, a civilization will never be lost or forgotten. It will always remain top of mind and thus remain easily accessible, while secondary, non-essential learning/knowledge will be left by the wayside. On this topic, Martin notes: “My immediate concern, however, is that, for the foreseeable future, the research on women and education that feminists of all varieties have been doing be located near the living legacy end of the preservation continuum,” (p. 68). I am hopeful that this concern/hope will be fulfilled, because for as long as women will need to keep fighting for their rights, for respect, for equity and for fairness, they will need to be supported. Their battle, as we know, has not lasted years or decades, but centuries and millenniums.

Question to the author: In my text, I wonder if the preoccupation with preservation of cultural wealth is not a Western concern? So many civilizations still thrive today with the transmission of knowledge by word of mouth… Have you any thoughts or insights you can share with us?

REFERENCES

Ball, J. (2004). As If Indigenous Knowledge and Communities Mattered: Transformative Education in First Nations Communities in Canada. American Indian Quarterly, 28(3/4), 454–479. https://doi.org/10.1353/aiq.2004.0090

Martin, J. R. (2003). What Should We Do with a Feminist Educational Theory When We Have One? A Response to Audrey Thompson. Curriculum Inquiry, 33(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-873X.00250

***

Affordances of Digital Technologies for Learning

I chose to read this article because my next PME course (my second to last!!) will be on digital literacy and I wanted to familiarize myself with digital technologies employed in education. To my immense surprise, I got bogged down with the definition of the term affordances, as proposed by Ilic. In trying to understand what initially seemed to me like a very simple concept, I finally resolved to… get on the web to find a simple definition that I could relate to. Affordances: a resource, an opportunity, even a cue. This exercise, in fact, made me reflect on the necessity to Keep It Simple, a principle that I relentlessly upheld as a PR practitioner where I attempted to deliver information in levels of complexity that hinged on the reader’s or receiver’s capacity to assimilate the information. How I remember having to deal with curators of contemporary art who mostly wrote scholarly articles to dazzle themselves when they would have done better to use simpler terms with an aim to engage young students or budding art lovers.  

In this article, Ilic discusses how technology “affords” education and learning and, most certainly, the technology does offer many opportunities to enhance learning. Let’s just think of the multiplicity of mobile devices available to those who can afford them; the immediate accessibility of knowledge; ubiquitous learning; multimodality and so forth. The advantages of these highly innovative and creative “affordances” are not few, especially that this is the way of the future. But my fear, especially for K12 students, is an overexposure to such devices even within the educational arena and the lack of a clear protocol for usage that has not been clearly or adequately explained. 

First, kids today already spend so much (too much) time on the web to the detriment of their own physical and mental health. Second, I believe that before one can play around and access the web, kids – and their parents – should be shown 1) how to properly perform an online search and 2) how to avoid the dangers that lurk on the web. As you can see, I am far from promoting that AI or Augmented Reality should be introduced in the K12 classroom! With this I am not saying that the innovative AI should be kept out of bounds, but I firmly believe that students should first learn to master certain more dated learning protocols. Why jump to Artificial Intelligence when a 14-year-old student is still unable to perform a proper well-formulated search that will yield rich and safe results? All I’m saying is… let’s first see where this boat is going before we all get on board.

And finally, the use of digital technology for teaching and learning and its ubiquitousness also spell out another problem that I greatly take to heart and that is the digital divide that only serves to worsen inequalities. 

If I had my druthers, the ideal solution for K12 education would be for all schools to have access to digital technology – as this is still not a given in some rural areas in Italy, especially in the south. And computers and the internet would be used during the day but only say for certain collaborative projects and activities, as children need to be exposed to a variety of approaches and methodologies. Since Information and Communications Technologies are amongst us for good, I believe they can be best used to “[enhance] the capability for collaboration and networking around a task and [afford] the capacity for production and co-production,” (Ilic, 2020, p. 4).  

Question to the author: Do you believe there are any dangers to all these technological affordances? I believe that forest schools could have an even greater impact on students’ learning than digital technologies. What are your thoughts on this?  

REFERENCE

Ilic, P. (2020). Affordances of Digital Technologies for Learning. In: Peters, M., Heraud, R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation. Springer, Singapore. https://doi-org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_135-1

-