Anti-Oppressive Education

While reading Kumashiro's article about oppression within education, specifically the "Other" vs. the norm, I was intrigued by how the issues were addressed. Upon first reading the article, I kept thinking about how each individual student can be the Other, and in order for teachers to recognize this in their students, they have to relate back to when they were in school and were considered the Other, and how that can then be used to help direct their students away from oppression. I was pleased when it was said in the article regarding what students "know and should know about the Other", that "...this approach aims not merely to increase the students' knowledge but to develop the students' empathy for the Other (Britzman, 1998a)." (33). I think it is very important to teach students, no matter the issue, about empathy. It is important for us all to understand that every individual has their own experiences, and that we need to acknowledge what it may be like for someone else. However, I was surprised to read how empathy can in turn backfire on the intended lesson plan, when Kumashiro says, "...empathy is often based on the assumption that learning about 'them' helps a student see that 'they' are like 'us'; in other words, learning about the Other helps the students see the self in the Other. Such a perspective leaves the self-Other binary intact, and allows the self (i.e., the normative identities) to remain the privileged." (35). After processing this, I understood how empathy might not help to eliminate oppression. But if that is the case, I feel it is the responsibility of the teacher to have the students think past themselves and think only how the Others have been affected by oppression.

In relation to that, I found that Kumashiro's response to how lessons can affect how students learn about the Other to be very important in encouraging a level of thinking that extends beyond what is within the books and lesson plan. I found this to be most true in regards to learning that there is more than what is just being said, when Kumashiro says, "Students need to learn that what is being learned can never tell the whole story, that there is always more to be sought out, and in particular, that there is always diversity in a group, and that one story, lesson, or voice can never be representative of all. According to Ellsworth (1997), teachers need to get student to always ask, what has not been said (by the student, by the teacher, by the text, by society)?...The goal is not final knowledge (and satisfaction), but disruption, dissatisfaction, and the desire for more change." (34). I think one of the best ways for a teacher to teach is to impart this method, because there is a better chance that by the students questioning what they have just learned, they are more likely to remember and therefore be impacted by the ideas generated both from within their classroom and from within their minds.

While reading and reacting to all of this, I kept referring back to hidden curriculum, and how that can truly influence what it is the students will learn, especially about the Other. But I'd have to disagree with what Kumashiro includes in regards to hidden curriculum: "...the 'knowledge' many students have about the Other is either incomplete because of exclusion, invisibility, and silence, or distorted because of disparagement, denigration, and marginalization. What makes these partial knowledges so problematic is that they are often taught through the informal or 'hidden' curriculum (Jackson, 1968), which means that because they are taught indirectly, pervasively, and often unintentionally, they carry more educational significance that the official curriculum (Jackson, Boomstrom, & Hanson, 1993). (32). I think that hidden curriculum can be used effectively to discourage the negative perceptions of the Other, when it expands in the classroom beyond the lesson being taught. Specifically, if it is the way a student that would be considered an Other is being treated by his/her peers, that is when a teacher can step in and teach their students what is acceptable in eliminating oppression towards the Other.

That being said, although this had encouraged me to think how to approach these issues when I am a teacher, I can't help but wonder about the other teachers I will be working with. Kumashiro concludes, "Yet, I believe this article shows that more and more educators are educating themselves of the dire need to engage in anti-oppressive education, and that more and more educators are making a positive difference in the lives of their students. I expect this trend to continue, and hope that this article helps in this effort." (48). I have a feeling that when I will be teaching, I might be working with teachers who don't want to include this into their lessons, or who don't consciously think about the Other students.

Could this anti-oppressive education be as successful within a school when only a few teachers implement this into their teaching?

Also, how can the teachers that use anti-oppressive education work together within the school to make this a success?